Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Luis B. Reyes
(Iudfic, Court of Fint I t t a n c e of Mdniia)
Profossar of Criminal Law and Criminal Law Review
Bar Reviewer in Criminal Law
at the 6
' Colle~eof Law. Ateneo de Manila University
School of Law, Lyceum of the Philimines
Institute of Law. Far Eastern University
Distvibrited Exclusi.ueZy by
. % PHILAW PUBLISHING
2103 C. M. Recto Ave., Manila, Philippinss
, . .
" Philippines Copysight 1868,
'< :i i
'~: by
"
LUIS B. REPES
Piinted 1%
./
of Ja. a r y , 1932 (Art. 1, R.P.C.).
1
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
''ti:--. 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin o r currency describe the means.
note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities Acts and omissions' punishable by 1
issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands; (delitos).
..,' ',, 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the intro- Felonies are committed not only, by means' of
:. '..'duction into these Islands of the obligations and securities (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).,
.1., '~ mentioned in the preceding number; There is deceit when the aet is performed
.," ..., , .
..,-' 4 . While being public officers or employees, should erate intent; and there i s ,fault wben t h e W
it an offense in the exercise of their functions; or results from imprudence, negligence, lac
. Should comrpit any of tine crimes against national
urity and the law of nations, defined in Title One of
k Two of the Revised Penal Code.
(Art. 2, R.P.C.)
hat eases may the provisions of the Revised Penal f3act done be klifferent 'from th
'be enforced outside of the jurisdiction of the Philip.
:pines?
s provided in the treaties and laws of pre-
lication, the provisions of the Revised Penal
enforced outside of the jurisdiction of the
ainst those who:
- '1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship Bn impossible crime is one
an act-which would be an offens
2. Should forge o r counterfeit any coin or currency
te of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities
sued by the Government of the Philippine Islands;
3 . Should be liable for acts connected with the intro-
ction into these Islands of the obligations and securities What is the duty of the
whieh should be repressed but which are
n the preceding number;
being public officers or employees, should
t. an offense in the exercise of their functions; or Whenever a court has knowledife o f , a n
may deem proper to repress and which .is
2 3
CRIMINAL
. . LAW kEVlEWEE /' CRIMINAL LAW REVIETVER
, it shall render the proper decision, and shall re- felonies are punishable oiiIy' w h e n
the Ckief Executive, through the Department of with the exception of those:c
the reasons which induce the court to believe (Art. '7, R.P.C.).
act should be made the subject of penal legis-
rt. 6, par. 1, R.P.C.). 12. commit felony and pro
mit felony. When are conspiracy and p
le duty of the court when a strict enforcement felony pUni5hdble?
visions of the Revised Penal Code would result A conspiracy exists when two or more p
osition of a clearly excessive penalty? to .an agreement concerning the commi
Irt shall submit to the Chief Executive, through and decide to commit it (Art. E, par. 2,
There i s proposal when the person. who h
to commit a fdony proposes its execution to
person or'.persons (Art. 8, par. 3, R.P.C.)."
Conspiracy and proposa,l to comrpit felony
die only in the cases in which the law speoifi
Jides a penalty therefor (Art. 8, par. 1, R.P.
.,:<
. . The following do not incur any criminal liability: 7. What are the requisites of self-defense?
1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, The requisites of self-defense are:
provided that the following circumstances concur: First. Unlawful aggression;
. , . .- First. Unlawful aggression;
Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed
to prevent o repel it;
T h i r c d a c k of sufficient provocation on the part of
the pe on defending himself.
A n y o n e who acts in defense of the person or rights
his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natu- The exempting circum
, or adopted brothers o r sisters or of his relatives by insanity, ( W 6 n o r i t y under
affinity in the same degrees, and those by consanguinitY
urth civil degree, provided that the first and
second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circum- (@--uncontrollable fear, and (7) failure to p
nce are present, aud the further requisite, in case the act required by law because of lawful or insuper
as given by the person attacked, that the
fense had no part therein. The provisions of the Revised Penal Code on
ing circumstances are, as follows:'
Anyone who acts in defense of t,he person or rights
rovided that the first and second requisites The following are exempt from criminal liabili
first circumstance of this article are 1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless t
the person defending be not induced has acted during a lucid intertal.
ment or other evil motive.
who, in order t o avoid an evil or in- an act which the law defines as a felony,
an act which causes damage to another, pro- court shall order his confinement in one of
owing requisites are present: or asylums established for persons thus ',a?
F_(,..
, ,; . .'
j_
6
,,,.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CK-IMINAL LAW REVIEWER
.
e.
.,
,
1 not be permitted to leave without first obtaining 3 . That the offender had no intention to commit
e permission of the same court. grave a wrong as that committed.
2 . A person under nine years of age, 4 . That sufficient provocation or threat o n
3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, of the offended party immediately preceded the
. ,'T unless he has acted with discernment, in which case, such 5. That the act wa
hall be proceeded against in accordance with the cation of a grave offense to the one committing the,fel
ns of article 80 of the Revised Penal Code. ( d e l i t o ) , his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitim
natural, or adopted brothers or siaters, or .,relatives
court, in conformity with the provisions of this affinity within the same degrees.
6. That of having acted upon
as naturally to have produced passio
7. That the offend
I mitted to the care of some institution or person mentioned self to a person in authority or his agents, :or
in said article 80. had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the.eou
4. .Any person who, while performing a lawful act to the presentation of the evidence
I' 8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind;
with due care, causes an injury by mere accident with-
.- out .fault or intention of causing it. wise suffering some physical defect which thus
his means of action, defense, or communication
5 . Any person who acts under the compulsion of an
felIow beings.
. .irresistible force.
9. Such illness of the offender 3s would d
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of a n un- exercise of the will-power of the offender wi
controllable fear o€ an equal o r greater injury. ever depri i6g him of consciousnes
7. .Any person who fails to perform an act required d, finally, any other ci
plflaw, when prevented by some lawful o r insuperable natu and analogous to those ab0
,,
e.
.,., ,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIZWER
i
., ./= :,:.,,
.,." c. .1
That the act be committed with abuse of confidence 15. That advantage be taken of superior stren
..
.,,,. . . .,, ungratefulness. means be employed to weaken the defense.
6, That the crime be committed in t'le palace of the 16. That the act be committed with tre
ief Executive, or in his presence, or where public au-
thorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties or There is treachery when the offender commits any Of
a place dedicated to religious worship. the crimes a,gainst the person, employing means, methods,
6. That the crime be committed in the nighttime or o r forms in the execution thereof which tend directly
in an uninhabited place, o r by a band, whenever such and sneciallv t o insure its execution, without risk, t o .him-
circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense. self arising from the defense which the offended p a r t y , .;:.r ,;
might make.
Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall
have a.cted together in the commission of an offense, it 17. That mcans be employed or circumstances brought , ,.a
. . , about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the , ,::.
shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. ..
act. . ,. .. ~
7. That the crime he committed on the occasion of a
18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful ,,...;I
conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic, or other
entry.
~
..
..,, ,.,,.
~ calami1.y o r misfortune.
There is an unlawful entry when an entrance is effected '.
.I
8. That the crime be committed with the @id of by a way not intended for the purpose.
armed men or persons who inswe or afford impunity.
19. That as a means to the commission of a crime .a :
9. That the accused is a recidivist. wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.
A recidivist is one who, a t the time of his trial for 20. That the crime be committed with the aid of per-
'., . one crime, shall have been previously convictec! by final sons under fifteen years of age, or by means of motor
judgment of another crime embraced in the same title vehicles, airships, or other similar means.
' .I . of the Revised Penal Code. 21. That the wrong done in the commission of the
'1
10. That the offender has been previously punished crime c deliberately augmented by causing other wrong
f a r an offense to which the law attaches an equal or not ecessazy for its commission.
more crimes to which it
11
, ,.I ,. ,
I, ., :::~1
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER +q&&&,,
1
,.?".$
.l
A
*
;,,A' .$ -*,,z*,
~. '
- $;/. ?<.$",,
The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be are a e / ,<
.,~,. ,.~.~".,
,,~b.*
into consideration when. the offended party is the Accomplices are those persons who, not being' included {:?$I
, ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural, or adopt- ? in article 17 of the Revised Penal Code. coouerate'in ,the' *
executiowof the offense E/y arevious or'sim&aneous actB i.:if:. ~
::-:<4
brother or sister, or relative by affinity in the same '
,
,+,;
.>
..~.
",,+
/' .
^_j
3 . Those who cooperate in the commission of the of-
.fense by another act without which it would not have
. ,*s..',~'%been accomplished.
As a general rule, no *felony shall be p,u
any penalty not preserihed by law
,;&I ;&,..: hi*-!8'. > ,:,e<,
&.+i (Art. 17, R.P.C.) (Art. 21, R.P.C.).
12 13
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
But Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect in so The penaltks which may be imposed, accordi
Revised Penal Code, and their different classes,'
included in the following:
unless such person by reason of his conduct or enforcement of the penalty. The duration of ..the 0th
other serious cause shall be considered by the Chief penalties shall be computed only from the day on w$ic
as unworthy of pardon. the defendant commences to serve his sentence.
Reclusion temporal.-The penalty of reclusion temporal (Art. 28, R.P.C.):
twelve years and one day t o twenty years.
Prision mnyor nnd temporaw disquaZif$cation.-The
duration of the penalties of prision mayor and temporary
disqualification shall be from six years and one day to
twelve years, except when the penalty of disqualification
is imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case, its
duration shall be that o€ the principal penalty.
3.
I 37. In what cases shall the offenders who have undergone pre-
ventive iniprisonment not be credited in the service of their
sentences with one-half of the time of their preventive
imprisonment?
Offenders who have undergone preventive imprison-.
ment shall be credited in the service of their sentences
Prision eorreceional, suspension, and destierro,-The consisting of deprivation of liberty, with one-half of the
duration of the penalties of prision correceional, suspen- time during which they have undergone preventive im-
sion, and rlestierro shall be from six months and one day prisonment, except in the following cases:
to six years, except when suspension is imposed as an 1. When they are recidivists, or have been convicted
accessory penalty, in which case, its duration shall. be previously twice or more times of any crime;
that of the principal penalty. 2 . When upon being summoned for the execution
Arresto mayor.-The duration of the penalty of ar- their sentence, they have failed to surrender voluntar
resto mayor shall be from one month and one da 3. When they have been convicted of robh
months. estafa, malversation of public funds, falsification,
Arresto menor.-The duration of the penal or prostitution.
.;rent0 menor shall be from one day to thirty
,
Bond to keep the peace.-The bond to keep the peace /
shall be required to cover such period of time as the court What are the effects of the penalties of perpetual or tern
ma,y determine. porary absolute disqualification for
(Art. 27, R.P.C.) The penalties of perpetual or temporary abs
qualification for public office shall produce the
State the rules for the computation of the term of the
duration of temporary penalties and the term of the dura-
tion of penalties consisting in deprivation of liber e f f e z p r i v a t i o n of the public offices
ments which the offender may have held,
If the offender shall he in prison, the term f e r i - ’ popular election.
duiation of the temporary penalties shall be com
The deprivation of the right to vote in
from the day on which the judgment of conviction
have become final. for any popular elective office or to be elec
office.
. ’, If the offender be not in prison, the term of the dura-
’, tion of the penalty consisting of deprivation of liberty A d i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n for the offices
“-‘Shall be computed from the day that the offender is ployments and for the exercise of any of t
laeed a t the disposal of the judicial authorities for the tioned.
16
17,
CItIIMINAC LAW REVIEWSR
& case of temporary disqualification, such disqualifica- such profession or calling o r right of suffrage during
n as is comprised in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article term of the sentence.
11 last during the term of the sentence. The person suspended from holding public office s h
4 . The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other not gold another having similar functions during the perio
pensfon for any office formerly held. o p i s suspension.
/
/
he effects of the penalties of perpetual or tern- 42.1 What are the effects of civil interdiction?
ial disqualification for pubJic office, profession, Civil interdiction shall deprive the o€fender during'the
time of his sentence of the rights of parental authority,
1
The Penalties of perpetual or temporary special dis- o r guardianship, either as to the verson or property' .of
ualification for public office, profession, or calling shall ny ward, of marital authority, of the right t o manage
roduce the following effects: his property, and of the right t o dispose of such property
1 . The deprivation of the office, employment, profes- by any act or any conveyance intar vivos (Art. 34, R.P;C:).
on or calling affected.
2. The disqualification for holding similar offices or 43. What are the effects of bond to keep the p
kWnentS either perpetually or during the term of the It shall be the duty of any person sentenced to^
e m , according to the extent of such disqualification.
bond t o keep the peace, to present two suffic
(Art. 31, R.P.C.) who shall undertake that such person
40. '.What are the effects of the penalties of perpetual or tern- the offense sought t o be prevented, and that
*;. , porary special disqualification for the exercise of the right offense be committed they will pay the amoun
, ' of suffrage? by the court in its judgment, or otherwise to deposit
The perpetual o r temporary special disqualification for amount in the office of the clerk of the court to y a r
the exercise of the right of suffrage shall deprive the of- said undertaking.
fender perpetually or during the term o i the sentence, The court shall determine, according t o its discreti
according to the nature of said penalty, of the right to the period of duration of the bond.
n any popular election for any public office or to be Should the person sentenced fail to giie
d to such office. Moreover, the offender shall not he required he shall be detained for a period whi
tted to hold any public office durilig the period of no case 'exceed six months, if he shall have been
isqualification (Art. 32, R.P.C.7. for a grave or' less grave felony, and shall not exce
days, if for a light felony.
What are the effects of the penalties of suspension from
/
public office, profession, or calling, or the right of suf-
44. What are the effects of a pardon by t h
, . ., / The suspension from public office, profession, or call- upon the convict's right to hold public office
', '. ing, and the exercise of the right of suffrage shall dis- suffrage? May a pardon exempt the cdlpri
qualify the offender from holding such office or exercisiw payment of civil indemnity?
19
I
f
c e his financial circumstances should improve; but he
4. The costs of the proceedings. all be relieved f?om pecnniary liability as to the fine.
/' (Art. 38, R.P.C.) (Art. 39, R.P.C.)
What are the rules relating to subsidiary penalty? 8. What are the accessory penalties of death?
If the convict has no property with which to meet the The death penalty, when it is not executed by
liabilities mentioned in paragraphs Ist, Znd, of commutation or pardon, shall carry with it
the next preceding article, he shall be subject
..,, personal liability at the rate of one day
and 50 centavos, subject to the follow-
ina rules:
22 33
_1 . ,:. ._ . . .
?%..,*,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWIER
:?,&
e.,&,
'I!he penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed
. .
. '
.. for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon 64. What is the additional penalty to be imp0
to the commission of a consummated felony accessories who should act viith abuse of the
" , . 1. ( ' tions in harboring, concealing, or assisting
i of the principal of the crime?
hat is the penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in a a Those a.ccessor?es shall suffer the additional penalty
., .
' The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed
of absolute perpetual disqualification if the principal df-
fender shall be guilty of a grave felony, and that of ab-
for the frustrated felony shall be imposed upon solute temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of
the accomplices in the commission of a frustrated felony a less grave felony (Art. 58, R.P.C.).
, , * '% I
impose the corresponding penalties upon tho
.. , ' 69.T':tWhat :ire {.he rules for graduating penalties?
I principals of the frustrated felony, or of atte
'.%:For the purpose of graduating the penalties which, mit the same, and upon acc
:.,. ,:. ,: ' according to the provisions of articles fifty to fifty-seven,
,',
~ .;..;, inclusive, of the Revised Penal Code, are to be imposed
, . ,. i . I .,',
CRIHINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
/
stitute a crime specially punishable by law o r which are (Art. 62, R.P
tuclcded %j the law in ddinmg a mime and prescribing
the penalty therefor shall tlot be taken into account for
t h e purpose of increasing the penalty. 71. Who is a habitual delinquent?
2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any A person shall be deeaed to be habitual delinquent, ,.
aggravating circumstances inherent in the crime to such if within a period of ten years from the date of his
a degree that it must of necessity accompany the com- release or last conviction of the crimes of serious o r less '.
, ..
29
28
,5
. ..
4 . When both mitigating and aggravating circum- greater penalty than that prescribed by law, in its paxi-
stlfnces attended the commission of the act, the courts mum period.
s all reasonably allow them to offset one another in
onsideration of their number and importance, for the
purpose of applying the penalty in accordance with the
preceding rules, according to the result of such compensa-
73. "bat are the rules far the application of penalties whkh 4. What is the rule in cases in which the penalty is not'
contain three,,periods?
In cases in which the penalties prescribed by law con-
'
, fain three periods, whether it be a single divisible pe.nalty
'
I
..: o r composed of three different penalties, each one of
.
,... ,. , 30
CkIfMINAL LAW REVIEWER CkIMINAL LAW REY'IEWEB
,'.. .76. What are the rules to be observed as to the penalty to be executed successively or
.__,, , .. '.> i m w e d upon a person under eighteen years of age? a pardon have beezi granted as to the Penalty Or .,
m e n the offender is a minor under eighteen years ,~, penalties first imposed, or should they have been sewed ~..
and his case is one coming under the provisions of the out.
:*
.y - parwraph next to the last of article 80 of the Revised
: ' Penal Code, the following rules shall be observed:
? .
1. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years
of age, who is not exempted from liability by reason of
the court having declared that he acted with discernment,
a discretionary penalty shall be imposed, but always lower
by two degrees a t least than that prescribed by l a ~ vfor
the crime which he committed.
2 . Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years
of age the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law
shall be immed, but always in the proper period. redo mayor
(Art. 68, R.P.C.)
. . -.
;; ,.. ,What is the penalty to be imposed when the wime corn-
"',-77. disqualification
,<;~, ., mitted is not wholly excusable?
...
, >
disqualificatioll
.. A penalty lower by one o r two degrees than that pre- office, the right to v
: ', scribed hy law shall be imposed if t h e rleed is not wholly and be voted for, the right to fOh%' Profess1
excusable by reason of the lack of some of the conditions
or calling
required. to justify the same o r to exempt from criminal
. liability in the several cases mentioned in articles 11 and
I,'
12. Public censure
'
. . 12, provided that the majority of such conditions be pre- Notwithstanding the provisions of the
:I : sent.. !Che courts shall impose the penalty in the period ing, the maxinrurn duration of the eonl.iet's sentence
,' which may be deemed proper, in view of the number and not be more than threefold the length Of time corres
nature of the conditions of exemption present or laeking ingto the most severe of the aenalties imposed. on
(Art. 69, R.P.C.). N~ other penalty to which he may be liable shall be,',
,?C,
flitted after the sum of those imposed equals tbe"s
1 78. What are the rules regarding successive service of sen- maximum period.
1* such maximum period shall in no case exceed
When the culprit has to serve two or more penalties years.
e shall Serve them simultaneously if the nature of the applying the provisions of this
rmit ; otherwise, the 2ollowing rules of perpetual penalties ( p e m p e m t u a ) shall
a t thirty years.
of the penalties, the order of their
11 be followed so th?,t they m y be
1
i
. . . , i
, , ,, .'. .
. ,, , . ,,, . .
. .. .
. .,
' 79. What are the.graduated scales from which the lower or 81. What is the presumption in regard to th
; . higher penalty is to be taken? accessory penalties?
.. In the cases in which the law prescribes a penalty Whenever the courts shall impose a penal
.", . ...
. .'
lower 01 higher by one or more degrees than another provision of la-#, carries with it other pen
enalty, the rules prescribed in article 61 shall be ing $6 tbe provisions of articles 40, 41, 42, 43, 44,
ed in graduating such penalty. Revised Penal Code, it m ~ s tbe understo
he lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the penalties are also imposed upon the-eo
ted scale in which is comprised the given penalty.
The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty,
shall observe the following graduated scales: 2. What is the penalty higher than reclusion perpetua
law does not prescribe the penalty of death? .. ''
Scale No. 1
In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty hi
than another given penalty, without. speeifi
. Beelusion temporal the name of the fonner, if such higher pen
that of death, t h e same penalty and the accessory
of article 40, shall be considered as the
(Art. 74, R.P.C.!.
8. Arrest0 menor 83. What are the rules as regards increasing or reducing
9. Public censure penalty of fine by one or more d e ~ r e e s ?
Whenever it may be necessary t o incr
Scale No. 2 the penalty of fine by one or more d
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification increased 01" reduced, respectively, for e
2. Temporary absolute disqualification one-fourth of the maximum amount pre
3 . Suspension from public office, the right to vote and without, however, changing the minimum.
be voted for, and the riaht to follow x profession The same rules shall be observed with regard t o fine
or calling / that do not consist of a fixed amount, but are made pro-"
/
4. F'ublic censure portional.
6. Fine
(Art. 71, R.P.C.)
. ~
,., .. 84. What is a complex penalty?
.:-,t~,;...,~.,80.
,. , . How art! the civil liabilities of a person puilty of two or
more offemes satisfied? A complex penalty is one composed of three di
The civil liabilities of a person found guilty of two penalties, each one forming a period; the lightest Of
ore offenses shall be satisfied by following the shall be the minimum, the next the medium, and t
nological order of the dates of the final judgments severe the maximum period.
endered against him, beginning with the first in order Whenever the penalty prescribed does n
f:,time (Art..,72, R.P.C.). of the forms specially provided for in the R
i
, .j
.: , .. ' . 34
... .
Code, the periods shall be distributed, applying by 'analogy i df the minor has been committed t o the custody o r
the prescribed rules. care of any of the institutions mentioned in the first para-
(Art. 77, R.P.C.) graph of this article, with the approval of the Director
of Public Welfare and xnbject to such conititions as this ?
85. What is the provision of the Revised Penal Code as regards official in accordance with law may deem proper t o im-
the execution and service of sentence in case the convict ;pose, such minor may be allowed to stay elsewhere under
becomes insane o r imbecile? +he care of a responsible person.
When a convict shall hecomeinsane or an'imbeeile after If the rn- has behaved properly and has complied
final :sentence has been pronounced, the execution of said with the conditions imposed upon him during his confine-
sentence shall be suspended only with regard to the per-
sonal penalty.
ment, in accordance with the provisions of this article,
he shall be returned to the court in order that the same ,:a*
,::
1.
If a t any time the convict shall recqver his reason, may order his final release.
his sentence shall be executed, unless the penalty shall In case the minor fails to behav
have :prescribed in accordance with the provisions of the with the regulations of the institution to which h% has
Revised Penal Code. been committed or with the conditions imposed upon him '.
These provisions shall also be observed if the insanity wheri he was committe
or imbecility occurs while the convict is serving his sen- son, or in case he should be fo
tence. eontinu& stay ir, such
(Art. 79, R.P.C.) he shall be returned to
may render the judg
86. What are the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on the committed by him.
suspension of sentence of minor delinquents? (Art. 80, R.P.C., as amended
Whenever a minor of either sex, under sixteen years ...
ljy Com. Act No. 99 and Rep.
of age at the date of the commission of a grave or less Act No. 47)
.- grave felony, is accused thereof, the court, after hearing
the evidence in the proper proceedings, instead o f pro-
nouncing judgment of conviction, shall suspend all further
proceedings and shall commit such minor to the custody
l7 . In what cases is the execution of the death senten
suspended?
or care of a public or private, benevolent or charitable The death sentence shall not be inflicted upon a wo
- ' institution, established under the law for the care, cor- within the three years next following the date of the"
.. rection, or education of orphaned, homeless, defective, and tence or while she is pregnant, n o r upon any person
delinquent children, or to the custody or care of any other seventy years of age. In this last ca,s
responsible person in any other place subject to visitation shall be commuted to the penalty 0
and supervision by the Director of Public Welfare or any with the accessory penalties provide
, . , of his agents or representatives, if there be any, or other- 83, R.P.C.).
wise hy the superintendent of public schools or his repre-
, ' sentatives, subject to such conditions as are prescribed 88. How is the penalty of destierro executed?
. , until such minor shall have reached his majority or for Any person sentenced to destie
'I ."".": such :less period as the court may deem proper,
mitted to enter the place o r places designated ~
36
i: CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
d woman, as pro-
' 38
. ,
,. . .
What are the causes of partial extineticn of criminal lia-
96, R"P.C.).
.. . .
. , . , ,
period of his sentence:
:' I . .
r , . J
40
. . , ~ , ,
L. ,.
. ,
I
or insane person, and by a person under nine years of ing him, of the deposit of such goods within t h e inn;;Fd .. ,'t"
age, or over nine but under fifteen years of age, who shall furthermore have followed the directions which such '.,<'
has acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those innkeeper or his representative may have given them with,, ,;;;,&
having such a person under their legal authority or con- respect t o the care of and vigilance over such goods. NO .,:A
trol, unless i t appears that there was no fault or negli- liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence ,:$!h
.gence on their part. agiiliist or intimidation of persons unless committed by , > ' #
Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile, the innkeeper's employees, .,g;'$
or minor under his authority, legal guardianship, or con- (Art. 102, R.P.C.) .:$&
-.x
trol, oir if such person be insolvent, said insane, imbecile,
or minor shall respond with their own property, except- 144. What is the subsidiary civil liability of employers engag
ing property exempt from execution, in accordance witii in any kind of iiidustry?
the civil law. The subsidiary liability established in the next preced- ,
ing article shall also apply to employers, teachers, per- '.
~:
Second: In cases falling within subdivision 4 of article
11, the persons for whose benefit the harm has been pre- sons, and corporations engaged in any kind of industry
vented shall be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit for felonies committed by their servants, pupils, workmen, ?
which they may have received. apprentices, or employees in the discharge of their duties. j&,*
'
',
...,',,., ,,,? diminution of value as determined. by the cour
42 43
?
i i . .,. . . .., ,
"i: ,,q-.; . ,
.. . . ..
.. '
The/thing itself shall be restored, even though it be No. If there are two or more persons .civilly liable ',,'
n the possession of a third person who has ae- for a felony, the courts shall determine the amount for',,
it by lawful means, saving to the latter his action whic each must respond (.Art. 109, R..P.C.). ' . .
the proper person who may be liable to him.
plicable in cases in which the
'ng has been acquired by the third person in the manner
d under the requirements which, by law, bar an action
/
11 State the several and subsidiary liabili1.y of principals, ac--
complices. and accessories of felony and the preference in
payment.
The principals, accomplices, and accessories, each with;
(Art. 105, R.P.C.) in their respective class, shall be liable severally (in ~
the civil liability in solidum of two Does service of sentence or amnesty, pardon, or commuta-.,
of a felony, without determining tion of sentence extinguish civil liability under the Revised
each must respond? Penal Code?
45 . .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
o the Government of the Philippines, not being ', any information, plans, photographs, or o
a foreigner, levies war against it or adheres to the ,enemies, confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine
giving them aid or comfort witbin the Philippines or else- ~ ; or
eing .in possession, by ?emon of the public office '
of violation of neutrality
Violation of neutrality is committed by anyone wh
(Ark 115, R.P.C.)
any regulation issued by
..,
I
. .. . 46
-5 47
~,.,"
't.
.;
, .
..,
I
.~ ,
It is committed by any person who, in time of war,
2. 125. How is the crime of arbitrary detention committed?
, '
shall have correspondence with an enemy country or terri- 4 It is committed by any public officer or employee who, ., ,~
' without legal grounds, detains a person (Art. 124, R.P.C.). '.
tory occupied by enemy troops, aad khe correspondence
has been prohibited by the Government; or it is carried 126. How is the crime of delay in the delivery of detained per-
an in ciphers or conventional signs; or notice or informa- sons to the proper judicial authorities committed?
'tion is given thereby which might be useful to the enemy
.,. , ., (Art. 1.20, R.P.C.). It is committed by a public officer o r employee who,
having detained any person for some legal gr
. . fail to deliver such person to the proper judicial
122 How is the crime of flight to enemy's country committed? within the period of; six hours, if detained
,. It is comnitted by any person who, owing allegiance or offenses punishable by light penalties, or their equi-:.
to the Government, attempts t o flee or go to an enemy valent; nine hours, for crimes or offenses punishable
1 . country when prohibited by competent authority (Art. correctional penalties, or their equivalent; and eighte
,,, , ~ .z:, . 121, R.P.C.). hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by afflictive^
.. capital penalties, or their equivalent (Art. 125, R.P.C
123. IIoy iri the crime of piracy committed?
'427. Row is the cyime of &laying relase committed?, .
'Piracy is committed by any person who, on the high
.. . It is committed by any public officer or ,employee
seas, shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being a member
.- of its complement nor a passenger, shall seize the whole delays the performance of any judicial or executive of
for the release of a prisoner o r detention prisoner,.
or part of the cargo of said vessel, its equipment, or per- unduly delays the service of the notice of such order
sonal belongings of its complement or passengers (Art.
said prisoner, or the proceedings upon any petition
"" 122, R.P.C.). the liberation of such person (Art. 126, R.P.C.).
Not@: The mutiny which the Revised Pe~,zlW e punisha is Note: The three farms of arbitrary detention are defined:'
that which is committed on the high seas. Arts. 124, 125, and 126.
.r 2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned, their victims It is committed by any public officers or em
withont means of saving themselves: or who, not being authorized by judicial order, shall
*. 3 . Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, any dwelling again.st ihe will of the owner thereof,
homicide, physical injuries, or rape. papers or other effects found therein without the
., (Art. 123, R.P.C.) consent of such owner, or, having surreptitious1
49
48
I
. ,. . .
'..
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRTXMINAL LAW REVIEWER
said dwelling, and being required to leave the premises, It is committed by any public officer or employee who
~. shall refuse to do so (Art. 128, R.P.C.). shall prevent or disturb the ceremonies o r mjllifestations'
of any religion (Art. 132, par. 1, R.P.C.).
,, .
. ,
..,
130. How is the crime of search warrants maUeiously obtained,
, .
and abuse in the service of those IegaUy obtained, com-
mitted?
/'
134. When is the crime qualified? ---
If the crime of interruption of religious
% ;~
~ .,;:. .. ~,
It is committed by any public officer or employee who ,committed with violmce o r threats (Art.
.' .. shall procure a search warrant without just cause., or., , R.P.C.).
having legally procured the same, shall exceed his au-
(2''
:'.,
thority or use unnecessary severity in executing the same
.(Art. 129, R.P.C.).
Jdk. Hmitted?
o:v is the crime of offending the religious feelings corn- ~ .
.. ,
It is committed by anyone who, in a place devoted to
131. How is the crime of searching domicile without witnesses religious worship or during the celebration of any religious
'. committed? ceremony, shall perform acts notoriously offensive to the
.*v
, $.
. It is committed by any public officer or employee who,
I
I feelings of the faithful (Art. 133, R.P.C.).
in cases where a search is proper, shall search the douecile, Note: The crimes against religious worship are defined in.
papers, or other belongings of any person, in the absence Arts. 152 and 133.
of thc latter, any mcmber of his family, or in their de-
;. fault, without the presence of two witnesses i'efiiding in 38. How is the crime of rebellion or insurrection committed?
.,'
~
. ., &.$&,.
,,(i_
the same locality (Art. 130, R.P,C.).
,, .. The crime of rebellion or insurrection is committed by
'$ :, . Note: The three P o m s of violation of domicile are defined rising publicly and taking arms against the Government.
. .I in Act& 128, 129 and 130. for the purpose of removing from the allegiance to said
Government or its laws the territory of the Philippines
.,. 132. What are the acts punished in connection y i t h peaceful
/
o any part thereof or any body of land, naval, or other
a . .%'; . meetings$, association, and petition?
rmed forccs, o r of depriving the Chief Executive or the
1. By prohibiting o r by interrupting, without legal Congress, wholly or partially, of any of their powers o r :
. '
groaad, ike holding of a peaceful meeting, or by dissolv-
ing the same,
'prerogatives (Art. "4, R.P.C.).
9. .:
2. By hindering any person from joining any lawful 37. Who re liable for rebellion?
/ (W3;$
' '
association or from attending any of its meetings. e, following are liable for rebellion:
,. , .
:.
,,.., 3. BY prohibiting or hindering any person from ad- Any person who (a) promotes, (b) m a i n & +
dressing, either alone or together with others, any peti- eads a rebellion o r insurrection; or
. ~ ,'. tion to the authorities for the correction of abuses or Any person who, while holding any
redress of grievances.
. . or employment, takes part therein, (a) eng
7, , :'.
( .. ..<-;.,
(Art. 131, R.P.C.) against the forces of the government, (b) de
erty o r cominiMng serious vio'rence, and (c)
'.::. 133. How is tbe crime of interruption of religious worships'
"
tributions or diverting public funds from th
. .. :, ., committed?
pose for which they have been appropriat
. , , 60 61
,~
1. ''
* -
I
crime of inciting to sebellion or insurrection 144. How is conspiracy t o commit sedition committ
~ ' .
It is committed when two or more persons come
It is committed by any person who, without taking a n agreement and a decision to rise public1
ing in open hostility against the Government, tuously to attain any of the objects of seditio
others to the execution of any of the acts B.F.C.).
Article 134 of the Revised Penal Code, by
means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, ban-
ners or other representations tendina to the same end 145. How is the crime of inciting to sedition eo
The crime of inciting t o sedition is committect in
ferent ways, which are as follows:
1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of an
The crime of sedition is committed by persons who the acts which constitute sedition by means of spee
rise publicly and tumultuously in order to attain by force, proclamations, writings, emblems, etc.
intimidation, or by other means outside of legal methods, 2. Uttering seditions words or speeche
any of t.he following objects: to disturb the public peace.
52 53
3 . Writing, publishing, or circulatin scurrilous libels v(
- CRIMlNAL LAW REVIEWER
54 5s
CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER
2 . Associations totally or partially organized for some 2. By refusing to be sworn o r placed under affirma-
purpose contrary to public morals. tion while being before such legislative or constitutional
(Art. 147, R.P.C.) body o r of€icial.
8 . By refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to pro-
152: Who are the persons liable for illeg.al associations? duce any books, papers, documents, or records in his pos-
They are: session, when required by them t o do so in the exercise
i
of their functions.
1. Founders, directors and presidents.
,. .;
i 4 . By redraining another from attending as a witness
2 . Mere members.
in such legislative or constitutional body or official.
;5
153. How are direct assaults committed? 5 . By inducing disobedience t o a summons or refusal
?
;>,. .'. to be sworn by any sucb. body or official.
,.,,
... .' . Direct assaults are committed by any person or per- (Art. 160, R.P.C:)
sons who, without a public uprising, shall employ force
v,.. .
~, , I
~ or intimidation for the attainment of any of the purposes /
'156.
.
How IS the crime of resistance and disobedience to a
enumerated in defining the c r i m s af rebellion and seaition,
.,:,
.,., ,.
I",
>;l> '
or shall attack, employ force, or seriously intimidate or person in antiioriity o r the agents of such person com-
,<$: .. mitted?
,A), resist any person in authority or any of his agents, while
.* >I engaged in the performance of official duties, or on occa- IC is committed by any person who, not being included
sion of such performance (Art. 148, R.P.C.). in Arts. 148, 149, and 15.0, shall resist o r seriously dis-
obey any pers,on in anthority, or the agents of such per-
154. How are indirect a s a u l t s committed? son, while engaged in the performance of official duties
(Art. 151, par. 1, R.P.C.).
Indirect assaults are committed by any person who shall
make use of force or intimidation upon any person coming The penalty is lower when the disobedience to a n agent
' . to the aid of the authorities 01' their agents on occasions of a person in authority is not of a serious nature (Art.
. , of the commission of any of the crimes defined in Art. 151, par. 2, R.P.C.).
_I..
/
-;$
. ~e%, ,-
".
:':.,
..! ,, , .
148 (Art. 149, R.P.C.).
56
I
*
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CLLIMIIYAL LAW REVIEWER
1 ' . who comes to the aid of persons in authority, shall be 3. By maliciously publishing or causing t o be published *, i.
-7 '
deemed an agent of a persoi~in autliorjky. my official resoluiio~~ or document without proper au-
In applying the provisions of 148 and 151 of the Re- thority, or before they have been published officially;
.,,. vised Penal Code, teachers, professors, and persons charged
with the supervision of publk 01. duly recognized private
4 . By printing, publishing or distributing (or causing
the same) boolKs, pamphlets, periodicals, or leaflets which
'
. . schools, colleges and universities, shall be deemed persons do not bear the real printer's name, or which are classified
in authoritv. as nnonymolts.
(Art. 152, as amended by Rep, (Art. 154, R.P.C.)
Act No. 1978, R.P.C.)
160. What are t h e acts punished as alarms and scandals? .
' 158. What are tumults and other disturbances of public order?
They are:
They are:
1, Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or
I, Causing any serious disturbance in a public place, other explosive within any town or public place, (cal-
3
office or establishment; culated to cause) which produces alarm or danger.
2. Interrupting or disturbing public performances, 2. Instigating os taking an active part in any charivari ','.
functions or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act or other disorderly meeting offensive to another or preju-
' i s not included in Arts. 131 and 132; dicial to public tranquility.
3 . Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or 3 . Disturbing the public peace while wandering about
,:
,,I
sedition in any meeting, association or public place: at night or while engaged in any other nocturnal amuse
4. Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a ments. ..
..
disturba.nce of public order in such place;
5 . Burying with pomp the body of a person who has
4. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places '."
I .
iuhi.!e intoxicated or othervise, provided Art. 153 js not
been legally executed. applicable.
(Art. 153, R.P.C.)
% '
159. What are the acts punished as unlawftil use of means of 161... How is the crime of delivering prisoners from jails C
,:.,,. publication and unlawful utterances? mitted?
They are: It is committed by any person who shall
1. By publishing or causing to be published, by means any jail or penal establishment any person co
.. of print.ing, lithography o s any other mezns of publica- in or shall help the escape of such perso
tion, as news any false news which may endanger the of violence, intimidation o r bribery, or other
public order, o r cause damage to the interest or credit escape may take place outside of the penal establis
j of the State; by taking the guards by surprise (Art. 156, R.P.C.
,, .,' 2. By encouraging disobedience to the law or to the
, ',. constituted authorities or by praising, justifying or ex- 162. Mention the different forms of evasion of the service
tolling any act punished by law, by the same means or i the sentence and state how each is committed.
by words, utterances o r speeches. They are:
68 69
3
. ,*:.
..,.
I. .c.
. , . '
.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWE11
,., 1. Evasion of service of sentence by escaping during It is committed by any person who' shall forge .the
the tern1 of sentence. Great Seal of the Government of the Philippines-or the ,,
. . 2 . Evasion on the occasion of disorder. signature or stamp of the Chief Executive (Art. 161,
3 . Other cases of evasion by violating the condition R.P.C.).
. . of a conditional pardon.
165. How is the crime of using forged signature or counterfeit
Evasion of service of sentence by escaping is com- seal or stamtp committed?
mitted by any convict who shall evade service of his sen-
,. . . tence by escaping during the term of his sentence by
.. It is committed by any person who shall knowingly
make use of the counterfeit seal or forged signature. or
' reason of final judgment (Art. 157, R.P.C.).
stanq of the Chief Executive (Art. 162, R.P.C.);
I
.
, j
,
forty-eight hours following the issuance of a proclamation
. by the Chief Executive announcing the prssing away of
4
~ " t ~ he . l n.mitated
: CO ~ . may be any ."in: silver coin, any
of the minor coinage of the Philippines, or coin of .e foreid
, ,:'$
', ..
_I such calamity (Art. 158, R.P.C.).
. I that are kcal tender, or those withdrawn from ,'
.,
Other cases of evasion is committed by a convict who, circulation.
.,.: having been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Ex- But the coins mutilated must be legal tender coins of the , <r
,: Philippines, not foreign coins and not withdraam from cir- * :.: ,
ecutive, shall violate any of the conditions of such par- dation. 'ir
\ . . .Id!.
.
,..ai
.~.S'
y
,'Lf.h34.
,
,
' ,.
,__
, ,
How is the crime of counterfeiting the Great Seal of the
. Government. of the Philippines, or that of forging the
signature or stamp of the Chief Executive, committed?
They are:
1. Forging or falsifying treasury or ,bank notes
other documents payable t o bearer.
60 61
..,. ,
I
-:,.
~*e%
,:., ,:
, ... .,~'
,
' . 2 Importation of such false or forged obligations or 172. %ow is the crime of falsification of legislative documents . ,,
. ._ '.~
note$+pi: . ,. . committed? ._
3 . Uttering such fZlse or forged obli@ons or notes' It is committed by any p a s o n who, without proper. .'
in connivance ivith' the forgers or importers, authority thercfor, alters any bill, resolution, or ordinance .
, enacted 01' apprqved or pending approval by either House&
.. (Art. 166, R.P.C.)
1
of Congress or any provincial board or municipal council;i
Note: If the instrument forpad, imported or uttered is pay-
,. ,. able to order, the crime is pmished under Art. 167. The acts
(Art. 170, R.P.C.).
.. ,
punishcd are the same a8 in Art. 166.
. ,.<,. c
.
,
173. What are the acts of falsifieat,ion that may be committed
What are the treasury or bank notes or other documents on any document?
payable to hearer the fiirging or falsification of which
is punishable?
or imita,ting any handwriting, signa-
They are:
1. Obligation or security of the Philippines. Causing it t o appear that persons have participakd . ;
. i ,,
.,. .\
, .L. 2 . Circulating note issued' by any banking association they did not in fact so
, . .
4 '
. duly authorized by law to issue the same.
I ' 3 . *Document issued by a foreign government. Attributing to persons who have partkip
4 . Circulating note or. bill issued by a foreign bank other than tho
duly authorized to issue the same.
in a narration o f "
How is the crime of illega1:possession and use of false
treasury or bank notes and other instruments of cxedit tering true daten;
committed?
It is committed by any person who shall knowingly
use or have in his possession, with intent to use, any
false or falsified instrument payable to bearer or payable Issuing in an authent,icated form LI document
,?
to order (Art. 168, R.P.C.).
How is forgery
-~ committed?
0.
9**," - Forgery is committed by any of the followin~g,.,meam:
1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instru- '. Intercalating any instrument o r note relat
ment pa,yable to bearer or to order mentioned therein, the issuance thereof in a protocol, I
the appearance of a true and genuine document ; book.'
&p .:. >,'
,.d:
,
2 . By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering
,
.
,,,
~i
by any means the figores, letters, words, or signs con- 1'
' ., &! :, tained therein. 174. Distinguish falsification by public of
., ,,.,~
,...
* (Art. 169, R.P.C.) notary from falsification by private
..
,?.. '
,.
'.i .'i
62 63
t .
,
.. i ~ , , '-
. ..'
.
.' the intention of using them, shall have them in his pos-
session (Art. 176, par. 2, R.P.C.).
d False testimony in civil cases (Art. 162).
&"False testimony in other cases (Art. 183). (People
182. How is the crime of usurpation of anthority or official vs. Bautista, 39 O.G. 1272)
functions; committed?
It is committed by any person who shall knowingly 6 . h s t i n g u i s h false testimony against a defendant from false
and falsely represent himself to be an officer, agent, o r testimow favorable to the defendant.
representative of any department or agency of the Philip- In both crimes, the witness who gave false testimony
pine Government or of any foreign government, or who, is liable even if his testimony was not considered by the '1
- court. The Code punishes false testimony 'gainst a de- .'
'. under pretense of official position, shall perform any act
pertaining t o any person in authority or public officer fendant even if the latter is acquitted. e false testi-
of the Philippine Government or of any foreign govern- mony favorable to the defendant need not directly in-
ment, o r any agency thereof, without being lawfully en- fluence the decision of aequieal. It need not benefit the
'-
titled to do so (Art. 177, as amended by Rep. Act 379, defendant. It is sufficient that the false testimony was
R.P.C.). given with intent to favor the defendant.
As to the basis of the penalty, they differ in the sense
183. How are the crimes of using fictitious name and conceal- that in false testimony against a defendant the penalty "
depends upon the sentence of the defendant against whom
. , ing true name committed?
The crime of using fictitious name is committed by the false testimony was given, that is, whether he is
convicted or acquit,ted; and in case of conviction, the
.i
,,j
any person who shall publicly use n fictitious name for
the purpose of concealing a crime, evading the execution penalty to which the defendant is sentenced. In false
t, or causing damage (Art. 178, par. I , testimony favorable to the defendant, the penalty depends
on whether the prosecution is for a felony punishable .
The crime of concealing truc name is committed by by an af€lictive peiialty o r it is for other classes of
conceals his trnc namc and other personal felony.
(Art. 178, par. 2, R.P.C.).
A87. Distinguish false testimony in civil cases from false te
184. How is the crime of ille~al use of uniform or insignia mony in criminal cases.
committed? i' In &
fw tcstimony in civil casetr, the testimony
It is committed by any person who shall publicly and ; relate to the issues presented in. the case; wherea
improperly make use of insignia, uniform, or dress per- false testimony in criminal cases, it is not required
taining t o a n office not held by such person or to a the testimony be material.
class of persons of which he is not a member (Art. 179,
188. How- is the crime of false testimony in other cases
perjury in solemn affirmation committed?
85. What a r e the three forms o f false testimony?
'It is committed by any person who, knowingly m
untruthful statements and not being included i
visions relative to false testimony in crimin
cases, shall testify under oath, or make a n affidayi
66 67
. *
,.
,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
*'% quires (Art. 183, R.P.C.). any other person or persons to monopolize said merchan-;
dise or object in order t o alter the price thereof by.
,189.. How is the crime of offering false testimony in evidence spreading b i s e rumors o r making use of any other art;; :
.
committed?
It is committed by any person who shall knowingly
offer in evidence a false witness or testimony in any
1
fice to -estrain free competition in the market. "-
Any person who, being a manufacturer, producer,
o r processor of any merchandise or object of commerce
judicial or official proceeding (Art. 184, R.P.C.). or an importer of any merchandise or object of commerce
from any ioreign conntry, either as principal or agent,.
, -190. Mention the crimes which are classified as frauds and wholesaler or retailer, shall combine, conspire or agree
.', state the manner each is committed. in any manner with any person likewise engaged. in t h
manufacture, production, processing:, assembling or im-
portation of such merchandise or ohject of comm
I
-.
.
d
7
ao?:it:ns in public auctions.
2 Moaopolies and combinations in restraint of trade.
Importation and disposition o€ falsely marked ar-
with any other persons not so similarly engaged f
purpose of making. transactions prejudicial to
commerce, or of increasing the market price in any pa
, ' ticles o r merchandise made of gold, silver or other pre- of the Philippines, of any such merchandise ' or , obj
of commerce manufactured, produced, processed, assem
. .. eionsjpletals.
. . 4 Substituting and altering trade-marks and trade- bled in or imported into the Philippines, or of a n s a
in the manufacture of which such manufactured,
, ~.
, n a m y or service marks.
. . ,
Unfair competition, fraudulent registration of duced., orocessed.
_ or imoorted merchandise or objec
trade-mark or trade-name, or service mark; fraudulent commerce is used.
designation of origin and false description. /
The crime of machinations in public auLtions is com- d e crime of importation an6 disposition of fals
mitted by any person who shall solicit any gift or prom- marked articles or merchandise made of gold, silver,
_' ise as a consideration for refraining from taking part other precious metak is committed by any perso
in any public auction, and any person who, shall attempt shall Bnowingly import or sell or dispose of a n y
to cause bidders to stay away from an auction by threats, or merchandise made of gold, silver or other p
:"-gifts, promises, or any other artifice, w t h intent to metal, or their alloys, with stamps, brands o r marks w
'cause the reduction of the price of the thing auctioned fail to indicate the actual fineness or quality. of
(Art. 185, R.P.C.). metals o r alloys (Art. 187, R.P.C.).
The crime of monopolies and combinatiors in restraint The crime of substituting and altering trade-m
of trade is committed by: trade-names, or service-marks is committed by:
1. Any person who shall enter into any contract or 1. Any person W ~ Dshall substitute the trade-n
agreement or shall take part in any conspiracy or com- trade-mark of some other manufacturer or dealer;
,
. bination in the form of a trust or otherwise, in restraint colorable imitation thereof, for the trade-name or t
,,. .
, , i,i;. : of trade or commerce or to prevent by artificial means mark of the real manufacturer or dealer upon any-articl
.' , free competition in the market. of commerce and shall sell the same; :
,;I.
. .~
,:_
68 69 ::(
,2:
..
I ,.G
.,'
GRIMINAL LA%’ REVIRWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
2. Any person who shall sell such articles of commerce 3. Any person who, by means of false or fraudulent
or offer the same for sale, knowing that th.? trade-name representations or declarations, orally o r in writing, or
nr trademark has he?. f r a d t l . J used such gads hy other fraudulent means shall procure from the patent
as described in the preceding subdivision, office or from any other office which may hereafter be
3 . Any person who, in the sale o r advertising of his established by law for the purposes, the registration of a’
services, shall use or substitute the service mark of some trade-name, trade-mark, or service mark, or of himself
other persons, or colorable imitation of s w h mark; or I’ as the owner of such trade-name, trade-mark, or service
mark, or an entry respecting a trade-name, trade-mark,
4 . Any person who, knowing the purpuses for which
r service mark.
the trade-name, trade-mark, or service mark of a person
(Art. 189, :is amended by Rep.
is to be used, prints, lithographs, or in any way 2.eproduces
Act No. 172, R.P.G.)
such trade-name, trade-mark, o r service mark or a color-
able imitation thereof, for another person, to enable that
191. What are the crimes relative to opium and other pro-
other person to fraudulently use such trade-name, trade-
mark, or service mark on his own goods o r in connectiun
with the sale or advertising of his service.
(Art. 188, R.P.C.)
The crimes of unfair competition, fraudulent registra-
tion m€ tmde-nnme, trade-mark o r service mark, fraudulent
designation of origin, and false description are committed
. .-- ,by: and sale of prohibited drugs (Art. 192).;
1. Any person who, in unfair competition and for the 4. I l l ~ g a ipossession of opium pipe o r other parapher-
purpose of deceiving o r defrauding another of his legiti- nalia $dthe use of any prohibited drugs (Art. 193).
~ . x. . mate trade or the public in general, shall sell his goods d Prescribing opium unnecessarily f o r patient (Ar
giving them the general appearance of the goo& of an- 194).
other manufacturer or dealer, either as to the goods them-
selves, or in the wrapping of the packages in which they 192. Define “nrohibited
., drug”.
~. “opium”, “inrlian hemp”,
~~
other Ieature of their appearance which would be likely / & g ” includes opium, cocaine, alfa and
t o induce tine public t o believe that the goods offered are beta eucai.ne, Indian hemp, their derivatives, and all p
those of a manufacturer o r dealer other than the actual rations made from them or any of them and such
manufacfmer or dealer, o r shall give other persons a drugs, whether natural or synthetic, having physiol
chance or opportunity to do the same with a like purpose. action as a narcotic drug.
2. Any person who shall affix, apply, annex, or use “Opium” embraces every kind, class, and character
in connection with any goods or services, or any container opium, whether crude or prepared; the ashes or refu
or containers for goods, a false designation of origin, or of the same; narcotic preparations thereof or therefro
any false description or representation, and shall sell such morphine o r alkaloid of opium; preparations in:
goods or services. ogium, morphine, 01’ alkaloid of opium mtcc 33,
70 71
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
gpedient, and also opium leaves or wrappings of opium 194. What are the. crimes against public morals?
Ieaves, whether prepared or not, for their use. They are:
“Indian hemp,” otherwise known as marihuana, canna- 1. Gambling.
bis Americana, hashish, bhang, guaza, cburruz, and gan-
2. Importation, sale and possession of lottery tick@
jah, embraces every kind, class and character of Indian
hemp, whether dried or fresh flowering or fruiting tops or advertisements.
of the pistillate plant cannabis satival, from which the 3 . Betting in sports contest.
resin has not been extracted, including all other geographic 4. Illegal betting 011 horse races.
..
varieties whether used as reefers, resin, extract, tincture 5. Illegal cockfighting.
or in any other form wkatscver.. 6. Grave scandal.
By “narcotic drug” is meant a drug that produces a 7 , Immornl doctrines, obscene publications and ex-
condition of insensibility and melancholy dullness of mind hibitions.
.
with delusions and may be habit forming.
8. Vagrancy and prostitution.
193. Enumerate the different acts relative to opium and other
nrohibited drugs 195. Wha.t acts are punishable in gambling?
- which are punished under the Revised
They are:
1. Taking part directly or indirectly in-
preparing, administering or other- a . any game of monte, jueteng, or any other form
of lottery, policy, banking, or percentage game,
dog races, or any other game o r scheme the
resort where any pro-
result of which depends wholly or chiefly upon
chance hazard; or wherein wagers Consisti
of a dive or re- gf money, articles of value, or representat
sort where any prohibited drug is used in any manner
of value are made; or
By knowingly visiting any such dive or resort. b . the exploitation or use of any other.
invention or contrivance to determine
By importing or bringing into the Philippines any the loser or winner of m
or representative of value.
selling or delivering to another any
2. Knowingly permitting any f o
place owned or controlled b
any opium pipe or other parapher-
administering, or using opium
n;rlia. f o ~ :smoking, injecting, 3 , Being maintainer, conductor
m anv ixohibited drur, the uossessor not being authorized of :iueteng. or similar game.
4 . Knowingly and without lawful piirpose
ribing opium for any person whose phy- lotte&ist which pertains t u or is used in
oes not require the use of the same, the of jueteny.
nder being a physician or dentist.
-2
73
. .,,~ . CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
,
i J ,%+$I
.>A*
1%. What are the acts punished in Connection with lottery 4 . By organizing such cockfights at a phee other than >,*,s
3
;,$,Z
00. What' are the crimes against decency and good customs?
i . races?
trines cpenly contrary to public morals;
, . ?&aziting on horse races during the periods not authors of obscene literature, published with
t h lr knowledge in any form, and the editors publishin
,
P
allowe by law.
2 B y maintaining or employing a totalizer or other
device or scheme for betting on races or realizing profit
such p f a t u r e ;
A. Those who in theaters, fairs, cinematographs, 0
open to public view, shall exhibit in-
therefrom, during the period not allowed by law.
plays, scenes, acts, o r shows; and
(Art. 198, R.P.C.)
sell, give awa,y, or exhibit prink,
What are the acts punishable in illegal cockfighting? engravings, sculptores, or literature which are offensive
to morals.
(Art. 201, R.P.C.)
money or other valuable things in cock- ,' /
2. Any person found loitering about public or semi- 4. Malicious delay in the administration of justice.
public buildings or places, o r tramping or wandering 5 . Derelictiou of duty in prosecution of offenses. . '
about the country or the streets without visible means . 6 . Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor-revela- -
of support; tion. of secrets.
3 . Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses The crime of knowingly rendering unjust judgment is
of ill-fame; ruffians or pimps and those who habitually committed by any judge who shall knowingly render an
associate with prostitntes; unjust judgment in any case submitted t o him for decision
.
4 . Any person who, not being included in the provi- (Art. 204, R.P.C.).
, sions of other articles of the Revised Penal Code, shall be The crime of judgment rendered through negligence
"
found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place be- is committed by any judge who, by reason of inexcusable
longing to another without any lawful or justifiable pur- negligence or ignorance, shall render a manifestly uiljuat
pose. judgment in any case submitted to him for decision (Art.
.. ..?.
G. Prostitutes. 205, R.P.C.).
(Art. 202, I1.P.C.) The crime of unjust interlocutory order is committed
. .
by any judge who shall knowingly render a n unjust inter-
04. Who are prostitutes? locutory order 01- decree; or by a judge who shall have
j$ ' i.n
Women who, for money or profit, habitually indulge
sexual intercourse o r lascivious conduct, are deemed
t o be prostitutes (Art. 202, R.P.C.).
acted by reason of inexcusable negligence or ignorance
and the interlocutory order or decree be manifestly nn-
just (Art. 206, R.P.C.).
&..;
6,;
4.
205.. Who are public officers for the purpose of applying eer-
..
,
t~
ain provisions of the Revised Penal Code?
I_
, party in the same case, without the consent of his first 210. How is the crime of illegal exactions committed? .
client (Art. 209, R.P.C.). It is committed by any public officer who, being en-
trusted with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees, and
207; Mention the two forms of bribery and state the 'manner other imposts, shall be guilty of any of the following acts
. . each is committed. os ornissious :
They are (1) direct bribery and (2) indirect bribery. (a) Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of
Direct bribery is committed by any public officer who sums different from or larger than those authorized by
shall agree to perform a n act constituting a crime, in law;
connection with the performance of his official duties. (b) Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided
,,., . in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present
received by such officer, personally or through the media-
by law, for any sum of money collected brr him officially;
. . (c) Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by
tion of another; or by any public officer who shall accept way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a n
' '
gift in consideration 01the execution of an act which different from that provided by law.
does not constitute a crime, and the officer executed said (Art. 213, par. 2, R.P.
'. act, whether accomplished or not; or by any public.officer,
if the object for which the gift was received or promised
.was to make him refrain from doing something which 211. What is the additional penalty for, and whe
s his official duty to do (Art. 210, R.P.C.). imposed upon, a public officer who commitq';~
The additional penalty is temporary speei
...'.. &direct bribery is committed by any public officer
tion in its maximum period to perpetual special d
ho shall accept gifts offered t o him by reason of his tion. It shall be imposed when the public officer6
2 6 ' '{Art. 211, R.P.C.).
any of the frauds or deceits enumerated in A
8. How is the crime of corruption of public officials com- to 315 of the Revised Penal Code, taking a
his official position (Art. 214, R.P.C.).
It is committed by any person who shall have made
1's or promises or given the gifts or presents under
212. What are prohibited transactions?
circumstances that will make the pnblic officer liable for The crime known as prohibited tiansactions'
1 direct bribery or indirect bribery (Art. 212, R.P.C.). mitted by any appointive public officer who, dunng
incumbency, shall directly or indirectly become interested
How is the crime of frauds against the public treasury in any transaction of exchange or speculation within the
committed? territory subject t o his jurisdiction (Art. 215, R.P.C.).
It is committed by any public officer who, in his of-
ficial capacity, in dealing with any person with regard 213. How is the crime of possession of pmhibited interest
to furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or the a public officer committed?
adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public It is committed by:
property or funds, shall enter into a n agreement with
Any public officer who, directly or indirectly, shall
any interested party or speculator or make use of any
come interested in any contract or business in which i
other scheme, to defraud the Government (Art. 213, par.
his official duty to intervene;
1, R.P.C.).
78 79
. .
:. , ,
* CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER . .
Q
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
and who f d s t o do SO for a period of two months after , ~
+Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants who, in such accwnts should be rendered (Art. 218, R.P.C.).
like manner, shall take part in any contract or transaction
$
. '._
~:i
'~ ,.,;...,is
,. connected with the estate or property in 'he appraisal, 217. How is the crime of faihre of a responsible public officer :"
. : ~ . distribution, or adjudication of which they shall have acted; t o render accounts before leaving the wountry committed? ,. ;
Guardians and executors with respect t o the property It is committed by any public officer who unlawfuuy.
to their wards o r the estate. leaves or attempts to leave the Philippines without secur-
(Art. 216, R.P.C.)
. . ,,
ing a certificate from the Auditor General, showing that
his accounts have been finally settled {Art. 219, R2.C:).
. .214. What are the crimes called mahersation cf public funds
. .. or property? 218. How is the crime of illegal use of public funds o r property
,. .
?@ are:
Malversation by appropriating, misappropriating or
permit ng any other person t o take public funds or prop-
committed?
It is committed by any public officer who shall apply .
any public funds or property under hi8 administration to *
.. ' ,.. ' .
rtg ~
any public use other than that for which such funds or '
I
before leaving the country. Nota: Darnage o r embarrassment to tlie public service is not
lXegal use of public funds or property. necessary. It only increases the penalty.
to make delivery of public funds or property. 219. HOT is the crime of failure to make delivery of public
funds or property committed?
215. How is malversation by appropriating, misappropriating,
or permitting any other person to take public funds OT It is committed by any public officer, under obligation
property committed? to make payment from Government funds in his possession
who shall fail t o make such payment; or by any pub
It is committed by any puhlic officer who, being ac- officer who, being ordered by competent authority
countable for public funds o r property, by reason of the
deliver any property in his custody or under his admims-
duties of his office, shall appropriate, or shali take or mis- tration, shall refuse to make such delivery (Art. 221,
appropriate the same, or shall consent or, through ahandon-
R.P.C..).
ment or negligence, shall permit any other person to take
such funds or property, wholly or partially, or shall other-
$i '~
k,,
.. .
of such funds or property (Art. 217, R.P.C.).
'
under the Revised Penal Code?
Yes, the provisions of the Revised 'Penal Code on
versation shall apply t o private individuals who, in
.~ 216. ffow is Uhe crime of failure of accountable officer to render
.r":,! accounts committed? capacity whatever, have charge of any national, provin
&;&; or municipal funds, revenues, or property or t o any a
It is committed by any public officer, whether in the
yt; . ~. service or separated therefrom by resignation of any other ministrator or depository of funds or property attache
seized, or deposited by public authority, even if such pro
cause, who is required by law or regulation to render
accounta to the Auditor General, or to a provincial auditor, erty belongs to a private individual (Art. 222, R.P.C.).
..., I
81
..
CRIMINAL LAW REVlEWER CIIIMIKAL IAW REVIEWER
221. What a.re the crimes classified under infidelity of public &ow is the crime of infidelity in the custody of documents
officers:! by removal, concealment or destruction thereof committed?
They are: It is committed by any public officer who shall remove, ., ~
1. Infidelity in the custody of prisoners. destroy, or conceal documents or papers officially entrusted
to him, causing damage to a third party or t o the public. ,
. , 2. Infidelity in the custody of documents. , interest (Art. 226. R.P.C.).
i
. .
3 . Revelation of secrets. / . .
/
227. How is the crime of officer breaking seal committed?
22. How is the crime of infidelity in the cnstody of prisonen It is committed by any puhlic officer, charged with
by conniving with or consenting t o evasion committed? t h e custody of papers or property sealed by proper au-
It is committed by any public officer who shall con- tliority, who shall break the seals or permit them t u be
sent t o the escape of a prisoner, whether sentenced by broken (Art. 227, R.P.C.). , .
Yes. Any private person to whom the conveyance or It is committed by any public officer
custody of a prisoner or person under arrest shall have any secret known t o him by reason of his offi
been confided, who shall consent to the escape of the or shall wrongfully deliver papers or copies
prisoner or person under arrest, or through his negligence which he may have charge and which s
make possible the escape of the prisoner or person under
/' arrest, shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than
that prescribed for the public officer (Art.225, R.P.C.).
82 83
Y
I
1 1
,
~ who shall openly refuse to execute the judgment, decision, office committed?
or order of any superior authority made within the scope
:. of the jurisdiction of the latter and issued with all the performance of the duties and powers of any public
':' legal formalities (Art. 231, R.P.C.).
.. or employment without first being sworn in or h
given the bond required by law (Art. 236, R.P.C.). ',
,232. How is the crime of disobedience to order of superior
officer when said order was suspended by inferior officer
. committed? powers committed?
.
'
"
It is Committed by any public officer who, havinq for
any reason, suspended the execution of the orders of his
I
':7-%234. How is l.he crime of refusal to discharge elective office &When is the offense of abandonment of office or position ;
:,,,
. committesd? qualified?
It is committed by any person who, having been elected When the office is abandoned in order to evade the\
.<,* by popular election to a public office shall refuse without discharge of the duties of preventing, prosecuting, or
legal motive to be sworn in or t o discharge the duties punishing any of the crimes against national security and
of said office (Art. 234, R.P.C.). the law of nations or the crimes of rebellion o r sedition'.
,"'and allied offenses (Art. 238, par. 2, R.P.C.).
235. How is the crime of maltreatment of prisoners committed?
4' ..
'
It is committed by any public officer or employee who b40. How is the crime of usurpation of legislative powers corn-;:@
"
shall overdo himself in the correction o r handling of a mitted? ,.d%*d
> ,scrr
prisoner or detention prisoner under his charge, by the It is committed by any public officer who shall
imposition of punishments not authorized by the regula- croach upon the powers of the legislative branch of
tions, or by inflicting such punishments in a cruel and Government, either by making general rules or regulations
humiliating manner; or shall maltreat a prisoner for the beyond the scope of his authority, or by attempting t o
purpose of extorting a confession or obtaining some in- repeal a law or suspending the execution thereof (A
. , formation from him (Art. 235, R.P.C.). 239, R.P.C.).
,. /,?;_ *
84 86
I
',
,-6.
>~
..: mitted?
It is committed by any officer of the executive branch
of the Government who shall assume judicial powers or
3. Any warden or officer who +Ihall solicit or make
immoral or indecent advances t o the wife, daughter, sister,
or relative within the same degree by affinity of any
, , ~ ..,:<. . shall obstruct the execution of any order or decision ren- person in the custody of such warden or officer.
' . ...~ ' dered by any judge within his jurisdiction (Ad. 241, (Art.245, R.P.C.).
R.P.C.).
47. How is the crime of parricide committed?
&45; How is the crime of disobeying request for disqualification ," It is committed by any person who shall kill his father,
committed? mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or
. , . " .+1 ,-.-' It is committed by any public officer who, .before the
~
any of his ascendants o r descendants, or his spouse (Art..
:c; question of jurisdiction is decided, shall continue any pro- 246, R.P.C.) ,
.(.,,ceeding after having been lawfully required to refrain
from so doing (Art. 242, R.P.C.). 248. What is the liability, if any, of a legally married person
~ CLT'
.., or parent for death or ,physical injuries inflicted under ,:
244. How is the crime of Qrders or requests by executive of- exceptional circumstances?
.,& :I<, .ficers to any judicial authority committed? Any legally married person who, having surprised his .~
,., , It is committed by any executive officer who shall spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with
. . address any order or suggestion t o any judicial authority another person, shall kill any of them or both of them;
. "-~ . , with reapect to any case or business coming within the in the act or immediatcly thereafter, or shall inflict upon
exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of justice (Art. 243, them any serious physical injury, shall suffer
R.P.C.,). of destierro.
If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of
245. How is the crime of unlawful appointments Committed? other kind, he shall be exempt from punishment.
"' It is committed by any public officer who shall know- These rules shall be applicable, under the same circu
' ., 'c...: ingly nominate or appoint to any public office any person stances, to parents with respect to their daughters u
. .~-. lacking the legal qualification therefor (Art. 244, R.P.C.).
' eighteen years of age, and their seducers, while
. . daughters are living with their parents.
' '' ~236.How is the crime of abuses against chastity committed? Any person who shall promote or facilitate th
It is committed by: tution of his wife or daughter, or shall o
86 87
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWIER
'
consented t o the infidelity of the other spouse, shall not of parricide, murder or homicide a penalty lower by one
be entitled to the benefits of this article. degree than that which should be im.posed under the pro-
(Art. 247, R.P.C.) visions of article 50 (Art. 250, R.P.C.). Art. 50 provides . .'
t h t a penalty one degree lower than that provided for
249. What is murder? the consummated felony shall be imposed for the com-
Murder is committed by any person who, not falling
mission of a frustrated felony. Hence, a penalty lower . ;:'
by two degrees may be imposed upon the person guilty
within the provisions of article 246, shall kill another,
of frustrated crime of parricide, murder or homicide.
with any of the following attendant circumstances:
1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior 252. May the courts reduce by three degrees the penalty to be
strength, with aid of armed men, or employing means imposed for an attempted fel'ony?
to weaken the defense, or of means or persons to insure
or afford impunity; Yes. The courts, considering the facts of the e y e ,
may likewise reduce by one degree the penalty whlc
2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise;
under article 51 should be imposed for an attemp
3 . By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, mit any of the crimes of parricide, murder o r
,,
,.~
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment of or assault (Art. 250, pnr, 2, R.P.C.). Art. 51 provides that
upon a street car or Iocomotivc, fall of an airship, by two degrees lower than that provided for the eonsu,?nm
', means of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other felony shall be imposed for the commission of an attempt
means involving great waste and ruin; felony. Hence, a penalty lower by .three degreei'inay
4 . On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated imposed upon the person guilty of attempted p a r n u
in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption murder os homicide.
of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic, or any other
public calamity; 253. What is the criminal liability of a person or persons
5. With evident premeditation; participated in a tumultuous affray for death caused t
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly aug- in?
menting the suffering of the victim, or outraging or When, while several persons, not composing
scoffing a t his person or corpse. ganized for the common purpose of assaulting
(Art. 248, R.P.C.) ing each other xciprocally, quarrel and assault ea
in a confused and tumultuous manner, and in the
What is homicide? of the affray someone is killed, and i t cannot be asce
Homicide is the unlawful killing of a person, which is who actually killed the deceased, but the person or p
neither parricide, murder, nor infanticide (Art. 249, who inflicted serious physical injuries can be ide
such person or persons shall be liable for death cau
..
.ii. in a tumultous affray.
"'"I' "
_isyi ' , ,251. May the courts impose a penalty lower by two degrees If it cannot be determined who inflicted the serio
<,;* : for the commission of a frustrated felony? physical injuries on the deceased, all those who s
. .
Yes. The courts, in view of the facts of the case, used violence upon the person of the victim shall
., may impose upon the person guilty of the frustrated crime therefor (Art. 251, R.P.C.) .
., , 88 jl 83
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
': -258.
..
, What is {,he criminal liability of persons who participated If the Cirearm was not discharged a t or
in a tumultuous affray for physical injuries i,lflicted there- person, but the firearm was discharged' wi
.~
,.. in? or public place and the discharge produced ala? or
' ., . When in a tumultuous affra,y only serious physical in- danger, he is liable for the crime of alarms and scandals.
' '
juries are inflicted upon t h e participants t k r e o f and the
: person responsible therefor cannot be identified, all those 257. If a person Idled a child less than three
~ , '. who appear to have used violence upon the person of the what crime was mmmitted by him and what
, . offended party shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree liability therefor?
'"'
than that provided for the physical injuries so inflicted.
The crime committed was infanticide. The penalty
When the physical injuries inflicted are of a less serious provided for parricide or for murder shall be imposed
nature and the person responsible therefor cannot be upon any person who shall kill any child less than three :.
identified, all those who appear to have used any violence days of age.
..:. , ,~ upon the person of the offended party shall be punished
by awesto from five to fifteen days. If the crime of infanticide be committed by the mother
.:., (Art. 252, R.P.C.) of the child for the purpose of concealing her dishonor,
she shall suffer the penalty of prision correctional in its
255. Is giving assistance to suicide punishable? If So, does the medium and maximum periods, and if said crime be eom-
person giving assistance to suicide incur the same liability mitted for the same purpose by the maternal grandparents
regardless of the nature and extent of the assistance given or either o€ them, the penalty be prision mugor..
'., ' . b y him? (Art. 255, R.P.C.)
., ,. Any person who shall assist another to commit suicide
", L .,,i,
,.,, 1: shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor; if such person 258. How is the crime of intentional abortion committed?
.~,.,,'<: lends his assistance t o another to the extent of doing the It is committed by any person who shall intentionally
killing himself, he shall suffer the penalty of reclusion cause an abortion, by using any violence upon the person
' temporal. However, if the suicide is not consummated,
t;
,,, . .
of the pregnant woman or, without using violence, by
~
the penalby of arrest0 mayor in its medium and maximum acting with 01' without the consent of the woman (Art.
.,~;*-
*)(.i : periods shall be imposed (Art. 253, R.P.C.). 266, R.P.C.).
.~...,
,
.,"
.?
~' .
r i .,
, i'.yp256. When is a person criminally liable for discharging a fire-
259. What is unintentional abortion?
arm?
Any person who shall shoot a t another with any f i r e It is a crime committed by any person who shall cause
arm is liable for discharge of firearm, provided that he an abortion by violence, but unintentionally (Art. 257,
has no intention to kill the offended party, or that the R.P.C.).
act cannot he held to constitute any other crime f o r which
a higher penalty is prescribed by the Code (Art. 254, 260. 1s the woman who suffered an abortio
R.P.C.). Yes, if the woman (1) practiced an abortion
If he had intention t o kill the offended party, he will herself or (2) consented that any other person shou
be liable for frustrated or attempted parricide, murder, so (Art. 268, R.P.C.).
or homicide, as the case may be. Otherwise, she ip, not liable. , '
90 91
.
d",~
,
,
,
.I_
.
. CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRlMINAL LAW REV'IEWBR
. ."
%;..261. When are physicians and midwives more severely punished They are: .!.. >
#?&&. 1. Nlntilation.
*:;.w . ,. ,. .v
for comimitting abortion?
d,.3,:>
, .<.
, , . The .penalties provided for intentional abortion shall 2 . Serious physical injuries.
il .,
.,,*. . ..
,~\!.<"., . - i _ ~
3. Administering injurious substance or beverages.
~,~. ,~.?. be imposed in their maximum period, respectively, upon
. .,
4. Less serious physical injuries.
. any physician or midwife who, taking advantage of their
i..
,~
scientific knowledge or skill, shall came an abortion or 5. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment.
' assist in causing the same (Art. 259, R.P.C.). . . ..
, .
266. What are the two kinds of mutilation?
262. When is a pharmacist liable for dispensing any abortive?
They are:
When the pharmacist, without the proper prescription
,, . .
'i'
1. By intentionally mutilating another by depriving
from a physician, shall dispense any abortive (Art. 259,
, . him, either totally o r partially, of some essential organ . '
'.~.i: . .., par. 2, :R.P.C.). for reproduction.
. , 2. By intentionally making other mutilation, that is, !
,<.: 263. What are the responsibilities of the participants and see-
$:.&:e
onds in a duel?
.,, ., . , by depriving the offended party of any p a r t o f the human
'.:. *< body, other than the essential organ for reproduction, ' ~ ,
. . The .penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed
upon any person who shall kill his adversary in a duel. (Art. 262, R.P.C.)
..,. , If he shaIl inflict upon the Iatter physical injuries only,
he shall suffer the penalty provided therefor, according 267. What are serious physical injuries?
, . to their nature. They are:
In any other case, the combatants shall suffer the 1. When the injured person becomes insane, imbecile, '.
penalty of arrest0 mayor although no physical injuries impotent or blind, in consequence of .the physical injuries
, .
. , have been inflicted. inflicted.
. .. . The seconds shall in all events be punished as acconi- 2. When the injured
: plices. 1
or the power to hear or
(Art. 260, R.P.C.) a foot, an arm, or a leg, or (b) loses the us
such member, or (e) becomes incapacitated f o r the
What are the acts punished as challenging to a duel? . -
.,;
; ... $4. in which he was theretofore habitually engaged, in
, ' ' They are: sequence of the physical injuries inflicted.
.; :
':.ii::.i- ' 1. By challenging another to a duel. 3. Wheii the person injured (a) becomes ,deform
' , , I , 2 . By inciting another to give or accept a challenge or (b) loses any other member of his, body, or (c) I
'.,,: ;.' in a duel. the use thereof, or (d)
, ' . 3. By scoffing at or decrying another publicly for the performance of the
*, . .. engaged for more than 90 days, in consequence of
..% having refused to accept a challenge to fight a duel.
., .. (Art. 261, R.P.C.) physical injuries inflicted.
4. When the injured person becomes ill or inca
~.. for labor for more than 80 days (bul; must no
.,* , "265.
,~ What are the crimes of physical injuries?
92 93
I
...,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRININAL LAW REVIEWER. . ...~
,. h
.;
than 90 days), as a result of the ph3sica1 injuries in- 1. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted
.
..:I-:*
..,,
flicted. more than five days; ,...
/.I
96
I
, ,
with the custody of a minor person, shall deliberately person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place wounded
fail t o restore the latter t o his parents or guardians or in danger of dying, when he can render such assistance
(Art. 270, R.P.C., as amended by Republic Act No. 18). without detriment t o himself, unless such omission shall
constitute a more serious offense; . .
' 277. IIow is the crime of inducing a minor to abandon his home I. 2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance
Committed? to another whom he has accidentally wounded or injured;
I t is committed by anyone who shall induce a minor 3. Anyone who, having found an abandoned child under
to :rbandon the home of his parents or guardians or the Seven years of age, shall fail to deliver said child t o the
authorities or t o his family, or shall fail to take him
t o a safe place.
278. Is slavery punished under the Revised Penal Code? (AI-$. 275, R.P.C.)
Yes. It is committed by anyone who shall purchase, 282. How is the crime of abandoning a minor committed?
sell, kidnap, or detain a human being for the purpose
of enslaving him. It is committed by anyone who shall abandon a child
If the crime be committed for the purpose of assigning under seven years of age, the custody of which is incum-
bent upon him.
the offended party t o some immoral traffic, the penalty
shall be imposed in its maximum period. The same crime is committed even if the death of the
(Art. 272, R.P.C.) minor shall have resulted or even if the life of the minor
i...
"
shall have been in danger, provided that the offender has
P. no intent to kill the minor.
1,'"'I ~;...a, 279. HOWis the crime of exploitation of child labor committed?
*-..W~
(Art. 276, R.P.C
g.:.. ".- ::,~ .
, p/,,,: It is committed by anyone who, under the pretext of
\e,.,,,
.._i reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant, 283. How is the erinie of abandonment of minor by per
.y .. : ..< guardian, or person entrusted with the custody of a minor, entrusted with his custody commitl~ed?
96 97
.,
.
:I
.
I
It is committed by anyone who, having charge of the gaged in any of the callings mentioned in paragraph 2
rearing or education of a minor, shall deliver said minor hereof, or t o accompany any habitual vagrant or beggar.
. . to a public institution or .other persons, without the con- (Art. 278, R.P.C.) ''
sent of the one who entrusted such child to Itis care or,
in the absence of the latter, without the consent of the 286. How is the crime of qualified trespass to dwelling com-
proper authorities (Art. 277, par. 1, R.P.C.). mitted?
It is committed by any private person who shall enter
284. IIoiv is the crime of indifference of parents Committed? the dwelling of another against the latter's will. i?
285. Wh80 are liable for exploitation of minors? 287. What are the ahsolutory causes in trespass to dwelling?
They are: The penalty for trespass to dwelling shall not be im-.
posed upon any person who shall enter another's dwelling
1. Any person who shall cause any boy or girl under
for the purpose of preventing some r;erious harm to hi&
sixteen years of age to perform any dangerous feat of
self, the occupants of the dwelling, or a third person, nor
balancing, physical strength, or contortion. shall it be imposed upon any person who aha11 enter 'a
2 . Any person who, being an acrobat, gymnast, rope- dweiling for the purpose of rendering some service @
walker, diver, wild-animal tamer or circus manager, or humanity or justice, nor upon anyone who shall enter
engaged in a similar calling, shall employ in exhibitions cafbs, taverns, inns, and other public houses, while the
of t.hese kinds, children under sixteen years of age who sam,e are open (Art. 280, par. 3, 1L.P.C.).
are not his children or descendants.
3. Any person engaged in any of the callings enu- 288. What is other forms of trespass? .
merated in the next preceding paragraph who shall em, It is a crime committed by any p,erson who shall e
ploy any descendant of his under twelve years of age the clcsed premises or the fenced es
in such dangerous exhibitions. either of them is uninhabited, if th
4. Any ascendant, guardian, teacher, or person en- be manifest and the trespasser has
trmted in any capacity with the care of a child under mission of the owner or the caretaker thereof (Art.
sixteen years of age, who shall deliver such child gratui- R.P.C.).
tously to any person following any of the callings enu-
mer'ated in paragraph 2 hereof, or to Any habitual vagrant 289. What are the three .forms of threats?
o r heggar. They are:
5 . Any person whg shall induce any child under six. 1. Grave threats.
teen years of age to abandon the home of its ascendants,
guardians, curators, or teachers t o follow any person en-
98
I
290. How is the crime of grave threats committed? 3 . By orally threatening t o do another any harm not
constituting a felony.
I:t is committed- (Art. 285, R.P.C.)
1. By threatening another with the infliction upon his
penon, honor or property or that of his family of any 294. How is the crime of grave coercion committed?
wrong amounting to a crime and demanding money or It is committed by any person who, without authority
imposing any other condition, even tl,o?gh not unlawful, of law, shall, by means of violence, prevent another from
. and the offender attained his purposz; doing something not prohibited by law or compel him to
2 . By making such threat without the offender at- do something against his will, whether it be right or
taining his purpose. wrong (Art. 286, R.P.C.).
3. By threatening another with t h t infliction upon his
person, honor or property or that of his family of any 295, Mow is the crime of light coercion committed?
wrong amounting to a crime which is not subject to a It is committed by any person who, by means of vic-
condition. lence, shall ssize any thing belonging to his debtor for .,,
(Art. 282, R..P.C.) the purpose of applying the same to the payment of the ~'
debt (Art. 287, R.P.C.).
291. How is the crime of light threats committed?
Tt is committed by making a threat to commit a wrong 296. How is the crime of other similar coercions committed?
not constituting a crime, demanding money or imposing It is committed by any person, agent, or officer of any
any other condition, even though not unlawful, the of- association or corporation who shall force or compel, di-
fender attaining or not attaining his purpose (Art. 283, rectly or indirectly, or shall knowingly permit any laborer
R.P.C.). or employee employed by him or by such firm or cor-
poration t o be forced or compelled, to purchase merchan- .
292. What is bond for good behavior? . dise or commodities of any kind; or by any person who
In all cases of grave threats and light threats, the shall pay the wages due a laborer or employee employed
person making the threats may also be required to give by him, by means of tokens or objects other than the'
bail not t o molest the person threatened, or if he shall legal tender currency of the Philippines, unless expressly
fail to give such bail, he shall be sentenced to destierro requested by the laborer or employee (Art. 288, R.P.C.).
(Art. 284, R.P.C.).
297. How is the crime of formation, maintenance, and prohid
I, 293. What are other light threats? bition of combination of capital or labor through violence
They are: 0.r threats committed?
I. By threatening another with a weapon, or by draw- It is committed by any person who, for the purpos
ing such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self- of organizing, maintaining, or preventing coalitions o
defense. capital or labor, strike of laborers, or lockout of emplo
r!. By orally threatening another, in the heat of anger, shall employ violence or threats in such a degree
with some harm constituting a crime, without persisting compel or lorce the laborers o r employers in the f r e
in the idea involved in his threat. legal exercise of thei.1. industry or work, if the act
100 101
. .
I I
E:
not constitute a more serious o-Cfense in accordance with
the provisions of the Revised Penal Code (Art. 289,
R.P.C.)
?$\
'? It is committed by the person in charge, employee,
or workman of any manufaeturicg or industrial establish-
ment who, to the prejudice of the owner thereof, shall
reveal the secrets of the industry of the latter (Art. 292,
.X,. :. ; 298. Wha.t arc the three kinds of discovery and revelation of R.P.C.).
secrets? s"
J
They are: 303. Who are guilty OP robbery?
.'
1. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspond- Any person who, wifn intent to gain, shall take any
-';
ence. personal proverty belonging t o another, by means of vio-
2:. Revealing secrets with abuse of office. lence against, or intimidation of any person, or using force
upon anything, shall be guilty of robbery (Art. 293, R.P.C.).
3,. Revealing of industrial secrets.
304. What are the two classes of robbery? ..
299. How is the crime of discovering secrets through seizure
.,I
1
. ,
of correspondence committed? They are: I
102 103
_.
I
..
,a
' A
,
".
I
' '
.
in the commission of the robbery to a degree clearly un.. timidation is made with the use of firearm.
<. ,. necessary for the commission of the crime; or by inflict- (Art. 295, R.P.C:)
* . b ~ ~
ing upon any person not responsible for the commission Note: The qualifying circumstances are not applicable to rob-
of the robbery in the course of its execution, auy of the bery with hamioide, or robbery with rape or intentional mutila-
physical injuries in consequence of which the person in- lation, qr robbery with serious physical injuries resulting in
jured became deformed or lost any other member of his the insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness of the victim.
body or lost the use thereof or became ill or incapacitated
for the performance of the work in which he was habit- 307. When is the robbery deemed to have been committed by
ually engaged for more than 90 days or that the person a bend and what is the penalty incurred by the members
injured became ill or incapacitated for labor for more thereof?
than 30 days (Subdivisions 3 and 4 of Art. 263). When more than three armed, malefactors take pa$
5. By merely employing intimidatior. or violence which in the commission of robbery, it shall be deemed to have
does not cause any of the serious physical injuries men- been committed by a band. When any of the arms used
tioned in Art. 263. in the conimission of the offense be an unlicensed firearm,
The following are also the provisions of the Revised the penalty t o be imposed upon all the malefactors shall
Penal Code on robbery with violence against or intimida- be the maximum period of the corresponding penalty pro:
tion of persons : vided by law, without prejudice to the criminal liability
for illeel possession of such unlicensed firearm.
When by reason or on occasion 09 an attempted or
Any member of a band who is present a t the com-
frustrated robbery a homicide is com.nitted (Art. 297,
R.P.C.). mission of a robbery by the band, shall be punished as
A n y person who, with intent to defraud another, by
principal of any of the assaults committed by the .band,
means of violence o r intimidation, shall compel him to sign, unless it be shown that he attempted t o prevent the same..
execute, or deliver any public instrument or document, (Art. 296, as amended by
shall be guilty of robbery (Art. 298, R.P.C.). Republic Act No. 12)
;306. What are the qualifying circumstances in the crime of 508. May robbery by the use of force upon things be committed
robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons? in any place?
When such robbery is committed- No. Robbery by the use of force upon things may be
1. In an uninhabited place. committed only (1) in an inhabited house, public building, "
o r edifice devoted to religious worship; or (2) in an un-'
2. By a hand.
inhabited dace (which must be a building) or in a private
3 . By attacking a moving train, street car, motor vehi- building.
cle, or airship.
4. BY entering the passengers' compartments in a 309. How is the crime of robbery with force upOn things in
. train, or in any manner taking the passengers thereof an inhabited house, or publie buildikzg or edifice devoted:
se in the respective conveyances. , ~~.
. I
It is committed by any person who shall enter the A11 interior courts, corrals, warehouses, granaries, barns,
house o r building, in which the personal property is taken coachhouses, stables, or other departments, or inclosed . :y
by him, by any of the following means: places contiguous to the building or edifice, having an ’ ,:
1. Through an opening not intended for entrance o r intenor entrance connected therewith and which form 3
egress ; part of the whole, shall be deemed dependencies of an :,
2. By breaking any wall, roof, OT floor or byeaking inhabited house, public building, or building dedicated to
any door or window; religious worship.
3 . By using false keys, picklocks, or similar tools; Orchards and other iands for cultivation or production
are not ineluded in the t e r m of the next preceding para-
4. B y using fictitious name or pretending the exercise
of public authority.
grzph, even if closed, contiguous t o the building, and :’:,
having direct connection therewith.
O r if- The term “public building” includes every building
The robhery be committed under any of the following
circumstances :
1. By breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any
owned by the Government o r belonging to a private per-
son but used OY rented by the Chemment, although tern-
porarily unoccupied by the sam-e.
- ’
106 107
I
,~, b, I:n the cases specified in articles 294, 295, 297, 299, 318. When are mined persons presumed to be highway roblfeers
300, and 302 of the Revised Penal Code, when the property or brigands?
taken is mail matter or large cattle, the offender shall
suffer the penalties next higher in degree than those pro- If any of the arms carried by any of said persons be
,~
:
vided in said articles (Art. 302, par. 3, R.P.C.). an unlicensed firearm, it shall be presumed that said
persons are highway robbers o r brigands, and in case
When is the robbery of cereals, fruits, or firewood to he of conviction, the penalty shall be imposed in the m a x i m m
punished with a penalty next lower in degree? period (Art. 306, par. 3, R.P.C.).
When the robbery with force upon things in inhabited
house, public building, or edifice devoted to religious wor- 319. How is the crime of aiding and abetting a hand of brigands
ship, or in uninhabited place or private building, consists committed?
~ in t,he taking of c&s, fruits, or firewood, the cnlprit 'It is committed by any person knowingly and in any
shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that manner aiding, abetting, o r protecting a band of brigands,
prescribed by the Code (Art. 303, R.P.C.). or giving them information of the movements of the police
or other peace officers of the Governtnent, o r acquiring
Hour .is the crime of possession of or making picklocks or or rcceiving the property taken by such brigands (Art. ::
similar tools comniitted? 307, X.P.C.).
:It is committed by any person who shall, without law-
ful cause, have in his possession picklocks or similar tools 320. Who are liable far theft? Or, how is theft committed?
specially adopted to the commission of the crime robbery: Theft is committed by any person who, with intent
or by any person who shall make such tools (Art. 304, to gain but without violence against, or intimidation of,
R.P.C.). perisons nor force upon things, shall take personal property
of ,mother without the latter's consent.
What are false keys?
Theft is likewise committed by:
The term "false keys" shall be deemed to include: 1. Any person who, having found lost property, shaU
:L. The tools mentioned in the next preceding article; fail t o deliver the szme to the local authorities or t o ita ,::
2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner; owner; :*, , . I ~
'c
3. Any keys other than those intended by the owner 2 . Any person who, after having maliciously damaged,,,.$
for nse in the lock forcibly opened by the offender. the property of another, shall remove or make use of the".,+ . .#
*
(Art. 305, R.P.C.) fruits or object of the damage caused by him; and ,..,j
%. .
Who are brigands? 3 . Any person who shall enter an inclos;?d estate or $
When more than three armed persons form a band
a field where trespass is forbidden or which belongs t o i4
another and, without the consent of its owner, shall hunt, ' 4
of robbers for the purpose of committing robbery in the or fish upon the same or shall gather fruits, cereals, or ..? @9
highway, or kidnapping persons for the purpose of ex- other forest or farm products.
tortion or to obtain ransom or for any other purpose to .
(Ark 308, R.P.C.) ':&
:.g
he attained by means of force and violence, they shall be
deemed highway robbers or brigands (Art. 306, R.P.C.) . 321. What are qualified thefts?
108 109
2, &', .. ..
.
' 1 . . . .
" ..: , >
.,.& I . .* ,:*:~
'
A<,%
de.:
.*j,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER r4 ;*
i
(Art. 310, R.P.C.) udice of another, money, goods, or m y other personal '2s
property received by the offender in trust o r on eom- ?!
'. 322. What are the crimes of usurpation? mission, or for administration, or under any other ?
324. How is the crime of altering boundaries or landmarks com- (a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending
to possess power, influence, qualifications, property,
credit, agency, business, os imaginary transactions; OT
I t is cosmitted by any person who shall alter the by means of other similar deceit$#
boundary marks or monuments of towns, provinces, or (b) By altering the quality, fineness, or weight of
estates, or any other marks intended to designate the anything pertaining to his art or business.
boundaries of the same (Art. 313, R.P.C.). (e) By pretending to have bribed any Government
employee, without prejudice to thme action for calumny,
325. How is the crime of fraudulent insolvency committed? which the offended party may deem proper to bring
It is committed by any person who shall against the offender. In this case, the offender shall
his property to the prejudice of his be punished by the maximum period of the penalty.
(d) By postdating a check, or issuing a check.in
payment of an obligation when the offender had n
funds in the bank, or his funds deposited therein wer
< not sufficient t o cover the amount of the check. The
110
111
, ,
. ...'**
,, ,:r
'S
cmrmib LAW REVIEWER
CR17dIXA1, LAW REVIEWE13
~. the:honor or reputation of another person (Art. 364,
I*.
or apartment house by the use of any false pretenses, 3 . B~ causing damage to the property of another .$%:a e, ,3
or by abandoning or surreptitiously removing any part through reckless imprudence o r simple imprudence or ., -;i
of his baggage from a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding
house, Iodging house, o r apartment house after obtain. nee or negligence ,
ing credit, food, refreshment, or accommodation there- sorne which, if done maliciously, would have Consti- ' '"
in without paying for his food, refreshment, or aecom- tuted a light felony.
modation.
3. Through any of the following fraudulent nleaus:
(a) BY inducing another, by means of deceit, t o sign
any document:
(b) BY resorting to some fraudulent practice to
., , insure success in a gambling game; xn the imposition of the penalties for criminal ne&:,:$
(C) BY removing, concealing, or destroying, in whole
01' in part, any court record, office files, docoment, %enoe,the courts shall exercise their sound discretion, with-:;
o r any other papers. "-.revard to the rules prescribed in Article sixty-four 1.
out. _
.o
.">, . ..
, *:,;q,
_..".,
, '
.p
,:. ,
-;,. ' CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRININAL LAW REVIEWER .,1v;
, S i %c 3*
,I 2
: .i
imposed in the period which they may deem proper to
auply.
.. .
It has general application, because Criminal .Law,,is ,,!2
binding on all persons who reside or Sojourn in ,?hiliPP@,,.,&a
2 . When, by imprudence or negligence and with viola- territory. ., . .,+
,' tion of the Automobile Law, the death of a person shall It is territorial, in that Criminal Law undertakes b,,,.?+
'.- he caused, in which case the defendants shall be punisxed Dunish crimes committed within the Philippine territory: -;" X,~
~ ',-
*
prision correccional in its medium and maximum It is prospective, in that a penal law carnot make an
act punishable in a manner in which i t was not punishable
(Art. 365, par. 6, R.P.C.) when committed. Crimes are punished under the laws in
,,, force at the time of their commission.
Define reckless imp,rudence.
A S to i t 4 geneVal application: Art. 2 of the Revisd:
R.eckless imprudence consists ip voluntarily, but with- Penal Code states that the provisions of this Code shall
out malice, doing or failing to do act from which material be enforced within the Philippine Archipelago, including
damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaut.ion
on the part of the person performing or failin'g t o per-
its atmosphere, interior waters and .maritime zone, with-,
such act, taking into ,consideration his employment out reference to the person or persons who might viola+'
occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and any of its provisions.
ther circumtances regarding persons, time and place Art. 14 of the new- Civil Code provides that penal
Art. 365, par. 7, R.P.C.). shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in P
pine territory.
efine simple imprudence. As to its territorial application: The same. Art-.:+
Simple imprudence consists in the iack of precaution of the Revised Penal Code states that the'provisions Of
splayed in those cases in which the aamage impending this Code shall be enforced within the Philippine Archi;
caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly pelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and ,
'est (Art. 365, par. 8, R.B.C.). maritime zone, which constitute the Philippine terr
As to the prospectivitll of Criminal Law: Art. 21 of
. When is the penalty next higher in degree to those pro-
.
the Revised Penal Code provides that no felony shall ,be
aided for in Art. 365 to be imposed? punishable 'oy any penalty not prescribed by law
The penalty next higher in degree to those provided t o its commission.
for in Art. 365 shall he imposed upon the offender who Art, 366 oC the same Code provides that felonies are
6 lend on the spot to the injured parties such help punishable under the laws enforced at the time of their
ay be in his hands to give (Art. 365, par. 9, R.P.C.). commission.
. . ~ ~ ~
-.. .~~~
be tried either by the Court of First Instance of P a p -
(e) The offense committed outside the bases by any ;$
member of the armed forces of the United States
is against the securi.ty of the United States.
panga, where the commission of the crime began, or by
the military court of the armed forces of the United States
:,d
, ',i$
2. Those who, by virtue of laws of preferential ap- ... Clnrk Field. where it was continued and consummated. :;!g
in ~~~
plication, are not amenable t o our penal laws. Hence, the Court of First Instance of Pampanga may
Thus, under Rep. Act No. 75, it is even a crime t o try the case. . '...*.
.*,
Army and our Criminal Law will be applicable to him. ber 01the armed forces of the United States (a) while
But if the offender is a soldier of the United States Armed engaged in the actual performance of a specific. military :
Forces, the stipulations in the Base Agreement will apply. duty, or (b) during a period of national emergency,.
United States may exercise jurisdiction.
May a Philippine citizen who committed a crime in this
country be punished by a law of a foreign nation? Ex- 392. Do civil courts have jurisdiction during time of war over.
plain your answer. a soldier who committed a crime?
Yes, when the crime is committed by a Philippine Notwithstanding the provision in the Articles of War
citizen within a base, provided that the offended party requiring a soldier to be delivered to civil authorities for
is not a Philippine citizen or that the offense is not trial for an alleged crime except in time of war, the
against the security of the Philippines. In such case, the jurisdiction of military courts over x soldier is not ex-:
Artides o€ War of the United States Armed Forces will clusive of the civil courts even during time of war, if .the
apply. soldier is stationed within the territory
~390. When is a soldier of the armed forces of the United States courts are functioning and where no actn
liable for violation of our Criminal Law? in progress (Valdez vs. Lucero, 76 Phil. 356).
The Base Agreement between the Republic of the Phil- But under the Base Agreement, in time 0
ippines and the United States of America recognizes the United States shall have the right to exercise
authority of our civil courts t o exercise jurisdiction over jurisdiction over any offenses which may be
all offenses committed within the Philippines, except in By members of the armed forces of the Unit
certain cases specifically provided in the Agreement. in We Philippines.
Hence, a soldier of the armed forces of the United
States is liable for violation of our penal law and triable 393. A and B, Filipino citi'ens, went to €Ioi%!kong on a pleasure;
trip. When they returned to, and were already in, the
.. by our civil court when the offense is committed (1) out-
side the bases and (2) the offended party is not a mem- Philippines, B discovered that A sto!le her di
worth P2,OOO while they were in Hongkong
ber of the armed forces of the United States or that Criminal Law be applied in this case? Explain your an2
the offense is not against the security of the United States.
Not one of the exceptions provided in the Base Agreement swec.
is applicable to this case. No, because this is not one of the cases where
provisions of the Revised Penal Code may be enfor
"391. When may the United States exercise jurisdiction over a n outside of the jurisdiction of the Philippines. The of@
offense committed outside the base by a member of its was not committed while on a Philippine shi
armed forces, even if the offended party is not a member the offense does not involve forgery or cou
' .,
thereof or the offense is not against the seeurity of the any coin or currency note of the Philippines, or obli
United States? and securities issued by the Government of the Phili
If any offense committed outside the base (the of- the offense does not involve any act connected
offended party not being a member of the armed forces introduction into the Philippines of forged o
,.., . of the United States or the offense is not against the securities; the offender is not a public officer or empl
'
. . ; security of the United States) is committed by any mem- who committed an offense in the exercise of his funct'
, . ., ~
134 135
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKIMINAL LAW REVIEWIER
. .
. ~~
or that the offense is not one of the ciimes against the or currency notes or obligations and securities issued by
., . natimonal security and the law of nations. the Government may affect the economic life of the n e
tion. Crimes against the law of nations, such as piracy
' .394. Why are the provisions of the Revised Penal Code appli-
'
and mutiny on the high seas, are against mankind and
cable to crimes committed on board the Philippine ship may he punished by any civilized government.
.>., ~~,,., or airship even if the Philippine ship cr airship is outside I
the jurisdiction of the Philippines? 397. When may our Criminal Law be given retroactive effect? I*
The Philippine vessel o r aircraft, although beyond three Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as t h e y .
miles from the seashore, is considered an extension of the favor a person guilty of a felony, who is not's habitual
national territory. delinquent, and provided that the penal laws do not speei-
E:ut when the Philippine vessel or aircraft is in the fically provide that the same shall not be applicable to
territory of a foreign country, the crime committed on pending actions o r causes of actions. ';r
., ."
said vessel or aircraft is subject to the laws of that foreim
398. A, who had been once punished for the crime of theft, was "
he did not commit the offense in the exercise of his because a t the time of his trial for estafa he was convicted
. . function. To commit an offense in the exercise of his by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same
.. functiou, the public officer or employee must have acted title of the Code. A new favorable statute dealing with
in his official capacity, or that the act committed must crimes cannot be given retroactive effect only in two cases,
be related to or connected with the peiiformance of his namely: (1) where the new law is expressly made in-
official duty. applicable t o pending actions or existing causes of action;
and ( 2 ) where the offender is a habitual delinquent under
hr are the crimes under the circumstances mentioned Rule No. 5 of Art. 6% of the Revised Penal Code.
Art. 2 made punishable by the Revised Penal Code
' A habitual delinquent is one who, within a period Of
.'..even if they are committed outside of the jurisdiction of ten years from the date of his release or last convidion~
of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
Because the commission of any of those crimes may robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, is found guilty of
affect the political or economic life of the nation. .The any of said crimes a third time or oftener.
i . Crimes against national security may affect the existence
of the State. The forging or counterfeiting of our coins
CRIMINAL LAW RlGVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
.. The three parts of the Revised Penal Code are: i 2 . That inan is essentially a moral creature with :
1. Basic principles affecting crimina1 liability (Articles an absolutely free will to choose between good and evil,
/ .
1 to 20). thereby placing more stress upon the effect o r result
2 . Provisions on penalties, including criminal and civil of the felonious act than upon the man, the crimlnal ,.
,.
, I
liabilit,y (Articles '21 t o 113). himself.
3. Felonies defined and penalized under fourteen (14) 3. I t has endeavored to establish a mechanical and .
. '. .. . different titles (Articles I14 t o 365). direct proportion between crime and penalty. $3
.. I . . 4. There is a scant regard to .the human' element."
_. .,,
.400. Classify felonies according to their nature. (Basic Principles, Eationale, p. 2, by the Code COP-
I$
.:,?
..
Felonies are classified according t o their nature, as mittee on Code of Crimes)
follows: Positivist theory -
1. Crimes against the national security and the law 1. That man is subdued occasionally by a strange: . ~ '
~ OI nations. morbid phenomenon which constrains him to do .,~. .I;,.
, , p
2 . Crimes against the fundamental laws of the State. rnronx, in sDite of or contrary to his volition. ,
. ,
1'. ., , ..,,. , . . 2 . That crime is essentially a. social and natural :.
. , . 3. Crimes against public order.
'' 4. Crimes against public interest. phenomenon, and as such, it cannot be treated and. ,.!;
'.... 5 . Crimes relative to opium and other prohibited drugs. checked by the application of abstract principles of law; .;
6. Crimes against public morals. and jurisprudence nor by the imposition of a punish-;, i
7. Crimes committed by public officers. ment, fixed and determined a priori; but rather through. .&
8. Crimes against persons. the ellforcement of individual measures in each par tic-^ ii
9. Crimes against personal liberty and security. ular case after a thorough, perSona1 and individual \:
.'
1. The basis of criminal liability ip human free 403. Classify felonies according to the means by which t
will^ and
the purpose of the penalty ia retribution. commit.ted and define each, and according to their
and define each.
138 139
. _ CRIMINAL LAW XEVIXWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Felonies are classified according to the means by which AI%? When is an act or omission voluntary?
. . ... they are committed into (1) intentional felonies or felonies A voluntary act is a free, +nteZZig& and ilttentiod
, , committed with malice or intent and (2) culpable felonies
or those resulting from imprudence, negligence, lack of act (U.S. vs. Ah Chong, 3 1 Phil. 488). IIence, an omis-
foresight or lack of skill (Art. 3, par. 2, R.P.C.). sion must also be free, intelligent and intentional. This is
the meaning of voluntariness in intentional felony. In
Felonies are classified according to their gravity into culpable felony, the act or omission must also be free
.I:
(1) grave felonies, (2) less grave felonies, and (3) light and int.dligent, hut instead of intent or malice, which is
~. felonies. necessary in intentional felonies, there is only imprudence,
.. Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
. :,,
I . .
I
capital punishment or penalties which in any of their pe-
. .
-
I..:.
, ,. i, . .,' .
riods are afflictive.
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes
with penalties which in their maximum period are correc-
j
407. What is mistake of fact and how does it affect~criminal
liability?
Mistake of f a d is a misapprehension of fact, showing
tipnal. j
lack of intent on the part of the person accused of - a
.. , ;. . . Light felonies are those infractions of law for the
1
. . felony. It exempts him from criminal liability, because
, ., .
commission of which the penalty of arrest0 1)zeno~or a intent, which is one of the conditions of voluntariness, iS
:. fine not exceeding two hundred pesos or both is provided 2ackir.g,
.. (Art. 9, R.P.C.).
,':
. :404.. State t h e elements of felonies as t h q are &fined in the 408 When is mistake of fact available as a defense?
' . .. Revised Penal Code.
'
The rule is: that in mistake of fact, the act Of the,. '!
'.
accused would have been lawful had the facts been aS he
As the term is defined in Art. 3 of the Revised Penal believed them t o be. His intention in pel-foming the act '
',
. , Code, felonies have the following elemnts:
. . should be lawful. He should not be a t fault or negligent.
1. There must be an act or omission.
2 . The act or omission must he punishable by law. 409. ~~~sthe mere fact that a <personhas acted under a mis-
3 . That the act must be committed or the omission take of fact mean that he is exempt from criminal Ea-
incurred by means of deceit (dolo) or by means of fault bility? Explain your answer.
(culpa). No, because it is reqnired that t h e . s t and the i&n-
. ., It is not necessary to state that the act or omission
. . tion of the accused must he la&]. Eence, if his act and
.+ ,. , be voluntary, as it is presumed. intention are unlawful, the accused is not exempt from
'1
'" -. 40 What i s the meaning of the term "dolo" as used in the criminal liability, notwithstanding a mistake of fact on , . ,
.' -:/'definition of intentional felonies in Art. 3 of the Revised ! his part. '1
. .. $1
Penal Code.
910. A wanted to kill B by shooting him. with a pistol. A,
The term dolo has been improperly translated to "de- 1 thinking that he was B, fired at a person who was walk- ~':;$
ceit". Dolo is equivalent to malice, which is the intent
,to do an injury to another;/It implies malicious inten-
I
ing in a dark alley. It turned out that the person killed
was C, the brother of A. A had no intention t o kill him. ,$ $
..*y
tion. Considering that there was a mistake of fact in this case,., !;:.
;;
140 141
CllIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIiMIN.41, LAW REVIEWER
do you believe that A is exempt from criminal liability?
Explain your answer. 371. What is th'e Yenue of action in libel?
No, because A had intent to kill when he fired his The criminal and civil action for damages in cases of
pistol. He &d w j k m a l i c e , since he had the intent written defamation shall be filed simultaneously or sepa-
to do an injury to another. Even if the person whom rately with t,he court of first instance of the province
he shot was really B, the act done by A would not have or city where the iibelous article is printed and first
been lawful. Under Art. 4, par. 1, of the Revised P e n d published or where any of the offended parties actually
Code, he is liable criminally for the death of his brother resides at the time of the commission of the offense:
C, because when he fired his pistol with intent t o kill B, Provided, however, That where one of the offended parties
A was committing a felony and the death of C was the is a public officer mhose office is ,in the City of Manila
direct, natlrral and logical consequence of the felony com- a t the time of the commission of the offense, the action
rgteea. shall be filed in the Court of First Instance of the City
of Manila or of the city or province where the libelous
411. A was awakened by the barking of his dog. Be looked article is printed and first. published, and in case such ,
out of the window of his house and saw a man in his public officer does not hold office in the City of Manila, :
yard. A got his shot-gun and, believing that man to be the action shall be filed in the Court of First Instance
a. robber, shot and killed him in his yard. When he went of the provinre o r city where he held office,at the t i e
down to see the man he had killed, he found out that the of the commission of the offense o r where @e libelous
man was his brother who wanted to spend the night in article is printed and first published and in case one o€
A's house. Can A successfully invoke mistake of fact as the offended parties is a private individual, the action
a, defense? Explain your answer. shall be filed in the Court of First lnstance of the prov-
NQ,because even if the man was in fact a robber, not ince or city where he actually resides at the time of the
his brother, A would not have been bs6fied in shooting commission of the offense or where the libelous matter
him to death. There was neither defense of A's person, is printed and first published: Provided, further, That the
defense of home nor defense of property in this case, be- civil action shall be filed in the same court where the
' cause there was no~~unlawful aggression on the part of criminal action is filed and vice versa: Provided, further- *
the deceased that might imperil the life or limb of A. more, That the conrt where the criminal action or ci$il
Since the act done by A would noLhave been~lawfulhad action for damages is first filed, shall acquire jurisdic.
the facts been as he believed them t o be, he is liable for tion to the exclusion of other courts. (Grt. 360, par. 3,
the death of his brother. K.P.C.)
412. May malice and negligence or imprudence co-exist in the 372. How shall the criminal action for d,efamation which .,on-
commission of a felony? Explain your auswer. s?sstS in tlie impatation of a crime which can not be pro:
No, because in criminal negligence, the injury caused secuted de oficio be '&ronght?
-.
to another should be unintentional, it being simply the It shall be brought at the instance of and upon
incident of another act performed without malice (People plaint expressly filed by the offended party (Art.
vs. Guillen, 85 Phil. 307; People vs. Sara, 55 Phil. 939). par. 5, R.P.C.).
In order that an act may be qualified a s imprudence, it
is necessary that neither malice nor intention to cause 373. What are the requisites f w acqkittal or of def
libel?
142
3.27
,. ,.,;z
CRIMIKAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW KEYIEWER
In every criminal prosecution for libel, the truth may the honor or reputation of another person (Art. 364, :
be given in evidence and if the matter charged as libelous R.P.C.) .
ir, true, and, moreover, that it was published with good
. .. motives and for justifiable ends, the defendant shall he
379. What are the quasi-offenses?
acquitted (Art. 361, par. 1, R.P.C.). They are the offenses committed by means of fault . '
:: imposed in the period which they may deem proper to It has general application, because Criminal Law is.
. . apply.
'
binding on all persons who reside or sojourn in Philipphie
2 . When, by imprudence or negligence and with viola- territory.
tion of the Automobile Law, the death of a person shall It is territorial, in t h a t Criminal Law undertakes to
.. : be caused, in which case the defendants shaJ be punished punish crimes committed within the Philippine territory,
''. by p n s i o n covreccionat in its medium sild maximum It is prospective, in that a penal law cannot make an
'W ~ periods. act punishable in a manner in which it was not punishable
.. . (Art. 365, par. 6, R.P.C.) when committed. Crimes are punished under the laws
force at the t'me of their commission.
382. Define rekkiess imprudence.
As t o its general application: Art. 2 of the Revised
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but with- Penal Code states that the provisiolls of this Code shall .
- out malke, doing or failing to do act from which material be enforced within the Philippine Krchipelago, including ,,,
damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution its atmosphere, interior waters anc! maritime zone, with- ' i
on the part of the person performing or failing to per-
out reference t o the person o r persons who might violate
form such act, taking into consideration his employment
m y of its provisions.
or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and
other' circumstances regarding persons, t:me and place Art. 1 4 of the new Civil Code provides that penal laws ,~, ,
(Art. 365, par. 7, R.P.C.). shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in Philip- ',
pine territory.
383. Definc simple imprudence. A; to its terril&io,l application: The same Art. 2
of the Revised Penal Code states that the provisions Of ,;
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution this Code shall be enforced wilhin the Philippine Archi- ,'
displayed in those cases in which the damage impending
pelego, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and
to be caused is not immediate nor the dmger clearly
manifest (Art. 3F5, par. 8, R.P.C.). maritime zone, which ccnstitute the Philippine territory.
As l o t h c pmspectivitg of C~nvinalLaw: Art. 21 o f :
i
584. When is the penalty next higher in degree to those pro- the Revised Penal Code provides that no felony shall be
vided for in Art. 3G5 to be imposed? punishable by any penalty not pi-escribed by law prior
to its commission.
The. cnalty next higher in degree to tllose provided
F
for in it,. 365 shall be imposed upon the offender who
fails to..-lend on the spot to the injured parties such help
Art. 366 uC the same Code provides
punishable under the laws enforced at t
be in h:s hands to give (Art. 365, par. 9, R.P.C.). commission.
",
_* -3%. In what eases is our Criminal Law not applicable to per-
,.,+385.
.., State and exp!ain briefly the main characteristics of sans living or sojourning in this country?
. .
. , , Criminal L,nw and state the provisions of law based on Art. 2 or the Revised Penal Code
thosc characteristics. t,hat the general and territorial applicati
Criminal t a w has three main characteristics: (1) gen- sions arc subject to the cxoeptions that
.
~.
,
eral, ( 2 ) territorial, and (3) prospective. in the trcatics and laws of preferential
130 131
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKInlINAL LAW REVIEWER
Art. 14 of the new Civil Godc provides that the general 387. An American soldier committed the complex crime of forc
application of penal laws is subject to the principles of ble abduction with rape, begun in Angeles, Pampanga, and
public international law and to treaty stipulations. eontinned all the way to Clark Field, a military base, where ..
Hence, the following persons ale not subject to the the victim was raped. May the offender be tried by the -1
operation of our Criminal Law : Court of First Instance of Pampanga?
1. Those who, according to the treaties between the Under the Rules of Court (Rule 107, Sec. 14), in all
Philippines and a foreign country, are not amenable to criminal prosecutions, the action shall be instituted and
our penal laws. tried in the court, of the municipality or province where-
in the nf€ense was committed or anyone of the ingredients
Thus, under the Base Agreement between the Philip
thereof tank place.
pines and the United States, our penal laws shall not
apply when- In the case of Parulan vs. Rodas, 78 Phil. 855, it was
held that the offendera who kidnapped the victim from ,'.
( a ) The offense is committed by any person within Manila and took him t o a distant place in Bulacan, where, . 2
any base, except (1) where the offender and the the latter was killed, may be tried either by the Cou
offended party are hoth Philippine citizens (not of First Instance of Manila o r by the Court of F i r
members of the armed forces of the United States Instance of Bulacan, but whichever takes cognizance
on active duty), or (2) where the offense is against the case first acquires exclusive jurisdiction.
the security of the Philippines; The aforementioned rule and ruling may be appli
_,
(b) The offense is committed outside the bases, but! in this case by analogy.
the offender and the offended party are both The American soldier committed the complex crime of-
members of the armed forces of the United States; forcible abduction with rape. The complex crime of
and h1e abduction with rape, being a w n i h u i n w f f e n s e ,
(e) The offense committed outside the bases hy any be tried either by the Court of First Instance of
member of the armed forces of the United States panga, where the commission of the crime began, or b
is against the security of the United States. the military court of the armed forces of the United
2. Those who, by virtue of laws of preferential a p in Clark Field, where it was continued and consum
to our penal laws. Hence, the Court of First Instance of
try the case.
under Rep. Act No. 75, it is even a crime t o
imprison any ambassador or public minister of 388. Is 6ur Criminal Law applicable to crimes committed by a
.," any foreign State or their domestic servant whose name soldier?
.. is registered in the Department of Foreign Affairs and
'.' posted in some public place in the Office of the Chief It depends on whether the offender is a soldier of the
of Police of Manila. Philippine Army or he is a soldier of the armed forces:
of the TJnited States. If he is a soldier of the Philippine:
3. Those who, under the principles of public Inter- Army, our civil court has concurrent jurjsdiction with the;
to the operation of our penal military court. If the civil court takes cognizance of the"
s and other chiefs of States, ca,se first, then it shall have exclusive jurisdiction ovq;
the offense committed by the soldier of the Philippine
132 133
I
... ,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW RZVIEWER
d ,
" Army and our Criminal Law will be applicable to him ber of the armed forces of the United States (a)
-But if the offender is a soldier of the United States Armed
. engaged in the actual performance of a specific mi
.'2,; Forces, the stipulations in the Base Agreement will apply. duty, or (b) during a period of national eme
. , United States may exercise jurisdiction.
' , 389. May a Philippine citizen who committed a crime in this
country he punished by a law of a foreign nation? Ex- 392. Do civil courts have jurisdiction during time
plain your answer. a soldier who committed a crime?
' . Yes, .when the crime is committed by a Philippine Notwithstanding the provision in the Articles of War
citizen within a base, provided that the offended party requiring a soldier to he delivered to civil authorities for
is not a Philippine citizen o r that the offense is not trial for an alleged crime except in time of war,,,the
'
. .against the security of the Philippines. In such case, the jurisdiction of military courts over a soldier is not er-
.-< 'Articles of War of the United States Armea Forces will elusive of thc civil courts even during time of war, if the
apply. soldier is stationed within the territory where the c i s 1
courts are functioning and where no' actual h
When is a soldier of the armed forces of the United Slates in progress (Valdez vs. Lucero, 76 Phil. 356).
liable for violation of our Criminal Law?
But undei. the Base Agreement, in time
The Base Agreement between the Republic of the Phil- United States shall have the right to exercis
.~ ippines and the United States of America recognizes the jurisdiction over any offenses which may be
authority of our civil courts to exercise jurisdiction over by members of the armed forces of the
"
all offenses committed within the Philippines, except in in the Philippines.
certain cases specifically provided in the Agreement.
Hence, a soldier of the armed forces of the United and B, Filipino citizens, went to Hongkong on a pleasure 1
States is liable for violation of our penal law and triable trip. When they returned to, and were already in, the ,'
by our civil court when the o€fense is committed (1) ont- Philippines, €3 discovered that. A stole her diamond ring
side the bases and ( 2 ) the offended party is not a mem- worth 82,000 while they were in 'Hongkong. May ow
ber of the armed forces of the United Sta,tes or that Criminal Law be applied in this case? Explain your an-'
the offense is not against the security of the United States. mer.
Not o&+of the exceptions provided in the Base Agreement rit
No, because this is not one of the eases where the
is applicable to this case. provisions of the Revised Penal Code may be enforced
391. When may the United States exercise jurisdiction over an outside of the jurisdiction of the Philippines. The offense
offense committed outside the base by a member of its was not committed while on a Philippine ship o r airship:
armed forces, even if the offended party is not a member the offense does not involve forgery or counterfeiting of
thereof lor the offense is not against the security of the any coin or currency note of the Philippines, o r obligations
United States? and securities issued by the Government of the Philippines;
any offense committed outside the base (the of-
II the offense does not involve any act connected with the
ed party not being a member of the armed forces introduction into the Philippines of forged obligations and
e 'United States or the offense is not against the securities: the offender is not a public officer or employee
h. Of the United States) is committed by any mem- i who committed an offense in the exercise of his functions;
i
134 I
135 , .
$?
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER $ CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWISR
,7/;
or that the offense is not one of the crimes against the 11, or currency notes or obligations and securities issued by
the Government may affect the economic life of the na-
national security and the law of nations.
4 tion. Crimes against the law of nations, such as piracy
and mutiny on the high seas, are against mankind and
394. Why are the provisions of the Revised Penal Code appli-
cable to crimes committed on board the Philippine ship may be punished by any civilized government.
or airship even if the Philippine ship or airship is outside
the jurisdiction of the Philippines? 397. When may our Criminal Law be given retroactive effect?
The Philippine vessel or aircraft, although beyond three Penal 1aw.s shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they
miles from the seashore, is considered an extension of the favor a person guilty of a felony, v h o is not a habitual ~
national territory. delinquent, and provided that the penal laws do not speci-
But when the Philippine vessel or aircraft is in the fically provide that the same shall not be applicable to
territory of a foreign country, the crime committed on pending actions or causes of actions.
said vessel o r aircraft is subject to the laws of that foreign
country. 398. A, who had been once punished for the crime of theft, was
on trial for estafa punishable by pirision correcdonal in ,'
395. A. an employee of the Philippine Government, was assigned view of the amount involved. Before the case was sub- ,:
to Japan'-as a clerk of t h e Reparation Committee. While mitted for decision, Congress amended Art. 315 of the ' :;i
in Japan, A falsified the record prepared and kept by an- Revised Penal Ode, reducing the penalty for estaf'a, com- ' ;
. . other employee of the Comntittee. In case A returns or mitted hy A, to arrest0 mayor. Is the new law applicable
is brought back to the Philippines, may he he prosecuted to A? Explain your answer.
and punished for falsification committed by him in Japan? On the basis of the facts given, .A should be given the ' ~;$
Explain your answex. benefit of the new law, it being favorable t o him. Hence,' .:
No, because although A is a public officer or employee, the new law is applicable to him. A was only a recidivist, ;
he did not commit the offense in the exercise of his because at tbe time of his trial for estafa he was convicted ,'.,
function. l f o commit an offense in the exercise of his by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same :
function, the public officer or employee must have acted title of the Code. A new favorable statute dealing With *
in his official capacity, o r that the act committed must crimes cannot be given retroactive effect only in tw
be rel.%d to or connected with the performance of his namely: (1) where the new law is expressly made in-
official duty. applicable to pending actions or existing causes o f
and (2) where the offender is a habitual delinque
396. Why are the crimes under the circumstances mentioned Xule No. 5 of Art. 62 of the Revised Penal Code.
in Art. 2 made punishable by the Revised Penal. Code A habitual delinquent is one who, within a per'
even if they are committed outside of the jurisdiction of ten years from the date of his release or last conv
the Philippines? of the crimes of serious o r less serious
Because the commission of any of those crimes may robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, is
a B c t tho p e l or economic life of the nation. The any of said crimes a third time or oftener,
crimes against national security may affect the existence
of the State. The forging or counterfeiting of our coins 399. What are the three parts of the Ileyised P
136 137
. .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMlNAL LAW REVIEWER
,!, , The three parts of the Revised Penal Code are: 2 . That man is essentially a moral creature with .-?'i'
1. Basic principles affecting criminal liability (Articles an absolutely free will to choose between good and evil,
1 to 20). Y thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result ' ~.
2. Provisions on penalties, including criminal and civil of the €elonious act than upon the man, the criminal ' <'$
.,%
. 4"
liability (Articles 21 to 113). himself. .:+
. .li
3. Felonies defined and penalized under fourteen (14) 3. It has endeavored to establish a mechanical and ' ,I, ?$-
different titles (Articles 114 to 365). direct proportion between crime and Penalty. .4,.
4 . There is a scant regard to the huma
400. Classify felonies according to their nature.
'
(Basic Principles, Rationale, p. 2, by the
mittee on Code of Crimes)
Feloni,es are classified according to their nature, a
follows :
q
Positivist theory-
.. 1. That man is subdued occ:tsionally by a strange
. 1. Crimes against the national security and the law I
1
.. Felonies are classified according to the maans by which 406. When is an act or omission voluntary?
they are committed into (1) intentional felonles or felonies
.’
, ’..
.’
committed with malice or intent and (2) culpable felonies
or those resulting from imprudence, negligence, lack of
foresight or lack of skill (Art. 3, par. 2, R.P.C.).
6 A voluntary act is A free, intelligent, and intentional
act (US. vs. Ah Chong, 11 Phil. 488). Hence, a n omis-
sion must also be free, intelligent and intentional. This is
the meaning of voluntariness in intentional felony. In
Felonies are classified according t o their gravity into culpable felony, the act or omission must also be free
(1) grave felonies, (2) less grave felonies, and (3) light and intelljgent, but instead of intent o r malice, which is
felonies. necessary in intentional felonies, there is only imprudence, - ~ ,
Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
capital punishment or penalties which in any of their pe-
riods are afflictive. 407. What is mistake of fact and how dues it affect criminal
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes liability?
. , I
with penalties which in their maximum period are correc- I Mistake of fact is a misapprehenision of fact, showing
tional. lack of intent on the part of the person accused of a
. I Light felonies are those infractions of law for the felony. It exempts him from criminal liability, because
commission of which the penalty of arresto mmnor or a intent, which is one of the conditions of voluntariness, is
fine not exceeding two hundred pesos or both is provided lacking.
‘ . (Art. 9, 1I.P.C.).
408. When is mistake of fact avaikdble as a defense?
404.’ State the elements of felonies as they are defined in the The rule is: that in mistake of fact, the act of the
.. Revised P,enal Code.
. . ”, accused would have been lawful had the facts been as he ’:.
.. As the term is defined in Art. 3 of the Revised Penal believed them to be. His intention in performing the a&
Code, felonies have the following elements: should be lawful. He should not be at fault or negligent.
1. There must be an act or omission.
2. T h e act or omission muvt be punishable by law. 409. Does the mere fact that a person has acted under a mis-
3 . That the act must be committed o r the omission take of fact mean that he is exempt from criminal lia-
incurred by means of deceit (dolo) o r by means of fault bility? Explain your answer.
(culpa). No, because it is required that the act and the inten-
It is not necessary to state that the act or omission tion of the accused must be lawful. Hence, if his act and
be voluntaiy, as i t is presumed. intention are unlawful, the accused i s not exempt from
criminal liability, notwithstanding a mistake of fact on
405. What is the meaning of the term “dolo” as used in the his part.
definiti,on of intentional felonies in Art. 3 of the Revised
Penal Code. 410. A wanted to kill B by shooting him with a pistol. A,
The term dolo has been improperly translated to “de- thinking that he was B, fired a t a perso
, ,. ceit”. Dolo is equivalent to malice, which is the intent ing in a dark alley. It turned out tlhat
to do an injury t o another. It implies malicious inten- was C , the brother of A. A had no inte
tion. Considering that there +vas a mistake of
140 141
iK/
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW RETIEWER
'.: . do yon believe that A is exempt from criminal liability?- injury should intervene; where su intention exists, the , .i
Explain YDW answer. act should be qualified by the felony i.t has produced even .. ,
'No, because A had intent to kill when he fired his. though it may not have been the intention of the actor
pistol. H e acted with malice, since he had the intent to cause an evil of such gravity as that produced (Viada's
.to do an injury to another. Even if the person whom comment on the Penal Code, Vol. 7, 5th ed., p. 7).
,..
he shot was really B, the act done by A would not have-
.been lawful. Under Art. 4, par. 1, of the Revised Penak 4t3:'^A, with n i&& to inflict physical injuries on B, threw a
Code, he Is'liable criminaily for the death of his brother piece of stone at the latter. The stone d i c b o t hit B and ' 1
.~
C, because when he fired his pistol with intent to kill B,. instead hit and seriously injured C who was standing near. ~ .
A was committing a felony and the death of C was t h e 13. The fiscai who investigated the case filed an informa- :
'-direct, nat.ura1 and logical consequence of the felony com- tion against A for sPriousphysimtin,luries -ht re&-
mitted. Jessimprudence, with C as the offended party. Did the
fiscai properly charge A with that offense? Explain your r .
4 l y d was awakened by the barking of his dog. He IookeS answer.
out of the window of his house and saw a man in his No, because when A threw the stone at B, he h&t&
yard. A got his shot-gun and, believing that man to be- intention to cauge an injury to the latter. Hence, A acted
a robber, shot and killed him in his yard. When he went w i t h a d i c e and his act was unlawful. .& order that a n act
down t o see the man he had killed, he found out that the may be qualified as imprudence, i t is ncmsmy that neither
man was his brother who wanted to spend the night ia malice nor illtPnllnn t oy- c should intenren
. A's house. Can A successfully inwlce mistake of fact a s Where an u&ayful act i s x 3 f d l y done, a mistake in the'
. , a defense? Explain your answer. blow or a mistake in the identity of the victim caanet-b
No, because even if the man was in fact a robber, not cwskkred as r e d s k s d m d s u e (Pe@plevs. Guillen, 85
....~
his brother, A would not have been justified in shooting- Phil. 307; People vs. Gona, 54 Phil. 605).
him to death. There was neither defense of A's person,
'
i
414. What are the conditions that make the act or omission
defense of home nor defense of property in this case, be-
cause there was no unlawful aggression on the part of
the deceased that might imperil the life or limb of A.
xk 'voluntary in intentional felonies?
In order that the act or omission in felonies by d d o t
'Since the act done by A would not have been lawful h a s may be considered voluntary or performed with deliberate
the facts been as he believed them to be, he is liable for- intent, the following requisites must concur :
'. . the death of his brother. 1. Freedom, .
F. May malice and negligence or imprudence co-exist in the 2. Intelligence, and
commission of a felony? Explain your answer. 3. Intent.
No, because in criminal negligence, the injury caused
i
415. What are the conditions that make the act dr omission
'. . .
' to another should be unintentional, it being simply the voluntary in culpable felonies?
, -.* ~
. . incident of another act performed without mhliee (People
vs. Guillen, 85 Phil. 307; People vs. Sara, 66 Phil. 939). Thev are:
In order that an act may be qualified a s imprudence, it
-.. is necessary that neither malice nor interition to cause
142 i
I
1. When he acted under the cnmp&@n of an irresisti- 421. What are acts mala in se? What are acts mala prohibita?
.. i.
ble force; and Acts mala in se are those which are wrongful from
. . 2. When he acted under the ig&ulse of uncontrollable their nature, such as acts constituting homicide, rape or
.,
.,
fear of an equal or greater injury. theft. .^
” . . .”
Acts mala prohibita are those which are violations of
24. In what cases may a person who committed a fdony be
mere rules of convenience designed to secure a more or-
exempt from criminal liability because he acted without
derly regulation of the affairs of society. They are wrong :r
iWir:enceL merely because they are prohibited by the statutes. . .
They are:
1. When the person who committed the felony was 428. How would you classify the crimes punishable by the
insane or imbecile; Revised Penal Code?
2 . When he was a minor under nine years old; and Generally, the crimes punishable by the Revised Penal .,,
. . . 3. When he was over nine but under fifteen years Code are classified as crimes mala in sa, because most ’;‘
,.. . old and he acted without discernment. of the acts defined as mimes in that Code are wrongful >.;
from their nature. , .
425. In what cases may a person who committed a felony be
;,. . exempt from criminal liability because he acted without 429. What is motive and how is i t distinguished from intent? ,
intent‘! Motive is the moviug power which impeis one.to ac-
They are: tion for a definite result. Intent is the ‘purpose to use.
1. When he had performcd a lawful act with due care a particular means to effect such result.
and caused an injury by mere accident without fault or While rn-otive is never an essential element of a crime,’.
intention of causing it; intent is an essential condition of voiuntariness in felonies
4
.&,.,, ’
146 147
I
, .
:&. -,: p-,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
' ' , committed the offense. But where the defendant admits injury to another, but the result is different from that
'. ~
the killing, it is not necessary to inquire into his motive which he intended.
. ,
'.
for doing the act (People vs. Arcilla, G. R. No. L-11792,
June SO, 1959). 4" / I f a person acted under any of the justifying circum-
Where there are no eyewitnesses to the crime, and f l f stances mentioned in Art.& the Revised Penal code,^
where s u s m o n is likely to @.llupon a number d - l l a s O a S , and in so doing caused a ' ' lo anather which waa
,, motive is relevant and significant (People vs. Mario, GA- not
_---, intended, did that person incur criminal liability? Ex-
G. R. No. 371-R,July 21, 1947). plain your answer.
No. There are two requisites that must be present
,, 432. Shall wiminal liability be incurred even if the wrongfu~ in order that a person may be held liable criminally for
., act done by the accused be different from that which he the -Aane-which is different from that intended,
intended or the means employed or the aims sought by him namely: (1) that a Scny H L ~ Scommitted; and (2) that
'. are impossible? the wyang.$ane the agguer. T e h p e m n be the direct,/-
Yes. Criminal liability shall be h%med: natural and 1qg-1- e of the felnny cammiited.
1. By %person cnmmitting a f e h y (delito) al- i n justifying circumstances, there is LIQ&&UJY com-
though the wrongful act m e be d m t from that mitted as thcre is & h i n g xnlaxf&l in the d-a the
which he intended. person who aded under any of them is deemed nOtte
h m t r a m c a s e d the-. Hence, the f i r s t r e w i s i t e is':
2. By any person performing an*which would be l&&g and =-fon the first paragraph of Art. 4 .
an offense agakst p g x s ~ ~OP+WPS&&
s vere it not for is not applicable.
the &- 'Mity of its accomplishment or 0%
a i n t of the employmat of in&u& or ineffectual In such case, he is &&&e for the consequence&
m m - ( A r t . 4, R.P.C.). inieded b y h i w .
149
. .. ,,
"
ment and disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may use the accused fired his gun a t a sleeping person, believing
.. ... such force as may be reasonably necessary to repel or him to be the notorious criminal named Balagtas, because
prevent an actual or threatened unlawful physical invasion the person sleeping was lying on the floor and facing
.
.. . or usurpation of his property. A then acted under a the wall of fne house with his back towards the door
justifying circumstance. Such being the case, A was not where the accused were. The person killed was not the
committing a felony when he caused B to fall through notorious criminal, but an innocent person. When he .,
the window to the ground below.Anly a person comfiib fired and killed the sleeping person, the accused made a '.
ting a Eelony may be held liable for the result different mistake in the identity of the victim. Although the wrong 1
from that which he intended. done was different from that intended by the accused, he ' ,
A cannot be held liable for homicide through simple was, nevertheless, liable for the death of that person, be-
or reckless imprudence, because u . the~ cireumstances causeaHen he fired at the sleeping person he w a s cam-
he could n_atbe expedal t o take the n mi&& a t l e a s t the felony of &ensatehmurder and the :
t o m s i&rsin-B. &e& of that innocent person w s the d w , -and
b"i.~l
-1 cgmeauenqe of the felnny cm&d 1ys-bim
, - Praeter intenlionem is illustrated in the case of People
.,
436. What, in general, are the causes that may produce a re-
sult which is different from that intended by the offender? vs. Cagoco, 58 Phil. 524. In this case, the accused did
not have the intent to kill the deceased. He gave the
There are three hypotheses that may be considered in deceased a fist blow on the back part of his head. When
answering this question, namely: the deceased fell as a result of the blow, his head hit the
(1) Abernttio ictus o r mistake in the blow; pavement and as a result i t wax fmctured. He died as
(2) Ewer in personae or mistake in the identity of a consequence. In this case,/though the death of the
the victim; and deceased was LoLintended by the accused, he was never-
(3) Praeter intentionem or that the injurious result theless liable f o r tlle reason that v&a> hcxaye a f i s t h l w
is greater than that intended. oj), the d$;gs.ed the accused was camI&hg the felanr , :,.
~,,
In aberratio ictus, the offender i n k x x h g to cause an of sl&hf-pbpicaljnjuries, a t a s t , and the death of the ':
injury to one person actually inflicted it on another, a deceased was the an& &u?A and lnsical consequence
result which was not inteTided by him, For instance, A, ofe felm-mmitted. Ob)&
with intent to kill, fired his pistol a t B; but he missed
B and hit and seriously injured C who was standing Ije- 437. When is the result deemed the direcit, natural and logical
..hind B. Undoubtedly, A did not intend to cause an in- consequence of the felony committed by the offender? :
jury t o C and, therefore, the result was not intended The rc&f. is deemed the direct, natural and logical
by himkevertheless, A is criminally liable for the in- consequence of the felony committed by the offender when
jury caused to 6, because when he fired his pistol at B the Wnw camraitted is the proximahe-cause of the result.
with intent to kill, A . was wmnitting the felony of at- A proximate cause is that cause, which, in natural and
tempted homicide and the injury caused to C was the continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervenin
direct, natural and logical consequence of the felony com- cause, produces the injury, and With'out which the
mitted by him. would not have occurred (38 Am. Jur. 605; cited
The hypothesis of error in personae is illustrated in case of 'Villanueva vs. Medina, G. 13. Wo. L-1012
the case of People VS. Oanis, 74 Phil. 267. In this w e . zz, i95n.
150 161
..,* . , '.., ,
I
'"Ita
People vs. Buhay, G. R. L-1003, Oct. 27, 1.947). the water. As the water was deep and B did not know
how to swim, B sznk down and was drowned. Is A liable , '
i" Phil. !j44; People vs. Rodriguez, 23 Phil. 22; and People A was committing a felony, that is, slight physical in-
i
'. .
i_ vs. Reyes, 61 Phil. 341). In these cases, the fist blows juries or at least ill-treatment under Art. 266 of the
or the physical injuries inflicted were the causes for the Revised Penal Cocle. The felcny d-c by A W W
. , .. acceleration of the death of the deceased. the proximate cawsiegf B's death (U.S. vs. Valdez; People
....~,
,:;
&!%~, h+kvs. Buhay).
p .: ~439. A. an insane. with a bolo in hand came rushing towards
,*?.,, .
*;+;*i; . B who retreated. Finding himself cornered in a place
~
162 153
. , ,
" ; )
,.
,,
.
.. CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Does iuberratio ictus, error in personae, or praeter inten- t o death, the penalty f o r the lesser offense,
tionem affect the criminal liability of the offender? Ex- eide, should be imposed on A, but the same to
plain your answer. i n its maximum period (Art. 49, B.P.C.
P m e t e r intentionem affects the criminal liability of the the intended victim and the actual ,victim
offender in the sense that it m i t i m a his criminal liz- t o the offender so that whoever was killed
bility or lessens the penalty to be imposed on him. This b e homicide or murder qualified by treache
is covered by paragraph 3 of Art. 13, which provides for stance, the mistake will not chance the pen
'the mitigating circumstance "that the,,offer.der had no .in- 49 is not applicable. Hence, the penalty
tention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed.". posed in the maximum period.
Error in personae may lessen the penalty to be im- But if tm-cxiB$F are actually committed, hecause
posed on the offender when the wrong kiefalls a person pfz,w%are affected by the udaxfulact, and crimes
other than the intended victim and which, by reason of a r e the r&t of ?Le- sg_le aci, the pma& for the
-offense shall be imposed, to be applied in its maximum .i
r w z s k i p or m k , c&ifiei the resulling crime. The
penalty for the Issser offense is to be imposed, to be period (Art. 48, R.P.C.).
applied in the maximum-period (Art. 49, R.P.C.). / Thus, if both E and A's fathe~rwere standing ClWe * .!
But when the felony intended t o be committed and to each other on the street and A fired his pistol at B
the one actually committed are e-d with the =e- to kill him, hut because of poor aim he hit and killed,
his father, t i e ~ e ~ a l t y _ f o r p a r r i c i dshould
e be imposed
penalty, error in personae does not affect the criminal in the maximum period. A is liable for theX - C
liability of the offender.
crime of parricide with attempted homicide.
Aberratio ictus should result in a comolex crime. The ,1
p&Ao be imposed is that corresponding to the m r 444. What is an impossible crime? ..,>
oJ&us% to be amlied in the maximum period (Art. 48, An immsible crime is one where the act performed
L_
,..
*'#.?.,.. ;
,.,
p"
$I
i~ ;.~
%q$: .,
, ,**~.,
'. 154 156
,.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
166 157
, .
. . . ,
., ,
.~
. and the injury caused by the offense, the Court should ,:'
Do you believe that A is liable for impossible crime, con-
sidering that the penalty for that crime is arrest0 mayor not suspend tge execution of the ser,tence. What.it shoufd ,:'.:;
do is to.~su&it to the Chief Executive, through the De;-
or a fine from F200 to F500?
partment of Justice, a staiement of the reasws. which,
It ia believed that the provisions on impossible crime induce-t~he-cgurt to believe that the ccrl&ict md%exe&&e
are ugrnd t o those cases where the a d performed would clemency (A& 5 , R.P.C.).
have been a gpye._or less grave felony. Hence; A is not
liable for impossible crime, because the act performed by 456, What are the stages of the acts of execution in crime?, ''
him would have been a light felony only. f i o hold other-
Are they punishable?
wise would be t o recognize the a b & r g y that to_~ill&t.
sii-g&t-physieal~ injuries on a dead person is a g r a e r - o f - They are: (1) attempted, (2) frustrated, and (3) con:
fense than to inflict them on a living person. surmated stages.
Ai+. 6, par. 1, .of the Revised .Penal Code provides
It is a. rule in Criminal Law that there is no crime if that consummated felonies, as well as those which &e~
there is no law that punishes the act. What is the pro- frustrated and attempted are punishable.
vision of the Revised Penal Code which is based on t h i s &
:'h'en the crime is punishable b y a special law,
principle? attempted and frustrated stages of the acts of execu
Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which it. are not punishable, unless the special law provides lb:,p
may deem proper t o repress and which is not punishable aity. th,erefor. Thus, a councilor who offered to furnish
by law, it shall r s d e r the groper.decision, and shall report sti-eet lamps t o the municipality is not liable for .violation
to the Chief Executive, through the ELepartxent of Justice, of a special law prohibiting members of the m u n i c i d
the reasons which induce the court t o believe that said act- councils from acquiring any interest in contracts with the
should be made the subject of penal legislation (Art. 5, municipality, it appearing that his offer was not accepted
R.P.C.). (US. vs. Lopez Basa, 8 Phil. 89). But in the later case,
, In such case, the proper decision that the court should it was held that the prohibition against interest in m u n b
render is to dismiss the case and the defendanf ipal contracts, includes all the steps .talcen to consummate'.
because the act is not punishable by Isw. the contract, that is, frustrated and attempted stages are
included (ionteclaro vs. People, 51 O.G. 2392). '
,455. May the court, after finding the accusdd guilty of the
crime ,charged, refuse to impose the penalty provided by
law when the strict enforcement of the provisions of t h e 457. Define preparatory acts and distinguish them from at- :;
Revised Penal Code would result in the imposition of a tempted stage of the acts of execution. Give two examples.,
clearly excessive penalty? Explain your answer. of preparatory acts. Are preparatory acts punishable?
h o , the Court has to impose the penalty provided b y i /Preparatory acts are those initial acts of a person who
law X e d e s s of its opinian as t o the e t y of the has c2LEived the idea of committinil a crime but which
Gannot by themselves logically and peces.ga&y_ r i d into
When a strict enforcement of the provisions of t h e a cSr&e-Qffense. They are pot^ _oULert-gis. and, hence,
result in the imposition of a clearly excessive- they do not constitute the a.!&tq&$-stage-of the acts
enalty, taking into consideration the degree of inalice. of execution.
4
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
The examples of preparatory acts are (1) conspiracy The attempt to commit an offense which the Revis&
and proposal to commit a felony, and (2) buying or secur- Penal Code punishes is that which has a.lo&al relation
ing a weapon to commit murder. t o a particular and concrete offenae. It is necessary
Generally, preparatory acts are not punishable, he- that the beginning of execution, if casried to its complete
cause the law regards~them as innocent or at least per- termination following its natural course, without being
missible, except in rare and exceptiona! cases. frustrated by an external obstacle nor by the voluntary
Preparatory. acts consisting in conspiracy to commit desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily
. .
a felony is punishable in treason, rebellion and 3_edition, ripe? into a concrete offense.
,'
and pxoposal to commit a felony is punishable in treason The acts of A and B, up to the time they tried t o
and rebellion. escape, consisting merely in proceeding and trying to open
Preparatory acts which are considered in themselves, the back .door of the house with tools that could break
by law, as ipdependent crimes are punishable, like POS- it open, do not have a logical relation to the crime of
session of picIIocks which is preparatory to the commission robbery with Eorce upon things. In robbery with force
of robbery with force upon things (Arts. 229 and 302, upon things, it is necessary that the offender, after enter-
R.P.C.). ing the dwelling or any other building, shall commence
to take, but without actually taking, personal prop:*
. '
Buying or securing a weapon, like a knife, is not punish- belonging to another with intent to8 gain, in order that
able. But when one buys or secures a f i r e a m and he has it may be considered as attempted robbery with force
no license to possess it, the mere possession of the same, upon things.
although a preparatory act to the commission of murder, /ft is the nature of the external ;act, n o t the i&dQn
not as preparatory act, but as a
..
is punished by law. But note that i t in punished by law,
. e Without alone, of the accused which should be considered in deter- , :'
mining the question of whether o r not the commission
any relation t o another crime. of a particular crime is already commenced directly by
overt acts.
458. A and B, armed with a bolo and screw driver, respectively,
went to the house of C. Once in the yard of C, they 459. A was questioned by a policeman fur acting suspiciously !
proceeded to open the back door of the house of C with near the house of B. When searched, a pistol was found ~:,sj
the 1,001sthey were carrying. When they were thus break- in the possession of A who had a license to possess it.
ing :and trying to open the back doos, C and t h e other When investigated, A admitted that he carried the pistol
perslms in the house were awakened. A and B, without to kill B. May A be prosecuted and punished also for ;,i
succteeding in opening the door, ran away and tried to attempted homicide? Explain your answer.
escape, but were arrested by the policeman who saw them
rnnn#ingaway. When investigated, A and B admitted that It is submitted that A cannot be prosecuted and pun-
they wanted to enter the house of C to take Rome property ished for attempted homicide.
of C!. Are A and B liable for attempted robbery? Ex- While it is .true that there was the external act of
plain your answer. carrying the pistol and that A. admitted his intention to
kill B, at mast the carrying of the pistol was only, a
i . It i s submitted that A and B are not liable for at- t to carry out the iritention to kill B. :A
tempted robbery. dici & yet cgmmenceJhe commission of homicide, directl
160 161
. ... .
CRIMlNAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER . ,
~.. .., .
,
by overt acts. Had A fired his pistol at E, without hit- ;:
. ...
<. the pistol was f m t @ i r L g and the hullet \vas &d&&ve.
, ' ' ting the latter, or infllcting only a wound which is not The ,lmlELiing of the bullet is an acddent, by a .'$
'1
mortal, he would have commenced the commission of homi- i d e r m t defect of the *or Met.
'
In impossible crime, the means- employed by the offender . ,
. cide directly by overt acts. &e commission of a crime /is either inadequate or ineffectual. The means is ineffectual
is deemed commenced directly by overt acts when (1) ,/ when beenuse of its cannot produce the . ' .
, ,.
1 .. there is an e a l ~ a c and t (2) such external act has intendod result.
direct connection with the crime intended to be committed. /"
~
I?, A (changed his mind and went out of 'the room. Is A planning or preparation, which ev&ee the intentiop of . , -
criminally liable? Explain your answer. the offender to commit a particular felony.
6 e s , but not for attempted rape, for he desisted be- The existence of the overt act Is important only in ;
fore he could perform all the acts of execution. He was, the attempted stage of the acts of execution.
however, liable for consummated...trespass to.dwelling, be- It is not necessary to determine' the existence of overt ' .'
which exempts from criminal liability act in the other stages of execution, because in frustrated
which the accused intended .to commit, stage, as well as in the consummated stage, of execution;
and n!)tto .that. already~~committed wh_en_he-desisted. the offender has performed all the ' acts ' of ' exec
Note: Desistance made after all the acts af execution have been which necessarily implies that the offender has done
/
perlormed, does not exempt the accused from criminal liability. than an overt act. . .~
Thus, the return of the stolen property after the taking was
'
complete, anly-mitigates biliky under Art. 13, par.
10, in relation to its par. 7, Revised Penal Code.
463. Having been provoked to kill B, A drew his ,pistol from-
his waist, to wbieh it was tucked, but before he could aim
iU B, aimed his pistol at the latter the pistal at B, C held the w,rist of the hand of A holding
and puilled the trigger. The bullet jammed and did not the pistol and disarmed A. Is this attempted homicide?
. . explode. For what crime must A be held liable? Explain .No. The crime is other light threat in Art-285. In
attempted homicide,, where the offender uses
e for attempted bomicide, because he a- the overt act is the offender's &Qf..&Xh . .
I . ' ' menced the commission of the crime dirertly by ovt- the opfended part.1 with &.&h-
and if he did not perform all the acts of execution it was inflicting a mortal wound on the latter (People vs. Tabago
due t o a- c , other than his spontaneous et al., C.A., 48 0. G. 3419).
desistance. When he aimed it a t B and pulled the trigger
of his pistol, A performed the 4-rrertact of h&ide. The 464. A raised his bolo, as if to strike or stab B with it.
cause or accident which prevented. A from performing blow was struck, because C. intervened and stopped'
all the acts of execution was the fact that the bullet from striking or stabbing C. Is A liable for attemp
jammed and did not explode. homicide?
Note: A is not liable for impoisible crime. because the No. A was liable only for t ~ t & & a % x 2 k b r , ~, .,~$' ~ i+
i..
employed in this case is bnih a w e and ,e- since a ;Ye_ilg_o_n_(U.S.vs. Simeon, 3 Phil. 688). .,
152 B
163
,,.~
,
I
, .
'C
' '! . "F
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER ;-$
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER , ...?
. ' ' ..::*3
.,:;a
,e. .a,,
Note: In a-txd-homicide where the offender uses a 6ple ,,$
or a. knife, he must-be able to strike a blow with it, aiming a mortal wound on B ig of no moment, because the law.:'.
.. at the offended party and with intent to kill him.. requiry only that the offender performed &the +:&$
J of execution, r5gardless of his belief.
;,;:.x*$* J
with intent to kill, fired his revolver at B but did not
hit him. B cried, asking A not to kill him. Ad-d Suppose after shooting B, A believed that he had inflicted
and left B. Is A w e for attempted homicide Why? a mortal wound and left B, when, as a matter of
the wound inflicted was only sJght, can A be held 1
No. A -tea d t h d perfarming u e &of for frustrated homicide? .
, . . ,, -y, .
R.
66;' A fired his gun at B who was at a distance of 50 meters
away firom A. B was hit, but was able to run away and
to hide in a vacant house. A looked for B to finish him,
A, a doctor of medicine, shot B who wa!3 daUy-wounded.
The intent to kill on the part of A is shown by the use
of a revolver, a deadly weapon. Bul after having wounded
thinking that he did not inflict a mortal wound on B. B, A performed an operation on B and saved him from
Not having found B, A left. But B was seriously.-wounded death. The injuries of B healed in lrwo months. What
in the chest, perforating his right lung. C, who saw B crime was committed by A? Why?
wounded, took the latter to the hospital and due to surgical
operation performed by a doctor, B did not die. What A committed serious physical injuries, because as a "
stage of execution was reached by A in the commission result of the woun$ inflicted by A, B became$for g.WX
of crime of homicide? thsi&Llqs. ,-The i & e d d _ k i & which A e&xt&d
at the beinning disappeared. when he pel.formed an opera-
~8. It is frustrated .homicide, because A perfowed.al1 the tion 011 B to save his life.
acts of execution which-would produce the felony of homi- A is not IiabLe. f o r attempted homicide, because the
cide as a consequence but did not produce it by reason wound inflicted was martaJ and, hence, he performed all 'i
of a cjias-eindependent of the will of the perpetrator. the acts of execution which would produce the crime of .$
The wound inflicted being mortal, that is, sufficient to homicide.
produce the death of B, A performed the 1.ast.act.neces-
.. wLt.o..pwduce homicide. If the crime is not produced
A is not liable for frustrated homicide, because t h e
gis~e._o€~homicide was n o t produced by resson ..Of..h.&-~w,:
~.::i
. . it is because of the surgical operation performed by the
will. In frustrated felony the crime is npt.p~&& by. :
,. ~'. doctor. p d f a c t that A believed that he did not inflict
reason of causes@dSperi&&rof the wip of thUmE&zehtor.
164
165
7. ,,,.,
CRIMINAL LAW RRVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
.-.. $69. Name some felonies which have no attempted and frus- 47,l.'HQW is consummated felony distinguished from the at-
,,.,
trated stages of execution and explain why they do not c' tempted or frustrated felony? . ..
have those stages of execution. In consummated felony, all the elemeztis. necessary for
They are: (1) flight t o enemy country, (2) corruption its execution and accomplishment are present. In attempt-
of minors, (3) formal felonies, like,slander and false testi- ed or frustrated felony, not all the elements of the felony.
. are present.
.~
. mony, (4) felonies by omission, like misprision of treason,
.. .i and (5) treason. Thus, in estafa with abuse of confidence, even if the ' ',I
i.$
1 ~ .
. T'<e first two do not have the attempted and frustrated element of abuse of confidence is present, but there is :,
~o actual damage caused to the offended party, the crime
~*
. .
",
I. , .
-
stages oi +xecution, because in flight to enemy country,
the mere atte& .to fle? or go~.to.enemy country con-
s w ! a t e s the crime, azd in corruption of minors the . m e
is not consummated, because the element of damage is
lackinff. Thes-e of estafa ach
r-e '
,'it
'.
to. satisfy the !u&f another eon- of confidence and ( 2 ) damagg.~or^ Dreiudice capable .of
. In f e e s , there is no at-.
ed stages of e x e c u t h . of e.- :is .Jacking, the crime ;
ated in. one instant by a single ri:t of estafa is in its attempted or frustrated stage. ':
ormal crimes, there is no chain of acp, b W A cut timber without L>ermitfrom the forestry. officer '.
and the d&, thata@ severed A nnd used said timber for building a house. V approached
him and, representing to be authorized by the forestry ,',
$
.-link. In felonies by omission, there is either a felony
when the offender fails to perform an act required by officer. asked and demanded from him the sum of P6.00 "::;
no felony, if the offender performs for the purpose of avoiding the payment of a fine and
n, the o a i n - i t s e l f w@&Kt-%s with a view t o preparing a petition for obtaining a free .,'
ixrmit t o cut timber. A offered to pay only F3.00, but
V refused to receive the <amount (US.vs. Villanueva,':l
Phil. 370). In this case, the element of deceit, consisting
.4,70. What felonies do not have frustrated stage of execution? in the false z e p r e s e n t h n that V was authorized by the.
not have the frustrated stage of forestry officer to ask lor and receive P6.00 from A, wag
present. But the ele_m_ent. of..damage was also lacking.
*E' contest and .1 ' afnublic of- It is, atternptcd estafa.
. .: &', &d.o not have frustrated s t a z c u t i o n . These This case is different from the case of US. vs.
' . felonies which e- the i n k w ni h ~of &&.L persons mingnez, because in this case the offender
to commit them, are r&mummated by s e r e agreement. ?ny money from A and, hence, V did not erf
. The inducement made by one of the parties to the other -
act necessarv to produce the f e l G & k ? % %
. . constitutes attempted felony, if the offer is rejected. If case, the offender who as salesman &the
the offer is accepted, the felony is consummated. from the customer performed the -1 when
Thus if the ofEer of & is # by the public of- not turn it over to the cashier of the store. It i
. ' '. . ficer, the person offering it is guilty of att.emuted cor- trated estafa. There would have bben actual dam
ru tion of mbli W r . If it is auepted by the public the offended party, if it was not dis
&kr, & Ge is of mmummated c&n of m c sold the books and received the procee
out delivering them to the cashier, as
166
CKIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKIMINAL LAW REVIEWEX
In the case of U.S. vs. Dominguez, had the accused There is conspiracy when two or more persons come '.
mi.sapprmp&ted the proceeds of the sale of the books to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony
,.. , which he sold, the crime of estafa would have been con- 2nd decide to commit it (Art. 8, 3L.P.C.).
~~.~~~ i:,
summated, because there wouldbe &ual. .damage caused Consoiracv is a f & o u when the esoecially orovides
to the offended party. The element of damage would a penalty therefoy. In such case, the mere agreement .'!
.i,.:~ have been present. and decision to commit a particular felony is punished '.
/When &&-the element of deceit or abuse of confidence _" law. Thus. Art. 115 of the Revised Penal Code punishes
hv ~
a d that of damage are present, all the elements necw- conspiracy t o commit treason, Art. 136 punishes conspiracy ,.
sary :for the execution and accomplishment of the crime to commit rebellion, and Art. 141 punishes conspiracy to
of estafa are present. commit sedition. Bat if the c?ns&Lcy the offenders
m ~ . c o m m i t t e dtreason, rebellion or sedition, the s-
i.:472. Are light felonies punishable in d l the three stages of s m ceases to be a f e l o n ~ a n dk2-s only a manner
xplain your answer. o€ incurring d o i n a l liability, that is, the &of ,"B I
As a general rule, &&&felonies are punishable only conmiratar is the act of all the other conspirators.
'
when they have been .
Under the general In other crimes, like murder or abduction, the mZ.C
'
rule, attempted or frustrated light felonies are not puunish- agreemenb and w n to commit them is not Dunishable,
as there is n o i n the Revised Penal C&
But light felonies c = m &t or m- s- conspiracy to commit m&?r o r ab
&
e are punishable even if they are o& m the a&@p&d conspirators become liable only when the crime, like mur- ;
S J o a x m . der or abduction, is actually committed. But they are
(Art. 7, R.P.C.) liable for the crime actually committed, not for conspiracy
to commit it. The conspiracy will be considered odY
3. Give examples of light fetonies which are punishable only to make the offenders equally liable, that is, they are ,:
when consummated.
G liable in the same degree and to the same. extent.
4
They are: (1) betting in sports contests, (2) illegal
cock-fighting, and (3) intriguing against honor. 475. What is proposal t o commit a felon:y? Is it p
These light felonies are punishable only when they are There is proposal when the person who has
consummated, because they are not against persons or to commit, a felony proposes its execution to som
property and, hence, they are covered by the general rule. person or persons (Art. 8, R.P.C.).
Nota: Reason for the general rule: Light felonies produce EA& It is punishable o a y in the cases in which the law
&At, such and ~ i n j m & that s && specially provides a penalty therefor. Thus, Art. 115 of,
cg-e issatisfied with p m a lieht nenalt," far their the Revised Penal Code punishes proposal t o commit treas-
consummation.JIi they are not consummated, the wrong done on and Art. 136 of the same Code punishes proposal to
is 8LCght that there is need of providing B penalty at all.
Reason for the exception: The commission of felonies aKains1
commit rebellion. The Revised Penal Code does not punish-
Drmerty ppsu~poscs in the offender s g ~ ~ ? m l the proposal to commit sedition or any other crime. ' ~
iracy. Distinguish conspirasy aa a felony bellion, if the proposal is reiected by the person t o whom
from conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability. the propo%il is made? Why?
168 169
...>*. , r,
. .
.,: . .< '.* CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
%,'I
. , ._.,,,.
',,
,..., ., %
....*
... Yes, because what the law nunishes is the mere~nroga2l
.+>,. of a person who kills another in violation of that Law aqd
.... %
, ,.
&:. '
--
commit it. The acceutima of such nrang3al is not neceg- Revised Penal Code to supplement the provisions of the Motor
.r .. -
, Vehicles Law.
477.
.,. State the reason why conspiracy and proposal is not punish- State the circumstances which affect criminal liability and ' ,,,
able in common crimes. state the basis of each.
In ordinary crimes, the State survives the victim, and They are: (1) justifying circumstances, (2) exempting .;
the culprit cannot find in the success of his work any circumstances and other absolutory canses, (3) mitigating .,'
impunif.y.+oreover, conspiracy and proposal to commit circumstances, (4) aggravating circumstances, and ( 5 ) al-
a crime 'are o2ly..-preparatory acts and the law regards ternative circumstances.
them a.s iEoc$nt_ or a t least permissible except in ,rare In jyskifyinz ,circumstances, the Revised Penal Code
and exceptional..cases. recoenizes the non-existence of a *by exnresslv stat- 1,
. . But in crimes against the intep-aL.security of the
State, like rebellion and seditior,, or against the external
a in the o M n g sentence of Art. 11'&reof +&$ , th
=sons therein mentioned "do not incurcriminal liability."
s~cecy of the State, like treason, if the culprit succeeds The act of a person under any of the justifying circum- . .
in his critninal enterprise, he would obtain the power and stances is i m x e with lax, so that such person
there€ore impunity for the crime committed. is deemed not to l m e transgressed-the law and is fa ':
478. What i s a soecial law7 Are the Drovisions of the Revised from. both r&minal and eivil 1iabiIi;y.
Penal Code applicable to offenses which are punishable Technically, one who &by virtue of any of the
under special laws? sxempting circumstances commits a &me, although by '
the CD ofW=of the conditions which
A : w i a l Inw is a statute euacted by Congress, & %! ill volnntariness of the a&, ne criminal
or
ju character, which is an mendmeht to the Rfx&& sate
liability a&%.,. .Hence, there is sn*.in the of
&&Code.
the crime m L o f the conditions which make the act
As a general rule, offenses which are punishable by
t s or negligent, There is, however,
special laws are not subject to the provisions of the Re-
vised Penal Code (Art. 10, R.P.C.). Mitigating circumstances are 0
of either the freedom of action, j n l l i g e ~ ,or
The Revised Penal Code is sunplementary to ylch laws,
or on the lesser~.pervers&y. of the odfadelel:
a. the - 1 should specially provide the ec&wy
Aggravating circumstances are on the _$Si?&
(Art. 10, R.P.C.).
Note: The provisions of the Revised Penal Code are u- perversiQ of the offender manifested in the commissiolr
plir;rble to the attempted or frustrated stage of execution of of the felony, as shown by (1) the
crimes punishable by special iaws and to mitigating or aggravat- self, (2) the-of commission, (2
ing circumstances that may have attended the eomminsion of employed, (4) the- or ( 5 ) the
crimes punishable by special iaws. of the offendexor of the offended par !&-
9nt when the special iaws & I provisions necessary for the
proper aaministration of jnstice, h
te-ns of the Iievified The of the alternative-circumstances is the
Penal Code are zmlementary t n the special laws, like the and -of the crime and the other conditions
Motor Vehicles Law wsi!r.h does not provide for eivil liability ing its commission.
-
170 171
+.t+.: ,.:>v: ,.I
., _*..
.:'.
I 1 1 .
. .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
.,q CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
1; 2. .
' ;, 4dO. A, who had entered his room, found B, a stranger, inside
The act, against which a person may make
must be an a c t kokunjustified and sufficient
I
,. .
;
. without any justifiable reason. A s B was reluctant to his life, limb o r right or that, of another
., < :~, .,. leave the room and was acting suspiciously, A drew h i s ,/?t must be unjustified, because the
, ..
knife, brandished it, and approached B with intention to clolthe fulfillment of a duty o r in t
,~
drive him away from the room. But B drew his pistol, of a risht or office.
, ,,'
;>ya;.: the only weapon available to him and shot A, inflicting
Thus, the a d of a peace officer in making an a r r e s t , g
@ .; . serious physical injuries on the latter. When prosecuted done in a violent manner because of the refusal of the..&j
...
,*<+W.;,f
for the crime of serious physical injuries, B claimed self- person t o be arrested to submit t o the arrest, is an - .:.i
.c
i
defense. Did B act in self-defense? Explain your answer. bGt.i$. not unlawful (People vs. Gayrama-n,, cq
&..<,,;:
i-:
.:
' . /It is submitted that B did not act in self-defense. A the case of a husband who. having surprised his wife and
had a ,right t o urotect his b e from a trespasser. another man in the act of sexual intercourse, attacked the ,<
"
-
if the a 2 of A in drawing his knife, brmdishing it, and man with a knife, but the man was able to parry the blow ':A
approaching B are considered as constituting Pmessip, and killed the husband, the act of the husband w u
a v e o n i s w s h d even if tho%'acts of A aggression, b&jugtLudwfful. The husband was t h e n i n !. I
' . constituted an unlawful aggression, B was &-iwtifid the exercise of a lawful right and such act would have.,,'::
in injurinp - A,. because one defendinp himself from an- fallen within the sanction of Art. 247 (U.S. vs. Merced). ."
other's aggression can stand ground ;nlL when he iSin Afingerf;he Civil Code, a personmay force or v i o l g s
the
__ - ~B had n-t-to
rig.& be in the room of A. B to protect his from beinp: taken by another. His
should have l e ~ Xthe room when A was approaching him- act, in 3 of protecting his property -i '
axression, but not- unlawful.
hat requisite of defense is so ipdisDensabk that without
4 p .".
it there IS no justifying or mitigating eircumst.;dce of in- Thus, if A saw B inside his house taking his radio
"
complele self-defense to speak of? Explain. from the table and to prevent B from carrying it away
A used violence and then and there B stabbed and killed
-
g I t is the of vnlawful aemezion. The orin- A, R cannot successfully claim self-defense, because the
.. I ci& of % e l f - d e f m, &.€ense o b x h t i x e or -of act of A, although an aggression, is lawful.
m e r is e ' y+Jthe sit of azo.&-
mce&..~ #L"USt h P su f f i c k t $0 the life, limb o a t
in^ t h e m to oRek life, limb o a t . Such u&l sxisis, of another or ofthe cne makin& a defense.
s . n l ! L w b tilmis aril-ession. Bnhif there D h u s , a- s on the head with the hand cannot j
173
. .
I
In the following eases: No, it is not essential that there should be abs
and positive danger to the party making the defens
1. When the unlawful aggression h a
da
rl
ead y ceased i s - e t that there was a well-grounded and
t o exj&at the time the one allegedly making a defense -,on the part of the ?adit
injured or killed the former aggressor; a
0-
he was i ~ j n i m i n e n tdanger a
2 . When there was an agreement k f t between the hum-.
accused and the injured party. Thus, the person making a defense, before shooting, is ::
In these cases, even if a person was an unlawful ag- not obliged to wait until the aggressor has obtained corn-. . , j
gressor, because he began the attack er -c plete possession GI. control of' his weapon. Re i s not re- ..
or kill another, the latter c w t claim lwitimate defense, quired to do anything or refrain from doing something ..'
if he injured or killed the former aLa.iime YdXP there which would increase the danger to his person or to the
was unlawful RepressiQn, &ha because the f.Q&L person of another or enhance the opportunity of the ag-
r n n t m o r already ran away or because he- m
a refusal to f u m y IonR'er. The first is illustrated in ---_ -
gressor to accomplish his end.
-4
./
the case of People vs. Alconga and the second is illustrated 485. Is threat an unlawful aggression?
\
.,
in the case of People vs. AIviar. In this last case, the
Supreme Court stated: "In view of the fact that the
deceased was then unarmed, from the loss of his bolo,
--
Bu I 4- -
Mere thre ening a.tt%iZ%
-
&-.unlawful aggression.
e that IS offensive-ppsitivelv
ing the wroncful
strong, show-- ..
t to cause an i n i u r j , that threat I
the use made of the same weapon by the accused was is unlawful aggression, .a
.' unjustifiable." Thus, even though it were true that when the accuSed . , :;
N o t e : But if the aggressor w h o was disarmed by the person appeared, the deceased ai-ose with a knife in her hand and ' .
making a defense -and f ~ to-ain
s & . ~led - his weapon, in a threatening manner asked the accused what had
the latter could use the ,-to disable its owner.
brought her there, w&& u m and materisl
In a fight which was acceptable to both combatants, the fact -a such asitti does not constitute unlawful $,,
that it WBS the deceased who commenced the aggression is of
no moment and, in such case, it cannot serve as a ground
aggression (U.S. vs. Guy-Sayco, 13 Phil. 292). ' ' '. .
for the plea of legitimate self-defense. Rut drawing a weapon f o r the purpose of using it to
But an agreement to fight PIeSUDpOBeS a . & d k W S and- attack another is an outward and material aggression.
-da Hence, if the challenge has r&.X?Lbeen a-W+Q.t&
when the challenger commences the W k , there is utrlawf 1 486. Is the art of taking another's property or of forcibly enter-
n-4 and the person challenged will be $&kd *t
.. 0.p prevent it L e . reasonable means. Again, if there i s an ing another's home an unlawful aggression? Explain y
+
agreement to fight, but the aggression is made ahead of the
stipulated time and place, sue11 aggression i s atently illegal-
The acceptance of the challenge does not place; on the 0 en ed
party the burden of preparing to meet any assault at any
answer.
174 175
..
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
176 177
I
6 , ..
-;?v
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKIDIINAL LAW REVIEWEIR ..'+ c
.,
,,
493. Supposc, the person defending in the preceding question No, n . in~-plete self-deiense, & m e & gave suffi; :.
is a policeman on active duty, would the answer be the cient provocation.de-t The UiEd r$g&&~&
.~ ~;':,,., $
same? -4, was not mesent.
No. His duty requires him to 0vercor.e his opponent.
The force which the peace officer may exert and the weap- What circumstance affecting criminal liability is present ,,
on which he may use differ somewhat from those which in the preceding question?
a private individual may ordinarily offer in self-defense. Incomplete self-defense. UIlder Art. G9, A is e d
a private individual can only repel or prevent an to a .penalty x r . two deprees.,lz!Z
.~. than the penalty
~ ~ l a peace officer has t o overcome his
k aggression,
i ;.' fw' homicide,
opponent, because the latter represents the law he /
must uphold (US.vs. Mojica, 42 Phil. 784). 497. Suppose, in the same ease, after kissing the wife of B,
A ran away and, tho next day, B casually met A on the
494. G was trying to cuddle his wife but she pushed him street and then and there attacked A. with a bolo, but A
depreciatingly and avoided his demonstration of husbandly killed B with his knife, can A successfully claim self-
affection. Thinking that the couple were quarrelling, S defense?
went upstairs and upon seeing the angry wife warding
off G's advances to her, hit G twice on the forehead with Yes, m e & h ~ & A xave sufficient provocat&n
au iron bar. Whereupon G drew his loaded revolver and to E, it^ mas (&oTFm->to the I_a!;ter's aggression, =e
began zihooting wildly, thus inflicting serious wounds on
_s;
.~, several relatives of his. Considering that there iyas un-
lawful aggression on the part of S, do you believe that ,4& And suppose, A was surprised by B while making love
G acted in self-defense? t o the latter's wife, and then and there B attacked A 7
with a IJOIO, but A killed B, did A act in self-defense? ,
G's act of self-defense was not exerclsed with due-care,
since he did not aim a t his assailant but instead indis- Yes, because even if the act of A, making love to B'S
wife, was provoking, it was not sufficient. Hence, all the .'
criminal.ely fired his deadly weapon at the risk of the lives
and limbs of the innocent persons whom he knew were three requisites of self-defense are present.
./' --I
at the ~ilaceof the occurrence. But absence of intent to
arr kill, although not mitigating circumstance, reduces the 4 9 d W h y is it that when the one defending himself gave suffi-
/ cient provocation to the aggressor, the former is not en-, .,;;
2
, felony to a mere physical injury in crimes against persons
who do not die 3s a result of the assault (People vs. titled to the benefit of the justifying circumstance of self- '(.?~:
defense? ::*
Galacgac, C.A., 54 O.G. 1027).
If the one defending himself has given sufficient pro- :.;
8 , ,
495. A was living in the house of B.
One evening, A kissed vocation to the aggressor, k,.kih t-bebl;tmed. &
H ;?
the wife of B who saw them. B took a bolo and attacked mt witlioa fault. That is why in such a case, he is :',
A with it. A avoided the hlow, opened his nwn knife and liable for honiicide if he lrills the aggressor. The only B?
:?a
. "' . stabbed B to death. Prosecuted for homicide, A claimed benefit he gets is, instead of being sentenced t o suffer, ; ;
. . self-defense. Did A act under the justifying circumstance the penalty for homicide, he shall be sentenced to a $
of self-defense? ,:$
'
\.I
'V."
.~ CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWYER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
They are: (1) the spouse, (2) ascendant, (3) descend-
500. A picked up a spear and with it tried to wound C, hut
ant, (4) legitimate, natural, or adopted brother o r sister,.
* niisstd. C took out his knife and stabbed A fatally. At (5) relatives by affiaitjrin the -degree, and (6) those
this moment, B, seeing his father A being stabbed by C,
by consanguinity within the €uukh...civil degree.
hit the latter with a bolo and, a s a consequence of which,
the latter died. Did B act in defense of a relative? A was in love with the wife of B. One day, A, at a dis-
No, hecause A was the aggressor. T h e e bhg tance of 50 yards, saw B in the act of stahbing c, a
&fended should &be an unlawful ~ppresl(nr(People vs. stranger, with a knife. A shot El who waa mortally
Panuril, C.A., 40 0. G. 1477). wounded. Did A act in defense of a stranger?
It depends. If A killed B only to save C from being
501. A was a M to give a fist blow on B, when the latter killed by B, A was justified in doing so.' But if A killed
retreated and picked up a piece of wood with which t o B to enable him t o marry B's wi&, then the third re-
strike A. C, brother of A, held B by the hand as the auisite of defense of stranger is k c k n g , A L b X h Z .hSn
latter was about to strike A with the piece of wood, dis- i d & k e y i l mutive. ._
armed B, and struck him with it on the face, inflicting / T h e third reouhite of defense of stranger is that the ;<;, ~
Defense of relatives is a justifying circumstance, even does an @ which causes d m t o another, provided that:
if the relative defended gave provocation, hut not when the following requisites are present:
he appears to he an unlawful aggressor. First. That the a s_ousht t o be avoided actually'
exjsts;
502. But suppose A only the face of B and the latter Second. That the h&Q.&a& be &r than t h a t
-_
took qut his knife and was in the act of stabbing A when
C, bmtlier of A, struck B with his bolo, resulting in the
a to avoid it.
death of B, did C act in defense of his relative? Third. That there be n o r p r a c t i d a&&sl
harmful means of Q~X&L?XZA.
Y I ? ~hecause
, A in $lapping the face of B merely
'''. p c a t i e n t o the latter and C had no part therein. This provision covers the so-called justifying circum-
EIaving & a stronp retaliatbn, B h e c a e an u&w.ful stance of state of necessity (Art. l:L, par. 4, R.P.C.).
*" a
- g g ~ m . The three requisites of defense of relatives
506. A, a married woman who had experienced difficult child-
.+'
d--
, -ti , . are present. birth which almost cost her life, consulted a do,ctor. The
73%: .'
doctor after mature consideration advised her that it wo$d
."$. , 1503. Who a t e the relatives referred to in the justifying circum-
,., .., he better to remove her ovary. By agreement of A and
+y,.- ' ' stanco of defense of relatives?
.:;
2
L. ., 181
I 180
,,~,~.
.;.., . CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIiMlNAL LAW REVIEWER
I
. ',.
,,
*. .j
the doctor, her ovary was removed by operation. Can A When he shot the murderer, the policeman was &he .'
. ' . and the doctor escape criminal liability for mutilation under fulfillment of his duty. The injury c:aused to the murderer
the justifying circumstance of state of necessity7 Emplain was the m s , ,of the due performance
your answer. of &isd &
y
. In the case of People vs. Gayrama, 60 Phil.
No, because the &sought to be ava e d did not a$- 796, where the accused had slashed with a bolo the munic-
tually exist, The -d that she mipht die of childbirth ipal president on his arm, the Supreme Court stated that
if she would be pregnant is a mere possibility. The first if the chief of police had been armed with a revdlver
requisite is absent. and had used it against the accused, the act of the chief
of police underthose c i r c u m - k w ~ o d w :
'507. The captain of the vessel loaded it with a quantity of justified. !:
;
.~ cargoes beyond its ordinary capacity. While the vessel Note: Rule i i 3 , Sectiom 1, Rules of Court, provides that,
was in the sea, it met a storm. Sensin,? that the vessel "No unnecessary or unreasonable farce shall be used in making
~I
'.,. wns going to sink because of the strong wind and big an arrest, and the person arrested shdl not be subject to any .,),
... ,, greater restraint than is necessary for his detention." *i
waws and due to its heavy load, the captain of the vessel
ordered that part of the cargoes be jettisoned, which was The Supreme Court believes that shooting a person who :.
,. ,
.-efused l o part with his dangerous weapon and to surrender
done by the members of the crew. Can the captain suc- to s peace officer who was arresting him, after be had at- ,',
cessfully invoke the justifying circumstance of state of tacked another wjth that weapon, is a necessnm and reaaon-
necesr;ity? Explain your answer. able fcvee to effect his arrest, and the peace officer was juati-
No, because the state of necessity was ut ficd in shooting him even if it resulkd in his death.
L
by- his nezlirrence.
The .vil which brought about the state of necessity
509. A picked the <pocketof B, while the latter was engromed ' ':
looking at the pictures in front of a theater, and ran away
-- -
must not result fsam a v a of Am by the actor or
from his nealieence or imarudence.
with the wallet extracted from the pocket of B. A police-
man who saw the stealing of the wallet of B b y A whistled
"
08 A policeman was trying to arrest a murderer who cmm- at the latter, but A did not stop and continued running
,$@
.-
mittell the crime within his hearing. Having gone im-
mediately to the scene of the crime, the policeman asked
away. The policeman fired his gun twice in the ab. h
A continued to rnn away with the wallet of I?, the poxce- ,
2
,
the murderer to drop his bolo and to submit to the arrest man shot him t o death. Is the policeman liable for killing
' being made. The murderer refused to drop his weapon A? Explain your answer.
and r,an away. The policeman shot him, inflicting a mor- Yes. W m the policeman a m - i n the performance '~:
f tal wound which was the cause of death. Was the police of his duty, he exceeded the fulfillment of his duty when
man justified in shooting tlie murderer to death? Explain he shot the deceased. He is guilty of homicide (People
your answer.
vs. Eentres, C.A., 49 0. G. 4919).
It is submitted that the policeman was completely N o t e : S m a thief who -h a danaerous weapon
justided, notwithstanding the fatal consequeme, because t o intimidate a m or to make good he-, is & a
it was demanded by the circumstances. His refusal to ne- and re- -f t o effect his arrest.
. . drop his weapon and to sstbmit to the arrest being made
. by the policeman s
mined, t o
j that the murderer was d a -
for his liberty.
510. Is the guard justified in shooting a prisoner who has e+
caped from jail? Explain your answer.
.. 132
I j
i'
Yes. In the cases of People vs. Delima, 46 Phil. 738, less serious physical injuries. Is A criminally liable for.
People vs. Lagata, 83 Phil. 159, and U.S.vs. Magno, et a]., less serious physical injuries? Explain your answer.
3 Phil. 314, the Supreme Court held that when the prisoner
is escaping and in his &ez& t o escape and
/ No. because A d i n the &&bxfxc%' o f a u t
and the caused to B was a necessarv conseauence .
there was no other remedv but t o jh-aLhm
t-mtihim f r-&bgA!za
' in..mder
y, the guard in shooting
-
of the lawful ex- af that righi (Art. 11, par. 6,
R.P.C.). Under Art. 429 of the Civil Code of the Philip
,,
~
the prisoner, even to the extent of killing him, acted in pines, t.he or lawful possessor -of a thing has the
the fulfillment of his duty and, therefore, is not criminally r&.to &u& any person f-thi? eniovment and dis-
liable. posal thereof. cor this nurvose, he may u ~ s u c hforce.
Note: This ruling applies -the
r L L &
e-ine nr i m w is&- a&mity & w o n a b l y necessary to
actual ni. i!xei&&
. a
or prevent an
unlawful physical invasion or nsurua-
t i o n h i s Dropeqty. TJiider Art. 11, par. 5, in relation
511. A prisoner succeeded in leaving the jail and in the yard to said Art. I'L9 of the Civil Code, it is pot necessary that I
of the gun and, in the struggle for the possession of the property.
gun, the guard jerked away the gun from the hold of the Note: Jf the person takins the property is kUkd by the owner, .;
the l&r is criminal1 liable, because the force emnlove9 was
prisoner, causing the latter to be thrown half-way around, not r e a s o n a b l k r 3 . But if the deceased, after dropping
"
3
.,
and because of the force of the full, the guard squeezed the sack of palay drew out his bolo and attacked the owner, >
. trigger, causing it to fire, hitting and killing the pis.
. ., ,.the y and the iattcr killed him, the provision of the Revised Penal
?de apR,lieable is Art. 11, par. 1. There is self-defense, which
oner. Is the guard criminally liable for the death of the $+
prisoner. Explain your answer. includes defense of right to property. .:,
The guard is not criminaIly liable, because he acted 513. When is obedience to an order of a superior a justifyjng ~
'
in the fulfillment of a duty (People vs. Bisa, C.A., 51 circumstance? .~...
O.G. 4091).
When the guard levelled his gun at the escaping pris-
oner, f.he former was acting in the fulfillment of his duty,
au
-,l obedience t o that order is a
because it was his duty to prevent the escape of the
prisoner. "?&-&&I of the prisoner was the -n sac.
Note: Thus, the soldier who tortured to death a private in-
c m s w e n c e of the due pwforman_ce of. It was the dividual in abedienw t o the order of his sergeant is criminally'
act of the prisoner in grabbing the muzzle of the gun liable. because the order to torture tlre deceased was not law-
which made the guard jerk it: away from his hold, thereby
causing the latter's finger to squeeze the trigger. fk&n, the w n who & p m e e s s a r y severity -i :
at -8 l w y d by the court is
A, while supervising the threshing of his palay in his rice under Art. 129 of the Revised Penal Code, because w v the
,-.~' search was ml,the p e a m use& to c
, saw B carrying away a sack of palay. A shouted .order to unlawful.
-o&xLrs m the
a t B to stop and return the sack of palay, hut B continued When the &.&im& does_notknow the-- of
.~ ,.$?., ' . t o run away with it. A picked up a piece of hard. wood order and e d it ,- ha is not criminally lia
.,: ' and threw i t at B who was hit on the right leg, causing because there is no criminal intent.
.. ...~
184 185
,3;*>,'*:".?.
. ,. .. , ,,
,
,. . ;
,
I
1 ~,
I
-3;
CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWEIL ..
514. A, employee of a prison during the Japanese Occupation, committed the crime. In short,. their acts arc ' ,
,. 2: minor under nine years of age, (4) the minor over nine
or imbecility, t m i s civil liability, which must be&.:
years of age and under fifteen, who actcd without dis- the ~ e r hh-t~e ~ n insane or imbecile under his ;
cernment, (5) the person who, while perfofming a lawful
legal authority or control,,g&gs it appears that there
act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident
without fault or intention of causing it, (6) the person was no fault or negligence on his part or that u,
I<
,, insolvent; in 'which case, the insane or imbecile s L U
L
186 187
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CILIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
because an imbecile lucid interval. without discernmat,. The prosecution who has t h e m
Note: To he from criminal liability by reason of in- of proving the existence of discernment on the part of
sanity or imbecility the accused g&-he. a*&el.v &
d the accused failed toJmxe-&.
of,= at the &t of the eomrnission of t4e crime.
Thus, feeblemindedness, eccentricity (deviatien from ordinary
conduct or manner),, mental weakness or mere depression re- 523. When A committed theft he was m a r
s old. During his
sulting from physical ailment, PI' extreme anger, which makes t u f o r the crime be was 1 6 s old. Is A criminally
a mrson act like a madman, -~ b ~
t a n d a h a d d a9.L b% $sa- liable? If so, can he he given a s-ded sentence? Ex-
sidered embraced in the term insanit , because the person plain your answers.
h x i : such mental condition i s ~ o n w l e t e l yd e n r h d of
reason and freedom of the-. No. It appearing that at the time of the commission '
of the crime A was under fifteen p a r s - o f age and no
520. What is somnambolism and h,ow does it affect the criminal fact is stated showing that he acted with' discernment,
liability of the person who committed a crime in state of he is exempt from criminal liability (Art. 12, par. 3,
somnambolism? R.P.C.).
It is sleep-walking. It is embraced in a plea.of in- It is the age of the minor at the time of the commission :!
$:'
sanity (People vs. Gimena, 55 Phil. 604; People vs. Taneo, of the crime, not his age a t the time of the trial, which
68 Phil. 255). determines whether or not he is exempt from criminal '
liability.
521. What is dementia praecox? fl- e m from criminal liability, A should be' ac-
It is mental illness otherwise called schizophrenia. quitted and the case against him dismissed. The susuended
?*,
When a person becomes affected by this kind of mental -s contemnlakdin Art. 80, R.P.C., presupposes tkat
illness, -1 nrrrantral r -w of h is cats, the is not exempLfam criminal liability.
the p e r i d . o f t (Legal Medicine and Toxicology
by Pcterson, Haines and Webster, cited in the case of
f i v e n if he was @&y, A could :n&be
\ given a u- 1
pended sentence, because only minors under 1G years of
People vs. Bonoan, 64 Phil. 94). This kind of mental a&at the h - of the are e&i&d t o a susuended ,i
illness gned-c
-b
embraced the t e w '&&any,"
the person affected h a completely lost the s r -
--
sentence,
..
& of his will power. 524. A girl 9: years of age pushed her p!aymate into a deep
,. place of the river, with intent to Ell her. The ~&.L!L@
522. In the prosecution of the accused, a boy 13 years of age, kill was -by the prosecution. Is she c r i m i n a
'"F '
the fiscal succeeded in proving the case of theft against
the accused. There was no evidence that the accused, at
liable for causing the death of her p!aymate who died
of drowning? Explain your answer.
the time of the commission of the crime, did not nnder- Yes. The fact that the offender had the intent t o kiI1
stand the consequences of his act. If yon were the judge
trying the case, would you acquit .or convict the accused.
the deceased when she pushed her into the river i s- 4
dence also of discernment, because her intent t o kill her , . .&
Explain your answer.
The accused musthearqiutted ,b m the presumvtipZz
playmate ,shows that she k n w wh- the eon-:'
'
-s of her unlawful act of pushing her'victim into '!
-i a &
m oyer 9 y e a -
s hut under '15 actep deep water and that she knew it t,o be wrong '(Peop!e ~?<
I
,
foreseeable.
Example of negligence: That same example may be.
come a case of negligence, if the driver of the truck
from the exempting circumstance of uncontrollable fear.’
When any of these exempting circumstances is present,
how many pers’ons take part in the commission of the
saw the man on the platform of the steam roller in the crime? Are all of them exempt from criminal liability?
Explain your answers.
, act of jumping and that fact notwithstanding he dkl-nat
slacken h w whkh was not authorized by the traffic In the exempting circumstance of kresistible force a
regulation, and when the man dropped on the street the person uses. physical forcp to make another commit a
190 191
. ..
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWEWEB.
crime: whereas, in that of uncontrollable fear, a person A wounded her with the bolo in the abdomen. Is A cr&
uses threat to make another c o w e. i n 7 Explain your answer.
In both circumstances, there are at least two persons No. A person who &d while in, a dream W t
who take part in the commission of the crime. l b u ? J X A have criminal intent. Hence, his a.& were not voluntaq
who USJS the force or makes the is a grinciual a&hg&m he i s m k t fgom criminal liability- (People ,
by indi- and the one who commits the crime because vx. Ianeo, 68 Phil. 255). .io-.
o f force or threat is a principal by direct participa-
-&
t But o&, the princiual hy indmtfp is criminally
liable. The principal by direct participation is t-
from criminal liahil@y, b.s.ause he acts without freedom-
532. T was prosecuted for selling a can of Mennen' Talcum'
Powder for B1.OO when the ceiting price for said article
was only P0.86, as fixed by Executive Order No. 6.2, series
"'
of the conditions that admi the a t vnlun t a p . of 1945. The defense contended that the government
EXPLANATION: But thc physical force must be irresistible, agent who arrested T induced the latter to violate the
that is, sufficient t o control the will of the person againat Iavv by pnrcliasing from him the article and paying for it
whom the physical force is used. It must produce such an in an amount above the ceiling price. Is there instigation
effect lipon tho individual that, in spite of all resistance, it
redneed him to a mere instrument. If the force is not irresisti- 41 this case?
ble, there m a y be only a mitigating, not an exempting, cir- No. The agent did not induce T t o violate the law.
cumstance. Ne simply discovered the violation committed by T when
The threat which caused the fear must pmmise an evil of he purchased the article. It was 7.' who charged and
such gravity and imminence that the ordinaw man would have collected the price of P1.00 (People vs. Tan Tiong, C A ,
succumbed to it. The fear must be real, i inent and reason-
able, not speculathe, fanciful or remote.
imminent when the &ugq to o
2 fear is d a " d
m orlimbis st. the point
43 0. G. 1255).
Qf t a k i n e p k r e The fear of a person that he might be killed 533. A policeman saw another person actiing suspiciously inside
by another if he would not do as he was told t o do so, & the premises of X. The policeman covered himself behind
geoeulatiw. fanciful o r a t e . the stone wall and watched the person as he was taking i
530. A, ivbo was holding a lighted torch and standing close
some valuabl~personal property in the premises. The 8'
to B'B house made of nipa, threatened to burn that house
policeman saw the person carrying away the property 'r
and when h e w a s out of the premises, the policeman
if B would not stab and kill C who was in the place, and stopped and placed him under arrest and seized from him :
afraid that his house might be burned, B stabbed and the property stolen, When prosecuted, that person con. ..
kill$ C. Is B exempt from criminal liability? Explain
tended that since the policeman saw him even before he .'
your answer.
began to take the property and, thwefore, the policeman
/No, because the first requisite of uncontrollable fear couId have prevented the commission of the crime, he
is that the tj.~&&wllich caused- the & a ~
w d an SyiL should not be held liable for theft. If yon were the judge,
g r e a m , or at lea& ~ L Qthat , S B
would you acquit or would you convict the accused? Ex.
p i r e d to commit. The threat which caused the fear of plain your answer.
B was of an eyll ' less than that which he was r e a u w
. to commit. If I were the judge, I would convict the accused. The
fact that the policeman saw him even before he commenced . ('
531. A suddenly got up in his sleep, picked up a bolo, and left the commission of the crime and did not prevent him from
the room. Upon meeting his wXe who tried to stop him, committing the wime is not a defense. There is, in this .
, I
192 193
.'.~*
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER . ..,
- _:i
. *;..<.
.,.
% . ,-. 4. Less serious or slight physical injuries inflicted
ease, entrapment which is&an e e p t i n g circumstance. under exceptional circumstances. L.
~..
-
'-:; ,
,.
In entrapment %
Y
- are -0 by the
'..r public officers for the w
, e of t@miU? and canturinx 5. Exemption from criminal liability of certain re&-
., . . the lawbreaker in the e m n of his ~&&
3;..,,
and.&- tives in the crimes of theft, estafa and malicious Inis- . ..,.
.. .. chief. *
I I
.'$$,34. But suppose that in the preceding question the policeman 6 . Marriage between the offended party and the offl
A$. :.... . , toid the nian to enter the premises and get some valuable fender in the crimes of rape, seduction, abduction or acts4
. . . . property inside and promised that he would not arrest
~
of lasciviousness. , ,
.. .
him and, because of the assurance thus given, the man
I committed theft then and there, and Iater the policeman 536. What are the defenses for acquittal o f the person charged
with the conimission of a crime?
. . . .: arrested the man with the stolen goods, can that man
be punished for the crime he committed? Explain your A person accused of a crime may be acquitted on any
..
. answer. of tiie following Rrounds: ?.
.. No, because the man was %ed to commit the crime 1. That of the essential e m of the crime is
notn2.oved by the prosecution.
,.. .. by the active c d'on and insticratiotlof a public of-
When the other elements proved established the com- ,..>
'. Ticer. A sound uublic nolicv re&s
--
that the court shall
, ' condemn this practice by directinz an acauittal whenever mission oI another crime, necessarily included in the one '' ' -''
i;:*' ' 4,.. '.
' it appe:ars that the public authorities or private detectives charged, the accused may be found guilty of the former.
"; . 2 . That the accused acted under any of the justifying r'
have taken active stem to &xLthe accused into the .Q?Q- *',~
. I. . . consummated, except those committed against pWSonS o r Penal Code, it is a privileged mitigating eircu
. ...
..",
L L -property.
L.. . . when the maj'ovity of the conditions required, to: ]u
..'
z i,, ., 3: Accessories are-not liable for light felonies.
I
the act or to exempt from criminal liability is w e
194 195
I
_-
CItIDlINAL LAW REVIEWER
The penalty lower by one or two degrees than that pre- is & a 1-1( Art. 68 izi pot amlicable and
scribed by law shall be imposed. m m is & an ordinary mitigating circumstance..
It il; an ordinary mitigating circumstance if the ?mior- What is not settied is the question of whether the age I
ity of :such conditions is not present, provided that in the under 18 years but 16 years or above is a privileged
three kinds of defense unlawful aggression is present. mitigating circumstance or it is an ordinary mitigating
Noto: Even as a privileged mitigating circumstance, an in- circumstance.
complete self-defense, or incomplete defense of relative, or in- In the case of People vs. Garcia, 85 PhiL“651, the
complete defense of stranger must have the requisite of un-
lawf‘ul aggression. What is lacking is either the second or Supreme Court held that the age under 18 years but 16
thirti requisite of self-defcnse, defense of relatives or defensa years or above is a privileged mitigating circumstance.
of ctranzer. But in the case of People vs. Perez, et al., G.R. No. L-
3513, Sept. 29, 1951, the Supreme Court considered it
hen is the age “under eighteen years” an ordhasy “!ti- an ordinary mitigating circumstance.
gating circumstance and when is it a privileged mitigating
circumstance? Explain your answer. 539. A, 15 years and 2 months old, inflicted on B u h t physical
There are three ages contemplated in Art. 13, Par. 2, injuries punishable by arresto menor or a fine not exceed-
of the Revised Penal Code, namely: (1) “under fifteen ing 8200. In case A is p m u t e d .for and found guilty:.’;;
but over nine years of age, who is not exempt from C r b of slight 1)hysical injuries, must the court in the decision’ ’‘>?
inal liability by reason of the court having declared that that. it will render impose a penalty one degree lower t h m , :
he acted with discernment” (Art. 68, par. l), (2) ‘‘over that prescribed by law for slight physical injuries? Ex-
fifteen” and “under sixteen years of age” (Art. 68, par. plain your answer.
2, and Art. BO), and ( 3 ) “under eighteen years of agb” No. Art. 68, which &OE for privileped mitigating :
(Art. 13, par. 2) but sixteen years or above. circumstances by reason of m y,t- says in its opening
A c c o r d i n g to Art. 68, when the offender is a minor sentence: “When the offender is a minor under eighteen
under 15 but over 9 years of age and h e @ @ &h-.dk~ years and his case is one coming under the provisions
e m a n t , a discretionary D e w shall be &I!Ji%ed,but of the paragraph next to last of Ai+. 80” of the Revised
always lower by two deuees at least than that presclebed Penal Code, the penalty one or two degrees lower than
b a m h e &e which be committ.?d. that prescribed by law for the crime shall be imposed.
When the offender is a &or a d a n d I
i
m On the other hand, Art. 80 applies only when the &&n~
years of age, there is no question that the penaltv “extl comlnitted by the minor is a grave or less grave felanu.
lower than that prescribed b y k w shall LejmDosed (Art. Sinca the felony committed by A is o& a lipht felony,
---
_._c
196 197
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER / CilIMINAL 4AW REVIEWER
.
, , 6 That d f i c i e n t . w v o cation_ar threat on the part
No. The @ article in the Revised Penal Code W L immediately ureceded'.the & : ,.
specifically urn far the privileged mikigating CirCUm- That the& was m d in the immediate en-..:
swe by reason of age is Art. 68,which d o e s t DiW- . . -.-dicatipl?-of a prave offense to the .~~~
~~~~
one commitf.inr
.--..the";
~~~.~~~~
~ -...
*. . the o s r seventy Years. felony, his spouse, ascendants, descendants, IegitiGte, nat-,'
..
"~
' \?
urzl, o r adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by affimty :
w i t h i d h e same degrees.
d That of having acted UPO? ane- so uowerfql
as
/---" nat,urally to have pnduced aassion or obfuscatien.
swei'. -#In a, party attended by prominent persons, . A called B
yerL
Evident premeditation and t?&%&LY are h&3.@.
- - - e -
h on t ' d and not upon the a swlndle~'. Being humiliated and Raving lost his rewon
and self-control, B grabbed a chair and.struck A with. it,
o-fs mind of the offender. On the other hand, the inflicting serious physical injuries on the latter. When
mitigating circumstance that the offender had no inten- prosecuted for the crime he committed, I? claimed the
following mitigating circumstances: (1) that suffilient
provocation or threat on the pnrt .of the offended party
immediately preceded the act, (2) Chat the act was com-
mitted in the immediate vindication of a grave offense
' to him, and (3) that of having acted upon an impulse
et al.,, 58 Phil. 536).
. so powerful as naturally to have produced passion or ob-. '
. . ,542. &laythe mitigating circumstance that the offender had fnscalion. Considering the meaning given to these miti-
. no iritentjon to commit. so grave a wrong as that corn- gating circumstances, do yon believe that they should all
mittcd be appreciated in felonies committed by means of be considered in favor of B? Explain your answer.
cul,pa or fault? Why? In view of the occasion and peiisons present, the im-
NO, because this mitigating circumstance is b & on putation made by A was a sufficient provocation to B. ,
the fiiminuh ' U f j n t e n t , whereas in felonies committed A provocation is "sufficient" when it is adequate to ex- ,
with negligence, imprudence or lack of foresight or skill, cite a person lo commit a wrong and must accordingly
the offender a s.t-w t- Hence, diminution of be proportionate to its gravity (People vs. Nabora, 73
intent is not possible in culpable felonies. Phil. 4341. Insults are held to be sufficient provocation
(US. v Firmo, 37 Phil. 134; U.9. vs. Cortes, 36 Phil.
Note: This mitigating circumstance is not w be appreciated
also in felonies where the il,tention of the offender is jm;
1-, like in unintentional abortion.
837).A he ~ ~ f & i n n ,A ~that ~ By was a
, '. .. -..543.
' Wh,& are the mitigating circumstances which are ~.
%the loss of r e a s w and s&.mUtd of the offender.
. . e and
'Of*?
..
as well as freedam
(I
~. They are:
. , 193
198
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL L A W REV1EW:ER
The act of ,E in attacking A hy ,striking him with No. The provocatioa m a t orijrinate from , t h e of-
a chair may alao be considered as having heen done in fended party. In this case, the offended party or the
the immediate vindication of a grave offense to him. victim was C, while the person mho pave the provocation
The remark of A under the circumstances in which he W&.
made if; was highly offensive to B and to any other
person in his place. It is not strange that i t engendered 546. Distinguish the mitigating circumstance of vindication of
obfuscalion i n him and impelled him to wt as he did, 8 grave o f f w e from the mitigating circumstances of pro-
in the immediate vindication of a grave offense (People vocation or threat and passion or pJ)fuscation.
vs. Rosel, 66 Phil. 324). In vindication, there must be a =me offmse cpmmitted
Note: In the case of People vs. Rosel, supra, it as held that to the me committiw the felony, his s m s e , azendant,
there was B grave offense when the deceased said in tho pres- dscendant, brothers, sisters, or rehtives by affinity in
ence of several persons that the accused was living a t the the same degree. In Drovocatiw and uassion ar obfusca-
expense of his wife, EQJI, i t is p o t necessary that t b - grave offense
The same Cause may also give rise to passion or Ob- committed by the og.m&d party.
fuscation on the part of B who last his reason a.nd self- The mitigating circumstance of vindication of a grave
control, because! of the imputation made hy A against. him offense Concerns the honor of the person who c o w % t e d B
in the presence of prominent persons. The application the crime, o r the honor of any of his relatives mentioned
of the mitigatjng circumstance of passion or obfuscation in par. 6 of Art. 13. Provocation or threat and passion
is justified when the act of the person injured is the or obfuscation are & -Le& &t the one
immediate cause of the loss of reason and self-control giving the provocation or threat or against the one whoso
on the part of the persan making the attack (U.S. vs. unjust or improper conduct produced in the offender t h e ' .
Esmedia, 17 Phil. 260). This extenuating circumstance is passion or obfuscation.
present when the offense committed was provoked by prior In bath the mitigating circumstances of provocation or ',
unjust or improper acts (People vs. Noynay, 68 Phil. 395). threat and passion or obfuscation, the unjust o r improper,
The conduct of A was the natural cause of the indignation conduct of the offended party rnust immediately precede :',
and anger against him which was aroused in the breast the commission of the crime by the defendant. In vin-
of B. dication of a grave offense, it is not necessary that the
/But h M - & n fssm o a a n d the same cause, the grave offense immediately precedes the commission of the
. -three n&k?.tiiIg cjrcumstances smmi.h cnnsidered as crime by the defendant.
three distinct and sagapte circ- es, but should be
1-t a s s n l r n n e (People vs. De 10s Santos, 47 O.G. 647. A had been fighting a losing battle in the courts with
5131; People vs. Yaon, 43 O.G. 4142). respect to a coconut grove over which he had been assert-
ing ownership. At one time he ;va9 prosecuted for steal-
... .- ing coconuts from the grove, but was acquitted beeawe
545. A, a woman, gravely insulted B who immediately drew out
.~' a knif,e and a1.tacked A. C, the son of A, tried to protect the title was in dispute. In an earlier civil action
his mother, but was fatally wounded, and killed by B. was declared in default and lost the case by the negligence '
In the prosecution of B for homicide, may the provocation of his lawyer. Then, A was impleaded in a civil acti
made by A be taken into consideratior. as a mitigating and an injunction was issued by the court restraining
circunistauce in favor of B? Why? from molesting or obstructing plaiintiff in the exerc
200 201
*
CRIMINAL
. . ..
LAW. REVIEWER CKlMlNAL LAW REYIEWER
, ..,,
,
',,*,~..3.
,
. ~ It
_ mnst
c a a f r o m I s i t i m a t e ~feeling, ~?L&QDI a f m
which is v&iom, u e or irnrnord.
. , sufficient irilelligence; (2
also affeet_s i n m e ,
549. A was maintaining illicit relations with a married woman. o-rave offense, and
' '
A and that woman went to a moviehouse. While seated defeet o r -of the o
1
202 203
CRl3IIXhL LAW REVIIEIYER
CRIllIlNAL LAW REVIEWER !
justice of the pe6ce n-ho accepted and approved the same,
i
&-%
&@n, or communication with his fellow beings or whick
&e
freedom of action.
of his x u = , thereby a f k t i u g his 1 filing of that hail bond tantamount to dolivering himself td
authorities? In the case of Peaple 7s. Ye&, the aeeused'
sented himself to post a hond. It seems that thia question'
The mitieating circumstances of voluntary surrender and, not settled. But the law requires that he must surrender him-.;.
voluntary plea of'guilty &wLinuaLue e t in t h e a d , self to a person in authority or his agent. .,:*I
of the b& the nerves, or tho moral faeudty of the 0-q. .'?%
They are &d on ,mu&- which -a the conmission 552. A, who was %vag amtcncc by final judgment for homi-
c _ - -~
of the crime. The Isw ehooaes-to be jeuiei?t_to the offender
cide, g s m d from the prison. 'While a t large, A com-
w&. voluntarilv surrendered himself to a person in authority
or his agent who voluntarily confessed his gUiltbefare the mitted &&=. Later, A m m s e l f up to the author-
court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the prosecu- ities boxye the remaininp Deriod of his e c e for
tion, b m s e such an act &.Es -r and t- & hommckle. Then, he was prosecuted for robbery which he
t & u i t indicates a moral d i s n a s i a in the offender farnr- committed after he had escaped from the prison. Is A
a&le to his reform. . entitled to the benefit of the mitigating circumstance of
voluntary surrender? Why?
551. As X was a t large and could not be arrested because hi5
No. A c m t successfdly &b the W t of the
whereabouts were unknown, the fiscal filed an information. mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, because
against him for serious physical injuries. The court issued'
he did not surr- &the authorities h y m ~ the f
a warrant for his arrest. Six months after the warrant
commission of the c h e for which he was nrosecuted, but
was issued, A presented himself to the justice of the peace €ahaving cv&& his w e for h d d e (see People
and posted a bond for his provisional release. Is this
vs. Semahda, G.R. No. L-11361, Oct. 26, 1958).
voluntary surrender, to be eonsidered as a mitigating cir-
,+ cumstance? Explain your answer. ~
553. Can the circumstance that the accused did not resist arrest
Ye!;, the fact that the order of arrest had already beem or did not struggle t o free himself after he was taken
issued is no bar to the consideration of the circumstance, to custody by the authorities amount to voluntary sur-
because the law does not require that the surrender of the i render?
' accused be prior to the order of arrest. Moreover, the No. While it is claimed that he intended to surrender,
surrender of the accused to post a bond for his temporary I the fact remains t h a t the accused was arrested (People
release was in obedience to the order of arrest and was vs. Dimdiman, G.R. L-12622, Oct. 28, 1959).
tantamount to the delivery of his person to the authorities Note: The offender may have heen actually arrested, but if he
to answer for the crime for which his arrest was or2ered. (a) helped in carrying his victim to the hospital, or (a) re-
Note: The low specifies tho public officers to whom the sur mained a t the scene of the crime and readily gave himself up,'
render should be made. If the public officer to whom the of- and handed to the poiiceman the weapon he used, he should be
fender surrendered is not a person in authority or his agent,. given the benefit af this mitigating circumstance (People VB.
Bahiera, C.A., 45 0. G., Sup. 5, 3:U; People vs. Parana, 64
it is not mitigating.
I t is not necessary that the offender should look for a person
i Phil. 331).
in authority or his agent to surrender; i t is sufficient that as
Soon as he meets a policeman, for instance, he gives himself up. ,554. In what cases is plea of guilty not a mitigating circum-
to him. stance?
!Phe offender must surrender himself. Suppose that the of- 1. When the plea of guilty is made after the presents-.:,
fender never presented himsdf to the justice of the peace, hut
only a bondsman with a hail bond for the offender went to the tion of any evidence by the prosecution.
204 205
I
that charged in the information. to the mitigating circumstance of plea of guilty? Explain. I
EXF'LANATION: The benefit of that mitigating cimumstance Yes, because although the confession was qualified and 2
is not deserved by the accused who submits to the law only introduction of evidence became necessary, the qualification
after the of s a n e evidence for th9 prosecution,
did not deny A's guilt and, what is more, was subsequently
helictving that in the end the trial will result in his conviction.
Iiut a chansc of plea, from "not guilty" to "guilty" is still justified. It was n o t the fault of A~ that' a qualifying I
circumstance was erioneously allegecl in the information . ,
mitigating, provided that the prosecution has not presented any
evidence. !People vs. Ytumiaga, 86 Phil. 534).
When (he accused pleads guilty on appeal before the Court
of First Instance, he wished neither to acknowledge his crime 557. Why is it that when the offender is deaf and 'dumb, blind
nor t o repent when his fizst opportunity came, that is, during ',
or otherwise suffering some physical defect, such circum-
the trial in the municipal o r justice of the peace Court.
stance is mitigating?
A plea of guilty to B lesser offense is not a spontaneous '
.,'. confession of guilt which the law requires. Because such physical defect m e - his ,means of
.. But when the information is amended so as to charge the ' '
' a&&, defense, or c.mmun'cation with his sellow beings, 2
lesser hut proper offense, the plea of guilty to the offense thereby diminishing his freedom of s n .
ck:irged in the amended information is mitigating.
558. Distinguish insanity from illness of the offender.
...555. A was on trial for malversation after a plea of not guilty.
' .While the prosecution was presenting its evidence by Call-
' Insanity presupposB e- &- of - i
'. ing its first witness and before the direct testimony of a t the -of the eommiss:on of the crime. Illness of
that witness could be finished, A asked t h d the testimOnY the offender only diminishes t h e w h of his;-w
-
. . of said witness be discontinued as he was willing to plead
guilty to the offense charged. The court granted the mo-
i t should not deprive him of e o n s c i n m s s of,u.
Insanity is an gn-e circumstance. s-1 of the
.'. 1 tion of the defendant and ordered the first witness to with- offender is only a mitigating circumstance.
draw, ' A then withdrew his former plea of not guilty and Note: Examples of illness which are eonsidered mitigating cir-
r,.l .. pleaded guilty to the offense charged. Is A entitled to the
cumstance are: (1) mild behavior disorder resulting from ill;
- benefit of plea of guilty? Why? ness which the offender had during'h,is early life; (2) acute
,. . No. Such plea of guilty cannot be given consideration neurosis which makes D person ill-tempered a n d . easily angered;
: . as mitigating circumstance'for it was a t e r e d after the (8) feeb!emindedness; ( 4 ) morbid infirmity, like that one which
., gives the offender the ohsession that the killing of a witch , .
prosecution had presented part of its evidence (People Vs. is f o r public good, because a person suffering from morbid in-
Lambino, 55 0. G. 1565). firmity does not have rea1 control over his wili, although he
,. .. retains consciousness of his acts; and ( 6 ) . k m a n i a , which
. 55F. A was prosecuted for murder qualified by evident pre- is an abnormal, persist.ent imdulse or' tendencv
meditation. He pleaded guilty when he was arraigned, ~~ ., tn.~ rtarl
""ll..
When the illnesr,of the offender completely de~rivesb,.
:' ' ~ but manifested to tlce court t h i t evid,ent premeditation of the oef- his will nowe?, i t is embraced in the tm'.'
did not attend the commission of the crime. The court insanity (People vs. Bonaan, 64 Phil. '87): '.' - ''. -
206 ZOi
I
559. May the court consider, as mitigating, n circumstance not I 4. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves e&
specifically provided by the Revised Penal Code? Explain stitute a crime specially punishable by law’or which are
your answer. included hu the law in defining a crime and prescribing
a penalty therefor shall not be taken into account for the
Yes, because paragraph 10 of Art. 13 of the Revised purpose of increasing the penalty.
Penal Code provides that “other circumstance of a similar 5. Awravnting circumstances which arise from the
nature and analogous to those” mentioned in paragraphs m.oral attributes of the offender, or from his private rela-
1 to 9 of said Article, is also mitigating. tions with the offended party, or from any other personal
Note: The other circumstances of similar nature and analogous cause. ehall only serve t o aggravate the liability of the
ta those mentioned in mzrspraphs 1 to 9 of Art. 13 are: principals, accomnlices and accessories as t o whom such
1. Over 60 years old with Sailing sight, as similar to over circumstances are attendant.
70 years of age.
6 . The aggravating circumstances which consist in the
2. -V restitutjon of stolen property, as -a to material execution of the act, or in the means employed
yoluntary surrender of the offender.
to accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate the liability of
3. Extreme poverty and necessity, as s k i & to incomplete those persons only who had knowledge of them at the
j3stifiention on state of news@. time of the execut’on of the act or their cooperation
4 . Any unjust or improper act or eonduct of the,offendad therein (Art. 62, pars. 1, 3 and 4, R.P.C.).
party which may affect the reason and self-control of the Note: Examples: (1) generic - dwelling, recidivism, nighttime;
offender, like the act of tho debtor o f avoiding his oreditor, (2) specific - ignominy in crime3 against chastity, cruelty or
causing the latter to injure him, which is of similar nature treachery in crimes against persons, disregard of the respect
and analogous to the mitigating circumstance of passion or due the offended party on account of rank, age or sex, applies
obfuscation. only to crimes against persons or honor: (3) inherent- evident
premeditation is inherent in robberJ; #ex is inherent in rape,
660. Wiiat are the effects of the attendance of aggravating cir- seducticn o r abduction; (4) qualifuing - treachery, evident
cumstances in the commission of the crime upon the lia. premeditation, or price which qualifies the killing of a persou
to murder. Note that dwelling, which is generic in other crimes
bility of the offender? -like murder-is inherent in certain crimes, like trespass
They are: to dwelhnp;, where dwe!ling must of necessity accompany the
eammissiorl of the erime of trespass. As murder can be eom-
1 , The specific and the generic aggravating c‘ wcum- mitted outside t h e dwelling of the offcended party, dwelling is
stances, ten- by any mitigating circumstances, not inherent in such crime.
to i w e m the penalty w,t- however, exceeding the The aggravating circumstance which in itself constitutes a
m A x a m of the penalty provided by law for the offense. crime specially punished by law is “That the crime be com-
mitted by means of fire.” I n the crime of arson, such eircum-
$!. The i n h e r e d aggravating circumstances shall & stance is not aggravating.
be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the The aggravating circumstance which is included by the law
penalty (Art. 62, par. 2, R.P.C.). in defininit a crime is “dwelling” in the crime of robbery in
inhabited house (Art. 299, R.P.C.).
3. The qualifying aggravating circumstances
e, the e&@ its and exclusivo name but also
The aggravating circumstance whieh arises from the moral ’
attribute of the offender is evident premeditation.
p&cg the thereof in such a situation as t o dewm The aggravating circumstance nhich arises from the private
m o t h e r penalty t h m t sQecifieallv mescribed by law relation of the offender with the offended party is the relation
fqf- said crime. of the scrvant with his master.
208 209
CRINIINAL LAW REVIEWER CKlllIlNAL LAW IlEYIEiWER
.,.
., “”
i.
! penalty for simple theft, involving the amount of F’600,~’$$
The aggravating circumstance which arise3 fyom other per- .
sonal cause is recidivism. only to the n w eriod. ~,
,,,. .
.....’ i ,. .,
The aggravating circumstance which consists in the material ,.L.<s’
execution of the act o r in the incam ernliloycd to accomplish ! 563. A policeman, upon seeing the offended party carrying an.:’?
it is treachery 01. nighttime. automobile tire, stopped the latter, charged him with hav- *,
ing stolen it, and threatened him with arrest, unless he 1
661. A is charged with murder in an information &??Zing tre-, would give 85.00, which the person gave to avoid being
-r as the qualifying aggravating circumstance. During
ey molested furt.her. The tire was the personal property of
the trial, where the prosecution established the conlmission the offended party. The policeman, in taking the P5.00
of murder by A, the defense pgRed a grivilered mitigating from the, offended party with iintimidation, abused his
circumstance of &rity, that is, that A was, at the time public position. In case the policeman is charged with,
of the commission of the crime, over 15 F a r s but under prosecuted for, and convicted of robbery, must the ag-
16 years of age. Can the privileged mitigating circum- gravating circumstance “that advantage be taken by the
stance of minority offset the qualifying aggravating cir- offendex of his public position’’ be taken into account for
cumstance of treachery? Explain your answer. the purpose of increasing the penalty? Explain your an-
No, because notwithstanding the ixivileged mitigating swer.
circumstance of minority, the desim&ion &z u&lYLof No, because in this particular form of robbery, the
the offense committed xemains.to be m m and the taking advantape of the public positio_n occupied by the
aualifying- a ’ e of treachery c a a o t offender is i w in the offense (People vs. Calderon,
be &-by the privileged mitigating circumstance of et al., G.R. No. 35889).
minority. The &&.&of that privileged mitigating cir- Note:/hhen the threat or intimidation employed by the public
cumstance is to -the penalty for murder by !?% officer to commit @b&ry, consists in threatening. the offended
party with a r m t and prosecution, taking advantage of his
d m z puhlic position is intemal in the offense. Taking advantage
Note: A qualifying aggravating circumstance cannot be offset of e b l i c Dosition ic’xso I-i in (1) bribery, (2) f a
even by n privileged mitigating circumstance. f-n
i Art. 171, and (3) malversation. Hence, it does E
have the ef&t uf increasing the penalty in those crimes.
562. A is charged with sin~pleth,eft of a ring belonging to B Taking advantage of public position is an aggravating cir-
and valued at E O O . During the trial, the prosecution cumstance and has the effect of increasing the penalty in the
p m d that A was a guest in the house of B at the time following cases: (1) il councilor who imposed and collected fines
and misaypropriated the same (US. vs. Tornda, 23 Phil. 18S),
of the commission of the crime. Can the court convict A (2) a goliceman. in miform who abducted a girl by availing
!,
of qualified theft committed with -abuse of cun- himself of his position (U.S. YS. Yumul, 34 Phil. 169), and
fidenee? Explain your answer. I , (8) the chief of police who duiing the search of a boat threat-
No, because grave abuse of confidence is a aualifying ened the ere.,, with bodily ham snd demanded money, thereby
committing robbery (People vs. Cerdena, et al., 51 Phil. 393).
aggraxating circumstance which must be alleged in the
infarmation. Since A was charged only w i t h x p l e theft,
564. A attacked the mayor of his town who was in the per-
which i m d e s that there was &legation of grave abuse
of confidence, the d o f abuse of confidence should es- formance of his duty. Did A commit the crime with the
.’ tablish o& a ge-ggravating circumstance which, if aggravating circumstance of “in contempt of or with insult
not offset by a mitigating circumstance, should r&e the to the public authority”? Explain your answer.
210 211
CizInimAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
No, because that aggravating Circumstance requires cumstance would be to give i t double effect (US. vs.
that h&&o is enpaped in the exercise of public fun&n De la Torre. 3 Phil. 516).
should not b e t h e m n against whom the &e is &m- Note: The aceused must have w & l v intended to aftend
.m
- or i?m& the s u a @ . o u a n k of the offended party (People
Mangsant, 65 Phil. 648) ; othenviue, this aggravating eir-
1,s.
cumstance is not present.
565. Classify the aggravating circumstance of “with insult or
in disregard” of rank, age or sex and explain your answer. 567. Explain why it is aggravating when the &me is epm-
It is a c-s aggravating circumstance, because it n&ted in the &yelling of the offended party.
may be taken into account only in u $ - a 9 a i n s t . p l S There are two reasons why it is aggravating when the
or honor. It is not annlicahie to c-s~ a~g&&prK!Wty. crime is committed in the &&ng of the offended party,
Thus, s w %e p& of a w - even with a namely: (I ) when the offender was w b e d in the home
etd- mrpose of offending ber, is not appravating. of the offended party and the former committed the crime
against the latter, t u a a s - ..
- of c o n f L e ; and
~
666. In what cases is that aggravating circumstance not con. (2) when the offender forced his w-into the m g
sidered present, even if the offended party js a woman, of the offended party to e& tke crime therein, there
an old man or a person of high rank? Explain your was violi&bn of the sanctitv 0 - w . ~.
answer. .Note: A combination house and store is not a dwelling (People
In i.he following cases: vs. Magnayc, G.R. L-3510, May 30, 1951),.
1. When the offender committed the crime with p-i--
568. In what cases is dwelling not aggravating?
sion or obfuscation or because of pr-omcation by the of-
fended party. In the following caseo:
A h e n a man is blinded by passion or obfuscation, or 1. When the o f f e n w party in his dwelling mfnf
is provoked, he 1-s his rsason.~.and self-control, and this f w a n d immediate provocation to the o m
beinz a mental condition, he could n & b Y e h a taus 2. When heb- offender and the offended party
t h t his a& was done with disrespect to the offended are occupants of the same dwelling.
p-. 3 . When dwelling is inherent
..
in the crime. such as
2 . When there exists a %elationship nb- the of- in r - y wigl-arce upon thin= and in tresnass tQ
fended party and the offender. .-d
When there exists a relationship between the offended EXPLANATION: In the first case, the offended party
party and the offender, there is norespect dus to the h$ right to.be respected in his- because he ro.
v o e t o the o m . But the provocation contemplated
offended party, e& when the offended party is a rela-
tive of a hh&~$e.aee than the offender. has three repisites, nsmely: (1) i t must be given in
dwellinp: (2) it must be s w n t ; and (3) i t must he h-
a
3 . When the cad&n of being a woman is in& m m . If any a i these requisites is J t i n g , even if the of-
@e in the commission of the crime, such as, in par- fended party g a - p n a c a t i o n , the aggravating cireurnstanee
ricide, rape, abduction, or seduction. of di&iig shall be t h into accoulG for the purpose of
inereasins the pcnaliy l o be imposed on the offender. The
Thus, it was held that the only thing which makes provocation is disregarded.
the offense parricide is the fact that the deceased was the Thus, if A boxed the face of B 01: the road and immediately
wife of the defendant. To allow it as an aggravating cir- thereafter A ran into his house near-by and B followed A
212 213
I
214 215
I
1 1
of the former, what aggravating circumstance attended the circumstances attended the commission of the crime of
commissi,on of the crime? grave oral defamation? Must all of -them be taken into
A&
e of confidence, not dwelling, because the paramour account for the purpose of increasing the penalty? Ex-
also lived in the same house (U.S. vs. Destrito and De plain your answer.
Ocampo, 23 Phil. 229). The aggravating circumstances are: (1) that the a e
Note: It should have been obvious ungratefulness, because the %as committed in the w e of the Chief Executive, (2)
a w d o a t to be rratefd t o the offelided party i M of his oresenqe, and (3) where public a ~ r i t i e were
s e u e d
5
committing a crime against him.
574. Suppose the husband, upon knowing that the man in the
preceding question was in love with his wife, sent him out
1 in the dkchaxge of their &ti@.
Only m - o f them should be considered for the purpose
of increasing the penalty to he imposed on A. Like in
of the house and, when the husband left for his office, tha.t 1 mitigating circumstances, one a d the same fact c m t
man went to the house and succeeded in having sexual be made the b&g of two or more m-yinp circumstances.
intercourse with the wife, what aggravating circumstance There is great= u n to a& this rule in aggravating
would you consider against that man? Explain your an- circumstances because they are unfavorable to the w d .
. .. swer. 4 676. While the janitor of the Supreme Court was cleaning the
The aggravating circumstance is .&&n$, not abuse I Office of the Chief of Justice at six o’clock i n the morn-
of confidence. The husband h.
.&&&.&J a& his.confidcnce 1
1
P
. . ing, another janitor attacked and seri’ously wounded the
.. . , illhim, a s shown by the fact that he of the
former then and there. Is the fact that the crime was
. .. house upon knowing that the n a n was in love with his committed in the Office of the Chief Justice of the
wife. The of the aggravating circumstance of
Supreme Court an aggravating circumstance? Explain
:. abuse of confidence are: (1) that the offended uarty.had your Rnswer.
. _ . tg&aLthe offender; (2) that the offendera-d-such
- trust by committing a crime against the offended party; j No, because the circumstance that the crime was com-
and (3) that the abuse of confidence facilitated the m-
~
niitted in the office of the public authorities is aggravating
mission of the crime. The first requisite is lacking in that only when the public authorities were engaged in the dis-
case. charge of their duties in their office when the crime was
The aggravating circumstance that the crime was com- committed.
L . mitted in the dwelling of the offended party is present, Note: But the aggravating circumstance that the crime be
committed in a @lace dedicated to religious worship does not
:. : . because the man was no longer living in the house when
.. require that there be a religious ceremony. And note the use
‘-‘;o;: the m’me of adultery was committed by him and, there- of the ward “edicated,” meaning that the &e is evclusively
. ,.’ . fore, he had no right to be there. u s o r re&ious womhig. A temporary altar built at thT
Luneta, even if mass is being said there by a cardinal, i s not
~-
-575. During the meeting of the Council of State in Malacafian a place dedicated to religious worship.
Palace, presided over by the President of the Philippines, Note RlSO that paragraph 6 of Art. 14 requ!!ires that when
A, a member fo the Council of State, utte1e.l serious de- the offender entered any of the places mentioned there, he
. . famatory remarks against B, another member. The fiscal,
,.
:..... who investigated the complaint of B against A, charged
i r a v e the i&,&ipn t o ‘tn a aiae i n that place. The
ruling in the case of People va. Jaurigue should be considered
.’ the latter with grave oral defamation. What aggravating i applicable to other places mentioned in that garagraph 6 of
Art. 14.
1
216 217
CIZIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
577. When is nighttime, an uninhabited place or by a band an
into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty?
, aggravating circumstance? Explain your answer.
Any of them is an aggravating circumstance- The question of whether or not it was difficult for
1. When it - facilitated
- the commission of the mime; the offended party to receive help must be considered.
*,
. . , 2. When it is easeially sough_t-fo_r by the offender to In the case of People vs. Rubia, 62 Phil. 172; it was
: '
~
insure the commission of the crime o r for the purpose held that the purely accidental circumstances that on t h e .
, . of i s u t y ; or day in question another banca with two persons was about
3. When. the offender t&~~advantage .thereof for the 20 lrrazas from the banca where the deceased was killed
. , .. did not alter the fact. that it was difficult for the victim
, . purpose of j i .
to receive help, the incident having taken place at sea.
'578. When is nighttime not an aggravating circumstance, evert Note: That the crime is committed in an uninhabited place i s
aggravating, because the !solation of jL& rq&.csA
if the crime was committed dnring nighttime? t a g t - the
~ 4 n um ~ e n .
In the following cases:
1. When the crime was the a t of a succession of. 580. Is the aggravating circumstance of by a band applicable
a& which took place within the period of two hours, com- t o crimes against persons?
mencing at 5:OO p.m. and continued up to 7:OO p.m.; Yes. Despite what has been said in some cases to the
2 . When treach-.x!-_v d- w in the effect that it is to be applied only to crimes against prop-
commission of the crime, because -n is a~ ~ ...m erty, i t is equally applicable to crimes against persons,
.. such as murder (People vs. Alcaraz, e t al., G.R. L-9064-67,
in treachery;
April 30, 1958).
3 . When the &ing between the offender and the
offended party a t nighttime yas-casual and t h e m f com- -581. A, B, C and D, all armed with piFjtols, raped a woman
mitting the crime came_mte ' thcmind-of the offender only one after another. What aggravating circumstance, if any,
a t that time. The reason for this is thate-n ms do you find in this case? Ex,plain your answer.
, ~ % not m se- W&. Of course, it None, because "by a band'' is ~ L m R l b k b l eto C Z ~ W S
may be aggravating, if the darkncss f a c i l i b d the %m-
against chastity, like rape (People vs. Corpus, et al., C.A.,
n&sh-of the c r i m M r that the Qffender tQok ta e 43 O.G. 2249). "Abuse of superior strength" ordinarily
O U
is not also applicable to the crime of rape or forcible ab-
Note: Case No. 3 and the rules mentioned therein apply also
t o 1) uninhabited place and (2) by B band. duction&cause the commissior? of the crime of rape or
//'The m e must be C O m m i t t P r l in dcvrknesg. Hence, if there
IS &it .. e in the glace of the commission
forcible abduction, which may be %cxmmEshd b a ,
presupposes suoezioxk-offorce on. the Dart of
of the crime, the aggravating circumstance of nighttime is
prgaent.
__
fenders.
But abuse of silperior strength may be present in the
commission of the crime of coercion or forcible abduction,
5.79. If in an, uninhabited place there were other persons pass-
if the strength availed of is clearly i m 9f t h o
ins by when a person killed another, may the circumstance quired for the realization of the&knsg (People vs. Fer-
that the crime was committed in uninhabited place be taken nando, et al., C.A., 43 O.G. 1717).
218 219
I 1
I 587. May a person convicted of a crime punishable under a- ginning to serve such sentence or uW~rwringthe same,
special 1a.w be declared a recidivist if at the time of h i s there is qu.+s.i,re.cidivism,
trial he had been previously convicted by final judgment Recidivism and reitzracion o r habituality, which are
of the same crime? Explain your answer. generic aggravating circumstances, have the effect of in-
No, because a recidivist is one who, at the time of his. creasing the penalty to the maximum period, if not offset
trial for one crime, shall have been previously convicted hy a mitigating circumstance.
by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same. Habitual delinquency, which is an extra-ordinary ag-
title of the Revised Penal Code, not of a special law. gravating circumstance, usually includes recidivism and it
Note: But the second eonvictim of the same offense was con- not only increases the penalty to the maximum, if reci-
sidered aggravating in n usury ease. The Usury Law i s a divism is not offset by a mitigating circumstance, but also
special law. Art. 10 of the Code was applied (People YE..
HodEcs, 68 n i l . 178).
authorizes the imposition of additional penalty.
Quasi-recidivism, which is a special aggravating cir-
588. When a person has been convicted of and served sentences cumstance, serves to increase the penalty for the new felony
for several crimes and is now convicted of a new crime, to the maximum period, regardless of the presence of any
what are the aggravating circumstances that may possibly ordinary mitigating circumstance. In other words, quasi-
be taken into account for the purpose of increasing t h e recidivism cannot be offset by an ordinary mitigating cir-
. penalty to be imposed on him? To what extent may t h e cumstance.
penalty be increased?
1. If the f m and the sycond. offenses are emb.?&c$d 589. A previouslv served sentence for !%%+-seriousphysical in-
in the sa_me title of the Revised Penal Code, he is a red-- juries, punishable by arrest0 mayor. He is m c o n v i c t e d
of estafa, punishable by prision curreccional. What ag-
u t ~&=c.on of the secanddffense. gravating Circumstance do you fins in this case? Explain
2. If the first and the second offenses are not em- your answer.
braced in the same title of khe Revised Penal Code, but
the convict Qreviouslm.rv.ed s e n h x e for the f a t offense There is m e , became, -it could not be reiteraciolt
.t to which the attaches an e ~ i a lor grecter penalty , r or habituality since the ?aen&L&tWd to t h e & & of-
... for two o r more crimA to which it attaLhes a l k h i g - fense is .r1
- thmA?a& f o r h e m Q
. Bd o & ~ e ;and,
'L
=then there is ?&@zw&n or habitnality. second, it could not be recidivism since estafa and physical
injuries are not embraced in the same title of the Revised
3. When the s&exeaLcrimes for which h.e sen-
." Penal Code.
tences are so-r l ~ s _ s e r i o u s~ h ~ j ~ a l - i n j d rnh-
es,
I,
k y , t&f.t, estafa or f&sWio_n, the semnd and s& EXPLANATIOX: In & ~ b - , o r m t y , the convict
muot hsvo previously served s e w for as-e, t0
w n t camktions are wifhin.-ten..yw.rs fmm the I& which the law a@&@ at ls&t an esual penalty; natlesser,
c ~ ~ Y & L o J ~or r x l ~ e and
, is naw convicted of any of s3.W as in We problem given. The penalty which the convict pre-
crimes the thirrlLime or-_oftener then he is a h a b i b a t .iiously served may be lighter, but he must previously serve
delinquent. sentences for at least two crimes to which the law attaches
lighter penalty.
4. When the person oz._tr_iaj,for one crime been
convicted by finaLaudgment of another crime, and t h e $90. A previously served the minimum period of reclusion tem-
crime for which he is a t r i a l was committed befoE be- poral, as the maximum of the indeterminate penalty, for
222 223
I
rapc, upon a plea of gnilty. Now A i s couvicted of homi- between the determination t o commit the crime and its
cide. Since there is no mitigating circuiastance that at- execution during which A could $&e@* the eonae-
tended the c~mmissionof th'e crime of horntcide, €he pen- quence of his act. Th.e aggravating'cireum~anceof evi-
alty of reclusion temporal for homicide will have t o he dent premeditation, which arose from the r n d a e t e
imposed, in the period higher than the min'mnm. Is there of the offender, being a&endant to A only, should senre
habituality or reiteracion in this case? Why? to aggravate his liability, but it will riot aggravate the
Y e s , there is still reiteracion or habimality, because liability o i E, because evident premeditation was not at-
the penalty attached to the crime of rape and the penalty tendant t o him (Art. 62, par. 3, R.P.C.).
f o r homicide are the same (equal penalty), that is, ye- qsfar_a,S_A..~-c.~~cer!led, the a c 4 w d i R g circumstance
elusion temporal.
It is the penalty attached..to the oj%nse that s h d d
of
i.~g~i~&&?n. It may be CQQ&%! %-.
BNnqd o r .ixomis-e. i W&illSd&&a-
as cQ&
:L
i@%!
ond _element of evident- prenieditation. But prim, reward
the see-
he considered, notAhe penalty actually imposed.
or promise is aggravating as against 5 , because he earn-
after having conceived the idea of killing C, looked mitted the crime in consideration thereof.
for B the next day and, upon meeting him, offered B The aggravating circumstance that the crime was com-
P1,OOO to kill C. As soon as he accepted the offer, R i ~ t e de e a n s . . o € .explosion (the use of hand grenade)
took a hand grenade with him and when he saw C , B should be comidered agcdnst-B, he h&&! the o s w_ho
threw .the hand grenade at him. When the hand grenade u-y&$-ns. It c m be taken int.0 aceaunt for the
cxplodf!d, C was killed. A gave P1,OOO t o B after the latter purpose of i n c w i n g the penalty to be imposed on A,
assured the former that C was already killed. What ag- if the latter had lmaq&dge that the hand grenade would
gravating circumstances attended the commission of the be u s e d h p B . But from the facts stated in the question,
crime? Against whom must they be considered? Must there is n a d k a t i o n that A knew th.at B would use a
each o f them be taken into account separately ils a dis- hand grenade, as they n-exer..t&Ced about the W w Y&h
tinct aggravating circumstance for the purpose of increas- which B would kill. .C. Aggl'avating circumstances which
ing the penalty? Explain your answers. consist in the material execution of the act, or in the means
The aggravating circumstances that attended the com- employed to accomplish it, shall serve t o aggravate the
mission of the crime are (1) that the crime was committed liability of those persons only who had kwxledge of them
in consideration of a price, reward or promise; (2) that a t the time of the exe.cution-of the & or thAL3DR-B
the act was committed with evident premeditation; and therein (Art. 62, par. 4, R.Y.C.).
(3) that the crime was committed by means of explosion. 592. When is the aggravating circumstance of price, reward or
There is evident premeditation in this case as regards promise to be considered against the person who gave or
A, because the time when A determined to commit the offered it, and when is it to be taken into account only
crime was known. A had conceived the idea of commit- against the offender who received or accepted i t ?
ting the crime the day before he offered E P1,OOO to kill When it is alleged as a qiJalifying aggravating circnm-
C. A performed acts manifestly indicating that he clang stance of murder and there is an allegation of conspiracy,
to his determination to commit the crime, when he offered i t being an elemeiit of that offense, it shall affect both
P1,OOO to B the next day after be had conceived the idea of them. In case of conviction both of them will be liable
of killing C. Hence, there was sufficient lapse of time for murder, qualified by price, revard or promise.
224 225
l i I
!
?
But when it is not alleged in the inforniation or, even the use of such means does not qualify the crime to mur-
if alleged, it is_pnly a generic aggravathg circumstance, der. It is a compiex mime, either (1) of crimes involving
it shall affect Znly the principal by direct participation: ,i destruction with homicide under Art. 48 in relation to
because he was the one who committed the crime in con- Arts. 3 2 i a n d 219, when explosion or inundation is used,
sideration of price, reward or promise, or (2) of arson -with homicide (U.S. vs. Burns, 41 Phil.
418). The penalty to be imposed is the penalty for the
593. Art.. 14, par. 12, of the Revised Penal Code, providing for mose serious offense, to be applied in the maximum period.
another aggravating circumstance states, "that the crinte 594. A decided to kill B on May 29, 1959. On May 30, A killed
be committed by means of inundation, fire, po:son, ex. 13. Is there evident prenieditation in this case? Explain
plosion, stranding of a vessel or intentional damage there- your answer.
to, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other
artifice involving great waste and ruin." Now, then, when No, because these was n g _ e x t m a L a t between t h e
is this aggravating circumstance qualifyittg, inherent or time A determined to commit the crime and the time he
one which in itself constitutes a crim,e or which is in- actually committed the crime.
cluded by the law in defining a crime? State the effect The premeditation must be h;iseri on e
of each upon the criminal liability of the offender. mLww.zm& from &time.
It is qualifying when t!le crime committed is against en & mdfe.stlW&in.g- that the d p i t has clung
persons and the offender uses inundation, fire, poison, ex- to his d&exmination to cnmmit the crime.
plosion, or any of the other means mentioned in paragraph 595. Is evident premeditation aggravating in aherratio ictus?
12 of Art. 14, to kill his victim. In this case, the killing
of a person is qualified to murder. The penalty is that No. Fhick- ' ion m s h b e properly_takpn
i g u c s u t when the person whcm the defendant in-
one provided for murder.
tended to kill was d s f r a m the one who became his
Once any of the means mentioned in Art. 14, par. 12, victim. In such^ case, the. a&aL.u- '-tim was mLw&np
is considered to qualify the killing of a person t o murder, plated in the s?r_emdihkion.
it becomes an inherent aggravating circumstance in murder
o r included by law in defining a crime and shall not be
taken into account again for the purpose of increasing the
P
EXPLANATION f l ident premeditation may be considered a5
present, even if person other than the intended victim was
killed, if it is shown that the offendem were &exnu&' t e k i y
penalty (Art. 62, par. 2, or par. I, R.P.C.). nataaly the intended victim but also a- who
When any of the means mentioned in Art: 14, par. 12, ,It& p& n vi&RJLw- and tho actual victim was one
who would have helped the intended victim put a violent resisL
is used to commit a crime against property, like arson, ance (People vs. Ubina, G.R. No. L49G9, Sept. 1, 1955).
crimes involving destruction, or special cases of malicious It is not necessary that there be a plan to kill a particular
mischief, it in itself constitutes a crime specially punished pei2mi (CS.vs. Manalinde, 14 Phil. 77; U.S. YS. Zalsos and
by law or which is included by the law in defining a crime Rogmac, 40 Phil. 90).
and, therefore, it shall not he taken into account for the Zvident premeditation is i d & in r u y (People v a
purpose of increasing the penalty (Art. 62, par. 1, R.P.C.). Daos, 60 Phil. 143), especially where it is committed by various
.~. If there is no intent to kill on the part If the offender, Perso1is, became they must have an ng.reernent, they have to
meditate and reflect on the manner of carryins out the crime
F; but inundation, fire, poison or explos'on is wed as a means and they have to irct-cudpa ' tely i
lL ed (.Peop!e
;$.:'to commit a crime, and a person is Billed as a consequence, vs. Valeriano, et al., G.R. No. L - z l S g m ) .
226 227
l i I
Known premeditation is inherent or implied in estafa, adult- tion of outhority to gain entrance into the liouse where offender
ery and other similar crimes (US.VS. Blaneo, 10 Phil. 298; committed acts of Issaiviousness.
U.S. v i . Hermosilln, 31 Phil. 406).
5 F m d - U.S. vs. Vnndal, 3 Phil. 8!3 - inducing victim to go
down to the lower story of his house, pretending to be buying
wine stored there and when victim went down then and there
596. A courted the maid of the house of B to enable him to killing him.
enter the.t house. During the second meeting with the
Diaguise - by resorting to any devise to conceal identity be-
maid in the house and when the maid had already con- fore committing the crime,
fidence in him, A stole money and jewelry of B. What
f i e eggravating circumstance of disguise is t-
aggravating circumstance attended the cornmission of the when the offender is reragnized 1 - u the d w e .
crime? Explain your answer.
C d t , because A r m to i ? & d m w and 598. A, a big and husky fellow, in the heat of anger attacked
cvnning to induce the m a i d t o ni- the house B, a small and weak man, causing upon the latter serious
T of B. physical injuries. Is the aggravating circumstance that
Note: It cannot be &bus* of confidence, bec%&%eBd b & advantage was taken of superior strength present in this
wQ
. =- ' eejnit. case? Extplain your answer.
No, because A attacked B while he was in the heat
697. How is the aggravating circumstance of employing fraud of anger and, therefore, he could not have taken advantage
in the commission of the crime distinguis5ed from that of his superior strength. . n o -t e of superior
of craft? strength means t o puruosely excessive force o w .
pLpMrtian to tlie m&n&o.f uraih& to the person
attacked.
or
a manner as to make it easier for the offender t o commit 599. Is the mere fact that the offender is a man and the vic-
the crime. tim is a woman an aggravating circumstance of abuse of
Thus, if in the preceding problem, A told the maid superior 8trengt.h in murder?
that he was an employee of the Meralco and that he wanted No. The aggravating circumstance of abuse o f superior
t o get inside the house t o read the meter and because of strength should not be taken into account just because
his said representations, which were false, ne was allowed the defendant is a man and the deceased is a woman, inas-
to enter the house and once inside, A at the point of his much, as this aggravating circumstance is inherent in the
revolver succeeded in taking money and jewelry from the crime of m w d w (People vs. Mangsant, 65 Phil, 548).
wardrobe of B, the owner of the house, the aggravating Note: When the crime committed is murder qualified by abuse
circumstance that fraud was employed in committing the of superior strength, it having qualified already the crime, i t
crime of robbery with intimidation would be present. shall not be taken into account to raise the penalty to the
Note: maximum. If murder is qualified hy trcaehery, abuse of super-
-
Craft U.9. vs. Gampona, 36 Phil. 817-inviting the vic- ior strength is absorbed i r treachery.
But the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior
tim to n distant mountain to see a tree of peculiar virtue and
once there killed the victim; People VS. Daos, et al., 60 Phil. strength is present when a man attacked a woman with B
143-pretending to be a passenger and once in the taxicab weapon and the charge is homicide 01' physical injuries, be.
a t a certain place robbed the driver of the money in his pos- cause his sex and weapon save the offender snperiority of
' session: People vs. Timbol, C.A., 41 O.G. 1869 -assuming posi- strength and it is not inherent in the crime.
228 229
I
600. A and B, helping each other, attacked and iajdred C with of a m t -a by the accused was deliberately rho=
fist blows. Is the aggravating circumstance of abuse of by him with a sgecial view to tine accomnlishment of the
superior strength present in this case? act withoEsisk.to himself arisinp from the defense which
the person attacked might make.
Therebeing uuhmymz ' of the d a i i q e plqisiealstrength
b e b e s n - h and B, on one hand, and C, on the other, their 602. A, who wanted to commit acts of lasciviousness on B, a
e x r-i doesno& nec@sa& impLr abuse woman, suddenly and unexpectedly approached her from
O f . 3 L p X i W h. behind, grabbed her by placing his two arms around her
Note: But the greater number of aggressors, if armed, may waist, and then held her breast and her private parts.
point to abuse of superior strenpth. Must treachery be considered i n this case? Explain your
Nighttime, craft or fraud and abuse of Superior strength answer.
are inhe.r.4 or rbsnrhed in ts%~!%rY, No, beause -t agnlies o n k t o crimes against
Abuse of su,perior strenglli, ordinarily, is not aggravating
in coercion, rape or forcible abduction, because these crimes
p, not to a C r h e & cf?a&, like acts o f s -
presuppose the employment of force v1j-s theresist- civiousness. Art. 14, par. l G , in defining this aggravating
i u - of the offendehllarty, but when the abuse of superjor circumstance, states that t u t - r e r y u-
'
strength is great1v.h e x ~ ~ s . . o f c t b armshd
t t w' the fender commits &=of the crimes a b t the uerso_n, etc.
. . O&JW, it i s aggravating. .
... Thus, abuae of superior strength .was considered by the 603. May the aggravating circumstance of treachery be present
,. Supreme Court in the commission of rape by four men who even if the assault was made face to face?
employed force and intimidation (U.S. VS. Camiloy, 3G Phil. Yes. The fact that the attack was made face t o face
767), and in the commission of forcible abduction by several
abductors (People VS. Fernando, 44 O.G. 177). does not necessarily imply that there was no treachew.
When the a&aAk was sudden unexpected, there is
601. A was found dead with a stab wound in the baclc. Accord. treachery if the offender puruoselv - ad&e_d that method
ing to the doctor who performed an autopsy, that stab or form of attack, as when it was done under the auiqe
v o u n d was the cause of death. B was suspected and in- pf friendship. Bat when the offender Qted nuon a&
vestigated. B confessed to the authorities that he stabbed &e whj& prodiiced passion ?r obfuscation, there can be
n-achery, becaiise the method o r form of attack could
A in the back. Did B kill A with treachery? Explain
mLha~% h.e.en m - y adouted, h.e having & I his m-
your aitswer. , s ~ , . a n dself contl.01 ~ ~ ~ . s ~ , o y ~ o h f u s c a t i ~ .
~-
The mere fact that the deceased had wounds in the
back does not necessarily show that the accused attacked 604. A killed I3 by shooting the Iatter_suddenIy and-unexpeetedly
him from behind, giving the deceased no chance to defend immediately after B Itad gravely insdted A. Is there
himself, so as to bring the offense within the definition treachery in this case? W y ?
of the crIme of murder qualified by treachery (People No, because when the accused committed a crime veith
vs. Embalido, 68 Phil. 152). In the case of People vs. passion orshfuscation, the offender e dd.i&p
Cafiete, 44 Phil. 478, the deceased received a~fatal thrust ately chosen that method of attack.
with a knife in the hack, and yet treachery was not con-
sidered against the accused. 605. A, in the heat of anger, shot at a woman with a child
h e f o r e treachery can be found to be present in the in her ann. The child, who was hit, died as a consequence.
killing of a person it must d a r l v muear t h a t t h e w
Is there treachery in this case?
230 231
I 1 ' I
I
While it is a rule that killing a child is characterized him. In this case ignorr.iuy was considered, although t
by treachery, because the weakness of the victim due to crime was against persons.
his tender age results in the absence of any danger to (2) Embracing and kissing a ysoung woman '
the offender, yet when the offender, as in this case, com- &many ,s-o is unjust vexation or
mitted the crime in the .heEf..anger, he c~?@d.~_npt have r s c i o n , hut -icny was considered.
-. of the defenseless condition o f the child.
been conscious (3) Less serious physical injuries is qualified and the
I .
Requisites of t r s u c k w : penalty is made higher by the attendance of i m n y .
1. !rhat the crime committed is a-t mers0ne. such as kill-
ing or injuring a person &hut iustifiahlaaw; 609. In what crimes is the aggravating circumstance of nnlaw-
2. 'Chat when the victim is attacked, he must be defenseless, fnl entry inherent? Why?
ihat is, he is n& in a oositiox t o make a defeng; and
3 . That the-!, method or-ef attack must be-&&&: In (1) qualified trespass to dwelling by passing through
chosen by t h e f e n d e r . the window (W.S. vs. Barberan, 17 Phil. 609) and (2) rob-
bery with force upon things committed in inhabited house,
606. Can treachery be considered in aberratio ictus? Explain because in these crimes unlawful entry is the specific and
your answer. essential element.
Yes, because when there is treachery, it is ,impossible. , N o t e : There is unlawful entry whcn entrance into the house
f o r s h z r the e d e d victim or the @at.l victim t u l e - where the crime is committed is effected through an opening
fgden-himmself against the aggression. not intended for the purpose.
The aggravating circumstance of breaking of a wall, rcuf,
607. When is the circumstance of ignominy present in the com- floor, door or window is inherent niso in robbery with force
upon things and in qualified trespirss t o dwelling.
mission of a crime? Illustrate the circumstance of ig-
This aggravating circumstance is present in rape or murder,
nominy. or robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons if
The circumstance of ignominy is present when GI it is committed in the house of the offended party after break-
are employed or circumstances brought about, tending tp ing a part of the house. This aggravating circumstance is not
-nr the oe-f the crime-nr or to & inherent in those crimes.
the offended party to shame.
Raping the wife in the presence of her husband (US. 810. May the aggravating circumstances of nnlawful entry and
vs. Iglesia, 21 Phil. 6 5 ) ; raping a woman in front of her dwelling be taken separately?
.' betrothed (US. vs. Casafias, 5 Phil. 377); and removing Yes. Where it appears that the accused made his en-
5,:. '. the drawers of an old woman to compel her to confess
I.'
trance into the house of another bj. forcibly opening a hole
to the theft of clothes (People vs. Fernando, C.A., 43 in the wall of the kitchen thereof, and then and there shot
'i,. O.G. 1'71'7).
t:.
and wounded a person inside, the circumstances of unlaw-
ful entry and dwelling may be properly taken separately
' 608. Is ignominy as an aggravating circumstance applicable only against the offender (People vs. Mutya, G.R. L-11255-66,
to crinies against chastity? September 30, 1959).
No. In other crimes, ignominy was considered:
.: (1) A with a pistol in hand made E, a rich and promi- 611. Explain why it is aggravating when the crime is committed
ihent person, kneel in front of his servants and then killed with the aid of persons under 15 years of age.
232 233
1
1
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER i CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
The purpose of the law is to.repress,so far as possible, I long the suffering of his victim, is mLm€fi&nt fbrdaking
the frequent practice resorted t o by professional criminals I this
'
simxnda.nce i-muidwdion (People
t o avail t.hemselves of minors takins adva!&a&e of their 7 vs. Dayug, e t a1.j.
-__--
jrresponsibility. Note: The first requisite of cruelty is lacking.
612. Explain why it is aggravating when the crimc is committed I ,616. What aggravating circumstances are those which cannot
'\
by means of motor vehicles, airships, or other similar exist if the offender lost his reason and self-control due
means. to provocation or passion or obfuscation? Exp!ain your
The purpose of the law is to &emaat the w e d - answer.
f a e 3 -Em by m n d m r i m i n a l s in saLmeans to eom- They are:
mit crimt-and flee and abscond OB the same is c m - 1. That the crime be committed with insult o r in dis-
mjtted.- , / regard of the respect due the offended party on account
o f his rank, age or sex;
613. A, who hired and used a taxi and while inside thereof
with his girl friend, stabbed and killed her. Is the use 2 . That advantage be taken of superior strength;
of motor vehicle an aggravating circumstance in this case? 3. Treachery ;
Yes. Tile crime was p e r n e t r a t d i n a LaLwhich was 4 . Cruelty.
hirehandxsedh&A (People vs. Marasigan, 70 Phil. 583). These aggravating circumstances casMtexls ' t if the
! ._-
must &p&-
uortion to the
malie use of excessive. force put
means.-pf d e ~ i
party; in t m k e x y , the offender must eg5s-w
k t o k
the
uco-
offended
adoDt
1. That the injury c a ~ & be deliberately i n m a d articular+means,
p__-- >rn-d_or f o m a f attack that would
by c m i g other_wrong; .-insure the e e u $ o n of the crime without risk to himself
2. That the other w a n p be unnecessary for the execn- arising froin the defense which the offended party might
tion of the purpose of the offender. make; and in c_r?Jey, the a i f a d e r must- i
Iong-the suifesing of the victim.
615. A repeatedly and without let-up stabbed B with a knife, I
On the other hand, if the offender I m h i s reason and
inflicting various wounds on the different parts of the self-control due to provoca.tion or passion or obfuscation,
latter's body. Is there cruelty? he c-at h x t - & d deliberately, gurnosel,~,consciously,
The mere fact of inflicting various successive wounds f oi-n&g.a&.
upon a person in order to cause his death, map.px&c.a&le
time i n t g v r v p g e e s p the infliction .of one-xamd and i
I 617. What are the alternative circumstances? Why are they
t h a t o f a d k - t o show that the offender wanted to pro- called alterriative circumstances?
234 235
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER i CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
They are relationship, intoxication or -of m- ,I Relationship is mitigating in crimes against property,
-
tion and education of the offend&(Art. 15, R.P.C.). They
are called alternative circumstances, because they are &&r
1)
whether the offender is a relative of a higher degree or
he is a ieir.tive of a iower degree than the offended party.
mitignting o r w a v a t i n g circumstances, acedins+ to. the
.w Relationship is aggraraating in crimes a p i n s t m
-
natureand effect of the crime and the o in cases whcre the offended party is a r&t~.e-of-a-kigher
attendirg its commission. I dzgree than the offender or when the offender and the
offended party are relatives of the same level, as killing
618. A s a e the ring of his nephew who was then living with a brother o r brother-in-law. The exceptions are (1) when
him. When prosecuted for theft, A contended that in view the deceased contracted adulterous relations with the wife
of his relationship with the offended party, he should be of his brother-in-law mho killed him, and (2) when the
given the benefit of the alternative circumstance of rela- cause of the maltreatment which resulted in the death of
tionship which, in this case, was mitigating because he was his brother-in.iaw was the desire of the accused to render
a relative of a higher degree than the offended party and service t o his relative. In these cases, relationship is miti-
that th,e crime comnlitted by him ivas against property. gating, even if the offender and the deceased a r e relatives
Is the contention of A tenable? Ex'plain your answer. of the same level, because of the conditions attending the
No, because the alternative circumstance of relationship commission of the crime.
shall be taken into consideration when the offended narty The fact that the offend& party is a relative of a
-
is the i m , ascendant, descendant, legitimate, naturai, I?w>r-depree than the offender is mitigating in crimes
or adopted- brother^ or sister, or relative .by af€inity in the against persons only when the crimes committed a r e &
same degrees &-the affender The relation of uncle and gc!e.or less grave felonies. Thus, if the serious physical
nephew is n o t e d by any of the relationships men- injuries are inflicted upon any of the persons mentioned
tioned. in the definition of the crime of parricide, such as the
Note: The relationship of stepfather a r stepmother and step- child of the offender, relationship is aggravating. Also,
son or stepdaughter is ic&&d by~.analogy, as sHl&r to that the killing of a step-daughter by the step-mother is ag-
of a s a t - a n d descendant. gravating, even if the deceased is a relative of s lower
The relationships of adopted father or mother, adopted ?an degree than the offender.
or daughter, and adopted brother or sister are also included.
621. Ie what crimes is relationship a&s.aggravating? Why?
619. When is relationship neither mitigating nor aggravating? // Relationship is always aggravating in crimes against ,.I'
Relationship is neither mitigating nor aggravating when _chastity, regardless of whether the offender is a relative ,,
it is &herent__in the crime, such as in r)arric!ide, adultery, of a higher degree or he is a relative of a lower degree .I
or :on.c.!bj.n,?ge w_here._the o f f e n M m & y is the.3-e. l than the offended party, becawe..o:€K thenature.and_e#ect . '
of the crime.
620. When is relationship mitigating and when aggravating?
Relationship is mitigating in erimes-.against property
by ag&sy to the provisions of the Revised Penal Code
(Art. 332) which exempt from criminal liability certain
i F22. The father stole the money of his Son, which was the
latter's salary as an employee. Is relationship in this case
mitigating? Why?
relatives who qomlxted theft, swjhdling or malicb.n.s_mis- No, because under Art. 332 of thc Code, Y.!.-.
c h z ag@t--a.n?&er. c&& and no criminaldiakiLity, when the crime committed
236 237
CIIIDIINAL LAW REVIEWER CIIIMINAL'LAiW REVlEWIIR
had heen drinking liquor for seven months and that he had heen consequences-of a criminal act, may still he e-ti this
drunk once or twice Q m o n t h does not show that the intoxication mitigating circumstance.
is habitual. But it is not necessary that it be continuous OX /.ow dep.rekor lack of instrueti n is not rnitiaatiria in crimes
of daily occurrenee (People YS. Amenamen). I t would seem against pr&, like arson, and in crimes n e a i u t a ,
that the offender must be intoxicated most of the time. like rape or acts of lasciviousness. In treason and homicide
or murder, the ~ u l eis not settled.
625. The trial court found that the two defendants were drunk 628. Is lack of instruction a mitigating circumstance in the
at the time of the commission of the crime. Is intoxica-
crime of murder or homicide?
tion an aggravating circumstance in this case:
Drunkenness is an alternat've circumstance which can In the case of People vs. Talok, et al., ti5 Phil. 696,
and People vs. Mantala, et al., G.R. L-12109, October 31,
be considered as aggravating ifm habitual
-
mitigatigg if n-td
~ . ~ . i or
-
b sintentional, ~it o f ,
e n c e . ~but
238 239
,,' ,
' I'
CHIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWEI(
But in the case of People vs. Mutya, G.R. L-11255-56, D is a principal by inducement, because he directly in-
' n and
September 30, 1959, i t was held that l & k X & d u d K duced others t o commit it: and E. is a principal by in-
dispensable cooperation, because he cooperated in the com-
i-kion cannot mitigate the a o f the offender who
committed murder&-se t o i s forbidden bv natural mission of the offense by another act without whic,h it
would not h m . k @ a a - d (Art. 17, R.P.C.).
--law which every rational being is endowed to&!! '
c _
aAd
feel. 632. A made a bet of 85.00 with B on a cockfight. The latter
havinp refused t o pay the amount thereof which the former
629. Who a.re criminally liable for felonies? Explain why ac. Claimed to have won, il dispute arose between them which
cessories are not liable for light felonies. resulted in a fight. When the fight began, A held B
Principals, accomplices, and accessories are liable for by the hand. C , son of A, seized the front p r t of B's
and less -a ' . Principals and accomplices shirt and D, another son of A, came upon the scene and
are liable f 'w (Art. 16, R.P.C.). with a pen knife gave B a thrust In the abdominal re-
& c m are M e for I&ht felonies, because gion, causing B's death sometime thereafter. Are A, G
and D principals in the crime committed? Explain your
the gcial wrong as well as the u-di urejudice ' I
--
small that penal sanction is deemed g&L.WSW&
answer.
No, only D is principal by direct participation in the
crime committed which resulted in VS death. A and C
630. If a corporation violates a criminal law, are all its officers
criminally liable? Explain your answer. are not responsible for the consequences of the wound
inflicted u ~ o nthe deceased by D, because there are no
As a general rule, the president or manager, or the facts stated showing -A, C and D had a e r s d UJ
directors of a corporation are criminally liable for their g; but on the contrary i t a r s $j& A and C h a n o t
acts though in their official capacity, if they participated k3- t h a w o u l d stab B when they held the latter.
in the unlawful act either directly or as aider, abettor or There was po conspiracx among A, C and D, because
accessory, but are not liable criminally for the corporate the f%t. was brouzht abo& by B's refusal to Day A, and,
a d s performed by other officers or agents thereof. Thus, tinerefore. the three c u hDe PI agreed and
if an agent of a partnership in his official capacity caused decided to kill B.
the death of a person because of his negligence, only he EXPLANATION: A and C are not principals by direct partici-
is liable, but not the manager of the partnership (People pation in tho crime committed by D, because there was no
vs. Montilla, C.A., 62 O.G. 4327). unity of purpose and intention among them, as the mere act
Note: Corporation could not have committed a crime in which of holding tlic hand and the front part of the shirt of B,
a vilfull ~urmpseo r malicious intent or nediiaence is reymired. without knowing that D would stab 11, does not indicate on 'I
their part an intention to kill (People vs. Ortiz and Zauza, ' 1
65 Phil. 9 3 3 ) . Hence, A and C did not share the guilty pur-
631. A, B, and C forcibly abducted a girl, in consideration of pose of D. To be liable for the criminal act of another, a
a sum of money given t o them by D, using a car driven person (1) must have the same criminal purpore as that of
by E, said car being the only available means of trans- the other and (2) he and the other must he united in ita
portation in the place of the commission of the offense. ezeeulion.
What kind of principals are A, B, C, D, and E? Why?
6.333. But suppose, in the preceding question, D was about to
A, B, and C are principals by direct participation, be-
~
cause they took a direct part in the execution of the act; stab B when A and C held B for the purpose of enabling '_
240 241
I
’ . D to kill B without any risk on the part of D, are all the place and without waiting for A, started burnbg the
: of the three principals by direct participation? house of the mayor and, as they were running away, they
. .
Yes, because A, C and D a a 7-
,w,& + . .L k L B ;and when 4 held B by the hand,
were arrested by certain policemen. When A reached the
place to help B and C, he saw that the Bouse was already
burned. What is the liability, if any, of A in the crime
C by the front part of B’s shirt, and D stabbed . .B, thCY
w s L &
l %d- ’ of the cqmmanrwnunalpur- of arson actually committed by B and C? Explain your
m e . In this case, the effect is the same as that when
answer.
there is anterior conspiracy. The act of one is the act None, b m e e
was a consairator; and e-
I of all. Thev have the same criminal liability and the same C e , w a t the E m o n p f ’ i t s ayrpose, &
penalty shall be imposed on all of them. There is collec@Je
--I_
Nota: This is similar to the ease of People vs. Lawas, et al. malversation. The charge against the audit clerks ,+.,:
Lawas ordered his home guards to fire at the men ill the that, through their recklessly negligent participation h.ini.1 'i
ground floor of a house, but in the course of the melee that
followed some of the home guards of Lnwas fired at the
tiding the falsified payrolls, without verifying the .cor-
.
women and children who were in the second floor of the house. reetness thereof, they had, in effect, cooperated with their$
It was held that Lawas was not guilty of murder for tl1e eo-defendants in the commission of the crime of mal:
killing of the women and children, because his order to fire versation of public flunds. May those audit clerks, whose: 1
a t the men in the ground floor of the house could not imply negligence made possible the actual ammission of t h e ?
or include an order to go up the house and massacre the crime by their co-defendants, he held liable i ~ sprincipals
innocent end defenseless womm and children.
Inducing another to commit d e r , w w -
by indispensable cooperation?
&&& is got a f elow. Proposal to commit a felony is punish- One who cooperatss in the commjssion of a n offense
able only in proposal to commit treason or rehellion. Eence, by acts of negligence without which it could not have been'
since merely iz&sinz r-a to &t a &me is n u accomplished may be held guilty of the offense as a prin-
f Z i w p r i n c i o a 1 bvinducemen t is not liabkfor thea:
cipal. The audit clerks could be held liable as principals
salt different frpm_tha..intended, under Art. 4, par. I, Revised of the crime of malversation of public funds through falsi-
Penal Code.
fication of public documents by reckless negligence, for
while they are not public officers entrusted with Govern-
643., Whih A and B were having a fistic fight, C was an on- ment funds, lilrc their co-accused paymaster, it is obvious
looker. Seeing that his friend A was getting the worse
that they cooperated in the commission of that crime by
~' of the fight, C opened his knife, approached .A, and handed
acts without which the crime could not have been per-
it to him. A, using the knife, stabbzd B in the chest,
246 241 ,.
I
. . No, because- a are those persons who, not be- 648. Mar a person be considered a principal even if the as-
ing principals, c-te in the ezecutio,l of the offense sistance he rendered to the other offender is only neces-
by w w i o z u or simultaneous & (Art, 1% R.P.C.). sary? Explain your answer.
248 249
I
Thus, when the participation of a person in the com- The driver was an accomplice, because
the criminal d e s i q of A, B and C, for he saw the forcihln
e
mission of a crime is not shown, but he lcnows the criminal taking of the girl, he concurred with them i w r &-
~......
purpose of the principal by direct participation, he is only
an accomplice and should not be Considered a principal, inal purpose by driving the &to their destination.
because to be considered a principal under Act. 17 Of the
&\++d p e d c d e . the act of the offender must either
(1) be direct, that is, it is t h RCI which p ~ hth.1,t C*IW
~ ~
6 5 2 . May a person who m A d y concurred in the criminal desisn
01%which tends to the same end, or ( 2 ) be illdispensable to of the principal by direct participation be held liable 88
the commission of the crime; or (3) that it induces the principal, and not nicrely a s an aceom,pIice?
commission of the crime by another.
Yes, the - J n f I ~ d is_ m~&& or the
650. X was the m p t a l eneuu of A and B. There existed a wound inflicted contributed-materiallx to Q2&th of the
c m a e on the part of A and B to kill X. One \e (People vs. Aplegido, 76 Phil. 571; People vs. As-
cona, 59 Phil. 58C; People vs. Ragmaa and Zalsos, supre).
.~~.,
dav. A. without knowing that B w a s following X to kill
~ I
Note:
- .
In crimes against persons where the death of the victim
the latter, went to an alley where X used to pass by
for the purpose of shooting him. When, X was coming musl take place to coxsummate the crime, tho --sa
fJ&S o&zij,r~_wcunds. His act should not.mkibute _ma-
towards the place where A was waiting for him, B, who t e a k to the death of the victim.
.. was following X, shot him. X died. What is the criminal
of A. if any? Explain your answer.
-
liahilitv
.... ~
enoughthat a a e m n an identical criminal desigll In the case of People 7s. Ubina, e t al., G.R. No. L-6969,
of the Drinciual (People vs. De la Cruz, et al., September 1, 1065, W e have an illustration of moral aid ren-
61 Phil. 162). iY.&&a A nor B k&sX that the other dered by the accomplices. The participation of the three de-.
fendants in the killing of the victim was limited to being p r e e n t , i
would kill X. Hence, there was no community ofn. and stayine around the premises, while the otllers fired at the:.+
victim and carried out their plan. The three deiendants were. i
.
651, A, B and C forcibly abducted a girl. placing her in a not among those who had conspired to kill the victim. They',.;
jeepney which was parked to get passengers, and then c joined the conspirators only on the way to the place where the .:
told the driver to proceed to another town. Tlie driver victim was killed. The three defendants were heId Iiahle only.'
saw the forcible takinx a w s of the girl, but he naer- as accomplices. . ..
! If the three defendants were also eonqirators, they would
tm,drove his @epney with the girl and the cu1prit.s. be liable as principals.
What is the participation of the driver in tbr crime of In the case of People 7s. Siivestre and Atienza, 66 Phil.
forcible abduction committed by A, B and C? Explain 363, Silvestre knew that Atienea would commit arson and &e 8:
your answer. was present when the crimes was cbrnmitted, hut the Snpmmi:);
250 261
I
-
driver, criminally liable? Explain your answer.
No, the contention of A is not tenable.
~~.
~
hrrsnsr. fn,.
~
I '--"-_-"
inducing B and C t o s&l the goods,
by inducemeLt. &n accessory h L e ULhD, a p m a l
-1-
artic-
O&i&dl?.
assisting the olender to b-y the effccls of the -e.
, naranspiwsy ~ between A and C to kill B,
$'.;
~ k ~ ~ Since A already u a r w d in the commission of' theft'$
as the fight between A and I3 was p m , &.E&ed. as 1-, his taking part subsequent to its commission
They not h a previously agreed and decided to kill by profiting or assisting the offender to profit by the ef-
B. A did not know that C would stab B when he boxed fects OS the crime cloes not make him onJy an aceessw; .:.
him. Hence, there was not community of design on the He is a .princilsd in the crime of theft.
part A and C . Such being .
. . the case, A and c h a i n -
--
dividnal c m
t ~suppose
~ ~ )But : that
Y.
c was the one wl-3 started the assault
If D, the driver of the truck used for hauling the good{:;
from the customhouse to the warehouse of A, e d a
by stabbing B and then A kicked the body Of B ,?hen the some of the goods as his e,-s knaxeing from the begin- !
latter was lying on the ground, and sometime there- ning that the goods would be m, that driver is not
after B died, what is the liability of A" an a c m m by profiting by the effects of the crime,
..
A is liable as an aec~m,pli~licein the crime of homicide com-
mitted by C.
for he already e d -a accomalice. But if h e .
came to know that the goods he received were prop
erty o & l a he yp.s receivme . . t& IP,but not when he
was hauling all the goods from the customhouse. he WSR
-, -__;
Q& an ay
-, because he U etp- as an
accomplice.
252 253
~.
662. A saw the commission of murder by B and C and the watch from B, knowing that i t had been stolen by B.
concealing of the body of the deceased by them, and At the time of the trial, B was already dead. Can c
afterwards joined their company until the following day, be held liable as accessory?
without denouncing the crime i o the local authorities Yes, because the prosecution and conviction of the
when he had the opportunity to do SO. If A was not in principal is not an essential condition before the accessory
conspiracy with the killers or if there was no community can be held criminally liable, for while the principal may
of design between him and the Billers, can he be held still be unknown or at large, the accessory may be held
liable a s an accessory? Explain your answer. responsible, provided that he had knowledge of the com-
No, because his failure to denounce the crime to the mission of the crime and that he participated therein
local authorities, knowing the commission of said crime, after its commission by any of the acts mentioned in
aside from the fact that i t is an omission, is not one Of Art. 19 of t h e Code.
the acts which make a person liable as a n accessory. A I
did not profit or assist the offenders to profit by the
effects of the crime; he did not conceal or destroy the
I 6F5. Is the accessory criminally liable if the principal, after
trial, is acquitted? Explain your ansn-er.
I
body of the crime, the effects or instruments thereof in It depends on the ground of the acquittal. If the facts
order to prevent its discovery; and he did not harbor, dleged in the informatior. are not proved o r that they
do . c o n s t i t u k a crime, no- legal mounds ex&
not for con- "'
L--
I _ -
conceal or assist in the escape of the principal of the ,
257
I
’<
,:
,.C ~.,,
.,
the effects
-. of the crime, o r (2) aj!d the of&&&
No, the law mentions only the “author” and the “prin- W& by the &&&s of the& (Art. 20, R.P.C.),.:
&pal” of the crime, whom the accessory harbors, conceals, Note: Only accessories under paragraphs 2 and 3 of AT^. -1s
or assists in his escape (Art, 19, par. 3, R.P.C.). It is
are exempt from criminal liability if they m e related to th&&
! ’ submitted that the _ - “ e r ” and “ p m r ’ d w t .principal. Thus, the father who buried the dead body. of the“i
i d e accomplice. victim murdwed by his son, to prevent tho discovery of the,:
crime, or assisted in the escape of his 13011 who committed treason
I
667. A. assisted in the escape of his first cousin, knowing that is not erirninallv lkbie, h m the neither nrofited
d-1 the offenderto -by the e m s of t u .
the latter committed murder. Is A criminally liable as
an accessory? Explain your answer. 669. A, who had killed his wife, went to his adopted brother
. Yes, because the penalties prescribed for accessorfes
shall’not be imposed upon those who are such, only with and asked the latter to hide hint in his house. The
adapted brother harbored and coneealed A, because the
respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendds, legitimate,
latter gave him his diamond ring worth P1,OOO. rS the
natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by
affinity within the same degrees (Art. 20, R.P.C.). & adopted brother criminally liable? Why? .
first cousin is &,one of those &&k&b, e-b h u No, the diamond ring which.hed- from
I .
e u o f the xim.
668,. A stole a carabao and brought it to his home. B, a
policeman in that locality, C, and D are all A’S brothers Note: But if A killed his wife to &the -Iwith intent
who knew that the carabao had been stolen by A. C a n , and she acquired said &w& before the m n e ,
and the diamond ring was one of the pieces of her said
-
hid the carabao under their house surrounded by Stone jewelry, such ring is an effect of the crime.
walls. B, the policeman, helped in the escape of A, be-
cause the chief of police might discover the crime and 670. What is the j-srjof the _State in punishing crime.97
and arrest him. Later, D sold the carabao and spent Ihe
proceeds of the sale. Are B, C, and D accessories? Are To secure justke,. The State has ane-e o m .
own to maintain, a coe- of it?: own ta assert, and
they criminally liable? Explain your answer.
They areall accessories, because B , a s s i s t d i n the S & P e moral principles to be . Penal justice must there-
fore he exercised by the State in the service and sa&-
of A with a b u s e ~ ~ & @ & ? L d b ! 2 l E - , C doc- the f a & o n o f y , and rests urimarilrjon the moral righht-
carabao to prevent the discovery of the crime, and 2, of-f the W k h m e n t inflicted.
profited by the e f f e c t of the crime.
But is criminally liable, because the &l&l 671. What penalties may be imposed for the commission of .
(A) being his brother, he is & from criminal lia- a felony?
bility. C is not also criminally liable, for the same reason.
Only is as m y , because he Only that penalty prescribed b y l a w ]xior to its com-
mission may he imposed for the commksion of a felony
pr&&d by the mf the crime. An accessory i s B t
-
exempt from criminal liability even if the DLi.QGiIlal is
his Spouse, a w t , d e e n t , lepitimate, n a m r
(Art. 21, R.P.C.). Felonies are punishable under the laws
in force at the time of their commission (Art. 366, R.P.C.).
But the penalty provided by a penal law enacted aftex,
ad-xbrother or sister, or a r a b y af=-w@- the commjssion of 8 felony may be imposed upon the person
in the Same degrqs, if .such acces- (1) profited by
258 259
Principai pendty is that penalty which. is express$. ,....
guilty of that felony, in so far as it favors him, provided
he is not a habitual criminal or that the new law does imposed by the court in the judgment of conviction. .:;&
not expressly provide that it shall not apply to pending The Principal penalties and their diflerent classes
action or’ causes of action. Capital punishment-death; afflictive penalties-(1) re;’:
liote; D~ not this question with the question calling elusion perpetus., ( 2 ) reclusion teniporal, (3) perpetual or
for the classification of penalties under Art. 25. temporary absolute disqualification. (4) perpetual or tem-
. , .. porary special disqualification, and (5) prision mayor.
672. May a favorable penal law apply to the Case of a coon- Correctional penadties-(i) prision correccional, (2) ar-
viet w ] l ~ is already serving sentence? resto mayor, (3) suspension, and (4) destierro.
Yes, because Art. 22 of the Revised Penal Code says, Light penalties-(]) arrest0 menor and ( 2 ) public cen-
“a]thoul:h at the time of the publication of such laws a sure.
final has been pronounceit and the convict is serv- i the three preceding claSses-(i)
t ’ i n u l f i c s r o i i i i ~ ~ o i.to
.. . ing the same.” fine and ( 2 ) bond to keep the peace.
673. If a penal law is repealed by another penal law, chaw- 67F. What is an accessory penalty? Enumerate all the acces-
ing the penalty for the crime and thereby alfectinr the sory penalties.
I ’
jurisdiction of courts, which law determines the juris- An accessory penaity is that penalty which .is,deemed
diction of the court in case the crime was committed be- included in the imposition of the principal penalty.
fore th.e repeal? Why? The accessory penaltics are: (1) perpetual or tem-
. . The jurisdiction of the court to try a criminal action porary absolute dispalification, ( 2 ) perpetual or tem-
.. /:
. . is determined by the law in force a t the time of instituting porary special disqua.lification, (3) suspension from public
the action, not by the law a t the time of the Commission office, the right to vote and be voted for, the profession
of the crime (People vs. Pegarum, 58 Phil. 7x5). or e a l l i n ~ : (4, civil interdiction, (5) indemnification,
(6) forfeitwe or confiscation of instruments and proceeds
of the offense, and (7) payment of costs (Art. 25, R.P.C.).
674. What is the threedold purpose of the penalty under the N o t e : The f i s t three above are either principal or accessory
Revised Penal Code? penalties, because they are mentioned under principal penalties
Tht! penalty under the Revised Penal Code has three- as well as under aceessxy penalties in Art. 25, R.P.C.
fold purpose: In Art. 236, the penalty for assuming the merformanee of
... the duties and powers of any public office without first being
1. Retribution or expiation-the penalty is commen- swoin in o r having given the bond required by law, i s SUS.
surate with the gravity of the offense. pension and fine from P200 to P500. The suspension here ia
2 . Correction or reformation, as shown by the rules a principal penalty.
which regulate the execution of the penalties consisting In Art. 22G, the additional penalty of temporary special dia-
qualification in its maximum period t o perpetual special dis.
in deprivation of liberty. qualification i s irxposed far infidelity i s the custody of docu-
3 . ,yociaz defense-as shown by its inflexible severity ments. Here, the disqualification is ii principal penalty.
to recidivists and habitual delinquents.
677. State the classification of fines.
675. What is principal penalty? Enumerate all the principal A fine shall be considered an afflictive penalty, if it
penalties and their different classes. . . exceeds P6,OOO; a correctional penalty, if it does not exceed
260 261
''I'
to fin,e imposed with another penalty? Explain your temporal. Pending his trial, A was detained in jail since
answer. May 10, 1968, because he could not post a hail bond.
No. Art. 26 of the Revised Penal Code providcs that After trial. A was convicted on November 10, 1958, and
'6% fine, whether imposed as a single or as an alternative was sentenced to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion
penalty, shall be considered an afflictive penalty, if it ex- temporal as the maximum of the indeterminate penalty.
ceeds pfi,oOo; correctional, if it does not exceed f6,009 Since A had been detained for six months before judg-
but is not less than PZOO." Hence, that classification is ment was rendered and not having appealed therefrom,
not applicable when the fine is imposed together with from what day must the duration of his penalty be cow-
.another penalty. 1 ' puted? , E m your answer.
i
~~
Thus, the Supreme Court did not apply that classifica- .=e duration of his penalty must be computed from
tion in a case where the penalty provided by law is v i s i o n the day on which the defendant commences to serve his
mayor and a fine not to exceed P5,OOO. In imposing the sentence.
penalty next lower in degree, the Supreme Court fixed a
fine of p50 (a light penalty) and imposed it together with 2t'fiere are three rules provided by the Revised Penal
mg.wh correcoional, a correctional penalty (People vs. Code for the computation of the penalties, namely: (1) If
r . .-- - . ~
Quinto, 60 Phil. 311). the offender is in prison., the term of the duration of the
t e m p o m q pendkies is computed from the day on which
the judgment of conviction shall have become final; (2) if
.. .
the offender is not in prison, the term of the duration
They do not have fixed durations. of the penalty consisting in deprivation of liberty shall
A convict sentenced to any of the perpetual penalties he computed from the day that the offender is placed at
is pardoned after undergoing the penalty f o r 30 Years, - @: the disposal o f the judicial authorities for the enforcement
cept when he is not worthy of pardon by reas011 Of b S of the penalty; and ( 3 ) the term of the duration of other
or Some other cause. If he is not pardoned, the
maximum duration of his sentence shall in no case exceed
penalties is computed from the day on which the defendant .
commences t o serve his sentence.
: forty years, as may be inferred from the provisions Of the ~ ~~
Revised Penal Code on the three-fold rule (Art. 70, R.P.C.) . The first rule is not applicable, because it applies only
to temporary penalties, not t o those consisting in depriva-
tion of liberty, like reclusion temporal. The second rule
is not applicable either, because it applies only when the
offender is not. in prison. Hence, the third rule anolies.
-
A should be credited with one-half of the time of the
~ ~~~
263
262
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
.~
: 682. A was prosecuted for a crime punishable by arrest0 mayor 685. A served sentence for slight physical injuries twent&
or a fine from 8200 to P2,OOO. Pending the trial of the Years ago. Now, he is on trial for homicide and during?
... case, A was detained because he ,could not put a bail the pendency Qf the w e , he has been detained for one
bond. JJe was detained for 6 months. The court Ten. Year. If he is convicted of homicide, is he entitled tn
dered a judgment of conviction and sextenced him t0
pay a fine of 8500. Must A be credited with one-half of, No, because he i s a recidivist and a recidivist is not
his preventive imprisonment of six months? Why? entitled to be credited with one-half of the time of his
No, because a person who underwent preventive im- preventive imprisonment.
prisonment shall be credited with one-half of his preventive 686. Who are not entitled to be credited with one-half of the
imprisonment only when the penalty imposed consists in time of preventive imprisonment?
deprivation of liberty. The penalty imposed, which is a
The following offenders are not entitled to be credited
fine of P500, does not consists in deprivation of liberty. with one-half of the time of preventive imprisonment:
683. A, having surprised his wife in the act of sexual inter- 1. Recidivists O r those convicted previously twice or
course with another man, k5lled her. Prosecuted for more tjmes of any crime.
parricide, a crime which is not bailable, A was detained 2 . Those who, upon being summoned for the execution
pending his trial which lasted for one year. After trial, of their sentence, failed to surrender voluntarily.
__
A was . sentenced to destierro. Must he be credited with 3 . Those convicted of robbery, theft, estafa, malversa-
., .. one-half
~.~ ~
of the time of his preventive imprisonment O t tion, falsification, vagra,ncy and pro:ititution.
one ye:ar? Explain your answer. Note: Habitual delinquent^ and those declared in reitemcion
yes, because the penalty of destierro also COnSiStS in or habitually, if the latter are previously punished for two 01
more offensrs, are not entitled to be credited with one-half of
. . depriva,tion of liberty, since the convict is not free to enter the time of preventive imprisonment.
the prohibited area. Offenders who have undergone Pre-
ventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of 68'7. Are those 'persons who did n.ut surrender voluntarily
their sentences consisting in deprivation of liberty. More- after the commission of the crime entitled to be credited
Over, this is not one of the cases where the convict is not with one-half of their preventive imprisonment?
credited in the service of his sentence with one-half Of the Yes, if they are not recidivists or are not convicted pre-
time during which he has undergone preventive imprison- viously twice or more times of any crime, and the crime
ment. committed is not robbery, theft, estafa, malversation, falsi-
fication, vagrancy or prostitution.
684. May a convict sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetua be . The persons not entitled to be credited with one-half of
credited with one-half of the time of his preventive mi- their preventive imprisonment are those who, upon being
prisonment? Explain your answer. summoned for the execution of their sentence, fail to sur-
Yes, because the article of the Revised Penal Code govern- render voluntarily.
ing preventive imprisonment does not make any distinctiorl 688. What is the purpose of the law in imposing the penalty
betwecn temporal and perpetual penalties, Moreover, the
of disqualification for the exercise of the right of s,,f-
duration of perpetual penalties is to be computed at 80 frage?
years.
264 266 . .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWER
The manifest purpose of such restrictions upon this ,692. What are the effects of pardon by the Chief Executive?
right is to preserve the purity of elections. The pre- Can the offended party in a crime legally pardon. the :'
sumption is that one rendered infamous by conviction offender? Explain your answer. .,:,
of felony, or other base offenses indicative of moral turpi- A pardon by the Chief Executive shall not work the
tude, is unlit to exercise the privilege of suffrage or to restoration of the right to hold public office or the right
hold office. The exclusion must for this reason he ad- of suffrage. unless such rights be expressly restored by
judged a mere disqualification, imposed for mere protec- the terms of the pardon. A pardon by the Chief Executive
tion and not for punishment, the withholding of a privilege shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of
and not a denial of a personal right (People vs. Corral, the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence.
62 Phil. 945).
No, the offended party cannot legally pardon the of-
fender so as to extinguish criminal action. Even pardon
689. A, who was a government employee for 35 Years and
nnder Art. 344 only constitutes a bar t o criminal prosecu-
already a t the age of 69, was prosecuted for and convicted
tion. The reason for the rule is that a crime committed
of a crime and was sentenced t o 8 years and 1 day of
is an offense against the State. But civil liability with
prision mayor, as the maximum of the indeterminate
regard t o the interest of the injured party is extinguished
penalty, with the accessory penalty of temporary ahso-
lute disqualification for mpnblic office. After service of by express waiver.
sentence, can he get his retirement pay? Explain your
answer. 693. A was convicted of estafa and was sentenced to suffer
No, because one of the effects of perpetual or temporary
4 m ~ n t h sand 1 day of arrest0 mayor, with the accessory
penalty of suspension of the right .to hold office and the
absolute disqualification for public office is the loss of right right of suffrage. After service of the sentence for two "
Subsidiary penalty is a subsidiary personal liability 698. What is the ma.ximum duration of the subsidiary penalty?
t o be suf€ered by the convict who has no property with
which to meet the pecuniary liabilities for the reparation If the penalty imposed is prision correccional o r UT-
of the Camage caused, indemnification oE consequential resto and fine, it shall not exceed one-third of the term
268 269
',>*
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER ir CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
.~? i_
701. A was prosecuted for rebellion punishable by priaio&2
of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue for more
.,than one year. nlayor and a fine not exceeding P20,OOO. A surrendered !.
::/. , ~if the
~ penalty
t imposed is fine only, it shall not volnntarily to the mayor of hid town and during the'
."'&ceed six months, if the offender is prosecuted for grave arraignment he pleaded guiltv to the charge. No ag-
gravating circumstance wns alleged in the information.
_. less,
. nave felony; and not more than fifteen days, if
I
It appears that A could not pay the fine, because he was
' prosecuted for a light felony insolvent. Can A be required to suffer subsidiary im-
prisonment for non-payment of the fine? Explain your
,....."I-__ . ~
answer.
. . I€ f,he penalty imposed is prision correccional or arrest0 Yes, became there are two mitigating. circumstances
'and fine, the subsidiary penalty shall consist in imprison- without any aggravating circumstance and, since the pen-
ment. [f the penalty imposed is destierro, the subsidiary alty of prision mayor is divisible, the penalty should be
n.,noltv i s also destierro. If the penalty imposed is sUS--
Y".Y.",, _I
lowered b? one degree (Art. 64, par. 5, R.P.C.), which is
pension, the subsidiary penalty is also suspension. Prision cor?eceionnl. Since the penalty actually imposed
is not higher than prision correccional, A can be required
700. A convicted of a crime for the commission of which t o serve subsidiary penalty.
the law provides a fine not exceeding 81,000, and Was. Nota: When the penalty Drovided by the Code far the offenee
sentenced to pay a fine of P200. In case A cannot pay is imprisonment, it is the penalty actually imposed, riot the
penalty provided by the Code, which should be considered in
the fine of P200 by reason of insolvency, what is t h e determining whether or not there should be subsidiary penalty.
duratbon of the subsidiary penalty. Explain your answer.
~~ ~~
Two months and twenty days. 702. A was tried for a crime, was convicted, and was sen-
When the penalty imposed be only a fine, the subsidiary tenced to 2 years, 4 months and 1 day of prision cur-
pena1t.y shall not exceed 6 months, if the culprit shall have reccional. He could not pay the reparation of the dam-
been Drosecuted for a grave or less grave felony; and shall age caused in the amount of PZDO, the indemnification
not exceed 15 days, if for a light felony (Art. 59, par. 2, of consequential damages in the aroonnt of 8150, the,
R.P.C.). Since the fine provided by law is not exceeding fine in the amount of 8100, .and the costs of P32. A
served subsidiary imprisonment for the first tluee pe- , .;
PI,OOQ, it is a correctional penalty (AI*. 26, R.P.C.) Less . cnniary liabilities. When released from prison, A w n e d
'grave felonies are those which the law punishes with pen-
a fortune. What pecuniary liabilitia must he pay, not-
n l t i e s which in their maximum period are correctional withstanding the service of subsidiary imprisonment?
.."(Art. 9, R.P.C.).
. . He must pay the reparation of the damage caused a n d ,
.
i. . p.200 + F2.60 = 80 days or 2 months and 20 days, which the indemnification of consequential damages.
is less than 6 months. Hence, the duration Of the sub- Note: He is relieved from pecuniary liabi!ity as to fine, once
idiary penalty is 2 months and 20 days. he served subsidiary penalty therefor.
, . N o t e : The crime committed by A is not a light felon)., be- Although, there is no subsidiary penalty for non-payment
for light felonies ''a fine not ezoeedins 200 pesos X x X i s of the costs, he may be required t o pay them when his financial
ed" by law (Art. o, R.P.c.). In the problem given the.
circumstances shouid improve.
fine provided by law is not exceeding P1,OOO.
It is lhe fine pvmided bv law for the offense, not the fine i 703. Is subsidiary penalty unconstitutional as an imprison-
ased by the court, which must be considered in determining
liether the felony is grave, less grave or light.
/ .
ment for debt? Explain your answer.
210
*
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW RRVIEWEK
such disability not having been removed by plenary par-
No, because the constitutional provision which prohibits don.
mprisonment for debt relates to the imprisonment of
debtors for liability incnrred in the fulfillment of con- I 706. Is subsidiary penalty an accessory penalty?
tracts, but not to the cases seeking the enforcement of No. Subsidiary penalty is a personal penalty pre-
penal statutes that provide for the payment of money as scribed by law in substitution of the pecuniary liability.,,
a penalty for the commission of crime or for damages when the latter cannot be satisfied because of the culprit's,',
,arising in action e r delictu. insolvency. Hence, subsidiary imprisonment cannot be :
served unless the judgment condemns the accused to suf-.:
A is sentenced to 6 years and 1 day of imprisonment by fer the same in case of insolvency (People vs. Fajardo,::
the court, as the maximum term of the indeterminate 65 Phil. 539, 541-542).
.: penalt,y. While serving sentence, A wanted to sdl his Do accessory penalty and subsidiary penalty
" ' 'house and lot to realize the amount necessary to pay the the jurisdiction of the court? Explain your
"'lawver mho handled his defense. Can A legally sell his
Accessory penalty, like subsidiary penalty, does no
real property? Explain your answer. determine the jurisdiction of the court, beca
Yes, because A was sentenced to the penalty of prision not' modify or alter the nature o€ the penalty
m y o r , 6 years and 1 day being the minimum of that hy the law. What determines jurisdiction in
penalty. The only case where a convict cannot dispose cases is the extent of the principal penalty w
of his property by any act or conveyance inter u<,uuos is law imposes for the crime charged in the info
when he is suffering from civil interdiction, which is complaint.
an accessory penalty only in (1) death, when not ex-
708. X was prosecuted for illegal possession of a fire
ecuted by reason of commutation or pardon, (2) reclusion Upon a plea of guilty, X was sentenced to
p e r p ~ l u a ,and (3) reclusion temporal. indeterminate penalty of not less than one ye
. Aandwasoneconvicted of theft and was sentenced to one year
day of prision correccional, its the maximum
maximum term. The fiscal presented no ev'
cause X pleaded guilty. Can the court leg
the confiscation and forfeiture of the firea
term of the indeterminate penalty. After service of possessed by X? Explain your answer.
sentence, A was released from prison. A now consults
you and asks for your legal advice whether or not he If the firearm was in the possession of
can vote in the coming election. What will be your tion, it being a party in the criminal case,
advice? Explain your answer. legally order the confiscation and forfeiture of the fire-"::
arm. In the case of U S . vs. Filart, et al., 30 'Phil. '80, :;
N y advice is that he cannot vote. While it is true it was held that when the automobile which was the ob-:
that the duration of imprisonment imposed on him did iect of the lottery and the money which 'was obtained"
not exceed eighteen months and the only accessory penalty from the sale of the tickets were not in the possession
inhercmt in the principal penalty is suspension from public of any party to the action, the court cannot legally order
'ce, and from the right to follow a profession or call- their confiscation. In this case, it is assumed that the
under See. 99 of the Revised Eiection Code, A is firearm was in the possession of the prosecution, one;<.
qnalified to vote, having been sentexiced by final judg- of the parties in the criminal case. lj ~.
nt to suffer one year or more of imprisonment, and
t...
273
272
;,,;,,. ~ , . .,. ~ ,.,,"
. ., .. .
,
.",
,, ,
" , CRIMINAL :LAW REVIEWER.
CKIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
r
', :'~.:turned t:o the owner thereof. of a case in which capital punishment has been imposed
. ''
ii' i
by the sentence of the trial court?
710. 'In , what crimes is death imposed as the maximum of The requirement has for its object simply and solely
.: -. the penalty? What is the justification for the death the protection of the accused. He is entitled under the ' :
penalty? law to have the sentence and all the facts and circum- '
. . I n the following crimes : (1) treason, ( 2 ) correspond- stances upon which it is founded placed before the highest
ence wit.h hostile country when it contains notice or in- tribunal to the end that its justice and legality may be . .
. formation useful to the.enemy and the intention of the clearly and conclusiveIy determined. Such procedure is. ";
...... , "offender .is to aid the enemy, ( 3 ) in certain acts Of
. . merciful. It gives a second chance for life. . ,',
.
, :.
. i
, .
espioiiage under Commonwealth Act No. 616, ( 4 ) certain
.. . . violations o l the Anti-Subversion Act ,( 5 ) qualified piracy, 713. What is a complex crime and what is the penalty there-
. . ~.(6) parricide, (7) murder, ( 8 ) kidnapping and serious for?
.illegal detention, (9) robbery with homicide, and (10) rape A complex crime is one where a single act constitutes
with hoimicide. :I two or more grave or less grave
Tho justification for the death penalty is social de- ofsense is a necessary means f o r
! ' fense and exemplarity. A convict, because of the nature Thc penalty for the more or most, serious crime
o€ the crime he committed, may prove himself to be a be imposed, the same t o be applied
dangerous enemy of society. The death penalty imposed
on him is a warning to others. 714. What are the requisites of the
crime?
711. In what'eases shall the death penalty not he imposed? They are:
Car? the court refuse to impose the death penalty, even
if the t:ircumstar.ces of the case justify the imposition 1. Only oue act must be performed by the" offend
.. . of that uenalty? Explain your answer. 2 . The felonies produced by the single ac
. The death penalty shall not be imposed in the (follow- or less ginve felonies.
1
I _
ing cases: (1) When the guilty person be more than 715. Ls the penalty for the complex
seventy years of age; ( 2 ) when upon appeal or revision defendant?
of the case by the Supreme Court, eight justices are not
unanimous in their voting as to the propriety of the Ordinarily, the peualty for the complex crime is fay
imposition .of the death penalty. able t o the defendant, because instead .of sufferi
or more penalties he shall be sentenced to one
The court cannot refuse to impose the death penalty.
,
...
. ~ . . ,because +he Revised Penal Code provides that "the death
3 penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be
only. But if the graver offense earties .with it t
alty of death as the maximum, it may be said t o
j. .i
favorable to him.
214
275
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER .
CRIMINAL LAW REYIIEWER
'. 716. What is the reason fpr the benevolent spirit of Art.
,
It cannot be a complex crime of the second .form,-,
. . 48 of the Revised Penal Code? because one offense is not necessary means for. commit;
When two or more crimes are the result of a single ting the other. ..
; , ' ~ 'act, tho offender is deemed less perverse than when he
. ., commits said crimes through separate and distinct acts. 719. A driver of a bus with 35 passengers drove it in a reck-
.:'. ,. Instead of sentencing him for each crime independently less and imprudent manner. The bus fell into a ravine:,
. ..~<~+<,&~,..
~ ~ 1 . ; . from each other, he must suffer the maximum of tXe
:, Five passengers were killed and the rest of the pas: .,
+$*$;.penalty for the more serious one, on the assumption that s e w e r s mere slightly injured. Elow many crimes were.,
.i.r ,= -.it ' is less grave than the sum total of the separate penalties committed by the driver of the bus? Explain your:
' ., ,, '. . for each offense (People vs. Hernandez, et al. 52 O.G. answer.
. , ? .: _.
. , 5506). Thirty-one crimes were committed, because the five
..-
L. ,717. A woman was found dead with stab wounds. The doetor
. .,'. - .who examined her dead body found that she was also
, . raped. .Later, X, who was suspected, was investigated
'~ . by; the police. X confessed to the police that he raped suffered slight physical injuries are the offended p
the woman and that he also stabbed her to eliminate a in the thirty different, separate and distinct cas
witness against him. Can X be held liable for a complex
crime of rape with homicide? Explain your answer.
Yes, X can be held liable f o r a complex crime of rape juries, cannot form a complex crime.
with homicide. It is not necessary to determine whether
!' one offense was a necessary means for committing the 720. The mayor of a town, while in the performance of
other, 01. whether the two felonies, which are both grave,
.
. . . were the result of a single act, because Art. 48 of the
Revised Penal Code is not applicable. Art. 335,as amended, plain your aaswer.
! . of the Revised Penal Code defines and penalizes a special Only one crime of direct assault was committed
complex crime of rape with homicide, when the homicide
' ' , is comm.itted by reason or on the occasion of the rape.
718. A, while cleaning his revolver with several persons around
; him, accidentally pulled the trigger. It exploded and
" ' the slug fired from the revolver hit and killed C and
. . the same slug that passed through and through the hody
, .. of C also hit and injured B, who suffered slight physical
. . injuries, a crime punishable by arrest0 menor. Did A
' ' commit a complex crime? Explain your arswer.
....: ., ., ',. , ~ No, because the crime committed as regards the in-
', jury caused to B is only a light felony and a li,ght felony Yes, because the single act of shooting B
- ,.
~@.:
F. . cannot form a complex crime of the first form;
;- .
i . ' 276 277
i
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
. . I I
gun a t . As regards B, Note: This case of - P e w l e YS. Desiarta is.'lfkelg to be -,d&&
was iLttemuted h&d&e. a understood, becawe there was a s j b - a c t
punish&le by grision GOT- tkigger. The reason for the ruiiup that %e
&s of homicide as- t persona killed hy
e committed against C vma.-gmxe is that in firing a Thompson sub-machine gun t
use it is punishable by reclzlsion. kzwaal. a&uually €iring s v e r 1 ot which may he
for the complex crime of h m wB-& a&&- It is nnly be:au$ f, its &a1 mechanism that the:?
- person firing i t ha3 to m s the trigger
finger pressed 011 the trigger to make the ,gun fire con-
.and keep his
't:;'from the single that produced the same (People VJ. When in the question there is no mention of intent to k W l
#;merto,
ii C.A., 46 O.G. 4642). on the part of the offender who burned the house of another,
278 279
..
. ,
. , ':' , ..
I,.,
' .'
5. ' A was arrested for posessing a firearm without license. 728. Is there a complex crime of grave coercion with mur-
During the investigation by the police, A admitted that der? Explain your answer.
he came into the possession of the firearm because he None, If a person compelled another to do something
stole it from B, the person who had license t o possess against his will and because of the refusal of the latter,
,:'it. Are there two separate crimes of theft and illegal the formcr killed him, such person executed two distinct.
.possession of firearm or do they constitute a complex acts and not only one, and one offense cannot be a ncces-
sary means to com it the other (People vs. Ang.,Cho I%:,
.crime? Explain your answer.
Theft of firearm and the illegal possession of it are
60 O.G. 3536). -rt"
e can compel the victim to do
thing against his will without murdering hm;:*a
two dislhct and separate crimes. The crime of illegal
can murder him without compellin,g him t o do'some
possession of firearm is not committed by mere tra%sie%t against. his will.
possessiom of the weapon. There must be intention to
use, which is not necessarily the case in every theft of 729. What are the requisites of the sccond form of .compl
'- firearm. Moreover, the crime of illegal possession of
firearm, being punishable by a special law, is not a felony.
crime?
They are:
A complex crime of the compound type 'requires that a 1. That two or more crinles are committed by
single amctshould produce two or more grave or less grave
same individual;
felonies. A felony is an act or omission punishable by
2 . That one or some of them is o r are necessary
the Revised Penal Code.
commit the other;
p&.: 3. That all the crimes are puiiished under the
&'2&
.",,.~, 'IS them a complex crime of attempted rape with theft?
&&; ..'+- None. If a person, who failed t o consummate the rape
I<
. +. statute.
~ because the woman kicked him, snatched her vanity case
%' from her hand a s she was running away,& executed two 730. Is it a complex crime where several crimes were 00
281
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER , .:..
‘732. The treaJurer of a municipality m h r o p r i a t e d Weti:
.,‘<qg
at thesame time to commit estafa by presenting all of
them at the post office for cashing on only one ocoasion. anwunt of P1,COO in his official c u s t o h and then ma.&%
a l k r d o n s in his books to make it appear that, t h e
nmount of 81,000 was la.vfulIv disbwsul. & . t h e treas-
731. A, purchasing agent of a private company, bought for . , ,:.,,
the company office supplies worth E 0 0 and paid it out urer liable’ for a complex crime? Why? . .
of the PGCO he bad received from the treasurer, but No; he committed two seuarate and ri :
in the receipt issued by the store from which the office The treasure]; an accounMe Z b l-i-c .nfiirrr committed
~.,’ supplies were purchased, A erased the figure “5” and malversation f o r misappropriating the 81,000, a public
wrote in its place the figure “6” and made other altera- fund. The o-nf of his book, an official -document,
tibns to make it appear in the receipt that the price was poJ.i~ necessary m e u s to commit the crime of mal-
of the office supplies was P600, and then spent the versation, bse- h s the mmev in his n c m e s i t n
. . .difference of 8100. Did A commit a complex crime, only The t m could m&atse &or a~~v-o€the funds io
one simple crime, or two distinct and separate crimes?
Explain your answer.
Only &e-el o f s t & with abuse d . a . ? k
-
his possession w h t t h e m of falsifving a&&
ment., But since damam o r m t o _cause d m g e &
not necessary in falsification of an ojificial document, it,
m ~ seuarate crime.
a
QtIence was . -c
It cannot h e a comtllex rSime of estafa
.&. through falsi-
-733. The mayor, the treasurer of a municipality,’ and X, a
I , fication, because the dncllmPnf: was & & f%hLXms-
?I!&
private individual, signed an official payroll for 8473.70
S W t# t h e , u b s j the money to the effect that certain persons worked as laborers .in<
.. . iZlhispnsso and it would not be necessary f o r him street projects, vvhen in fact no work was done and
<.,,i ,, , ,..to falsify the document to get the difference of ?lo0 and
spend it. The falsificatiPn was wlnmfk ’ ed to c o a a l & e
those persons were not entitled to pay. The amount
corresponding to their Supposed wa,Ses were taken and
crime of estafa. Moreover, the receipt being a private misappropriated by the three offenders. How many
. . document, a complex crime a-0f h-t iaM&&on crimes were committed by them. Explain )*our answer.
is not le&ly_passihle. There is n o h complex crime
The mayor, the treasurer o f the niunicipality, and X
:
. .
m
of estafa t k l d falsificatipri of a private nt, &e-
committed t m and independent offenses of ml-
.,. .
-,’ m a the eaudulent w i n obtained, in the c o e o n of versation and falsification. They were in constliracy and
,. ’ ,,
e&fa is the v m $ . a l U d - by the tXsXbtion uf all are guilty of malversation (US. vs. Ponte. 20 Phil.
the private docnment.
. ! . ,Ah-
’.
379). The first two committed falsification of a w a n d
ey ‘are not two distinct and separate offenses, be- official document with- a ’ ‘d and, ae-
ocument is falsified to conceal the cord-ing to Viada, the private individual whod-oc with
and the falsification will be dis- them is m e f o r the same offense. skt the falsification
was not a necessary means to commif; malversation, the
if ‘the offender bad to
t o obtain theaoney,,goods or other
fm -
treasurer having had i& possession the m m mid-
appropriated (see Regis vs. People, 68 Phil. 43).
rom another person and tkx~U-
e crime would be xddp falsification 734. A was forcibly and with intimidation taken from hh
document and the will be absorbed. house by B and C, placed in a jeep, and in a secluded
253
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER 'XIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
place one kilometer away from his house A was shot to 1. When the offender committed any of the
crjmesunder Art. 48 of the Revised Penal Code;
death. lis this a complex crime of kidnapphg with naur-
der? Explain your answer. 2 . When the @ecificalk f h a penalty
for two or more offenses, such as robbery with homicide;
No, it is plain rmvder, & a w e n&ng w d d z
3. When the offender committt!d a continuing crime.
d m J 3 and C showing that they had the i s t i o n .
to.deprive A of his liberty or to &eamd rwuxp f a
737. What is the difference between a continued or continuing.
.e-r In this case, the forcible taking of A by B and crime and plurality of crimes?
C was solely for the e- of Icillina him (People vs..
Camo, et al., XVII, L.J. 371; People vs. Remalante). There are two forms of plurality of crimes to be dis-
tinguished from continued or continuing crime.
N o t e : When it is -that the -of the taking of the
victim was to detain him ille,?dly for any IenRth o f e The formal or ideal plurality of crimes, which covers
or t o obtain ransom, and later the victim was killed when the two fornis of complex crime, is distinguished from
mnmm is not paid, then it i s a camolex crime of in continued o r continuing crime in the sense that the of-
with m u r k (Parulan vs. Rodas, 78 !?hi]. 8.55);. fender in continued or continuing crime does not perform
In complex crimes, whether of the first or second form. a single act, but a series uf acts, and each of the series
each of the two crimes can stand by itself. It must have
all the element8 or, a t least, the elements necessary to eon- of acts is not a necessary means for committing the others.
atitutc the attempted stage, like attempted estafa, which may The real or material plurality of crimes and the continued
be co-lcxed with falsification. or continuing crime are similar in that in both there is
a series of acts performed by the offender. But while in
-
" 735 A shot I3 with a pistol without license. R died as a real or material plurality, each act performed by the of-
, .. . , /result. Did A commit a complex crime of homicide through fender constitutes a separate crime, because each act is
illegal possession of firearm? Explain pour answer. generated hy a criminal impulse; in continued 01- continuing
No, because the offender cQmmitted two different acts crime, the different acts constitute only one crime, be-
with t w o w e criminal intents, u t , tlhL&i& cause all of the acts performed arise from one criminal
take unlawfully t h e m o f a =, and the willful viola- resolution.
tion of which penalizes the possmsioc of a I h -
' arm w i t b u t the required permit. M ,er- the b!lp 738. A, B, C and D entered a oompound where there were
" -are not punished !g!d.fz the Same st& te. Homi- six houses, each occupied by a family. When they en-
cide is punished under the Revised Penal Code, while tered the compound, the culprits had the intention to ran-
illegal possesion of firearm is punished by a special law. sack the different houses and take personal property
, I u n ' w , WLQone offense is nesessuy to therefroni which they djd after passing through the
.I,
e_ommit the other, it has ben a t h a t the b crimes. windows. How many robberies with force upon things
. -m punished under the Same statutwf were committed by A, B, C and I)? Explain your an-
swer.
736. In what cases may, a person who committed multipls. They c0mmitte.d Q&L o u e x d h e q -w thiqps,
6..
<.?&~~ crimes be punished with one penalty? because the ssveral ads .of g- the different houses
3;: A person who committed multiple crimes may be pun- were not uncounectsd and entirely d l from o n e a n -
gished with one aeiialtv in t h e following cases: other. They f&ccmponent pari$ of the general &
285
i' 1
I CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
. 742. Art. prnvides that "if the penalty prescribed for thr., .s
.. to despoil AIJ-those within the comnou&. (See People v s
felony c m n ! be liigliec than that corresponding to the
.
.. ~ u z et ai.,
, G. R. L-1746,May 23,4950.)
offense which the a c a i n t e n d e d to c<;mmit, the penalty
:,, .,. .. :
corresponding to the latter shall be imjposed in its maxi.
739. ,Suppose the six houses were standing on different lot%.
I
.' ' each lot ha.ving its own fence, and A, B, C and D en-
'
mum period." Now, suppose that A ivanted to kill B, a
;k$%l. tered each and every one of them throngh the window slranger, and upon seeing him aimed and fired his gun
,,.>;:. and took therefrom personal property, how many crimes. I
a t him, but he failed to hit him and instead he hit and
..,.: ., killed his father who was passing behind B. The penalty
_/r
j . , . were comm,itted by them? Why? 1 for parricide, the crime A actually committed, is reclusion
-.::i~ , . , There would be six different robberies with force won.
perpetua to death. The penalty for h<omicide, the cvime
.:.' ' t h i n g s , b s a i s e the six houses are e&elv distinct &
fm ~
mitted by A and B? why? ing that the p z - x n g in a dark alley was B, a stranger,
The ldlilof eleven persons and the injuring of twenty fired at him who was killed 8s a result. It turned out that
other pemons should be consideEd as resulting a that person was C, A's father. 8 we there. In such case,
s u e c3ninal impulse &nd constituting a sine'le offense only msr,mn was &&ed.. by t h G d the offender and.,,.i
.
..
., .
*(People vs. Emit, C 13477-R, Jan. 1956). , therefore, only 0-e. was &d. There could 4
con? lex crime when onlv one crime.is_nmdueed, because a :
.. - Qresuuposeg, the s p m r m.s.i
- ~nn of atJe&
l ~ ; .
- c & I
741. X entered a church and began firing with his .45 caliber crimes.
pistol at a crowd. Tyo persons were ki.kbmd.another Art. 49 does to izberratio ictus, because in this
seriously injured. One r m ~ t h r e bull&
e woJlLdS; t h e hypothesis there is a complex crime end Art. 48 applies. It
'other, two; and the third, one. How many crimes were does not ap@a-sol to p-aete? &&ticwm~, because in this '-
committed by X? h y p o t h x - l h e crime bef&.&e same person, whereas Art. 49
X committed tJwee crimes. Since the three victims has no application t o cases where a more serious consequence
not intended by the offender befalls the Same person (P-1.
were nptot by and the ggdldkk the three crimes 7s. Alburquerquue, 55 Phil. 150).
were not nroduced by a single act (People vs. Basarain,
.G;R. L-6690, May 24, 1956). 143. Art. 249 provides: "Any person who, not falling within
the provisions of Article 246 shall kill another without ':
the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated.,;
286
287
., ,,..
>+*:>?
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
,z CRI&IIINAL LAW REVIEWER
p:....'in 'the next preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of '.,'<
.''. homicide and be punished by reclusion .temporal." Upon by one degree the penalty which under Art. -51 sl?ould b?,
. ,,.; whom is that penalty of reclusion temporal to be im- impose2 for an attempt to commit the crime of pa:ricid'e, ..x
, "posed? To what stage of execution of the crime of ~ - - homicide, it is elear that the court can mpose
rnnrder or
:'. "homicide Is that penalty applicable? .. nenaltv lower by three degrees.
a
.. , The penalty prescribed by law for the commission of Note: The rules referred to in the two prweding questions
R?8werg are true only in three crimes, namely: (1). Parri- ,"
';i
: a felony shall be imposed upon the principals in the com- &de, (2) murder, and (3) homicide.
" ,:,I,
;';
.., mission of such felony. Whenever the law prescribes a
, ,,,
&:.felony,
"--,
and Art. 250 provides that the court may reduce 2. For graduating the penalties to be imposed u p,. p
I accomplices or accessories (Art. 61, R.P.C.) ;
288
289
290
291
,.
. ,.,
;,.,.
~<,:
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEVVER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
The proper penalty to be impos,:d on A is either
to prision, mayor in its minimum and medium periods: tiewo in its medium and maximum pirriods or arresto
It is also the penalty for the accessories t o the commis- in its minimum period.
sion of a consummated murder.
Art. 64, par. 5 , provides that when there are,.tw
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period more mitigating circumstances, there 1s no a
to death is; the penalty for the principals in a consummated circumstance, and the penalty is divisible, the
murder (,4rt. 46, R.P.C.). lower in degree shall be imposed. In this ea
Art. 5:1 provides that a penalty lower by two degrees two mitigating circumstances, without any
, than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony circnmstance.
shall be imposed upon the principals in a n attempt to com- Art. 61 in its paragraph No. 4' provides that
mit a felony. Art. 53 provides that the penalty lower penalty prescribed for the crime is composed
. by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the con- periods, corresponding to different divisible pe
summated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories penalty next lower in degree shall be compos
to the commission of a consummated felony. Hence, in period immediately following the minimum prescri
both cases, the penalty is lowered by the same number of the two next following, which shall be taken from
of degrees. penalty prescribed, if possible; otherwise, from the
immediately following in Scale No. 1 prescribed in
Art. 61 in its paragraph No. 3 provides that when the
penalty prescribed for the crime is compose? of one or The penalty prescribed f o r the crime of maltre
of prisoners is composed of several periods correspondi
', . two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of a
to difPerent divisible penalties (arresto mayor and P
divisible penalty, the penalty next lower in degree shall correccionnl) . Since destierro is the penalty follo
be compos,cd of the medium and minimum periods of the arresto mayor according to Scale No. 1 prescribed in
.' proper divisible penalty and the maximum p z i o d of that 71, the penalty next lower is either wrresto mayor minimurn'ij
,.immediately following in Scale No. 1 prescribed in Art. or destierro in its medium and maximum periods, because :
71. Applying the same rule in lowering tht penalty by it is impractical to require the convict to serve two penalties -$
another degree, because we have to lower the penalty by of different nature which are not specifically imposed by. '
I
two degrees, we shall obtain the penalty of prision cor- law.
reccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its
, , minimum and medium periods. 752. When the penalty prescribed by the Revised Penal Code
for the erinie is composed OC three periods corresponding
to different penalties, how many periods must the pen-
751. The crime of maltreatment of prisoners is punished by
alty next lower in degree have?
the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to
prision corireccional in its minimum period. A, who com- When. the penalty prescribed by the Revised Penal
mitted this crime, pleaded guilty when he was arraigned Code bas three periods corresponding to diflerent penalties,
before the court and proved that hem had no intention to the penalty next lower has three periods also, starting from
, ,.. . commit so grave a wrong as that eommitked, without the period where the higher penalty ends.
an aggravating circumstance attending the cammission of
the crime. What is the proper penalty t o be imposed on 753. When the penalty prescribed by the Revised Penal Code
. ~ A ? Explain your answer, stating the rules for graduat. for the crime has two ,periods, how many periods must
t> .ing the penalties. the penalty next lower in degree have?
..,
;:., . 293
292
I C
/ !
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
/" penalty. be'imposed to their full extent, the penalty next lower in
degree shall be that immediately following the divisible ,,(:
0. What is the rule for determining the indeterminate pen- penalty or the lesser of the penalties (in case there are ;!.
alty for the crime Ounishable by the Revised Penal Code? more than one) in Scale No. 1 prescribed in Art. 71. The .:
The indeterminate sentence shall have a maximum term penalty immediately following the divisible penalty of r e ',
.'/
. . which shall be that which, in view of bbe attending eircum- clusioit temporal is prision mayor, also in its full extent.
nces, could be properly imposed under the rules of the But the court has the discretion to impose the penalty next
evised Penal Code, and the minimum term shall be with- lower in any of its period or without regard to the periods
in the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed into which it may be divided.
..~
. ...:,;,:., .
b y the Code for the offense. Nota: Mitigating or aggravating cireumstanees are not con-
sidered in determining the minimum term of the indeterminate
~. 461. What is the purpose of the law in requiring that the penalty. It is only in fixing the maximum term that the court
will eon.;ider the mitigating and aggravating circumstances.
court should fix a minimum term?
The purpose of the law is to release the convict after 763. The penalty for illegal possession of firearm is 1 year
service of the minimum term, unless his conduct is to 5 ,years in case of small firearm. What is the rule
such that. he is not entitled to be released on parole; in for determining the indeterminate penalty for that of-
which case, he shall serve the full term of the sentence. fense?
Illegal possession nf firearms is punished by special
62. When the penalty prescribed by the Revised Penal Code law. When the crime is punished by a special law, the
for the lelony is. reclusion temporal in its full extent, minimum term should not be less than the minimum pre-
what is the maximum term ana what is the minimum scribed (1 year) and the maximum term should not be
term of the indeterminate penalty, if th,ere is neither
more than the maximum prescribed (5 years). The court
mitigating nor aggravating circumstance. Explain your
may impose 1 year, as the minimum term; and 2 years,
answer.
as the maximum term.
, ... The maximum term is reclusion tempord in its medium
period and the minimum term is within the range of prision 764. If the penalty prescribed by the Revised Penal Code for
magor, without reference to the periods into which it a felony is reclusion temmporal what is the longest period
,. .<
may be divided. of imprisonment that the court can impose for the mini-
The maximum term is the medium period of reclusion mum term of the indeterminate sentence? What is the
temporal, because according to Art. 64, which applies shortest period of imprisonment for the minimum term?
....- when the penalty is divisible, when there is neither miti- Explain your answers.
,
..
gating nor aggravating circumstance, the divkible penalty f Twelve years, bemuse the minimum term of the indeter-
should be imposed in the medium period. minate penalty is the penalty next lower from the penalty
:'., ..._.... , The minimum term should not be computed from re- prescribed by the Code for the crime, and in this case the
elusion temporal medium bnt from reclusion temporal in penalty next lower is prision mayor, which the court can
/
296 297
.&'
CHIMINAL LAW REVIBWEIZ CKIXINAL LAW REVIEWER
.,? .,,.
jmpose .in ' i n y of its periods or without regard to arty committed being a complex crime, reclt&on.temporal sho
of its periods. Since the maximum duration of prision be imposed in its maximum period.
mayor is twelve years, the court has the discretion to im- Note: In the ease of People VS. Fulgeneio, G. R. No. L-KSh
pose twelve years, the longest period of imprisonment that November 10, 1952, the Supreme Court disregarded its nrl
it can impose for the minimum term of the indeterminate in the case of People YS. Ganzalez, 73 Phil. 549, which is
better ruling. In the Fulgencia caiic, the penalty of mcZus~on
/'
penalty.
p e r p e t w to d a t h was first a.pplied in the maximum (death) ,
The shortest period of imprisonment that the court can
/
and then lowered it by one degree. The result is redugion
impose as the minimunl term of the indeterminate penalty serpetun.
is six years and one day, i t being the minimum of the
minimum period of prision muyor. 766. When the accussed is found guilty of a complex crime
under Art. 4R of the Revised Penal Code in relation to, ::
765. X, a minor 15 years and 6 months old, threw a hand other articles of the same Code, from what'penalty must
- grenade at his grandfather and grandmother, because the
~
298
D 299
CRIMINAL LAW REVEWER
. ~. . . .. . ...-
. . . -.-
sentenced to the penalty o f destieiro or sus- the crime is punishable by the Revised Penal Code i s ~ t
pension. p*. pergctlty which, in view of the attending circumstafice
should he imposed according to the rules prescribed,by
is the Indeterminate Sentence Law not applicable
penalt:v of destierro and suspension? A, being the servant of the offended party, is guilty
Because the law applies to “a prison sentence”, and of qualified theft punishable by a penalty two degrees.
of the law are expressly granted t o those who higher than the penalty for simple theft (Art. 310, R.P.C.). , J:
are sentenced bo imprisonment exceeding one year. €3 is an accomplice in the crime of simple theft, because r<
/
crime was not attendant to B. The rule in paragraph 3
a direct beming upon the criminal liability of all the de-
fendants who had knowledge thereof at the time of the of Art. 62, R.P.C., still applies, notwithstanding the fact ,?
that there was conspiracy between IL aud B. .~%
commission of the crime, or of their cooperation therein.
775. May treachery or nighttime aggravate the criminal liabd-
73. A, servant of C, and B, a stranger to C , were accused ity of the principal by induction who was never at the
of stealing the ,property of C-A as principal and B as ‘scene of the commission of the crime? Explain yollr
accomplice. The value of the stolen property is 8250. answer.
The penalty for simple theft is prision correccional in
its minimunl and medium periods, if the value of the Yes, iP the principal by induction had knowledge at
property is more than 8200 but does not exceed B6,OOC. > t h e time of the commission of the crime that the principal
What penalty will be the maximum term of the inde- by direct participation committed the crime with treachery~’
terminate sentence for A and for B? Explain your or that he purposely sought nighttime to facilitate t h e
answer. commission of the crime, because they consist in the mate-
rial execution of the act or in the means employed to.:
For A, the maximum term of the indeterminate penalty
is prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods. accomplish it.
For B, the maximum term of the indeterminate penalty Under Art. 62, par. 4, of the Revised Penal Code;
’.’
. is arresto mayor in its medium and maximum ,periods. offender is not affected by the aggravating circumsta
The ‘maximum term of the indeterminate penalty when of nighttime unless he knew that it would be’availed
302 303
.u-
. .-
~- ~ ,.
, I
/me
,' or ofkner.
fication, is found guilty of any of said crimes a third NO, because when he committed the cril;l$of
*. y&ifi&&:
tion he Was not yet convicted of the crimes of thefta~andj
' N o t e : R,Emember the six crimes specified in the, dafinitian. estafa. Moreover, since he only admitted-the co&'ssio$
Slight physical injuries is not inchtded. Homicide 1s not also ' of theft and estafa on cross-exanination and. there 'gap
included. The stage of execution of any of those crimes need no allegation of habitual delinquency in the i i x f o F t i $ n l
not be consummated. The offender may he only an accomplice he is not a habitual delinquent.
or neces:;ory in any of those crimes.
Note: In order that a person may he a habitual de '.''''_'+;.
. *'.:., ,. ,:!g
, ,,;<>a
..,
. In&, determining the proper period of the additional pen-
are aggravating and mitigating circumstances to be
The ten-year period is not counted in relation to the
of commission, but to the date of conviction, of subs;
crime.
considered by the court? Why? In other words, the ten-year period should be e
. Yes, hedause it would be arbitrary to apply it in any tween convictions or hetween release and convieti
tween conviction or release and commission of su
:of its periods without regard to the attending circumstances. last offense.
:.:(See
.. ' People vs. De Jesus, 63 Phil. 761.)
304 305
/ '
f
I
,.:.w
,"
,... ..
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIXINAL LAW REVIEWIER . ,.,.I. ..:..>x*
1
<'
,
L
780. In the preceding question, can A be declared a recidivis{? '' ,.?.,.>$, ~#+
. ....^I_. The medium pericd: the maximuq of the min@$.
No, because even in recidivism, the offender at the period plus 1 da., as the minimum; and such m @
i$?
time O f his trial for one offense must be convicted by plus 1yr., 3 mas. & 1 0 das., as the maximum of the medmmi
; :
final judgment of another crime embraced in the same period. =;;#
title of the Code. Moreover, his previous crimes of theft ' The maximum period: the maximum of the rnedi*a
and estafa and the crime of falsification for which he was
on trial are not embraced in the same title of the Code. period plus 1 da., as the minimum; and such minimum$
Theft and estafa are embraced in the title of crimes against plus 1 yr.) 3 mos. & 10 das., as the maximum of the max-.y
'property, while falsification is embraced in the title of imum period. . .
crimes against public interest.
782. A minor 13 years old who acted with discernment cum-.
;&l. What is the duration of each of the three periods of mitted the crime of slight physical injuries, punishable
;.'F, prision correecional maximum to prision mayor mkimum? by arresto menor. May the court which tried him and.-./
,*ST,
Make and explain the computation. found him guilty impose a penaltY two degrees lower
,,:,~
.. %
than arresto menor? Explain your answer. ,..:.
.~
Min. - 4 Yrs., 2 mos. & 1 da. to 5 yrs., 5 mos. g,
P. 1 0 das. It is submitted that the court cannot., impose a penalty
lower than arresto menor. Art. 68 which provides for
j
. i.~ .
-
...:',,.,i;, , Med. 5 yrs., 5 mos. & I1 das. to 6 yrs., 8 nios. &.
20 das. a privileged mitigating circumstance applies only after
-
Max. 6 yrs., 8 mos. & 21 das. to 3 yrs. the minor was proceeded against under Art. 80 and while.'
in the reformatory institution such minor became incor-
I. Computation: 6 rnos. '& 1 da. to 6 yrs. is the d u r a rigible. R u t Art. C0 applies only when the minor under:
tion of pTision correecional. 6 yrs. o r 5 yrs. & 16 years of age committed a Brave or less grave felony.
-
12 mos. 6 mos. (eliminate "1 da.") = 5 rrs. Br
In this case, the minor committed only a light felony, in :
G mos: + 3 = 1 yr. & 10 mos.
-
Min. 6 mos. & 1 da. to 2 yrs. & 4 moa.
view of the penally provided for slight physical injuries.
-Med. 2 yrs., 4 mos. & 1 da. to 4 yrs. & 2 mos. 733. A minor 15 years and 6 months old committed homicide,
-Max. 4 yrs., 2 mas. & 1 da. to 6 yrs. a grave felony. If after trial, the court found him guilty
11. COVLputation: 6 Yrs. & 1 dn. to 12 yrs. is the dura- of the crime of homicide, can the court sentence him
tion of Prision mazJo?. 12 yrs. - F yrs. (eliminate in 1.he decision to be rendered in the same proceedings
"1 da.") = 6 yrs. + 3 = 2 yrs. to a penalty one degree lower than that prescribed for
Min. - 6 yrs. & 1 da. to homicide? Explain your answer.
-
Med. 8 yrs. 83 I da. to 10 JTS. No, because a minor under 16 years who is convicted
of B grave or less grave felony is entitled l o a suspensi
Max. - 10 yrs. & 1 da. to 12 yrs.
of the sentence. If he is found guilty after trial, no pen-
-
111. Computation: 8 yrs. 4 yrs. & 2 rnos. = 3 yrs. & alty is imposed as the sentence is snspended. He will be
1 0 mos. + 3 = 1 yr., 3 mas. & 10 ~ Z S .
~
committed to a rcformatory institution until he rea
The minimom period: the minimum oP the maximum the age of majority o r f o r such less period as.the court
of prision coireccional, as the minimum; and such minimum may deem proper (Art. 80, R.P.C.).
plus the quotient of 1 yr., 3 mos. & 10 das., as the maximum
'. of the minimum period. It is orJy when the minor becomes incorrigible in €h
reformatory institiition that he shall be returned to th
306
CRINIINAL LAW REVIEWEK CRIMINAL LAW REVIIdWEll
court for the imposition of the proper penalty. In such of Court do not permit the cliarging of more than one
, . ,... case, the court will consider the privileged mitigating cir- in the same information.
::r'
cumstance of minority and will impose the penalty one
de ree lower than ?eelusion temporal. In other 'words, 787. X was convicted in eight estafa eases. He was sentene
rt. 68 is not immediately applicable. in the eight eases, 83 f o l l ~ w s :(1) 6 months, (2) 2 Yqt's,
.. .. . (3) 6 months, (4) 1 year, ( 5 ) 1 Year, ( 6 ) 2 y&m
, T 8 4 If a minor stayed in the reformatory institution f5r 5 (7) 2 years and ( 8 ) 5 years. Row long will the total ',;
.:
months and while there he became incorrigible so that period of his imprisonment be? Why? . ,
'
he .had to be returned to the court, is that minor en- Only 14 years, not 15 years whic
titled to be credited with one-half of the time of his 6 years multiplied by 8, because the 1
stay in the reformatory institution? Why? limit of iiot morc than threefoId the length ,.of,,fime
.< No, because his stay in the reformatory institution is responding to the most severe of the penalties ilh
not preventive imprisonment which is the period of deten- If the sum total of all the penalties impose
tion of the accused before and/or during the trial. The the most severe multiplied by 3, ail the penalti
confinement of the minor in the reformatory institution must be served.
Ces place,afte? the trial.
?.;f 7R8. The fiscal filed six informatioua for theft
5 78 What is the meaning of the threefold rule? The amount involved in each case was P45.
,@ The three fold r i beans that the maximum duration for theft inrolving an amount not exceeding 85
.,..., ..
, , ,
,..., .:.
of the convict's sentence shall not be more than threefold
the length of time corresponding to the most severc o f the
& resto mayor. X was convicted in the six e83
regular trial and was sentenced to 2 months and
4
.i
, :. penalties imposed upon him. of arrest0 mayor in each ease. As he could not ret
the stolen properties, he was required to indemnify
.,
786.- Does the threefold rule apply to, or does it regulate, offended parties in the total amount of P270. . If x'
the imposition of the penalty on the offender? insolvent, what is the total period of imprisonment th
,' ' No. It is error for the trial court to impose a penalty .he has to serve? Explain your answer.
,"'
in accordance with the threefold rule, since Art. 70 can m a s to serve ten (IO) months and twenty-four (
:y '
he taken into account, not in the imposition of the penalty,
u t only in connection with the service of the sentence
imposed (People vs. Escares, G. R. No. L-11669, Jan. 29,
days of imprisonment.
Under the threefold rule; the maximum
the convict's sentence shalI not be more than
1958). the -length of time corresponding to the most
N o t e : Hence, all the penalties f o r all the crimes of which th- ; :' th2 penalties imposed on him, Two months an
offender is found guilty must be imposed by the coun. Thus, multiplied by 3 equals 6 months and 63 days
if A was convicted of 60 estafas, for eaeh.of which he was
. sentenced to one year imprisonment, the court had to impose
'~ ' total of thc penalties after applying the t h
60 years imprisonment for all the crimes ,of which he was does not exceed 6 years, the subsidiary penalty- for
convicted. It is only in the service of the penalties that-% payment of the reparation of the damages ea
' ' threefold rule shall be observed. . , computed by dividing F270 by P2.50 a n d t h e
' ..
The threefold rule applies even if the several penalties am :p ,108days o r 3 months and 18 days. But the
imposed by different courts at diiferent time3, because the RuIsj i
pen& shal! not exceed one-third of the penal
I. . ,
,'
308 909
I
:/
l>.
has to servo several penalties, lhe basis of the subsidiary penalty 790. What is the penalty following arrest0
is the maximum duration of the convict's sentence, not the order of their respective severity?
total of the penalties imposed.
Arrest0 mens; (Art. 70).
9. game and explain the different systems of penalty. Are
, ",
all of them applicable in this jurisdiction? 791,. What is the penalty next lower in
mayor?
The different systems or penalty are: (1) the material
. Destiewo (Art. 71).
accumulation system, (2) the juridical accumulation sys-
Note: Dcstierro mag be imposcd by the Municjgal or J
tem, and (3) the absorption system. of the Peace Court (People vs. Santos).,.
They &e applicable in this jurisdiction. although the The reason for the order in Art. 7-i~
material accumulation system is made subject to the limita- the mrnnlties by degrees, the classification of
.tion fixed by the juridical accumulation system. considered, n o t their respective aeveritr. Desti
mayo? must bo close to each other, because
Under the material accumulation system, all the pen- 88 correctional penalties.
alties corresponding to several crimes must be served even It is not proper to place orresto men
if their sum total reaches beyond the natural span of hu- and dsstiewo because awesto menor is
man life, In Art. 70, rwresto menor is immediately below
Under the juridical accumulation sgstem, the service of and dsstiwvo follows awesto meno?, hecsuge in
their respective severity, w e s t 0 m6n01 is mor
the several penalties imposed on one and the same culprit destiewo.
'
is limited to not more than threefold 'he length of time The severity of penalty is judged not by the duratio
corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed the penalty, but by the degree of deprivptian of liberty hv
and in no case to exceed 40 years (par. 4 to 6, Art. 70,
R.P.C.). 792. A, as principal, B, as accomplice, and C, as
Under the absorption system, the lesser penalties are were convicted of B crime punishable by a
absorbed by the greater penalties. P200 to P2.000. What amount of the fine sho
The material accumulation system is followed in para- posed on A, B and C? Explain your answer.
g r a p h ~1, 2 and 3 of Art. 70, which provides that when For A, the fine of from F200 to 82,000 should be
the culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he shall posed, because the penalty prescribed for the crime is
serve them simultaneously if the naturs of the penalties penalty for the principal (Art. 46, R.P.C.).
will so permit (par. 1). The order of severity shall be For B, a fine of from ?ZOO to F'1,500 should b
followed, .so that they may be executed successively (par. 2). posed, because he is an accomplice and t&e penalty s
F o r the purpose o€ the successive services of sentences, be lowered by one degree (Art. 5 2 ) and whenever
"' the respective severities of penalties are stated (par. 9). necessary to reduce the penalty of fine by
310 311
, ,
e i
, ., , , .
1~ .: :,
..
I ;. .
xc
$~::-shonldbe reduced by one-fourth of the maximum amount
!:"-prescribed by law, without, however, changing the minimum.
I/''
/ prudence.
CRIMINAL LAW REQIEWER
The amoimt of the damage was.8200.
the law, the penalty is a fine from an amount eq
''
For c, a fine of from 8200 to P1,OOO should be im-' the ralue of the damage to three times such vah%
posed, because he is a n accessory and the penalty should What is the proper anionnt of the fine to be imposed;
be lowered by two degrees than that prescribed by law \;r
on A? Explain your answer. a:>".'
for the principal of a consummated felony (Art. 53). To Since the offender is .a minor. I5 years and 6 mane?
get the proper amount of the fine for the accessory, which ' old, in case he becomes incorrigible in the reformatow'
is to be reduced by two degrees, we have to reduce, for institution, the penalty to be imposed on him, should G '
each degree, by one-fourth of the maximum amount pre- one degree lower.
scribed by law without, however, changing the minimum A fins not less than P200 and not more than P460,:
(Art. 76, R.P.C.). should be imposed on A, because the same rules shall'be
111 determining the specific amount of the fine which I observed with regard to fines that do not consist of a fixed
should be imposed on A, B, and C, their wealth and means amount, but are made proportional (Art. 76, par. 2, R.P.C.). '
o r their ability to pay should be considered. But under Three times P200 equals P600. One-fourth of P600 is
no eifcumstance may the fine be less than €200. If A P160. F600 - P150 = F450. The minimum of ,?ZOO is not
is a poor man, the least amount of the fine which may changed. ?.*.
i s Pi,600. In the case of C, the biggest amount of the It is discretionary to the court to impose any amount
fine which may be imposed on him is 81,000. not exceeding Ihe maximum of the fine provided by law
, Note: The second reduction should be based on the maximum (Art. 6 6 ) .
of PZ,OOO, not on 81,600, because the law provides that in making
the reduction for each degree, the reduction is one-fourth of the 796. What is the provision of the law governing the procedure
: *:
ma%imumamount pvesc*ibed by law. In the problem given, the for the trial of minor delinquents?
mtinimnm amount prescribed by law is P2,OOO.
Whenever a minor of either ,sex, under 16 years of
?93.: Suppozie A, in the problem given, wmmitted the crime age at the date of the commission of a grave o r ,less
1 grave felony, is accused thereof, the court after hearing,, :,!
. .. with grave abuse of confidence and that under the Ian
., punishing the crime the penalty has to be raised by one instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, shall su& :' ~
;,~.. degree, what amount of the fine should be imposed? Ex- peud all further proceedings and shall commit such miq
" ' plain your answer. to the custody o r care of a public. o r private, benevole
<..
ii The fine should be from P200 to 82,600, because when- or charitable institution or to the custody or care of
ever it is necessary to increase the penalty of fine by one "other responsible person subject to the visitation and su
if.'
. / .
:.,
,
or more degrees, it shall be increased, for each degree, by vision by the Commissioner of, Public Welfare, :until
one-fourkh of the maximum amount prescribed ' b y law. minor shall have reached his majority o r f o r such
without, -however, changing the minimum which, in this period as the court may deem proper.
.'' . "case, is B200 (Art. 75, R.P.C.). fj
If the minor has behaved properly and h&
I with the conditions imposed upon him during his
'94.'-A, a minor 15 years and 6 months old, was convicted 1' men$ he shall be returned to the court in order.
, ..",
of the crime of damage to property through reckless im-
p.<: same may order his final release. . ,.
,~.. ,,,
:;(.7.; I.,
~
,,,,
">:,>,,>:.'<d ,,
I ~
!
.
,,?. ,
,,
312 313
?;ryp;::: ; ; .
'
'
1 1
.., .,
,-.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW .REVIEWER
I ,
. . , In case the minor fails to behave properly or to com- When a convict shall become an insane o r a
, .~ ply with the regulations of the institution or with the after a final sentence has been pronounced, the
conditions imposed upon him when he was committed to of said sentence shall be suspended only with reg
the care of a responsible person, or in case he should be personal penalty (Art. 79, R.P.C.). This provision is a$
:~',: (.
found incorrigible, he shall be returned to the court in plicable to persons sentenced to the death, who becom
.:%_ . ~
order that the same may render the judgment correspond- insane.
ing to the crime committed by him.
(Art. 80, R.P.C.) 800. Art. 47 of the Revised Penal Code pmvide8 &at th
Note: The minor should be under 16, not only a t the time of death penalty shall not be imposed when the guilty person-'
the commissipn of the crime, but also at the time of his trial. be more than 70 years of age. Art. 83 of t h
Art. 80 is applicable only to grave or less grave felony. Code provides that the death sentence shall not
The minor has the right to nppeal in ease he is foound flicted upon any person over 70 pears of age,
guilty. Hc has the right to bail, death sentence shall be commuted t o the pen
clnsion perpetua. In what proceedings is Art. 47
797. Does the suspension of his sentence under Art, 80 of plicable and when is Art. $3 applicable?
the Revised Penal Code relieve the minor of civil liability? Art. 47 is applicable in judicial proceedings when
No. The suspension of the sentence under Art. 80 of penalty of death may be, but should not be, imposed4
the Revised Penal Code does not wipe out 'his guilt, but the judgment of conviction by the trial court. Art.
merely put off the imposition of the corresponding penalty, is applicable when the death sentence is t o be eze
in order to give the delinquent minor a chance to be re- that is, after the Supreme Court affirmed the decis
formed. When after he has observed good conduct, the the lower court imposing the death penalty and the co
.. criminal case is dismissed, this does not mean that he is
R4
f origin already designated the day f o r the execution 0
exonerated from the crime charged, but simply that he the death sentence.
will suffer no penalty. Nor does such dismissal of the
criminal case obliterate his civil liability for damages 8 1. I n . wha cases is the penalty of destierro imposed?
(Magtibay vs. Tiangco, 74 Phil. 576). I the following cases:
, en death or serious physical injuries is or
798. May the court, in the same proceeding where the minor
F
inflict under exceptional circumstances (Art. 247, R.P.
''
is found guilty hut the sentence is suspended, impose his
civil liability? W en a person fails to give bond for good behavlo
* (Art. 4, R.P.C.).
No. 'The imposition of the civil liability is not fe@ble
without judgment of conviction (People vs. Bakil, et al., a penalty for the concubine in the crime of co
1 , C.A., 40 O.G. 102). cubina e (Art. 334, R.P.C.).
. . .. ~ Note: The offended party has to file B separate civil action When after lowering the penalty, destierro is t
to recover damages from the minor or from his narents or guard- proper penalty. ..
iws,
802. A, as an act of revenge, embraced and kissed B,
1 ; -:799. What provision of the law is applicable when the convict young unmarried girl. Upon complaint of B, the fis
: -becomes insane after final sentence of death has been filed a criminal action against A. After trial, the eo&
... , pronounced? convicted A of the crime he committed asainst B.
314 315
I
.~ ,
,..
.. ,
appealed from the decision of the court. While t h e Note: June has SO
31 days. From June 28 to 30, there are 3 d
appeal was pending in the Court of Appeals, A married to 31, there are 31
B. Do you believe that the criminal liability of A is 27 days. All in all
extinguished by the marriage of A with B? Explain your information was fil
r ' answer. prescribed. But the rule id exclude the day
No, because the crime committed by A against 3 was was committed and include tho day when the
filed in court. If June 28 i s excluded, the e
oily uniust vexation (Art. 287, R.P.C.), nst acts of lascivi- start on June 29 and it will be exactly 60 d
ousness, rape, seduction or abduction. It id only when the And if we consider that n month, is cornput
:,-',.
-. .
.~,. crime committed is any of them that the marriage of the ,30-day month, only
si. ,
~
offender with the offendeci party shall extinguish the crim- will he only 69 days.
,.
"
.
inal action or remit the penalty already imposed on him
(Art. 344, last par., R.P.C.).
'803. What i,s prescription of crime?
d/
8 6. The penalty for simple trespass to dwelling is arr
mayor and a fine not exceeding P3,000? What, is
prescriptive period of that crime?
Prescription of crime is the forfeiture or loss of the Ten years. When the penalty fixed by law is a co":
'~
right of the State to prosecute the crime after the lapse pound one, the highest penalty shall be made the basis
.., of certain time. of the computation of the prescriptive period (Art. 90,
804. What is prescription of penalty? last paragraph). Crimes punishable by arresto m y o r
prescribe in 5 years and crimes punishable by other cor- '
Prescription of penalty is the forfeiture or loss of the
'~ right of the government to execute the filial sentence after rectional penalty prescribe in ten year. A fine of '81,000. ~,'
the lapse of certain time. is a correctional penalty. It being the higher of the com-
pound penalty, the fine should be made the basis for classify-
4/05. A was arrested by a ,policeman for theft on June 28, inglhe crime for the purpose of determining the prescriptive
1958, the very day he committed the crime. In view of period of that crime.
.' the amount involved, the crime is punishable by arrestir Noto: The same rule shouid 5e observed in the ease af au
' ' menor. On August 27, 1958, an information for theft alternative penalty, like that one provided in- Art. 319 of the
.., ,\vas filed by the fiscal in court against A. Had the Revised Penal Code, which is arrest0 mffor or a fine double-
the value of the property involved (People YS. Basalo). Hence,
crime prescribed before the fiscal filed the information if tho value of the property involved in thE commission of the.
: in court? Explain your answer. crime of removing o r selling any personal property mortgaged.
No, it being a light felony, because it is punishable by hder the Chatlei Mortgage Law is PZOO, the fine doubl
: . arresto menor, the crime shall prescribe in two months
o r GO days. A month is computed as the regular 30-day
month. In the computation of the period of prescription,
the first day should be excluded and the last day included.
/ amount is B correctional penalty, which is higher than aTTeatg..
nmyeynr.
311
I
qt+
..,, %
:,p::~.:
. ,.
,.
1 .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
as long ,as the commission of the crime is known to the (1) of- injuries, after the preliminary investigation, the case .
s
fended party, (2) the authorities, or (a), their agents, in xhich was forwarded to the Court of First Instance. The
,+/ case the period of prescription of crime commences to run. fiscal filed an information for serious physical injuries
ten months after February 24, l9G.2. After trial, the
,
9. If the psriod or prescription of crime has commenced Court of First Instance found A guilty of slight physical
to run, because the crinie was discovered by the offend- injuries only. Had the crime prescribed before the fiscal
ed party, or the authorities or their agents, when is it filed the infomiation ten months after the commission
interru,ptcd? of the crime? Explain your answer.
It is interrupted by the filing 01' the complaint or in- Nb, because B immediately filed a complaint for serious
€ormation. physical injuries with the justice of the peace court. Pre-
liminary investigation was conducted by the justice of the
peace within two months. The filing of the information i;
,
810. With what authority or psblic officer must the complaint
or information be filed to interrupt the running of t h e by the fiscal ten months after the commission of the crime' S
:~ .prescription of the crime? is of no consequence, because the period of prescription '
The complaint or information must be filed in the of the crime never ran from the time the complain was
court which has jurisdiction over the offense, such that filed with the justice of the peace. (see U.S. vs. Lozada, ' "
the proceedings can terminate in the acquittal or conviction 9 Phil. 509).
of the accused. But there aye cases here the Supreme dote: The preliminary investigation conducted by the justice ' :"
Court held that the filing of the compiaint with the justice /of the peace was considered "criminal proceedings" in this ease. ri
:#
. ..:,
r
of the peace court for crimes not triable by that court
" ''- interruptcmd the running of the period of prescription of On December 27, 1963, A committed simple slander.'ql
the wine. against R. The next day, B denounced the act to the&&
,,.<,I.~
. ,
,.,,x.L', 318
,,
.;:, .,: I
I
.,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIHINAL LAW REVIEWER
justice of the peace who immediately conducted prc- No. From July 25, 1952, when the crime was com-
liminary investigation. On February 18, 1964, the com- mitted, until Augnst i, 1952, when the complaint was filed
plaint was dismissed for lack of midence. On March in the Justice of the Peace Court, only seven days had
15, l!)G4, B filed a new oomplaint against A, now in elapsed. The filing of the complaint on the latter date
the Court of First Instance which referred the ease suspended the running of the prescriptive period. Said
to the justice' of the peace of the provincial capital period commenced to rcn again at most frgm May 18,
for proper preliminary investigation. Having found mer- 1956, the date of the Supreme Court's decision, when the
its in the complaint, the justice of the peace of the proceedings may be said t o have been terminated. . From
provincial capital forwarded the case to the Court of that date until June 12, 1956, when the second information
First Instance, eltarping A with grave oral defamation. was filed, less than a month had elapsed. Adding this
'. After trial, judgment was rendered convicting the ac- perind to the seven days which had already run, there is
cused of simple slander, punishable by arrest0 menor. only about a month, which is certainly much less than
Did the crime prescribe? Explain your answer. six months prescriptive period provided for the crime of
No, the prescription of the crime commenced to run serious oral defamation (People vs. Uba, et al., G.R. L-
only on February IS, 19134, when the justice of the peace /;3&, October 16, 19.59);
dismissed Bs cornplaint. Simple slander prescribes in two
months. Only about 25 days elapsed when B filed a new A committed serious physical injuries pnnishable b r
complaint in the Court of First Instame on March 15, prision correcclonal and soon thereafter succeeded in
1964. leaving for Japan where he remained for 20 years. Dur-
ing that time there was an extradition treaty between
The running of the period of prescription of the crime the Philippines and Japan. Did the crime prescribe? Ex-
was interrupted on the day when B derounced the act to plain your answer.
the justice o f the peace.
No, the term of prescription of the crime does not run
813. On Angust 1, 1952, Demetria Somod-oug filed a com- when the offender is absent from the Philippines, and the
plaint in the Justice of the Peace Court, charging the fact that we have an extradition treaty with the country
accused Juliana Uba and Calixta Uba with the crime to which the offender fled is of no consequence.
of serious oral defamation said to have been comitted Note: Extradition treaty is important only in prescription of
against her on or before July 25, 1052. Finding probable penalty, not in prescription of crime.
cause, the court elevated the case to the Court of First
After the filing of the complaint or information, when
Instance where the Provincial Fiscal filed the corres-
does the period of prescription of the crime commence
ponding information. However, by mistake, Pastora
to run again?
Somod-ong was designated the offended party, instead of
Demetria. Because of this, the trial court dismissed When tine proceedings (1) terminate without the ac-
the case. The government appealed to the Supreme cused being convicted or acquitted, or (2) are unjustifiably
Court. On May lS, 1956, the Supreme Court affirmed stopped for any reason not imputable to the accused.
the order of dismissal, but ordered the Provincial Fiscal NOt5:. The proceedings terminated without the accused being
to fill! a new inforniation. On June 12, 1956, the convicted or acquitted, when the ease was dismis;ed upon ma-
Provincial Fiscal filed a new information. Did tho tian of the accused, based on the failure of the prosecution
to present its evidence because its witnesses could not be 10-
crime prescribe? Explain your answer. eatcd, and the court dismissed the ease.
320 321
I
322 323
CIZIMIXAL LAW REVIEWER CILli\llNAL LAW I~EYIEwEI<
by A after the service of the penalty for theft, While Yes, A can be required to serve the remgining period
serving the sentence for theft for 2 months, A escaped of 3 months and 1 day of his sentence of 4 months and
and, was captured after 17 years. Did the penalties for 1 day, because although the penalty of urresto mayor (4
theft and serious physical injuries prescribe? Explain months and 1 day) prescriben in 5 years, yet he committed
your answer. the crime of rape before the expiration of the period of
prescription.
As regards the penalty for theft, there is no Guestion
that the penalty prescribed, it being only urresto mayor A can be prosecuted and punished for rape, because
which prescribes in 5 years. But the penalty of 1 year rape is punishable by reclusion temporal and prescribes
of prision correceiona.1 did not prescribe, because when A in 20 Years. Since A was captured 19 years after the
commission of rape, the crime did not yet prescribe when
escaped he evaded the service of the sentence for theft,
he was captured. If the information is €iled in court with-
and not the sentence for serious physical injuries which in the remaining one year, the court can try and punish
he would serve only after service of the sentence for thelt. A for the crime of rape.
I-Ience, since he did not evade the service of the sentence
for serious physical injuries, the term of the prescription 823. What is the usual condition imposed in conditional par.
of the penalty for that crime did not commence to run. don? How long will that condition be operative?
Evasion of the service of the sentence is an essential condi- In conditional pardon, the condition usually imposed
tion for the running of the period of prescription of pen- upon the convict is that “he shall not again violate any
alties. of the penal’laws of the Philippines.”
The condition of the conditional pardon is limited to the
821. What are the causes that may interrupt the running oE remaining period of the sentence, unless an intention to
the period of prescription of penalties?
extend i t beyond that time is manifest from the nature
.. .._..after evading
When . ~
the service of hi3 sentence, the
I
of the condition or the language in which it is imposed.
culprit (1) gives himself upJ (2) ,d- (3) should Note: lllu8tmtion- A was sentenced to 12 years and 1 day
wn to a foreign country with which this Government has
~
I
324 325
.
s,, CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
:'1
gard ess of the conduct of the prisoner during temporary
Sentence Law. F o r violation of the conditional pardon,
de ntion.
the convict may be ordered re-arrested and reincar-
cerated by the Chief Executive and/or may be prosecuted
' ~ under Art. 159 of the Code; for viola,tion of the terms
'
828. A was convicted of theft of jewelry which the police-
, " of the parole, the convict cannot be prosecuted under man recovered from him when he was arrested, but
?p9 Art. l!59. He can be re-arrested and reincarcerated to which was suhsequently lost, because someone in the
!g@ serve the unserved portion of his original penalty. office of the police stole i t from the safe. As the jew-
:I elry could not be returned, may the court order A to
,826. Distinguish allowance for good conduct from special time pay the value of the jewelry?
' , ~ allowance for loyalty. Yes, because the rule is that a person criminally
In allowance for good conduct, the prisoner does not liable for a felony is civilly liable and in crimes against
evade the service of his sentence; in special time allowance property he is responsible to the owner, either for the
:for.loyalty, the prisoner evades the service of his sen- payment of its value if it cannot be returned, and this
.tence under certain circumstances. is whether the property is lost or destroyed by the act
326 327
I
I I
i
I
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRII\IlNAL LAW REVIEWER
of the malefactor himself, or that of any other person, demand civil responsibility arising from a crime before
or is the result of whatever other cause. the criminal prosecution. e
829. What are the rules governing civil actions arising from d! 1. May the prosecution prove, over the objection of the
offenses? defense, damages resulting from the commission of the
Except as otherwise provided by law, the following crime, when the information does not allege them? Ex-
plain your amwer.
rules shall be observed:
1. When a criminal action is instituted, the civil Yes, because every person criminally liable for a
action for recovery of civil liability arising from the ffrlony is also civilly liable. Allegation of damages is
ot necessary.
ofrenss charged is impliedly instituted with the criminal
action, unless the offended party expressly waives the
civil action or reserves his right to institute it separately;
2 . Criminal and civil actions arisizrg from the same
, ~ , 8J Suppose, the fiscal alleges in the information that as a
result of reckless driving by the one of the
passengers of his jeepney ,&€ere- ’ injuries and
offense may be instituted separately, but after the crim- damages in the amount of Pl,OOO, but fails t o allege
inal action has been commenced, the civil action cannot the damage suffered by the o v o s e prop-
be ins1,ituted until final judgment has been rendered in erty loaded in the jeepney was 4 estruyed, can the pro.
the criminal action; secution prove the - d ffrrell by the other
3. After a criminal action has been commenced, no passenger?
civil action arising from the same offense can be prc- In criminal prosecution where the intervention of the
secuted; and the same shall be suspended, in whatever aggrieved parties is limited to being witnesses for the
stage it may be found, until final judgment in the prosecution, the civil liability of the accused should not
criminal proceeding has been rendered; extend only in favor of the person o r persons mentioned
4. Extinction of the penal action does not carry in the information. Unless the record shows that an
with i t extinction of the civil, unless the extinction pro- omitted party has waived the civil liability or has re-
ceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the served the right to file a separate civil action to recover
fact from which the civil might arise did not exist; the same, it is impliedly included in the criminal action.
5 . A final judgment rendered in a civil &ion ab-
solving the defendant from civil liability, is no bar to 833. In a case of frustrated homicide, with the aggravating
criminal action. circumstance of nighttime, there was no allegation in
(Rule 107, Sec. 1, Rules of Court) the information and no proof off damages. May t h e
court sentence the acLvsed to indemnify the offended
830. Art. 100 of the Revised Penal Code provides that “evezy party in the sum of F’2,000?
person criminally liahle for a felony is also civilly liable.” Yes, because civil liability covers not only actual or
Does iit mean that a person must first be declared compensatory, but also moral, exemplary or corrective
criminally liable in a criminal prosecution before ‘ h e can damages in criminal offenses resulting in physical in- :
be held civilly liable? Explain your answer. juries. No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary to prove :j
.. No, because Sec. 1, Eule 107, of tilie kules of Court, moral damages, it being left to the discretion of t h e ~ r
expresslly permits the institution of a civil action to court. ...d%?
328 329
I
1
liability arising from negligence under the Revised Penal Subsequently, a civil action was filed in court to recover dam-
ages. This civil action was dismi:;sed, because of the dedara-
Code (Art. 2177, Civil Code); tion of the court in its judgment in the criminal case that the
6 , Exemption from criminal liability established in Art. fact from which the civil might arise did not exist.
12, except pars. 4 and 7, and justification under Art. 11,
par. 4, which according to Art. 101 of the Revised Penal 837. A, who is charged with estafa with abuse of confidence,
Code do not include exemption from civil liability: (a) of is acquitted because there is no misappropriation or con-
imbecile or insane person; (b) of minor under 9 years of version of t.he jerelry which A received from the of-
age; (c) of minor over 9 and under 15 years, unless he fended party. May the offended ‘party bring a civil action
acted with discernment; (d) by reason of irresistible force; i against A to recover the jewelry or its value? Explain
(e) by reason of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or j o u r answer.
greatsr injory; and ( S ) for acting under state of necessity.
/
Yes, since i t appears that -4 received the jewelry from
83 . cover
In a case where the civil action was instituted to re- the offended party, the fact from which civil liability
might arise exists (De Guzman. et a]. vs. Avila, e t al., 61
the amount misapprnpriated by the defendant en-
trusted with it, the case was dismissed, absolving the O.G. 1311).
defendant from civil liability. The judgment became final.
May lhe plaintiff file a criminal action for estafa based d38. May the court, acquitting the accused in a criminal case,
on the same act of the defendant? sentence the accused in the same proceedings to return
Yes, because Sec. 1, par. (e), Rule 107, provides that a the property belonging to the complainant?
final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the de- It depends upon whether the ljabjlify to return the ,,
fendant from civil liability, is no bar to a criminal action. property arises from contract or it arises from the proof
330 331 . .~
J
I
i
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
of the right of the offended party, not based on contract. No, hec.ause this is an independent civil action. The
to recover his property. term “physicai injuries” in Art. 33 of the new Civil Code
Thus, if the accused who is charged with estafa appears has been construed to mean bodily injury, not the crime
to have received the jewelry but the evidence shows that of physlcal injuries, and includes attempted, frustrated and
he did not misappr0priat.e it, all that the court can do is even consummated homicide (Carandang vs. Santiago, et
to acquit the accused, but not 60 order the return of the al., &.R. No. L-8233, May 25, 1955).
jewelry, because the liability to return the jewelry arosp Note: The term “defamation” includes slander and libel. The
from contract, not from a criminal act. term “finud” ineliides estafa. Hence, civil actions based on
Restitution may be ordered, even if the accused was ,’ the crimes of libel, slander and estnfs’ean proceed notwith-
. acquitted, when the identity of the thief was not estab-
lished, provided that the offense wus proved and it was.
1 standing tho pendency of the criminal actions therefor.
’/
shown 1.Ilat the stolen jewelry belonged to, and was formerly 8 2. What is a prejudicial question? What are its elements?
in the possession of, the complainant and the accused A prejudicikl question is one based on a fact distinct
denied having pawned it in the pawnshop from which it. and sepamte from the crime but so intimately connected
was recovered (People vs. Alejano, 54 Phil. OX’!). with it that i t determines the guilt. or innocence of the ac-
cused.
839. In what eases may the civil action be tried notwith- Its elements are:
.standin:: the pendency of the criminal action? 1. The prejudicial question must be determinative of
In Ihe following cases: the case before the court.
1. In cases of independent civil actiohs (Arts. 32, 33, 2. Jurisdiction t o try said question must be lodged in
& 34, new Civil Code).
.I
another tribunal.
1,
2 . When there is prejudicial question.
3 . When the civil case is an action based o n quasi-. 84.3. A, who was entrusted with the Torrens title of B,
delict (Arts. 2176 & 2180 of the new Civil Code). forged the sixnature of B on a siipposed deed of sale
and sold the property t o C. B filed a civil action with
40. A policeman was charged with the crime of violation, the Court of First Instance of Manila against A and
of domicile in a criminal case. B, the offended party. i C, the latter as vendee of the property. Later, a
filed a civil action for damages. Must the trial of criminal action at the instance of B was filed in the
the civil case be suspended until the criminal case is same court (Coart of First Instance of Manila) against
decided? A for estafa through falsification of a public document.
No, because the civil case involves an independent civil A now claims that the trial of the criminal case should
action, based on the violation of a fundamental right under be suspended and that the ciyil action sltould be. tried
bhe Constitution (Aft. 32 of the new Civil Code). first, there being a prejudicial question. Is the claim
41. A was accused of homicide for having killed B.
of A tenable? Ezplain your answer.
While,
the criminal case was ‘pending trial, the surviving wife. No, because there is no prejudicial question, as both the.,
of I1 filed a civil action for damages. Must the trial: civil and the criminal cases are predicated upon t
of :the civil action be suspended until the criminal case same ground, that is, forgery; and that both the ciy
. .., s .aecial?d?
’-: i and criminal cases are lodged with the same tribunal.’
. .
. I * 332 333
I
I /
J
1
a crime therein during such violation cannot be found or cial one which employs much labor and is distinct branch
is insolvent, the innkeepers, tavernkeepers, or the persons rade. There is nothing stated in the problem that the
or corporitions who own the establishments are civilly liable. octor was negligent in the selection of his chauffeur.
2. When the guests notified the innkeepers or their H e x e , even nnder the Civil Code the doctor is not liable
representatives in advance of the deposit of their goods for the damages caused by his driver.
within the inn and they iollowed the directions of the inn-
keepers or representatives with respect to the care of, and 847. A deposited his goods in an inn. A notified the inn-
,. vigilance over, such goods, the innkeepers are civilly liable keeper of such deposit and followed the instruction of
334 535
I
the innkeeper as to the care of and vigilance over the No. The law (Art. 106) says "the restitution of the
goods. B entered the room of A and burned the goods thing itself must be made whenever possible." The pur-
of A a s an act of revenge. D was prosecuted, convicted pose of the law is to place the offended party as much ,
and sentenced to the corresponding penalty and to pay A as possible in the same condition as he was before the
Doffense was committed against him.
the value of the goods. B was insolvent.. Can the inn- . .
keeper be held subsidiarily liable for the value of the
goods? 852. Suppose that in the preceding problem, B, after buy-
ing the pig from A, without knowing t h a t . i t had been
No. Innkeepers are subsidiarily liable only for the stolen, slaughtered it and consumed the meat, is B
restitution or payment of the goods taken by robbery or civilly liable for the value of the pig? Explain your
theft. The crime committed is arson. answer. /
848. What does civil liahility in criminal cases include? No, beiause the law (Art. 105) merely provides for
the restoration of the thing by the person who acquired
The civil liability in criminal cases includes: (1) resti- it by lawful means. The reparation (Art. 106), in case
tution, (2) reparation of the damage caused, and (3) in- the restitution is not possible, should be made by the of-
demnification or consequential damages. fender, not by the person who acquired by lawful means
and consumed the thing. Indemnification (Art. 107) 'is
849. May thc! court order the restitution of the property also to be made by the o€fender, not by the person who
involved in a charge of estafa pending the trial of that acquired by law€ul means and consumed the thing.
criminal case? Why? But if B participated gratuitously in the proceeds of
No. The restitution of the property involved in a crim- the felony (Art. 111), he shall be bound to make restitu- '
inal case may be ordered only after trial and the court is tion in an amount equivalent to the extent of such par-
convinced that the offended party is the owner thereof. ticipation.
N o t e : It would seem that B n a y be held liable for the value
850. The courrt in the judgment of conviction ordered the of the pig, if he received it gretuitousfy from A. However,
defendant t o pay the offended party the value of the there is an opinion that the person who participated gratuitously
in the proceeds of the lelony may be held liable civilly only
jewelry stolen by him, although the defendant admitted when tl:e proceeds of the felony enhanced his fortune. Accord-
during the trial that he had the jewelry in his pos- ing to this opinion, if that person did not sell the pig or its
session. Was the court in error? Explain your an- meat but only ate it, he is not bound to pay for the pig.
swer.
Yes, because the first remedy granted by the law to 853. If a person is unlawfully and feloniously killed, what
the offended party is restitution of the thing taken away damages are recoverable by the heirs of the deceased
by the olfender. It is only when restitution is not possi- from the defendant?
ble, because the offender or his heirs cannot return it, In the case of People vs. Tan, CA..G.R. No. 12578-R,
that reparation should be made, Oct. 23, 1956, the Court of Appeals held that the award
o f damages to the heirs of the deceascd in the sum of
S51: A sold t o B a pig whicli the former had stolen from (1) P3,000 for moral damages, (2) P6,OOO for the death
C. Can A gi5-e to C another pig of the same size and of the deceased, (3) P10,OOO for the loss of the earning
weight in case the court orders the restitution? Why? capacity of the deceased, and (4) P1,000 for exemplary
,.,
336 337
I
to the enemy.
actually purchased
them to the Japanese Army, there is
There must be
delivering them
They are: to the enemy to constitute the crime of treason by adher-
ing to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort. Intention
1. Treason
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason.
alone is not enough.
3. Misprision of treason, Elernentr df baason:
."
1. That he offender owes allegiance to the Government of the
d
4 . Espionage, i
i Fhili ines;
5 . Inciting to war or giving motives for ieprisals, 2. Tha there is a war in which the Philippines is involved,
6 . Violation of neutrality. S. Th the offender either-
7. Correspondence with hostile country,
.,
,., . . .
I 8. Plight to enemy country, / .
a levies war against the Government, o r
A, adheres to tho enemies, giving them aid or comfort
338 339
1
858. Assuming that a foreign country has the intention to .Although the law (Art. 114) provides that treason is ,L
invade the Philippines in the near future, and a group committed by any person who owes allegiance t o the Gov-
of Filipinos in sympathy with that country has been I ernment of the Philippines, not being a loreigner, it is _,>
' . sending financial help 'to its government, thereby giving likewise committed by an alien, residing in the Philip- :$$
aid and comfort to that country, do yon believe those pines. y!hnmary allegiance is the obligation- of fidelity
Filipinos are liable for treason? andobedience which a resident alien owes to our Gov-
No. Although t , w s an oy&actLof.aid DL c o ~ & ~ r t ernment.
given to the foreign copntry, and because ,of their sym- Note.: Art. 114, R.P.C., as amended by Executive Order No. 44,
pathy to its government those Filipinos maniPested adher- punishes an alien, residing in the Philippines, who commits act8
ence the~eto,they c E n n t b e held liable for reason because of treason.
the crime of treason can be com-mji@&.only in .ti=~.of
War. That treason can be committed only in time of war,
was definitely decided in the case of Laurel, vs. Misa.
involves danger from wit&&. Hence, there must be a aliens. _'esiding in the Philippines can be held liable for
wai'. treason.
Those who would levy war against tlie Government Note: 'The element of treason which is not present is: The
offender YY.CS allegiapkg to the Government of the Philippines.
to overthrow it for the purpose of delivering the country
Aliens who are not residing in the Philippines do not owe
in whole or in part to the enemy are traitors and there allegiance to OUT Government.
are no traitors until war has started.
Note: The element of treason which is not lpresent in the t w o 862. During the Japanese occupation, A, a Filipin,o, was always
preceding pestions is: That there is a war in which the Philip- entertaining Japanese army officers in his house and was
pines is involved. I giving them parties on special occasions. A, however,
managed to avoid talking with them or with anyone else
S60: In treason, the offender mnst be o a - l g i a n c e to the about war and the countries at war. Was A guilty of
Government. What kind of allegiance is contemplated in treasun? Why?
' the crime of treamn? I No. The fact that a Filipino is friendiy with 0r-sy-g-
BQth !&a1 allegiance and temporary allegiance are pathetic to the enemy is not necessarily a n act. of trea>on.
:.contemplated in the crime of treason. To beCtreasonous, the egtent of aid- and comfort given
340 4
341 ,.
. I
I
:/
in defense plants or essential works and other things which 8 1 ) actual assemblage of men; and (2) the purpose is to
.: impair our cohesion and diminish our strength, but if execute a treasonable design by force.
there is no adherence to the enemy, if there is no intent
to betray, there is no treason.” 866. ,/’ hat in your opinion is the justification for punishing
Note: The element of treason by giving nid or comfort, which , /
resident alien who commit treason against the Philip-
pines?
is not present is: The offerider adheres to Lhc enemies.
/
a group of Filip’ o citizens whose weapons were in- ! hy assisting the soldiers in the capture of
adequate gathered together in the plaza of the town for named X. B and C are witnesses
the purpose of a tacking the officials and policbmen in that he saw A with a nnmber ,~
the municipal b ilding and, if successful, to turn the Japanse soldiers on their way to the house of X on ;.
4
342 343
I :
I
I
I I
'
C R I ~ I N A LLAW REVIEWER
4
of B .kd C?
0, because the two-witness rule requires t h a t there
must tie twq~xitnessesto each-part ,of the overt act.
No. In a case, the accused was a Japanese spy. He
also took part i n the execution of some of the guerilla
suspects and in the infliction of physical injuries'on the
others. In that case, it was held that murders and phwwa ' 1
Tho overt act which is the subject of the prosecution injuries were inherent
~~ .. in the crime of treason' character-
is the giving of assistance to the enemy by A, leading ized by-gNnx.&id aidcomfor t .to_thunemy. The murders
to the capture of X. One part of the overt act is A'S and physical injuries committed, although criminal .dffenses
going with the Japanese.soldiers to the house of X. The in themselves separately punished by, the Revised Penal
other part of the overt act is the tying of the hands of
X by A in the house of the former. Only B'testified
c,, are the very acts of giving. aid 'and comfort to the
In the nature of things, the giving of aid and
to the first part of the overt act of A, and only C comfort can be accomplished only by some kind of act.
testified to the second part of his overt act. Its very nature partakes of a deed or physical activity
Note: In this jurisdiction, w e fallow the zeverely .restrictive as opposed to a mental operation (People vs. Prieto).
;c
,
. .. , rule, as .distinguished from the eommosite theory. Under the ,,. . .
'; composite theory, it is, not necessary that two witnesses testify B agreed and decided to commit treason.,: Then,
to each part of tho overt act or cireumstanoe, as long as the they proposed the commission of the crime. t o several
parts OY circumstances constitute B single, ecntinvaus, and eom- other .persons who were also deterntined lo dommit treason.
finsite overt act.
.._ Thereafter, all -of them committed treason. how many
'86 . arraignment.
Charged with treason, A was brought to th6 court for
The clerk of court read to him the in-
%
.,
,
cfimes were committed by them?
. .
Only one, and that is treason.'
' ,
TG
conspiracy to com-
*. mit treason between A and B and the proposal to commit
formation which alleged that A was a Filipino citizen
who joined the NIakapili organization which fought on the treason made by them to several persons ,are absorbed in
side of the Japanese Imperial Army against the, Philip- the crime of treason which they later committed.',
N q t e : In conspiracy to commit treason and in .proposal to
pines :inn the United States and took part in the exeeet1-
commit treason: the crime of treason $->E' be a&?&
, . tion of guerilla suspects. When asked if he was plead-
guilty or not, A ad~nitt.edall the facts allege$ in the
e ~ ~ ~ i i m i t t e d ~ p r o p to
o s acommit
l treason, the -s.al e
... - .in&! , n-ae _*Led by the person, !O-&~?LP the proposal is made.
'information but that he had to do them because he was If the p p o ~ s d . i s ~ e & s d , and t4ere is a decision t o commit
kfraid of the Japanese. Can he be convicted of treason the Arne of treason, it would he pnspiracy to commit 'treason.
. .....
on' the hasis of his said admission? Why? I
'871. How, is conspiracy to commit treason ' committed?
NO. The statement of the accused is tantamount- to Conspiracy to commit treason is committed when k o
, .
The confession mentioned in the law
p l e a d i u a g u i l t .y. .. - -. : . o r more persons come to a n agreement concerning the
meanS a 1 L E n A s i d g u i l t i ! . I of treason aud c!ed&xi to commit it. (Arts.
C&rcession and avoidance is not _a confession of guilt. and 115, R.P.C.)
Note: Had A made a confession nf guilt, that'g, he pleaded
:: guilty w&houLexplanation, A could have been lawfully ,convicted. 'i to commit treason committed?
344 ! 345
I
I
Proposal to commit treason is committed when the per- favored emotionally and intellectually. A did not report
son who has decided to commit treason prcposes its execu- it to the governor or fiscal where he was residing and
tion to some other person or persons. (Arts. 8 and 116, 9 where the act of treason was committed. Is A criminally
R.P.C.) liable? Explain your answer.
No. In this case, there is no misprision of treason, be-
873. Is misprision of felony punishable? cause the crime of treason was already committed. Art.
A t common law, misprision of felony is a criminal 116 sags “having knowledge of any conspiracy against”
.
Meet either (1) to prevent a felony from being com- the Government of the Philippines, which means that there
mitted or (2) to bring the offender to justice a.fter its is only conspiracy to commit treason. When treason is
commiz:sion. ?ctuallg committed, m$?.csilence of one who knows of ita
commission d9e3 not make him criminally liable, either
Our penal law does not consider misprision of felony as princigal, accomplice o r accessory.
as a crime. The only single instdnce where it is considered
Elements of mispvison of tmaron:
a crime is in misprision of treason. 1. The offender must be owing allegiance to the Government,
Thus, i t has been held that the failure.of 8 private and must not be a foreigner.
individual to report to the authorities the commission of 2. I€e has knowledge of any e_onsp>r?y (to commit treason)
an offense is not a crime and the r.ere silence of one against the Government.
who w h e s s e d the commission of a crime does not make 3. H e conceals or does-not disclose and make known the same
as SO& as possible.
him criminally liable.
# 4. To the Governor or Fiscal of the province, or Mayor or
Note: But a publie.afficer who has th; duty to prosecute or Fiscal of the City in which the offender resides.
cause the prosecution of a law violator may be held liable for *.
Thc element of misprision of treason which is not present
dorelictiol of .duty under Art. 208, if he maliciously tolerates
is: IIe has knowledge of any conspiracy against the Govern-
-/
the commission of a crime which is about to be committed or
maliciously refrains from prosecuting. 8 violator of the law.
S76. May an alien residing in the Philippines commit misprision
874. Is the person gnilty of m i o n of treason only a9 of treason?
merit. Why?
accesso;ry to’ the crime of treason? i
No, because the law (Art. 116) provides that the of-
He is o n a K n i s h e d as an accessory to the crime. of fender is “not being a foreigner”.
treason, but he is principal in the crime of misprision
of treason, this being a separate and indegendent crime 677. A, a private individual and a IWpino citizen, knowing
defined in a different article of the Revised Penal Code. that B was in conspiracy with others to commit treason
Note: It is absurd to think that a person guilty of misprision against the Government of the Philippines, during the
of treason is only an accessory to the crime of treason, when I time of war, harbored, concealed and later assisted in
there is no treason committed. What is being committed by the escape of B. Is A criminally liable?
other persons is onlp conspiracy to commit trcawn, and wbat
constitutes misprision of treason is the failure to make known Yes, not under Art. 19, but under Art. 116, because
to the ‘proper authorities the existence of that conspiracy. r he is guilty of misprision of treason f o r not reporting
the conspiracy to the proper authority.
_., 875.
.,~? . A, a l?ilipino citizen, knew that B committed treason, Note: A private individual i3 liable a s a n aeeessorg
~.
‘ k
,
having given aid and comfort to the enemy whom he par. 3 of Art. 19, R.P.C., for hairboring, concealing or
346 347
,
i
I
I
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEIVER
CRIMINAL LAW IWViBWEI:
#
.. . . ing in the escape of the principal, ,_.rlyif the pcin.&al is 8. Malting or causing war materials to be made in a
q - o f i r s a s o n (not y
c- to commit treason), parricide. defective manner when the Philippines is at war; etc.
mur er or a n attempt to take the life of the .Chief Executive,
or is known to be habitually guilty. of some other crime. ?
880. A foreigner was arrested by the military police in a *
base of the U.S. Army, stationed in the Philippines. He
/,878. What a m the e!ements of the crime of espionage, as it was caught in possession of a photograph of a certain
is defined in the Revised Penal Code? place in the base which was off-limit to the civilians.
Elements of the ist way of committing espionage: Which has jurisdiction over the offense of espionage com-
. _ 1. That the offender enters a warship, fort or naval: mitted, the Philippine Government or the United States
or military establishment or reservation; authorities?
2 . That he has no authority therefor; Either one could try and punish the offender, because
3 . That his purpose is t o ~ o b t ~ ~ n . i a n y ~ n ~ ~ r mplans,.
-a~on, the act of espionage committed affects the security of
photographs or other data o f a confidential nature both nations.
relative to the defense of the Philippines. Note: If the offense is against the security of the Philippines,
Elements of the 2nd way of committing espionage: even if it is committed within the base, the Philippine courts
have jurisdiction. If the offense is against the security of the *'
1 . Offender is a public officer; United States, even if it is committed outside the base by 8 .i
2 . He has in. his. &.$esssn the articles, data or in- 1 member of the.armed forces of the United States, the latter
6rmation referred to in the first way of commit- has jurisdiction over the offense.
:"'
ting espionage, bxreason~.oChis- .a€fice;
.
He & A d h e i r contents to the rmIesenJ*bive of - 881. What are the crinles clasgified as provoking war and
disloyally in case of war?
,.
a foreign nation.
They are: (1) inciting to war or giving motives for
879. ay espionage be committed by acts other than those reprisals; ( 2 ) violation of neutrality, (3) correspondence
defined ass acts of espionage in the Revised Penal Code? .with hostile country, and (4) flight to enemy's country.
Explain yonr answer
The first two are crimes that may,provoke war. The
Yes. Commonwealth Act No. G16 punishes as acts of i last two are crimes involving disloyalty during the war.
- espionage, the following : Note: In inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals, even
/'r
I. Unlawfully obtaining or permitting, through gross mere negligent act, which is unlawful or unauthorized, is con-
negligence, to be obtained information affecting national templated in the definition of said crime, for the effect is the ,
defe e ; same whether committed intentionally OP through negligence.
. Unlawfully disclosing information affecting national In the crime of flight to enemy's country, mere attempt
t&-o~x~.goAmemm. consummates the crime. The q3
,: d ense; I law doen not require that the offender should not be a foreigner.
3 . Disloyal acts or words in time of pcaee; This crime may be eqgmjt&d by a resident alien,
4. Disloyal acts or words in time of war; In the crime of cmrespondenee with hostile country, the
penalty is +-eclusioit temporal to death when the correspondence.
5 . Conspiracy to violate certain sections of t h e Act;
.,.
6. Harboring or concealing violators of the Act; r contains notice or information which may be useful to the ene
and the offendw intended to aid the enemy thereby. The e
~./., . '7. Destroying or injuring or attempting to injure or
:
is not treason, because in corrcspondenee with hostile eaua
adherence to the enemy is not necessary.
. aestroy war'materials when the Philippines is at war;
948 549
i
CRIXINAL LAW IZEYIFXER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
882. A group of men in a fast motor boat intercepted a cargo They are:
vessel in ithe waters on the seacoast of Sumatra and by 1. Arbitrary detention, /.
means of violence and intimidation took valuable personal 2 . Delay in the delivery of the person arrested to th
. property from the cargo vessel. They came to the Phil- proper judicial authorities, ,..
ippines in the same motor boat. If they are apprehended 3. Delaying relea,se,
' here, can they be prosecuted criminally before our court?
1 very 'placs where they had committed the forcible de. Note: It will be noted that with the-single exception of the
crime of offending the religious feelings in Art. 133, the of- :
predation, what crime was committed by them? Explain. fender in all the crimes against the fundamental laws of the
I n that case, the crime committed was j:obber+with State is n public officer or e@oyf!!
-~ I
/
prosecution Tor mutiny on the high seas? Explain your '/
i., ,~I. Arbitrary~detention by arresting ' and detaining a
answer to the second part of the question. I . . person without legal guounds (Art. 1 2 4 ) ;
It is the raising of commotions and disturbance on 2 . Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the
board a ship against the authority of its commander. proper judicial authorities; and
s:;peia,:ing release.
It being a crime against the law of nations, the crime
may be prosecuted and punished i n any country where
a Note: In these three classes of arbitrary detention the pen-
'
whenever the crime was accompanied. by murder, ' 2 . He detains a person.
.-
omicide, physical injuries, ox rape. / 3 . Without lcgal grounds.
. ., . .
the State7 .
6. What are the crimes against the fundamental laws-of .
d W h a t is the usual cause of arbitrary detention by arrest-
ing and detrinin:: a person without legal grounds?
350 361
I
I
'i
/
CRIalNAL LAW RE
/ CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
The usual cause of the commission of the crime is ar-
. resting a person without warrant by a public officer. A
8 d m u n i c i p a l treasurer of a town, having found h i ' . . .
i servant quarreling with his wife, seized him and detained:!!
. . . .peace officer must have a warrant of arrest properly is- him in the municipal jail. Is the mnnicipd treasurer: :
sued by the court in order to justify an arrest made by him. guilty of arbitrary detention or of illegal detention?, Ex-
f there is m - r m n t o€..arrest, the arrest of a person plain your answer.
889
? a public officer may constitute arbitrary detention.
1
a dwful arrest without warrant in the three cases pro-
ded by the Rules of Court, namely: (1) when the person Although Art. 124 mentions public officer or employee,
to be arrested has copmitted, is actually committing, or without qualification, the offender @ u s t a c t in his official
is about t o commit an offense in his presence, (2) when c ~ z & y in detaining , a ~person^ in otder to be liable for
an offense has in fact been committed and'he has reason- arbitrary detention. Only uublic o m r s w u e the
abre ground to believe that the person to be arrested has authoritr to dzt-Gn oz to order the d m ~ ofya person
committed it, and ( 3 ) when the person ,to be arrested is' a can commit the crime, and the treasurer has no such
prisoner who has escaped. authority.
*mIikicipal tFeasurer is not guilty of illegal deten-
890. Is actual commission of the crime by the person to be of thk purpose of the detention.
. arrested necessary to justify his detention? Explain yuur Note: The crimes of arbitrary detention, illegal detention, and ,
answer. unlawful arrest are committed in the same manner; that i s : ;
the offender arrests or detains a person without legal grounq4
No, because the legality of the detention of a person In arbitrary detention, the offender is a public officer; &i
does not depend upon the actual commisSion of a crime illegal detention, the offender is a private individual; in un- .'
b;him, but upon the nature of his deed which makes the
rresting officer believe that a crime has been committed
' lawful arrest, which is committed by any person, thk offender
has the purpcse of delivering the person arrested or detained
o r is about to be committed by him ( U S . vs. Batallones). t o the proper authority, not necessarily judicial authority.
/. Note: Even if the person arrested without warrant 09 arrest 892. Suppose a policeman arrested a person without legal. :
w a , s innocent as he did not in fact commit a crime, the arrest-
ing officer i s not liable f o r arbitrary detention, if (1) there gr'round and detained him in his house, not in the jail, ?;
was reason to believe that the person arrested had committed '8 would he be liable for arbitrary detention?
or was about to commit a crime o r breach of the peace; and It is submitted that the place of detention is immat6- ,?
(2) the peace' officer acted in good faith.
B rial., The law v i d e t a i n s a person." .<.<
352
// 353
# iI
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWlER
~,>:
.. .., mitted it. A warrant of arrest,is not necessary to arres@
Note: But if the poliecrnan detains a person f o r e ,
personal motive m n d s the public oosithn of the offende: a person under those circumstances, because ,the offens$$
=-commits i l G d c i e n t i o n with the aggravating. cir- was in fact committed and the peace officer had reasonable8::
.. eumst:mee of taking. s g e of his public position. around to believe that the person to be arrested committed'::
a , If the crime committed is arbitrary detention, taking ad- it (People vs. Malasugui).
vantage of public position is inherent = aggravating circnm-
Note: The element that is lacking Is: Without legal groupds;:,,
stance in the crime and does not serve to increase the penalty.
There was legal ground for arresting C. , .
, ,.i:
.,
893. A policeman, suspecting that X stole the missing jeep ,
:of M, called X to the police precinct at about 8 o'clock while on patrol duty, heard somebody'&-.,:
in the evening and was investigated then and, there. X iag, "Police! Police!" When the policeman arrived,at the:
. ' . ' , .was told to stay in the precinct until the investigation sceae he saw a priest just getting u]p and freeing hmi &&
dernninated, but allowing him to go to the near-by from the accused. The policeman did not see the attack:!
when he wanted to drink and to eat and permitting i made by the accused, but he heard the cries of the priest.
go around the premises of the police precinct. He 1 calling for help at a very short distance of forty -metem',;
:go home until the next morning., t o . his disgust
.. ..and annizyance. Was the policeman guilty of arbitrary I away. The policeman arrested the accused and detained
him in jail. Is the pdiceman who maide the arrest without :
. . detent'&? Explain your answer. . . i,
warrant of arrest liable for arbitrary detention? ' Explaii,
.
..
. tiecause no confinement and no restraint on his !
!
your answer. ; \'T% 'A I . . _ ,- ,
I
, person was made by the policeman. At most, there was No, because the arrest was lawful and the detention
only unjust vexation. of the accused was €or some legal ground. The warrant,:
.., . Note: The element of arbitrary detention by Cetaining a person
without legal ground, which is lacking, id: That the offender
i
of arrest is not necessary in this case, because the person
. , arrested had committed an offense in the presence of t h e
detains B person.
. . T b conn-, there m.%i.be confir,em*ent w..restraint
peace officer. The policeman heard the disturbance creatdd
on the person of the offended party. by the act of the accused and .proceeded a t once to the
, ., scene. Direct personal knowledge of the commission 'of
894. A, who was carrying with him a pocketbook, containing the crime may be through sense of sight or hearing.
money bills in the sum of 8230 and his identification /
card, wazi found lying on the ground with several wounds. 896. May the chief of police order the icrrest of the offender,
B asked A to name the person who had attacked him. after hearing the complainant and hi:r witnesses and being
A said t h a t C did it. Later, A died because of the wounds. satisfied that the person complained igainst committed
policeman, who had received information that C was 2
robbery? Explain your amwer. '
possession of much money, arrested the latter
searched, the pocketbook of A with his iden- ! No. What the chief of police should do is to file a
tification card was found in the pocket of C. The poke- complaint with the proper authority, such as the justice
man locked up C in jail. Is the policeman who made of the peace in the municipality or the fiscal in the prov-
the arrest without warrant of arrest liable for arbitrary ince or city. Any of these authorities will conduct pre--
, ', . detention? Explain your answer. liminary investigation and, if there is probable cause, may
.. . file the corresponding complaint o r information with t h e
ii
I
,.
.
' No, because the crime was in fact committed and the
had reasonable ground to believe that C corn:
~
. . proper court.
354 355
i
I
"?
8 . . He fails to deliver such person to the proper judici$&
I auihority within: v
U S . vs. Sanchez, the Supreme Court held n. six (6) hours, if detained for crimes or offenses punish-,,
complained against may be arrested. able by light penalties, or their equivalent;
. . . b. nine (9) hours, fcr erimeft or offenses punisliable by
crime of arbitrary detention limited correctional penalties, or their equivalent; o r
or employees who actually detained . C . eighteen (18) hours, f o r crimes or offenses punishabla
by capital punishment or iifflietive Qenalties, or their
ground? Explain your answer. equiva!ent.
do, because a judge of the Court of First Instance, a
justice of the peace or the jodge of a city court, or the would be the crime if a private individual detained
fiscal, before whom an arrested person is brought for another for some lezal ground and failed to deliver the
.*.
I
' ,_ investigation, may &r then-d of that person w&h- i person detained to the proper judicial authority within the
,,, o k v e r i f y i n g t h m h of the charge. In such a case, i time specified by Art. 125 of the Revised Penal Code?
,, such public officer, even though he does not actually de- The private individual would be guilty of illegal de-
. , tain a person, becomes a principal by induction in&e kntion.
'. , c&oof arbitrary detention. ! Note: While the private individual may make an arrest in vim
Note: What is the liability of B private individual who effee- ! of the provisions of the Rules of Court, he must u r
,,;,:';.;
t i d y induced a policeman to detain a person without legal ! the person arre-tted to the police officer without unnoce888~p
d.-
ground and the policeman actually so detsined that person?
But the private individual who failed to do m is not liable
That private individual should be held liable for arbitrary for arbitrary detention, because only public officers may be
, 1detention, 8s principal by induct.ion. held liable for that crime.
Private individuals who conspired with public officers in
.:. I, certain policemen are guilty of arbitrary detention
detaining 900. The second element of the crime of delay in the delivery
(:People vs. Camerino, CA-G.11. No. 14207-R, Dee. 14, 1056).
of detained person to the proper judicial authority is that
the person is detained for some legal ground. What would
.$9& When may a public officer or employes who arrested be the offense if that element is Racking?
some legal ground be held liable
The offense would be arbitrary detention by arresting
and detaining a person without legal ground under Art. 124.
f& t o r l ~iw
l such person
(1) within 6 hours, if 901. A inflicted on B serious physical injuries resulting in the
punishable by light pen- latter's total blindness, punishable by prision mayor. The
,.'.:, I alt&i or their equivalent; (2) within 9 hours, if detained policeman who saw the commission of the crime arrested
for crimes or offenses punishable by correctional penalties i and detained A. For how long a time ean the policeman
.: , . or their equivalent; or (3) within 18 hours, if detained
I ( > ..
.
(,i,,,
for crimes or offenses puuishable by capital punishment
/ t i . or afflictive penalties or their equivalent. (Art. 125, R.P.C.)
I
. . . . Elements
,. .
of arbitrary detention by delaying the daliuew of
detained peison to the pvoper judicial authorities:
1. The offender is a public officer or employe$,.
I
i
w y detain A without delivering him to the proper
judicial autkionty?
The crime being punishable by prision mayor, which,
is an afflictive penalty, the policeman can legally. detain.;
A Miithout delivering him to the proper judicial authorities 1
>I;! .I,:
lb$al
2. IIe has detained B person f o r some .. pound.,
i within 18 hours.
,- ..
356 357
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
'arrested X for theft committed within his The purpose of this provision is to prevent any abu,se,;
penalty for theft is arrest0 mayor. The that may result from confining a person without infom~,,
"
.. ing him of his offense and without permitting him'to go
'
' policernan.detained X for 2 days, after which the chief
'
of police filed the corresponding complaint with the justice on bail.
', of the! peace court. Later, a petition for habeas corpus
was filed- in court in which X contended that he should
be released because the complaint was filed after 9 hours
+v- Note: Art. 126 does not apply when there is a warrant d
arrest, because his detontian is b~ virtue of ah qrder. of :the+
e&. At. 125 a d i s s - m l y when a pliblie officer akeded
or,detained a person without warrant of arrest. When a ,public,'
and, hence, his detention was illegal. Is the contention
of X tenable? Explain your answer.
.. The -of the policeman to him to the court
within the period of 9 hours does not affect the lezality
,. 905. Upon order of the m
and confined in jail for direct assault at 5:OO pm.
the following morning, a co
was filed against them with the justice of
but the justice of the peace did ]not conduct
investigation, as required by
mained in jail for six days
liminary investigation. It a
the complaint, the justice of the peace advised the,
of police to release A, B, and C, hut the mayor obj
because it would be hard to locate them later
The judicial authorities are the Justices of the Supreme they go in biding. Is the m
tsntion? ExpIah your answer.
Court and Court of Appeals, the Judgee of the Court of
First .[nstance, the Judge of the City Court, and the Justices No. On the assumption
' ,
of the Peace Court, , P d & c a l or any of the other prosecut- for some legal mound, the
ing attorneys with whom the complaint may be filed isnot them with the justice of the peace, a judicial a
a judicial authority. the next day is a sufficient compliance with the
358 369
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REYIE,WEK
' ' into consideration (People vs. Acosta. C.A.). The ob- Of the jailer, he is liable for arbitrary detention by d 8
..'
jection of the mayor to the release of A, B, and C does laying release through negligence. jq
not make him liable criminally, because the justice of the Elements of Selaziins mleasa:
peace has the sole power to order the re:ease or commit- 1. The offender i s a public officer or employee.
..? ,,. ,
ment of the persons arrested, after preliminary investiga- 2. That there is a judicial or executive arder.for 'the r e
tion. lease of a prisoner or detention pi-isoner, or that there i s 8
proceeding upon a petition for the liberation of such p e r s m
3. The affender without good reii~onsdelay (1) the serving
906 A policeman, on mere suspicion that B committed theft of the notice of such order to the prisoner, or (2) the rperfom-
, R a n d without reasonable ground thercfor, arrested the anee of such judicial or executive order for the release of tha
latter and locked him up in jail, but ,5 hours later he prisoner, or (3) the proceedings upon a petition for the release
delivered B t o the justice of the peace, by filing a' eom- 4 of such person.
I
plaint for theft. Finding that the coaplaint was not 1
suppoi:ted by any evidence, the justice of the peace dis- 908. What are the crimes known as violation of domicile?
missed the complaint. Is the policeman- liable for arbitrary They are:
detention? Why? ~l 1. Violation of domicile by entering a dwelling against
The policeman is guilty of arbitrary detention by ar- the will of the owner thereof or making search without
resting B without legal ground under Art. 124, because the previous consent of the owner;
. he arrested the person without warrant of arrest and the 2. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in
arrest was made not under any of the circumstances pro- the service of those legaily obtained; and
vided by the Rules of Court, whereby an arrest . m y be 4i 3 . Searching domicile without witnesses.
made without warrant of arrest. He arrested the person
on mere suspicion and without reasonable ground therefor.
4 A policeman, becoming angry with the owner of a house,
Note: .Henee, even if the geaee officer delivered the person forcibly entered the same against the will of said owner
(horn he had arrested to the proper ludieial authority within and attacked him inside his house. Is the policeman
the time specified in Art. 125, if the arrest WBB without legal liable for violation of domicile? Explain your answer.
praund, the peace officer is liable under Art. 124. i
No, because the policeman was n ~ t _ a c t i in
g hisqffNal
907. The justice of the peace who dismissed a criminal case capacity- when he entered the house. The policeman should
for insufficiency of evidence told his clerk to tell the be held .liable for physical injuries committed on the per-
jailer l o release the accused, unless held on other charges. son of the owner 3f the house, with the aggravating cir-,
.
'
The jailer did not release the accused, because the order cumstance that the crime was committed in t h e - n l g
was not in writing. As a consequence, the accused con- of the offended party.
tinued to be detained in jail until the next day when the Note: It cannot be trespass to .dwelling, because when trespass
justice of the peace called the jailer to his office and to dwelling is_.a ,direct m e a n s . . t o - ~ ~ m - ~ i t _ . . ~ ~ o ~ith ~is. _ c ~ e ,
,
reprimanded him for disobeying his order. Is the jailer .absorbed
... in the other crime.
, criminally liable? Why? Vioiation of domicile under Art. 128 i s usuallv committed
when the publie officer has eesea-ant.
Yes, because a verbal order of release from the justice
~'. , . of the peace is sufficient. Hence, the jailer is liable for 910. In what cases may a public officer who 'entered the:?
delaying release. Since there is no malice on the part domicile of an individ?tal and searched papers and other,&
"
360 961
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CllIDfINAL LAW REVIEWER
,... .
effects found therein, without search warrant, not be Elements of violation of domicile by enta*ing and/w aearehhgi
held c:riminally liable? the dweiling: ,
y? . .
proyided that thcrf: is an i n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . o f - p ~ h-It . ~ b i ~ ~ ~ . n
b{ the owner.
362 363
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
is committed even if the search was made in the presence 917. Does a policeman or chief of police have a legal g o
of the owner or in the presence of other persons, provided for interrupting a meeting simply 1Secause the speaker
that the owner did not give his consent to the search. talking against his religion?
914. During the meeting in Manila of the municipal mayors If the meeting is peaceful, the fact that the speake
of the different municipalities in the Philippines, several ! , , is talking against his religion is not a legal ground
of them created a disturbance, resulting in the interrup- i interrupting. such meeting. He must respect the free
tion of the meeting. Are those mayors who created If the speech is defamatory, he may later
the disturbance which resulted in the interruption of the a cdmplaint for defamation against; the speaker, but
$
o f police o r the policeman cannot legally stop t h
,. . -
meetina liable for intermution of ,oezceful meetina under
,'
/Of speech.
chief
moeting.
Art. 131 of the Revised Penal Code?
No. The public officer or employee liable under Art. 918. May a public school principal stop' the speaker 'in the
131 of the Revised Penal Code must have the intention commencement exercises who delivered a campaign speech,
to prohibit, interrupt or dissolve the peaceful meeting. It it being election time?
would seem that the public officer o r employee, commit- Yes. There is a legal ground f o r stopping him, b e
ting the crime under Art. 131 must be acting in their cause the speaker was talking about a prohibited subject . '
.,.. official capacity. And even if that is not required, a
in view 01 the occasion.
. . distinction should be made between a case where the public
Illustration: The municipal president bf a town stopped the
officers are participants in the meeting and a, case where s eaker from continuing with his speech at a publie meeting,
they are not participants therein. In the first case, it is
disturbance of public order under Art, 153; in the second
2 ecause the speaker talked of politics contrary to the agree- '
ment. It was held tliat the munioipal president was not liable
case, it is interruption of peaceful meetkg without legal J, , , or interruptins peaceful meeting (People vs. Yalung, C.A.).
ground under Art. 131.
919. hat are the crimes against' religious worship?
Since they were participants in the meeting which was
' They are:
interrupted by reason of the disturbance they created,
they are not liable under Art. 131. I,, Interruption of religious worship (Art. 132); and
1 2 . Offending the religious feelings (Art. 133).
915. What crime would be committed if the offenders who /
dissolved or interrupted a peaceful meeting without legal '$60. What would be the crime if the public officer who pre- ~Y
ground a private individuals who are not participants vented or disturbed the religious ceremony or manifesta-
/
6
916. When may a public officer prohibit, interrupt or dissolve prevented or disturbed a religous ceremony or manifests-
a meeting without incurring criminal liability? tion of any religi,on?
When the meeting is Rot peacefuland there is a l e& &$& G q CJwy.
If there is only a distur ance, it is st hanc of
g r r for prohibicthg, dissolving or interrupting it. public order under Art. 153; if prevented by violence or
364 365 %
I
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWIER
I,
. intimidation, it is grave coercion and the penalty is one 925. A group of persons rose puhlicly and took arms against,!
degree higher (Art. 286). the forces of the government, resulting in the killing';
of certain policeman. Some of thoije who rose publielyj
922. A policeman and a private individual threw stones a t were killed and those who were captured refused t~ give:
the minister of the Iglesia Ni Cristo who was then any statement or make any admission. Are. they liable
preaching in their chapel. What crime was committed for rebellion? Why?
. .
by the policeman and what crime was committed by
private individual?
Both are liable for offending religious feelings under
No, because the purpose of the public uprising is not
known.&hen the w u e of the public uprising and
taking arms against the forces of the government iiJm-
Art. 133. It is not necessary that the offender is a public kq_ow_n, the offenders cannotbe held liable for rebellion.
officer. The act of throwing stones at the minister i s Elenenl.8 4 j rebellion:
notoriously offensive to the feeling of the members of the ;/That thore bo (a); public upriaing and (b) taking a m
Iglesia ni Cristo. against the Government.
2:'The p-ssuf the uprising or movement is *c-
923. Suppose, that in a baptismal party where all the guests- a . To remove from the allegiance to said Government
were Catholics, a priest who was there was slapped and of its laws,
gravely slandered by a man belonging to another reli- (1) the territory of the Philippines or any part there-
gion, is that man liable for offending the religious feel- ,of, or
ing? Why? ( 2 ) any body of land, naval 0.c other armed forces; or
b,' 'To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly
No, because the acts wei'e ilot performed in (1) a o r partially, of any of their powers or prerogative.?.
place d c z m o religjous worship or ( 2 ) during t h e ~ c d e - ,.-
bration of any religious ceremony. 926. , Suppose, those who were captured admitted that their
N o t e : Art. 133 requires that the acts notoriously offensive te purpose was to overthrow the Philippine Government, but
the feelings of the faithful must be perfomled either (1) in a
- . place devoted to religious worship or ( 2 ) during the eelehratiom 5. ! they failed to accomplish their said purpose, because they
of any religious ceremony. were overp3wered by the forces of the Government, what
stage of the execution of the crime of rebellion did they
924. A Protestant meeting was being held on the middle o f reach?
a road. The procession of the Catholics was approaeh- The crime of rebellion is complete or consummated the
i n g that meeting when the accused, who had been speak- very moment a group of rebels rise publicly and take arms
ing against the Pope, shouted, "This criminal and de-- against the GoxemBent, for the purpose of overthrowing
vouring beast!", referring to the Pope. Is the accused, the same by force./he i&ent or mrpase of overthrow-
liable for the crime of offending the religions feelings? ing the Government is only the $ubjec&te element of the
Explain. offense and it is m i c i e n t , that such pmse_exists. It is
No. In that crime, the offender must act with deliberate not necessarx that they accomulish it.
intent to hurt the feelings of the faithfuls. The accused j .T??
4:-
in the case of U.S. vs. acmes, where a great
.I
did not purposely attack the Pope and deviate from the 'j riumber of individuals gathered at a place with the object ':
.
, ,. .. topic of his speech when the procession was approaching of attacking the government and of taking possession by
.. the meeting place. means of force ytown, which object .they did not aceom;%$$
5 ,,'i*./:,.!..i
i, 1
&?i.
366 .j, 567 .&
I
..
I.
.. murder as a separate crime from rebellion? Can the be punished as leaders of the rebellion (Art. 135, last par..,:
crime of murder committed by A be cnmplexed with ’ R.P.C.).
rebellion?
No. The act was perpetrated in furtherbrce of rebellion. 934. May a group of alien residents in this country who rose.
Since murder was committed in iurtheraiice of rebellion, publicly and took arms against the government for the
murder is not a separate offense. Any or all of the acts purpose of overthrowing the same be held liable f o r
described in Art. 135, when committed a: a means to or rebellion? Why?
in furtherance of the subversive ends dexribed in Art. Yes, because Art. 135, which provides for the penalty
.. 134, become absorbed in the crime of rebellion. It can- for those guilty of rebellion mentions, “Any person” with-
not be I-egarded or penalized as distinct c k n e s in them- out qualification as to his nationality. Moreover, in the
.. selves. In law, they are part and parcel of the rebellion case of U S . vs. Del Rosario, it was held that it is not
itself and cannot be considered as giving rise to a separate a defense in the prosecution for rebellion that the offenders
. , crime that, under Art. 48 of the Code, would constitute never to3k the oath of allegiance t o the government or that
a complex one with that of rebellion (People vs. Togonon, they never recognized it. It is submitted that this ruling
et ai.). may apply Lo resident aliens. To hold otherwise, is to
negate the right of the government to exercise authority
932. In what cases may a public officer or employee be held ovei’ certain class of the population.
liable for rebellion?
A public officer or employee may be held liable for 935. When i s the crime of murder, lxbber-y or arson cam-mit-.
rebellion by doing any of the following: ( I ) engaging in tcd in the oourse of the rebellion punished as a separate
war against the forces of the government; (2) destroy- offense, and when is it considered as part of tile com-
ing property or committing serious violence; and (3) exact- mission of rebelfion?
ing contributions o r diverting public funds from the law- The common crimes of‘ murder, robbery, and arson
ful purposc for which they are appropriated (Art. 135, committed in the coiixe of rebellion may be punished as
R.P.C.). seperalc offenses when they are committed_ for private
Note: A public offieer or enipioyec m a y also be guilty of re-’ purposes or profit, vilhout any p d i t j .a!.motiW_o_n. But
bellion by promoting, maintaining o r headinz a rebellion, or .ivhen any of these common crimes s committed in the
by merely participating o r executing the commands of others course oC t h e rebellion, not for pri ate ends or profit,
in the rebellion. This is so, because Art. 135 States that re-
bellion may be committed by “any person who promotes, msin- but to accomplish any of the purposes of rebellion, it shall
’
tnins or heads a rebellion.” The same article a h says, “any he considered a ~ ~ b ~ o r bine the
d crime of rebellion.
person merely particioating O P execotinp. the command of others -I--
in a rebellion” is liable. 936. Several ,persons had the purpose of overthrowing the
Government. They secretly enlisted their sympathizers
933. Who shnll he punished as leaders of the rebellion, if ,as future soldiers of the movement and solicited contrihu-
their i&entities are not known? - tions from those willing to give. Before they could or-
. , Those who in fact directed the others, spoke for them, ganize to rise publicly and take arms against the GOV-
.. signed receipts and other documents issued in their names, ernment, they were arrested by the . ~ a h h
. or performed similar acts on behalf of the rebels shall
I
and when investigaled they confessed t o the foregoing
.-<
370 372
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIIGWER
facts. For what crime can they be prosecuted and pnn- proclamations, writings, emblems, banners and other repre-
ished? sentations tending to the same end.
C&&a_cy-to. commit rebellion. There is an agreement
as shown by the purpose; there is a decision to commit 939. What wonld be the crime, if the crime of rebellion &s
rebellion, as shown by enlisting men and soliciting con- a s k committed by the peoplo to whom the p r o p o d
tributions to carry out the purpose. was made or who were incited to commit it?
The crime committed is e n . The proposal or in-
c;/.i
93
9o
Under Art. 135, public officers or employees may also
commit the crime of rebellion by any of the manners
specified therein. How wonld you distinguish 'rebellion
citing to connnit rebellion is absorbed.
372 373
I
They must pursue any of the following objects: 9.14. What is the nature of the crime of sedition?
1. To prevent the promulgation or execution ‘of any It is one of those offenses which a r e directed against
law or the holding of any popular election: f the authority, not against the existence of the government,
2. To prevent the National Government, or a h provin- or the general peace. The u@g&?-_objsst of sedition is
cial or municipal government, 01’ any public officer thereof a vglation of tine puhlic-.peace.,
from freely exercising its or his functions, or to prevent
the execution .of any administrative order; 945. E, in a meeting, uttered: “The big ones are persecuting
3 . To inflict any act of hate nr revenge upon the per- and oppressing us, who are small, which they have no
son or property of any public officer or employee: right to do.” Then shouts were heard from the audience,
4 . To commit, for any political or social’end, any act R saying, “Let u s fight them until death.” Is this in-
of hate or revenge against p r i n t e persons or any social citing t o rebellion o r inciting to se,rlition? Why?
class: and Inciting t o sedition, because the people were actually
5 . To despoil, for any political or social end, any per- incited when they said, “Let us fight them,” followed .by
son, municipality or province, o r the National Government R’s shouting, “Let us fight them tc death.” When E
of all its property or any part thereof. uttered that the big oues ivere persecuting and oppressing
them, he was lamenting a feeling of hatred andxexe.we
043. A wanted to eliminate his political rival B before the among them (People vs. Evangelista). To inflict an act
election which was about to take place in their province. ”
of hate or rcvenge against the person or property of public
A had an understanding‘ With the Huks, whose com- officer is one of the objects of sedition. The crime of
mander was his friend, to the effect that the Huks would inciting to sedition is committed when the offender who
attack the barrio where B was living, with a particular does not take direct part in the crime of sedition i&
end in view of killing B. During the attack madc by
others to the accomplishment of any o f the objects of
the Hukri in which A also took part, B was seriously
injured and his house was burned. Considering that the sedition by means 01“ speeches.
Huks were engaged in rebellion and A was in conspiracy
94F. Suppose, the speaker uttered and told the audience, “Over-
with the Huks, do you believe that A committed rebel-
lion? Explain your answer. throw the present Government and establish your own
government, the government of the poor. Use your whip
NO. A committed pkditioa
so t.hat there may he marks on their sides”. Is this
If the purpose of the vpr&ing is cot exactly against inciting to rebellion? State your reason.
thesovernment and not for the purpose of doing any No. This is inciting to sedition. The reason is that
of the things defined in Art. 134 of the Revised Penal
the words uttered “suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies
Code, bi:t-.-merely to attain by force or other means out- 1,
or riots,’’ which is one of the ways of inciting to sedition
side of legal methods one object, to wit, to commit for
under Art. 142 of the Revised Penal Code (People vs.
any political end an act of hate against private person, Nabong) .
the crime committed is sedition.
N o t e : While it is true that the Huks were engaged in rebellion ! 947. May there be inciting tn sedition even if the inciting does
and that A was in w n s p i r a c y with them, their purpose was
< not to overthrow the government, but o&&Q-@fljct fozL&iEl not relate to the accomplishment of any of the objects,
end an act ..of. hate against B. of sedition mentioned in Art. 139?
374 375
I
Yes. There are two parts of Art. 142. The first part . ~ducedisaffection among the people a n d - a state of feeling:;,.
defines inciting to sedition by inciting others to the accom- incompatible with a disposition to remain 1oyal”to the
i . .. ,
plishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition, Government and obedient to, the la.ws.
by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, ernblems Under the clear and present danger rule, it is required’~
or other representations tending to the same end. The ,‘thatthere must be a reasonable ground to believe that the
second part defines inciting to sedition, as by uttering danger apprehended is imminent and that the evil to be
seditious words or speeches, or by writing, publishing or prevented is a serious one. There iaust be the’probability
circulating scurrilous libels against the Government or of serious injury to the State.
any of the duly constituted authorities thereof, which tends Eznntpl~ of the application of c l e w and v e s e n t danger &:
to disturb the public peace. ,,In the second part of Art. A political @arty applied for a permit to hold a publIc
142, the accomplishment of any of the objects of sedition mecting in Mimila. The Mayor refused to grant permit.
is not the purpose of the act of inciting others. The refusal of the mayor to grant permit for the holding
of a public meeting was predicated upon fear that in view of
948. What is the justification for punishing the uttering or the bitterness af the speeches expected from the minority men
- - who^ were fresh from political defeat and were smarting with
writing and publishing of sediti,ous words or speeches?
,charges of fraud agaiiist those in power, there might be hreach
The justification for punishing it is that the utterances . of the peace and of public order.
or writings which tend to overthrow, or undermine the Held: The danger was not imminent and the evil to he
.. security of, the governmellt or t o weaken the confidence prevented was not a serious one. The mayor was ordered to
of the people in the government are against the public issue a permit (Primieias VB. Fugono) .
peace, and are criminal not only because they tend t0
951. What are the crimes against legislative or similar bodies.
-
incite a breach of the peace but also because they are
--
conducive t~ the destruction of the goxe.rgment itself. They are: (1) preventing the meeting of a deliberative
body by force or fraud (Art, 143); (2) disturbing its
949. Does not the second part of Art. 142 violate the eonsti- session or meeting; and (3) misbehaving in .the presence
tutional guaranty of freedom of speech and of the press? of any such bodies as to interrupt its proceedings or to
It is opined that it does, because what is Dunisheid in impair the respect due to it (Art. 144).
that part: of Art. 142 is cot, the act of ineicing to sedition Note: The legislative or similar bodies referred to nre eithe?
but the Citterances. or the-publication of words or speeches,. House of Congress, its committees or sub-committees, constitu-
thereby affecting the freedom of speech and press. Under tional commissions, provincial hoard or city or municipal council
the c!e&r-and..present danger rule, the second part of OF board.
Art. 142 may be dgc&red~u.nconstitntiona1.
952. What is the liability of il person who disturbs the pro-
950. What is. your understanding of the “dangerous tendency ceedings of either House of Congress?
. rule’’ in relation to the crime of inciting to seditbn, and
.. The same act of disturbing the proceedings of either
.
how is it distinguished from the “clear and present danger House of Congress may be made the basis for contempt
rule”? proceeding and/or for criminal prosecution (Lopez vS.
Under the (angerous tongency rule, there is inciting
~
De 10s Reyes).
to sedition when the yords uttered or. nublished have a
seditious, tendency, in the sense that they could easily pro- 953. What do you understand by parliamentary immunity?,
376 377
I
I I
i
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CIUMINAL LAW REVIEWER
1’ ,SW*
Parlinmentary immunity, under the Constitution, means 2156. D,oes parliamentary immunity mean exemption from crunBq
, ,.>.y
that the members of Congress shall, in all cases except ina1 liability?
Ui
treason, felony and breach of the peace, be pivileged from No, because the immunity under the Revised Penal Code
arrcst during their attendance bt the session of Congress, 1
extends only to awest and search during regular or special,
and in going to and returning from the same. Under the session of Congress and the felony committed is not punish-
Revised Penal Code, it means that the members of Con- able under the Revised Penal Code by a penalty higher
I
. . gress should not be arrested or searched during the regular than pi.ision .irztqior. Even if a senator o r representative
or special session, except in case a member has committed committed a crime under circumstances where his arrest
a crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code by a and/or search would be punished as a crime, he can be
penalty higher than pvision mayor. prosecuted and, if found guilty, he can be punished.
Eveu under the Constitution, parliamentary immunity
954. In what cases may a public officer lawfully arrest or is limited only to civil arrest. The immunity excludes all
search a senator or a rempresentative? indictable offcnses.
In the following cases a public officer may lawfully
arrest or search a senator or representative: (1) when ,1157. In n meding where many persons were invited to con-
Congress is not in regular or special session, he may law- sider the ways and means of improving the community,
fully arrest or search a senator or representative in con- A volunteered to speak and, in the course of his speech,
nection with any crime; and ( 2 ) when Congress is in he incited the audience to carry arms and use force and
regular o r special session, he may lawfully arrest or search violence against the mnyor and councilors for neglecting
a senator or representative, provided that the crime com- their duties. Js that meeting an illegal assembly? E X -
mitted is punishable under the Revised Penal Code by a plain vour aiiswer.
penalty lt<gher than prision mal/or. No, because to constitute a n illegal assemblx, where
T
Note: A member of Congress may bc arrostod or searched the audience is incited, the meeting must be organized
during regular or special session, if he committed homicide for the purpose of inciting the audience to the ;commission
o r rape, because these crimes are punishable by re02usio.n ?ern- of treason, rebellion, sedition or direct assank4
poral, a penalty higher than pvision. magor. pose of the meeting mentioned in the question w
Note: A is liable for alarms and scandals under
955. May a member of Congress, who, during its session, has par. 4, of tlie Revised Penal Code.
in his possession a revolver without license be searched
and arrested,’ the crime not being punishable under the ‘958. A group of about 20 persons, armed with bolos, daggers
‘ Revised Penal Code? Explain your answer. and licensed pistols, were gathered together in a c e r t a i n
No. The crime of illegal possession of firearm is punish- place holding a meeting. A group of PC soldiersJwho
able by imprisonment from one to five years, which-is ! were suspecting them investigated each and every one
not higher than prision mayor. The part of the provision of them on the spot, but n,ot one of those persons revealed
relating t o “crime punishable under this Code” states the the purpose of the meeting. Can they be prosecuted and
exception. Hence, crimes punished by special laws are , and punished far illegal assembly? Explain your answer.
included in the prohibition. It is only when the penalty No, because to constitute the crime of illegal assembly
is higher than prision mayo? that the crime should be the meeting must be either one of the following: (1) any
’K
punishable under the Revised Penal Code. .’ meeting atteuded by a m e d persons for the purpose ?f
378 319
>c
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEYYER
380 381
I
I
,
CRIhIIXAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVItEWER
.~ 2. By conspiring with any other person to overthrob- 986. What is the difference between conspiracy to coma
the Government of the Republic of the Philippines or the rebellion under the Revised Penal Code and conspiracy
. . government of any of its political subdivisions by force, .overthr,ow the government under the Anti-Subversion Act?;!
violence, deceit, subversion or other illegal means f o r the In conspiracy to commit rebellion under the Revised
purpose of placing such government or political subdivisions. Penal Code, the conspiracy relates to the crime of rebellion_
under the control and domination of any alien power. as t!ie latter crime is defined in the Revised Penal Code)
whereas, in conspiracy to overthrow the government under
. '/
3 . By taking up arms against the Government to over-~
throw it, to establish a totalitarian regimd in the 'Philip- the Anti-Subversion Act, the purpose of the offender is
pines, and to place the government under the control and to estahlish in tb.e Philippines a totalitarian regime and
domination of an alien power. to lace the government under the control and domination
.,/
pines by deceit for the purpose of placing such Govern-. while engaged in the performance of official duties or
ment oi' political subdivision under the control and domina- on the occasion of such performance,
tion of any alien power. Elements of dived assault of the 1 s t form:
1. The offender employs farce or intimidation.
9 a. What is the difference between rebellion or insurrection- 2 . The aim of the offcnder is to attain any of the purposes
under the Revised Penal Code and violation of the Anti- of t h e crime of rebellion or any of the objects of the
Subversion Act where the purpose of the offender is to crime of sedition.
take up arms against the government? 2. There is no public uprising.
Xlaments of d.bect nssuult of the Bnd / o w n :
Both in rebellion or insurrection and in violation of
1. That the offender (a) ,makes an attack, (2) employs
the Anti-Subversion Act, the offender takes up a.rms.ta farce, ( e ) . makes a serious intimidation, or (d) makes
overthrow the government. Gut while in rebellion or in- B serious resistance.
surrection the purpose of the ofEender in taking arms is jf
2 . That the peisan assaulted is n person in authority or
only to overthrow the existing government and replace it his agent.
with a new government, in violation of the Anti-Subversion 8 . That t h e person i n authority o r his agent is (a) engaged
.,
in the perfarinanee of official duties, or (b) on the
Act the purpose of the offender in taking arms to over- OCCBSi0,l of SUCII performnaee.
throw the government is to establish in the Philippines 4 . There is no ,iiublie uprising.
, . .a totalitarian regime and to place the government under Note: The phrase "on the occasion of such performance'' should
the control and domination of an alien power. be undwsloud as "by reason thereof."
382 383
?
,.
/' ,~,
i
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIllIINAL LAW REVIEWER
I
8. May direct assault 'be committed against a private in- They are :
dividual? Explain. (1) By attacking;
Yes. if the crime committed is direct assault of the (2) By using force;
. . first form. because in this form of direct assault the ob- ( 5 ) By seriously intimidating; or
ject of the offender may be any of the objects of sedition. , (4) By seriously resisting a person in authority o r his
.. When the object is to commit for any political or social ,,"agent while in the performance of his olficial duty or
end an act of hate or revenge against private person or by reason of the past performance o f such duty.
social class, and there is no public and tumultuous up-
rising, but only force or intimidation, the crime is direct 971. What degree of force is necessary t o constitute direct
: assault even if the offended party is a private individual.
assault?
'S
But in the second form of direct assault, the crime is
always committed against a person in authority or his If the offended party is only an agent of a person;
agent. in authority, the force employed must be of a serious
character as t o inclicate determination to defy the law
B How do you distinguish persons in authority from their and its representative at all hazards.
agents? The force employed need not be serious when the of-
Persons in authority are those public officers directly ended party is a person in authority. The mere laying
vested with jurisdiction, that is, those who have the power of hands, as slspaing his face, is sufficient.
and authority to govern and execute the laws. Thus, the
Provincial Treasurer is a person in authority because with- the purpose of the crime of direct assault by resist-
in the province for which he is appointed, he has the duty ing a person in authority or his agent, what is the nature
t o execute all the laws pertaining to finance and collection of the resistance? Why?
of taxes in addition to hi6 other duties; tine Provincial Serious resistance; otherwise, it would be resistance
Health Officer, within the province where he is appointed, and serious disobedience only.
has the duty to execute all the laws relating to health
and sanitation; the Division Superintendent of Schools,
with respect to all the laws pertaining to education, in A, the mayor of the town, and B, a private individual,
were conversing in front of the municipal building. I n
additioii to his general superintendence over all the schools
and school teachers within the province to which he is the course of their conversation about politics, B and the
.
assigu ed
mayor became engaged in an altercation, resulting in
B's giving a fist blow on the lips of the mayor. Is B
On the other hand, agents of persons in authority are IiabIe .for direct assault? Explain your answer.
only charged with the maintenance of public order and
~~
. the protection and security of life and property. He is No, because the mayor was& in the performance
a subordinate official of a person in authority. Thus, the
municipal treasurer and the municipal health officer are
only agents of the provincial treasurer and district health
officer, respectively. Note: The crime committed is o n l y ( & ~ ~
384 385
i
formance of his official duty when he is attacked o r b a w n that the a m c k w d e by reason of the past , :,
/
,
-I
/
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWIER
' .?# I
.. , ~,.> ~
No. He is liable for physical injuries o& because
&
b w s e contendine in the exercise of authority. Jhere !
was no i,ntention t w h e authority of the n t , k ut t ..
o-son in authority.
9 1. A slapp,ed the barrio lieutenant who was helping the
policeman in preserving order in a procession., Is the blows. Is A liable for direct assault?
crime direct assault? Explain your answer.
I t is submitted that inasmuch ai3 the offended party
.. Yes, because the barrio lieutenant is a person in au-
was no longer a person in authority at the time he was
. ,. thority by direct provision of Art. 152, as amended. =e attacked, A was not liable f o r direct assault. One of the
.
f w w d , when the offended uarty is a person i n
a-yt, need not be serious. The law simply mentions elements of direct assault is that the offended party is
laying oP hands, without making any distinction as to dif- a person in authority or his agent.
ferent cases. It is to be noted that the same provision 984. A policeman saw X when the latter attacked the justice
of Art. 148 with regard to intimidation or resstance as
other constitutive elements of assault expressly requires i
that they be serious. If the law had intended to distin-
guish between the case of a serious laying of hands and
. ,
,I
that which is not serious, i t would have laid down that itted by X?
~ .', distinction. This indicates that the distinction which the
. . ' ' law makes in the cases of intimidation or resistance is
4
... . ..
388 i 389
-v
I
stabulary major ordered them t o get out from the road against the policeman, direct assmlt or resistance and >
:
; and clear the way. They refused to do so. What crime serious disobedience? Why? n
’ . . . was committed by the strikers? Explain your answer. The crime committed was only qSistance and serious
The strikers committed the crime of simule disobedienxe,
I G-3 The order disobeyed is that which requiTed
because the disobedieuce Lo an-of H person in a- him to go to the police sergeant. ,The foree ‘emdovef
w t y was not of a serious n a b.e (Art. 151, par. 2, i u t o f a &s nature and did not indicate defiance I
R.P.C.). of the law 01: its r e p r e s e n w e , iEview
the aecusedadxd.re-i
a
f& &at
. ,, :.
For raiding his house where some gamblers were arrested, -of resistance and serious rii8i-e:
A became resentful against the policeman who made the 1. That a p s n in authority or’h-t ikenaaaed’h
raid. The next day, A met that policeman, while patrol- the nerformaneeqf_official duty.
’.’ ling on the street, and struck him with his fist which 2. Such official duty c o d i: givinp a Iawful~order to
the ofgnder. . ,
hit the latter on his breast; but when the policeman held
his hand, A desisted from further attacking him. What I
S . That the offender resists or seriously disobeys such per-
crime wais committed by A? eon in authority or his azent.
.
. ,. 4. That the act of the offender is not included in- the
A wa2: liable f o r 6 t r e a t m e n t on@ He w a s not liable provisions of Arts. 148, 149, and 150.
-
for resistance and serious disobedience, beeause there was
no order by the policeman that A disobeyed. u d
i
--
What are the6rimes against public o r a
&I Le gkect assault, be&se the force employed k.p& They are:
ofasedous nature as to inilkate &e, Ofthebw
Tumults and other disturbances of Oublic order.
case of US. vd.
Unlawful use of means of puh-n and unlawfui
Tabiana, wherein the policeman who was struck on the breast
by T a l h n a with his hand had ordered Tabianr to submit him- , f Alarms and scandals.
self to the arrest being effected. There w88 then in order
disobeyed.
,’ 4 Delivering prisoners from i&&
a certain Chinam? I 98# A, beccming angry with the employees in a government
office, shouted to the top of his voice and chaenggd
I
alien registration
both the agent them to a fight. There was disturbance in the office.
390 391
.*’
I , ,
I I
i' f
./
. I
.99
.I---
.
Note: A is liable fw @arms and seandal$u.ider
p' news that the President of the Philippine% died in his "other means", but the penalty for falsification of a public
/
sleep, is that reporter liable for unlawful use of means document by a priyate individual under Art. 172 is prision
. . of publication? Explain. correccional medium and maximum periods and a fine
No, because such false news may not endanger the not exceeding F'5,000, which is higher than the penalty
for delivering prisoner from jail if other means are used
public order or cause damage to the interest or credit
(awesto m a g o r ) . Although the falsification was the means
, ,'.,. .
I of the St,ate.
used to commit the crime of delivering prisoners from jail,
99 . Iftown,a person fired his pistol upward in the air within
what crime was committed by him? Explain.
a
the falsiiication which is a graver offense cannot be ab-
sorbed by the lesser offense.
E l m m t s of deJive&ng p7isoneru ,from jail:
The crime of4i&ms and scandamwas committed by 1. That there is B pemm confined in> jail or penal estab
him, bsakse it producd alarm or d a n e r , since the slug lishment.
i
ired from the pistol would fall down and might hit a 2 . That the offender removes therefrom such person, or
person. elps the escape of such person.
3 . By means of violence, intimidation, or bribery, or by
/
a perison caused serious disturbance in 'the meeting other means.
of a municipal council, what crime was committed by
him? 994. A is a detention prisoner in jail. B scut through C to A
file wrapped in the clothes delivered to A. Later, A
-
He committed disturbance of proceedings of a legislative
ed the file in cutting the iron bars and succeeded in
body unddr Art. 144 of the Revised Penal Code.
escaping. What crime was committed by B who sent
the file to C? Explain your answer.
Delivering prisoners irom jail.
There are two ways of committing the crime o f deliver-
ing prisoners from jail: ,@f by E m A n g a person eon-
fined in jail or penal establishment, and @ by
such person to escape. The act of helping the escape of
a person confined in jail or penal establishment d-
h the intention of helping B to escape from jail, e&~&$ thaL&f Lrovidinq the m'isonc with tools armeaps
ed an order of release and counterfeited the signa- that may facilitate his escape.
392 393
... ~
,-.~.
*:;,:., :.r,.:~' ,
, .
I
i
I
I
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
--
person is not a detention prisoner. A person confined he might also he killed. He never gave himself up hi;
the authorities even if the disorder already ceased to exist.)
. .. in prison pending his trial &
i a detention urisoner.
-9of evasion on the oocasion of disordem:
Is he liable criminally?
1. The o f f e n d g is a convict who is se&ng sentence i u Not under Art. 158, because the disordgr mustresult
penal institution. from conflagration, earthquake, e s u o n or similar catas-"
2. Them is rd- resultina frm- *te, o r d i n g the m u t i w in which h e x a s not partici-
a. conflagration. e d . But he is liable under Art.157, for evasion by
b. earthquake, -.-
escaping during tile +yam of his sentence. ' .
e. explosion, or
d. similar catastrophe; or Noti: F i s an i ed resistance to superior officers.
. . Hence, lsarmlng the guards hy certain prisoners is not mutiny.
e. in which he has & participated.
B U the guard@ attacked th&m~&s, there is mutin=.
3. The offender evades the service of his sentence by .leaving
the penal institution where he is confined, 0.1 the oceasipn
of such disorder or during the mutiny. 1002. A. was gwa>ted a a d i t i o n a l pardon after serving four
4. The offender fails-ot p to the authorities
years of the six years imprisonment imposed on him by
, w i g n 48 hours following the issuance of a pmelamation the court. The condition was that he ShQuld not commit
by the Chief Executive announcing the passhg away of any other crime in the future. Oln year after, he wi1q
such +unity. accused and found guilty of concealing deadly weapon
Note: If the offender fails to give himself up, ire ets an in punishable under a special law and was sentenced to pay
penalty is that the m c u s e h ~ a fine of twenty-five pesos. By order of the President,
f the time still remainine to be served
under the origina ntence, n a exceed six (6) months. A was reincarcerated and required ito serve the unexpired
If he ives himself u to the authorities
'
in 48 hours, portion of his sentence of six years. A filed a petition
Lf.
he shall z T & d - of the of.J&&.w for habeas corpus claiming and contending that he was
(Art. 98). illegally detained, because he was never prosecuted and
tried for violation of the conditional pardon under Art.
1000: Explain why those prisoners who & . n o t leave the pen& 159. Will his petition prosper? Why?
institution during a disorder are n o t entitled to a reduc- No, because the President of the P-s, &r
tion of their penalty. the Revised Administrative C o b (See. [64]), may order
Those convicts who remain in the penal institution are the arresi a& reincarceration of the person
&entitled to 1/5 deduction of their sentence, b m the conditions of the =don without previous judicial trial.
there is no assurawe that had they successfullv run away Jn such case, it would not be necessary to urosecute
and ' w d their
t-s, - l$v
. they would have, never-
ed i -1 with the a r i v a w
--
him and to li-
Penal Code.
L
&IL~ under Art. 159 of the Revised
convicted of violation of the conditional pardon, w h a t violation of the conditional pardon, as there was no coiidii
will be her penalty, the unexpired portion of destierrw ' tion violated.
which she was serving when granted a conditional pardon,. The duration of the condition subsequent annexed to
or the penalty of prision correcciondl in it3 minimum . a pardon would be limited to the remitted portion of the'
period? prisoner's sentence, unless an intention to extend it be-
c' ase
The Supreme Court held in one case that in such a .
the m u
d-
& $
of prision. eorreceio~@Z in its minimum erfbd,' when the
unexpired Dortion of his sentence is
1s h~ he t
years.
u
." yond that time was manifest from the nature of the condi-
tion or the language in which it was imposed (Infante
vs. Provincial Warden).
@
1005. A, 15 years and 7 months old, i s confined in the r q
formatory institution pursuant to Art. 80 of the Revised
.
',
years that tksxmuc ' t shall suffer the unexpired portion. Penal Code, having been found guilty of homicide. While
in that institution, A killed a guard there. Is there
I
ing without license. A's pardon dld not s t a t e t = i s A is a recidivist, because at the time A committed estafa.%
within which the condition thereof was to be observed.. it was after service of sentence for theft. To be a qua?i-'**
" recidivist, A must have committed estafa before beginning .to,
Hence, A had to observe the condition of the pardon only serve or while Eerving the sentence for theft. As e s t a f a . ' d
'within 1 year, 6 months and 20 days. When he com- theft are embraced in tho same title of the Code, A i s ' ?
'_ mitted another crime thereafter, it did not result in the reeidivisc.
... <
398 399
I
,,, ,.
'i i , CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWER .,I ~,
: .',
1
1407. While A was serving sentence for homicide, he inflicted of the peace in favor of X. M stole from the desk of 4i$!
. . .serious physical injuries on another prisoner. Is A a
secretary the paper with the signature of the Presidei#j
recidivist or a quasi-recidivist? Why? in blank and typewrote a document over it, making :the>,,:
i'.,.
- ..
. ..
A i s a quasi-recidivist, because when he committed the
. felony of serious physical injuries he was alreadz cmYi&ed
President liable to him for a sum of money. What c&e7<
was committed by M? Explain. Is M liable for forge+$
under Art. 161? Why7
b a a L i u & m a t of homicide a& he committed the new
', ' . felony while serving the sentence for homicide. Falsification of a private docum& The President "'
1009. What are the Gimes called forgeries3 .1. M m and importine false coins and utterine false i
They are: CAS in connivance w u e c-feiter or ~L?.Q&. r ; ~
4.
Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents , , ,.,
payable to bearer. 1012. A made a dollar coin of the United States. Is he'liable's
', . ,,-. .I_
8
Counterfeiting instruments not payable to bearer. for counterfeiting coins? Why?
4
Falsification of legislative documents. Yes, because & s n a m e a , n s the imitation of a
Falsification by public officer, employee or notary genuine coin. Under the law (Art. 163) , the counterfeit- :
or ecclesiastical minister.
.-ing
. of a c u a foreien country ig punishable. The,:,
. ..
4.
Falsification by private individuals.
&
Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and tele- -w
-- -
Spanish text of the law (Art. 163) Eses the word-!
any Qualifying word, which embraces not odx$
phone messages. those that are legal tender, but also those out of circulation.!
Falsification of medical certificates, certificates of
~
signature in blank with instruction to typewrite above Yes, because it is $ttempted counkFZEiEZ3 B&$i
his .signature the usual form of appoifltment for justice :a imitation of a genuine coin, the offender commence!4$,, .
.. .%
-"
400 401
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEMTER
. -the m
m
o-c directlv b v 'O,&ac'st, & d a t i n g after liberation. Is A liable for mutilating e
ot perform a& the acts of sxeeutiin -w Explain y o u amwer.
ce the felony, i t is because Lf the cause 4s No, because the law (Art. 164) r-
t he does not know how agmdmuL. . 9- t
.. m-&.l tender.
ve,r, there are a- who claim that when Note: Art. 164 uses the phrase8 "eo
i ~ imperfect
o th& no one rrav.be deceiwd and "current coins", which mean t h
p-orduce t h P a l t a s .
-
shall take off
. . piubstitutind with another -1
. : ~ y h mutilates
o
part of the metal either by filing i t
of inferior qualiv. One
a coin does not do so for the sake o f t i -
mutilator.
, .
:i f :
1 9 , bot to take advantage of the metal abstracted; 1013. What erinie is eoiiunitted by a person who makes 1-p
:appro
. ... -,---L-?, riates a p. .of .the. metal of the coin. &
a r t &',e %e biils which are imitations of the I-peso bill issued by
coin diminlsks in intrlnslc value. One who utters said Central Bank?
I ,..mutilated coin receives ita legal. value, much more thm
-its.intrinsic value (People vs. Tin Ching Ting, C.A.). I / .
. . .
?016.,,A.
.. _ . , was surprised by plicenian -;the 1-peso
siIv5r 'coiri;'.which ' w ;circpl+on bef& "the war in 1020. What crime is committed hy a person who
.;*2.-:..
": Philippine National Bank check?
tlie Philippin&s;.but ,w&i1 has,bekn withdrawn from cir-
4Q2 403
.
,. , .
I
i
is(&$ification of eommacial documenfiPeople vs, Samson, chased from his store, is that storekeeper criminally Iiabl'g
:i C.A.,and People vs. Cruz, C.A.). for possession of forged treasury or bank note? .ExpM,p:;
your answer.
..
, I.
Note: The "checks" mentioned in the law as obligation and
the intent to use the counter-.'.
security of the Philinpinea does not include e h a -si
Is51 or foreim banks *Qrivate core-. ThecEEQj to defraud or
. .
, . raferred t o as obligation and security of the Philippines a
tho2 is& by the Government and drawn aaainst DUbliC fnnda. . , , .'
1025. What crime was committed by a person who wrote the;^^.
1021. Is there any difference a8 to the manner the crime is word "Victory" in ink at the back of a one-peio .bill, zv.3
:T ' committed when the instrument involved in the forgery
, , . genuine pre-war treasury certificate "payable t o the &?arer
;j . Is payable to order?
, . <':.
- -I on demand", which has been, however, withdrawn ftom,..
y, . No, the manner of committing t m e i t i A e a , eirculation?
.L,
--
sary to obtain the cain in.tm&d, approved or pending apbrovsl by oilher House of Cane
or anv. nrovineial
_ . council.
board or munieiaal
1024.
.~ If the storekeeper keeps a counterfeited 50-peso hill to i 2.. That the offender a t h e same. ..
&$,: be used by him for comparison with bogus 50-peso bills 3 . That the a m n has ehan;wd the mealline::.
'is,, .td-
@qz:: that may be presented to him in payment .ofgoods par-
s:;Y$::.::., 4 . He has no proner ' th-or.
404
405
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER . ,... .
CRlMINAL LAW REYIEWER
2i : .
-
,;.;'.. ,, made b y ;
i .. ;.::I.:
~~
that the suspect admitted the commission of the crime, In the following cases:
knowing that the suspect did not admit anything, as in 1. When there is no law requiring the making of such
.. . fact he! denied having committed the crime. As the 811s- statement or the disclosure of certain facts;
d not know how to read, he signed it. Was the 2. When there is colorable truth of the statements in
b
investigator guilty of falsification? In the affirmative, a narration of facts. .,.,
what act of falsification did he commit? 3. When the person making the narration of facts h&;
Yes, .attributing to the suspect who participated in no knowledge of the falsity of the facts narrated by him:..
or proceeding statements other than those in fa& 4 . When the perversion of truth in the narration of
made or given by him. facts was not made with the wrongful intent of injuring-.
a third person.
. ....,., .’
. I
408 409
1
. . , ,$*
”~,,~ . i
I
J
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
ntrnded to be protected undex Art. 171 js the, intere2t of,~,the 1087. A, a private individual, prepared - a 'deed of sale wher6
..,. ..
,. . ',
, ommunity which is' mainly intended to be' @arantezd hy 'the
strictest 'faithfulness of tlie dficials charged with ,the, prepara-
he made a false-statement in t,he narr.ation of facts, makg
tion and preservation of acts in which they intervene. i n g it appear that he'sold his prwerty to B, when iti
And if ha did not take, advantage. 'of' his 'Dfficial position,
truth arid in fact he never sold it. . The, purpose of A W q
... , who is ,!t bq treated. as 5 private izdividual, to put his property beyond. the reach of A's. creditorel
.. i. Art. , 1 1 2 : ; p ~ ' 1, of the'Revised Penal Code. The consideration mentioned in the deed of.,+onveym$E
Und,ef-this pro&sion, damage 01. inteht to eausd damage is not was fictitious. 'Later, he asked a notxriry.public to havf
.:,;.. .: ,: ,,,, ..nscessary either,, bearduse what. is punished .under that i y d it n,otarized, which was done hy 'the notary :public, not
vision is the violation of the Dublie faith and the nerversm
of iha truth which the document ,solemnly proclaim. ..knoiving the statements contained in ' the dowment . tQ
" ,-
?rhe'&g a-:'i;lust be m&b.l (People vs. 'Reodiea and be false. What crime or crimes were. committed 'a$
;. ,: . ' Cbhlefo). r.Ei.en:'if ordinarily the d a h 'in 'imrnat8rie. 2 what document was falsified by A, considering that the
. ,
.: , &r&n.of suchh-da was made to conceal a , ' O r i m e ~ ~ ~ e .dqcument was prepared.'.by him., as a private,.individ$i
..
:<,,.. . tho, a c e u s e d A i t B crime, t h a e ;becomes, essential and the ,act of falsification. had been conimitted by hlm
(TG- .
'Belpiea, C.A.) . , 1. , , ; , : before the document was notariized? 1 -:xp
1035. A requested a stenographer in the office of the treasurer A committed other form .o-f
.. The docume$z
+A&.
.,?
sur
' . tb pay his land tax and gave him P4040:' 'The stenwjrapkei-, falsified by A is a 6 u E m T a . ' ,- ?
: . instekd of payins' the amount ' t o tlte trMsurer"for A,
,
sented t o the no
:~,P~''.'?%# official receipt. What crime was committed by the
.>
%-
:. . stenographer?
The stenographer committed two crimes, namely : (1)
, estafa and (2) falsification_af-document, the
' . receipt of his father. The act of falsification committed very act constituting the crime 0:
i S i g a genuine cbcumd which c a its- (See Art. 316, par. 4 , of the Revised Penal Code.)
i%. The falsification w a a m r y t o m i t M a . Note: In the case of People VS. Tan Diang, the Supreme %o
. The falsification was committed to conceal the crime sf
,__
-
the money, not as tax collectpr, but as a private individual. the same beyond the reach of his creditors, and that th
tion of the judgment issued realiaed only a small am
'1036. What i!s the crime committed by a private individual
, .. .
: ..
who.cooperates with a public officer in falsifying a docu-
ment, the public officer taking advantage of his official
iseaudulent a
certain qersonal ro erty of the debtor, the crime
(Art. 314, R.P.C.).
Under Art. 316. mar. 4, of the Revised Penal Code, i
position? . , other form of swindlim, - w
a-r, shall execute any fictiti
A private person who cooperates with a public officer I It would seem that the proper
<..;:,,:., -'
in the-:falsification of a public document W s thesame tion is other form of swindling,
>.
d ,. .,
~~:,~.,~..~. imty.and .penalty as the public officer. (Viada; US. R:P.C., because the deed of sale etitious and it
.. , ,,:. vs. Ponte). .
ecuted to 'the prejudice' of -mothe
i
. ,i.A,. ..,
4JO 411
,
,, ,..,,>.:
i
' 1 .
.,.
i
,
. .
.
B
i
;
,
,I
.
Thq'&&consists e t& falsified check
-.1038.What dociument was falsified when the signature of a. m A t of the car of the offended party, t .
. judge was counterfeited on the order of arrest prepared
'~
pretending to Dossess urouerty (money in the form of,,.
c G k ) or defrauding the offer.ded party by means of
.by a private individual and used the same to cause t h e other similar deceits.
_iI arrest of the offended party? Why?
The falsification of the check ' w a s n e c e s s a r y m e a G
. . F m : a t i o n of a 6ublic document) bv a urivate in- for committing estafa.
. ' dividual under Art. 172, par. 1, of the Revised Penal Code,
,'
, _I
the words "Pay to ", the sum of P1,OOO in words
and figures, and signed the signature of the owner of
-
mhis official osition, it is @%EifiEi€ion
Penal Code.
uub!i$ under Art. E?o??%%%ed
r,
the lost check with intention l o imitate it and with striking When the public officer, F p l o y e e or pstary public-,::
siqilarities with it. Then, A used the check in buying -f a p b l i c , flicial o r m m e r c i a l document '
;
.
-
w
B's car. As the check was worthless, B was prejudiced. taking advantage of his official i,osition, *when thq'C
What act of falsification was committed, what kind of o-f is a private individual, the crime is punished :$
document was falsified, and what crime was committed? under Art. 172 and the name of the crime is falsification,;
Explain your answers. by a private individual. %
The act of falsificatiw is qountevfeitina the signature .>,
..A.
0iAhE.df-
O LthLKK- .
Y.
Y. 1041. A is a public officer whose duty, among others, was to.:;
::
?- -
The djxument falsified is a 6 m m e r c i a l docuZG33
documenQ tour the province and to make a report of his observa-1%
+. tion in the different places he would visit. He was y.
?-
412 413
CRIMINAL LAW IUWIEWER CHIDIINAL LAW REVIEWER
.. " h.,
which he used issued a receipt f o r F25. A erased the Is there falsification of private document through rmHe$i
figure '$2'and wrote in its place the figure "4". Then imprudence if there is z actu:il damage caused? Sup-'
A prepared a v d e r for the refund of the amount of pose that there is actual damage caused?. Explain your,:
p-15 be allegedly paid to the driver and attached thereto answers. .. .
, .: :
*:
.".
.,.
the altered receipt issued by the driver. He signed the No, b a s e there must be
voucher and submitted it to the provincial auditor for G e ai m m c e i-es
auditing and later to the provincial treasurer for Pay- if there is actual damage caused
ment. A was paid the amount of 845. What crime was -that becornsimportant. In such case. -ai;
comniitted by A? Explain your answer. of falsification
p a n e e exists. -
of private document t w h 'e-r
A committed estafa through falsification of . . an official
document, because he-EXlBlX& 3 U S &la1 caDacity 1041. Is there any differeJlce between the use of falsified doci.,:
:-thefalsification vas a necesc;lrdirneans to_ defraud
meiit in judicial proceedings and the use of
t u v e r n m e n t . ' The receipt, which is a private docu- i ,' document in transactions or proceedings other 'th
' ' ment. Z e l y a supporting paper to the. voucher. cial? Explain your answer.
Note: The crime committed is against the pub$
tres,sury under Art. 213 of Code, because Yes, in the crime of
==ision requires that the p-qfficer must enter into
52-6Z-F
. was paid t o him.
Do not eonfuse this question with the case of U.S. vs. Nieto,
where the municipal president in preparing the voucher to seek
reimbursement of what he paid for the typewriter acted as a
p,ri,uute pereon.
.-::1042.
.. In what kind of falsification is damage to a third person g carbon copy of the receipt, by,making it appear
amount paid by that customer was only P300,
._.:
, ~ ,
or at least intent to cause such damage an essential ele- the difference of P200 and turned over to the
ment?
.. ts, damage a at
hfalwflcation of
, least intent t,o cause damage on the nart of the Offender
', is a_n indispensable &?LlLnt. If there ism d a s e caused
- to another or at least an intent to cause damage, a r e
.~~
~.~~
_.-
of falsijiieatior, showing the intent to cause damage.
Thus, if the person who falsified the receipt. showed 't
~
. . ..
t o other persons to prove his claim that he already paid hls
i;daebt fication 'of private document, b m e
__I . to X, the intent to e s u ~ edamage is present.
' 'I 3,
...
, , "'
- ,. ...
,win the commission a ~ t a ef- ia &Q ., . ,,It is consumma.ted felony,, because
-be ~
cautled by'the falsificativn of the private d w t .
~~ aLe is_ sufficient in ,falsification af
In a complex crime, each of the crimes forming i t must be Actual damage to the offended party
..,.. * .. -complete in'itself, that is, it can stand alone as a distinct crime. : ,
-. I
They form a complex crime, because both or all the mimes
,> , (
are the result of one single act, o r that one a some af them 1048. ,A found a check for,.PSOO, payable?
.... . . took i t with him to the bankj cOnn
d d a m a g e or intent t o cause dam&! e, wh&is
the crime 03 estafa and that of falsi
s
G
ere necessary means to commit the other or others. Th
of B on the dorsal side of the check, the1eby.m
appear .that it was endorsed ' by- B,
ment, cannot he considered aa-xeaeut a t the What crime was committed by A.?
both &&B. Bgse, o m -
considered in Ialsifieati n t e In a similar case, the Supreme Court.of :Spain held
i m . The falsification of a private docu. ' ' that the crime committed was theft, becaus'e. finding'the
ment is &a crime umJ&%there is d a m s o r at le.%&Wm* which is a lost property'\jithout returning' it
'
to cause damage. Hence, it cannot stand +a 8 distinct criine,
if there is d-amage to consider. Such being the ease, i t
I
. check its owner or turning i t over to the proper author
.. cannot form a complex crime with estafa or he a crime separate
II ' ' theft: and the falsification aud.e&hing of' tlie:ch'ec
'
and distinct from that of estafa.
1 ' bui the continuation of the crime of t k f t already c
mitted. 'But t h e
1046.
,.
A, an employee of a prLvate company, was in charge ' ' crime of estafa t
of preparing the payroll and paying the wages of the m n t . This is the
inborers of that company. He put there names of laborers " of Appeals. T a k d m e
~ , . .,.-;,,,..-,:
~
, . ,. ,
who did not work and placed opposite their names amounts / .
conresponding to their supposed wages for the month. 1049. A entrusted to B a Torr&&, ,title covering ? pare
i.'
Then the payroll was presented to the cashier who gave land 'for' safekeeping: Later, B" falsificc 'a' deed "of
' A ithe necessary amount to cover all the wages of the covering the property described in the.'said 'ToFiens
. . laborers, including those who did not work. He pocketed and counterfeited the signituse 6f the owner "Of
the wages for the laborers who did not work. What "
Torrens title. ,Then, he sold the liand .ani3 delivered
crime was committed by A? '~ Torrens title and deed of SaIe to the' purchker.
Falsification of private document (People vs. Reyes). deed of sale was notarized at the instance of B.
' . receiving the proceeds of sale, he s:pent the .&e for
I
Note: When the offender has t o falsil7 a pri\.ate document
t u t the money or proporty from the offended party, the . 0wn benefit. What crime was 'comriiifted by,,?? Expl
crime committed is falsification of B private document only. I vour answer.
,>
~~~~~ ~
,;e,
416 417
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW' REVIEWER
'
. '
title. But the falsification was a necessary means for p)the u s 9 i a d the ca- of falsifying the docu-
committing the crime of estafa. ment.
Ilkzstvation: Thus, when the blank check was atolen 0-
1050. A bookkeeper of a company, in connivance with its cns- before the falsified check, made on wid blank check, was p m
tomer B, while recording the account of the latter, did sented for payment, and the person who presented it was BTL
employee in the office where the blank cheek was stolen,
not record some of the invoices of the said customer. the two requisites are present.
Later, A sold the invoices to B for half their respective
values. What crime was Committed by the bookkeeper? 1052. A, a private person and not enlp~loyedin any office, sent
The bookkeeper committed the crime of falsificatio> a telegram to B who was then in Mindanao, stating in
ofarivate document by omission when he did not record the telegram that the latter's fat.her was dead and that
some of the invoices in the record of the account of B. he had to come home to Manila. B came home, incurring
The falsification by omission in effect constitutes the mak- expenses for his trip, only to find out that his father was
ing o f untruthful statements in a narration of facts. The very much alive and in good health. Is A liable,for fal-
selling of invoices to the customer for half their respective sifying telegraph message? Explain your answer.
values does not constitute a separate and distinct offense,
., . because it is merely evidence of damage to the company,
~
f
The falsification of, or the uttering of fictitious w i r e
Commerce or other mercantile law, the bookkeeper is liable ess, telegraph or telephone messages can be committed
for two distinct and separate crimes, namely, (1) qualified only by an officer or employee of the Government.or of
theft 'of the invoices which he sold to B:'%nd (2) falsi-
fication of a commercial document which was committed
t o conceal the crime of qualified theft. \ any private corporation engaged in the service of send-
ing or receiving wireless, telegraph or telephone messages
(Art. 173, R.P.C.).
The falsification was not necessary to commit the But A is liable as a princiual bv inducement -e
qualified theft, because the bookkeeper had in his posses- -.
c&Ee of f a m o n nf telenrauh message.
, . sion the invoices stolen.
Note: The selling of the invoices is qualified theft, because
, . . the baokkemer toak the invoices with grave abuse of Con-
1053. In what cases may a private person commit a crime:
fidenee. He & d only the m m a S e x % ' D of in connection with false wireless, I!able, telegraph or' tele-
the invoices. H e t-d have the juridical oossession of the phane messages?
, ., .,
same, because his possession of the invoice is, in law, the poa- When he knowingly u m such falsified dispatch
mrsion of the company.
prejudice of a third party, &r atle;l& with intent ot-e
1051. When is the uger of falsified document deemed the such prejudice (Art. 173, par. 2, B.P.C.).
author of the f m i c a t i o n i
1064. A was applying f o r a job in a oompany. The m
When the following two m a r e present: required A to submit a certificate from his forme
B q w h e n t u s e was so cbselv connected i n m e ployer regarding his length of service in his :fo
w&fihp f alsification: and ployment and efficiency as an employee. .A -eo
418 419
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWIm
'. .., &., : present any, a s he was never employed, befare. 'To impress 1057.. What are .the crimes classified as ,&her falsities?
the manager of the company, A typewrote a. certificate . ..
.They are: I ,
, ,,.., ,.,office .of the executive department of. the Government, 1. Usurpation of authority or official functions.
1 *-. .)..stating therein that A was .a former ,ehaploYee of that 2. Using fictitious name and concealing true 'name.
department ' and very efficient and t h a t 'he intended to 3. Illegal use of uniforms or 'insignia.
resign to look for a n employmen( with a bigger salary. 4. False testimony against a defendant.
A ,coumterfeited ,$e signature of the administrative officer 5. False testimony favorable to the defendant.
. ti....
6. false testimony in civil. cases.
on thi? certificate and later presented it t o the manager
.,,. . of the: Company. What crime was committed by A? 7 . ' False testimony in other cam3 and .perjury.
8. Offering false testimony in evidence; ' '
the owner of a house to enter the same, because of his No, it is notpunishable-
false representation that he would make an investigation. (1) When used as a @nym
Once inside, and taking advantaxe of the fact that tho or
owner went to his bedroom to changd clothes, A h l r (2) When a fictitious name is nqtnsed
from a table a purse containing money and left. In ad-
dition to whatever other crime he nommitted, did A
(3) When the purpose is && conceal a crim
to evade the execution of a judg:ment, or not to
commit usurpation of authority? damage to public interest, or
No, because pretending the exercise of public authority (4) ,When the use of fictitious name is an -ent o
was made by A to gain entrance into the house of the a particular felony, as it is absorbed.
offended party to commit robbers with f o w unan_thingn
Thus, in estafa or in robbery where fictitious name is
in that house. Since it is a n e n t of the offense of
used to commit the crime, 80 that it is an integral part
robbery, the cfime of usoroation of authority is deemed
of the commission of the offense, it is not t o be considered
a&rM
a separate and distinct offense.
1062. In nsulrpation of authority or official function, is it Also, when fictitious came is included in the false
neceszry for the offender to perform a public functicn statement in the narration of facts, i t is considered pa
in the Government o r in any of its branches? of the crime of falsification.
If he already knowingly and falsely represented him- Elemext8 of using fictitious E r n e :
~'
self to be an officer, agent or representative of any de- 1. The offender uses n name oLhor than his real n F e .
partment or agency of the Philippine Government or Of 2 . He uses that fictitious name publicly.
any foreign government, it is not necessary to perform 3. For the purpace of-
any act pertaining to any person in authority or public =. concealing a crime;
officer. He is already guilty of usurpation of authority. b. evading the execution of 2t judgment; or
But if, in addition to pretense of official position which e . causing damage.
he made, he also performed any act pertsining to any
:,. person in authority or public officer of the Philippine 1065. A represented himself to C that he was B and signed '!
Government or foreign government, or any agency there- B's name. on a deed of sale of a ]piece of land belonging, :
: . of, without being lawfully entitled to do so, he is guilty to B and, after receiving thc proceeds of the sale
of usurpation of official functions. C, the vendee, A spent the same. Is A liable for
fictitious name? Explain your answer.
:. 1063. Republic Act No. 10 punishes any person who, with or
.. without pretense of official position, shall perform any While it is true that A publicly used a name other t
his real name when he represented himself as B on
act pertaining to the Government, or to any person in
authority or public officer, without being lawfully entitled public document, with the purpose of causing &ma
to (lo so. To whom is it applicable? to B, A is*liable, because the
the law (Art. 178) is said to be
Republic Act No. 1 0 is applicable only to members of terest. Since the act of A re
, . seditious organization engaged in subversive activities. -.
private interest of B, the crime commit
~.'3064. Is 1,he use of a name other than one's real name dways means of deceit. And having f & i e d a
. , .I ..,
,t;- ,. pundshable? as a necessary niea,ns to commit
:, i
422 423
,,.
I
I
I
--
' "I
c&&e of estafa through falsification d f a public
, document, by causing i t to appear that B'pahicipated in . -P,maginary The insignia o r uniform tahould not be that of an
office.
a n act or proceeding when in truth and in fact he did . , ,:,,
~, .,'. .
~.,
, . not so participate. 1070. What are the three forms of false testimony?
.1066.
.. They are :
. . Give an illustration of publicly using a fictitious name
2,,
'
1. False testimony in criminal cases.
to conceal a crime; and an illustration, to evade the execu-
I, tion of a judgment. ,.,,
2. False testimony in civil c a s e !
,,.,,. ,
When A, who looks like B, a prisoner by final judg- 3'. False testimony in other cases.
ment, takes the place of the latter in the jail. A hae l o
'use the name of B, and B has to use the name of A ; 1071. The evidence presented against A ;shows that.dur&g the .:
other wise, the authorities will discover that one takes the preliminary investigation conducted by the fiscal, A tes-.":.'
place of the other. The purpose of A is to conceal the tified under oath that he saw B stab C who was k i l l e l -
. , crime he has committed, that is, delivering a prisoner as a result. n% he' the' case was tried before the Court
' of First Instance, A changed his.' testimony by testifying ;''
,, . from jail. The purpose of B is to evade the execution then and there that he did not 3ee B at the.~piacewhere -'.
' ' bf the judgment against him, that is, to evade the service
' '
'
of the penalty imposed on him by the court. ' C was killed, and that C was killed b y an unknown 'person.. :!
.I Can A be 'Convikted of false testimony on the basis of ,.
1067:-A w : arrested
~ for playing a gamb1ing:game. A gave the foregoing facts?
the name of B,for himself, stated he wag married, which ' ' No, the -1 must' determific"'~fY& wllich of the W
was true; gave his real residence, real 'occupation, and contradictory testimonies .- If the testimony given
correct age. Is A liable for concealing 'true name? by A before the fiscal is false, it being a testimony upon :
No. He must &o 1-c his other aersonal circnm- a material matter, under oath before a competent
s&,g. He must n a n l y conceal his true name, &l artthorized l o receive and administer' oath, and the
: _. 5''. a i all his other personal circumstances. requiring the giving of that testimony, it-is-
. . testimony of A was upon a material matter;.-becaudg,
:What crime. is committed. by a lieutenant who used the death of C and the person who caused his death were'
'insignia ,of the captain of the Philippine Army? W h y ? main facts which were the subject of"th& 'itiquiry;
Illegal use of i-because the lieutenant u m fiscal before whom 'A gave his testimony' wag a.,compe
2 :! , ni&& which aertaiw to an office no$..&ld by him ( officer
. authorized to receive p,nd, administer oath;
. ' -. 8 (Art. 179, R.P.C.). waa a willful and deliberate assertion of falseho
cause A knew. his testimony before therfiscal was false;
1069. What crime is committed by a constabulary soldier who and under the law, the person giving evidence-ortestimony-;
. used the uniform of the policeman of the Manila Police relative to the subject of the inquiry -by the fiscal must
'
, .
4
Department? Why? do so uiider oath (Art. 183, R.P.C.).
because the constabulary soldier If i t is the testimony of.A before.the .court which is .:
.false, then the cri
j,w&fihe is not m member (Art. ,170,R.P.0.). '
; qf the defendant
494 425
CRIMINAL L A W REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW HEVIE'WER
427
CRIMINAL. LAW REVIEWER CKIMENAL LAW REVIEWBR
or official proceeding.
. ' 'a1
'fiscal that the servant stole^ some ,clothesbnd money ,,
belonging to A. A was guilty of the crime fonnerly Note: This ctime is also committed when.the offender offered
in evidence a false witness o r .false teutimony in an official
. . known ,as ,subornation of perjury. Under,Jie, Revise$. proceeding. This is not a crime formerly known. 8 s Subornation
.. Penal Code, A is liable for perjury as a' q$$pal
,,. by^ 09 perjury, because under Art. 184. it is not necessary that .
induction. the witness offered should testify falsely !n B manmr making
him liable for perjurv.
"~
1076. A procured I) to testify in his favor, their agreement If the offender knowingly offered in evidencc false doeu-
.:,, , .
being that I3 would testify that he was present when A. est in a judicial or official proceedinz, the crime is' not
" ' covered by Art. 184, but should be^ punished under;the last
paid his debt to'C, which was not true. Dur&g the trial,.
,.. ' . .,
.paragraph of Art. 112. , .
when A presented B, a s his witness, the lader told t h e The false teatimony may be offered without the witness by
. . . t r u t h ' t h a t ' he had no' knowledge of any payment made ' ' ' '
, '>f
429,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL L A W REVIEWER
and fanatical ideas that unless they lower the prices' of
' , i n d y liable under the Revised Penal Code on the basis OF needful commodities they would be viziited by flood and
,,': : that agreement? Explain your answer. other calamities. As a result, the people lowered the
.~, '. , .
"
Yes. Under the Revised Penal Code, any person who prices of their commodities and used inrjtruments of meas-
.
shall enter into any contract or agreement or shall take? ure larger than the regular size.
part in any conspiracy or combination in the form of a
" trust or otherwise in restraint of trade or commerce o r 1080, When is the pussession, preparation, administration or
:
' '
' ' to 'prevent by artificial means free competition in the
market is liable for monopolies and combination in restraint
otherwise using any prohibited drug punishable?
When the possession, preparation, administration or
of trade (Art. 186, par. 1, R.P.C.). the use of any prohibited drug is n e i s u l l y authorized.
. .
1078. A, a millionaire, invited all lumber concessioners and of-
..
,. , . :
1081. What requisites must he present in order that a persohi.
. ,
'
" fer& them certain price plus a share in the profits if dl may be convicted of illegal possession of opium?
of them wwld sell their lumber to him only. A's purpose
was t o conitrol the price of lumber sold locally or exported
They are: tl?_eoccupancy or taking and:&&-
to foreign countries. The lumber concessioners refused tent to possess the substance shown to be opiLm.
Note: The second reqiiisite is lacking .in. the case of . a wife
, and,.rejected the offer. May A be held criminally liable who was told by her husband to got from beneath.-a pillow
under the Revised Penal Code for his attempt to mono- B can which contained opium and, after having tnken it-there-
':,.polize the sale and exportation of lumber? Explain your from, attempted to throw it away when the policeman was
. . your answer. searching for opium in their house. She was caught by.tha
policeman wliilc in the act of throwing it away. I t was held
No, be,cause in monopolies and combinations in re- that she had no intent to possess opium.
' straint of trade, it is necessary that the offender &@
. -combine with any other person or persons to monoDo&e 1082. A policeman found in the possesion of the accused a bottle
, ' a particular merchandise or object of commerce, !y&& containing opium in very slight quantity. The ,accused:
.,.-"-.' ' presupposq that there Should. b_e an acre- n claimed that he purchased them 6 months' prior ,:tb h is
-
.i,
two or m r e aersons to accomalish $he uuraogO. The . .Re- arrest,' because the state lof ..his health. necessitated his
' 'vised Penal Code-e& or CoDlbdWn. frequent use of the same. Is the accused criminally
But in this case, since the proposal of A was rejected liable?
by the lumber concessioners, there was no meeting of the The law penalizes the mere possession of opium by un-
mind between him and the lumber concessioners and, there- authorized person without regard to the quantity. If the
^'fore; there is not even a conspiracy. state of his health really required the pills there must be
a prescription of a physician therefor.
Illustrate monopoly by spreading false rumors or making Note: P-=ion of Datent medicine q -w , the
use of any other artifice. possessor k m that it contains wium, i s also punished by
.. Spreading false rumors or making use of any other -cause the term "oDium" includes vrenarntians, b-&isb
opium or morDhine e m ag an inzredieat.
artifice to restrain free competition in the m a r h t is illus-
ted in the case of U.S. vs. Fulgueras. i n that case, 1083. Two ,policemen, armed with a search warrant t o 'search
.'accused went about distributing papers and prochma- for opium in the house of X, found under his bed a can
s to .the people of a certain town, spreadink suhvewive
451
. . . 430
*
,/" CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER.
CRIMINAL L.4.W REYIEWER,
a b ? s l s e the law r d a e s n o t . ~ ~ ' p ' a ~ ~ ~ i i ~ s s s e s s i o n , 1 No. Only those "g&being included in the provisions
of the next preceding article," which p& possessing
but present nasi%&- ' (U.S. vs. Tang Seng Ki).
or -u prohibited d n g , can be chmred with'knnwingly
l.1
1
visiting an opium dive o r resort (Art. 191, par. 2, R.P.C.). 1:';
:
...., /-
,
.
'
.,
, .. .
place
iually
of 9ersons
liable?
for smoking . , -
A and,:B crim-
- t i s illegal imQortation of opium. The
terms "import" and "bring" are synonymous. Importation
is a m m f an onium dive. B
per bf o m - r c c ,m
, r t : (Arts. 190, -d 're - e the goods at the customhouse,
"i 7 , R.P.C.)., , .. , , , \ ' ..~
b m e l y hr&$C~ t&m inta wort. K t would be absurd
to think that A was merely carrying opium back and forth
e found'-in that house by.'tlie 'policemen and a foreign country. No better ex-
'the place: X, Y and 2 are'. just sitting
~
the logical deduction is that A
er 'Chinese' are smolcing opium. They fail be brought into t h e Philippines. There
regencf there. ' What
~. crime .is committed illegal importation.
But if the steamer was not makinx Manila a$ its n a t
are !gdlty of the erirne of. knowinglp. ' v i m of destination, then there i s m r i m e Mere possession
'
-'(Art. 191, par. 2, R.P.C.). . - of opium in such case is He, because it does
T
J
432 433
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAI, LAW REVIEWER
., % .
pot involve a breach of Dublic order and the steamer o n No. I n the nature of things, B jxeiew list 'nat..rag&
which it is found is a foreign vessel. pertains to a game of iueteng and that the actus<$ %oil@, I.,,...
-
When the physical condition of the uatient dls.ot (US.vs. Rafael):
-
require the use of opium (Art. 194, R.P.C.).
What -si , .
..I
*.
It is a 01' scheme the result of which deDends
-
wholly o r a l y upon chance .or. hazard.
,,. . . i w a m b l i n g game.
4. .Must the Drosecution wove that the iuetenz list is con-
ectea wi& a game ai
jueteng wW&has taken place or
&ut Ito :take, place?
434
I
I . / .
I ,
1097. What are the provisions of the Revised Penal Code pun- 1100. Suppose that the woman w a s m e a s old and the man
:' nishing the crimes pertaining to lottery? was her teacher, what would be the crime? Why?
.+
I .;
~. . '
,
chance. -
Art. 185, par. (a) punishinc lottgy as a gasle9f
below the wall is not visible to the publie. The man p h 3 . Is lack of visible means of s u u p s t an indispensable.
was pcrforniing acts of lasciviousness on the person of element in vagrancy?
1
L .1 . the woman, with her consent. Are they liable for WIXS No. Only in two cases is lack of visible means of
&Qmkll? sui5fGrt an indispensable element of vagrancy. !
437
I
I I
,i
CRUIINAL IAIV REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
1104, Suppose that B who has a pension or income from rents are the crimes classified. .under
of his property and has nothing to do, finds pleasure and office?
. . spends his time in the house of 'prostitution, is he a 5 The crimes which are classified under malfeasanc.nce,m
vagrant?
' ' .
-Yes, because any idle or dissolutn nerson who lodxes
in houses of ill-fame is also a vagrant. This 'is true, e m I
office are:
/'2.
1. Direct bribery, and
Jndjreci hr-.
if he has a visible means of support. .I
Y
,,,WlO. A justice of the peace, a lawyer for many years, hap-,.'
loitering in the yard of the house of B, at pened to try his political enemy on a charge of less&
\ late hour of the night. He could not explain his presence serious physical injuries which under the Revised Penal
.: there. A is a man of moderate means with a good job. Code is puriishable by arrest0 mayor. A s a revenge, t h e ,
What crime, if any, did A commit? justice of the peace convicted, and imposed two years h-
Vm
'. A person is also a vagrant if he be.fyyd prkonment on, the accused. What crime was committe$.,.
, ' . i .
oitering -i inhabited or u n i n h a h i t d & X 2 belonping by the justice of the peace?
a n o t l r w or iustifiab!c purpose. He is nowingly rendering unjust j u d a The judgment
liable, e d f he has a good iab. 'I is ntjust and he knows or he ought to know that his judg-
in having sexual intercourse wit11 a woman .~ ment is unjust. There is malicg 9' ill~will~JI this ease,
in consideration of t500 given by A. That was the first t&eAustice of the peace having acted in the spirit. &.
time ,she had sexual intercourse. Is she a prostitute? -e (Art. 204, R.P.C.).
Explain your answer. Note: An unjust jud-ent is one which i i
i d supported bv the eYiddnce.
No;because a rostitute is n a,
$0;. mnnev
,
,- An unjust judgment m a y be iUe
'
.or profit, & $ j e s C l intercourse. because of bribery.
438 439
I
/”
;m
CRIlIlINAL LAW REYIEWER
440 441
CRI>IINAL LAW REVIEWER CKIXiNAL LAW KEVIEWER
,'>
<., ,i
The taxpayer gave a dozen chickens to the tax collector A is liable for (--theft
-J&m
i &
l hW
sO ' n. He :
n u i a b l e for cprruption of public officer, because the .;:< .i
and did not pay his tax. Is the tax Collector guilty of
bribery?
-.. policceman is& Ii-for direct or indirect hriben.
i.@
.,., (1
442 443
I 1
much earlier. The clerk of court set the case for hear- in its entirety. Is the judge liable criminally? How
ing, although the old cases should have been set for
hearing instead. Is the clerk of court liable for direct
bribery?
w
about the plaintiff who gave the gift?
Yes, the judge is liable for&&ct
din?& bribery, the art nPrfnrmPrl bv t h ~ .
bribera In i n - ,
2.
'
2, being a public officer he is liable f z a e c t b r i b e d &just and praper.Ttt? law puxes the a m c e
committed by executinK which d a e s = a ',a ~constitute by the public officer of offered to him bv reason '
I of his office, because the object of the giver of the gifts
a crime in consideration o u t t , the act be-
(Art. 210, par. 2, R.P.C.). is that they are given to h i p in anticiDation of f uture
f w from him in connection with the performance of his
duty or that he is rewarding him for having performed
1124,' Suppose t h a t when the clerk was not busy as he had a duty, and if the public officer has acquired the habit
nothing to do, he was asked by the plaintiff in a civil
of accepting gifts, he is ther&y e . x x to future cor-
case to prepare a writ of execution, the judgrrent in his
ruvtion.
favor having become final, but to expedite the prepara-
tion of the writ the clerk was offered P20, which he t h e f t i&.hUe f o r c o m
accepted and by reason thereof he prepared the writ im- the gift to h-t (Art.
mediately, what crime was committed by him? ,"212, R..P.C.).
c l'
fi-bXi(Art. 211, R.P.C.), because the money A
, &?.' What are the crimes under frauds and illegal exaction?
hich he ad 1- y a s offered t o by reason Qf.hk3 / y?? and transactions?
&e. It is not direct bribery ef the second farm, be-
e w e t a g performed wi?a nSt xz.hst. NohQdv was
M e d (11. uniustly affected by the act which he ex- a&t the public treasury and s i m i l a r -
* e g h x l (People vs. Pamplona, C.A.).
, / 3 Oiher frauds.
1125. A sanitary inspector who inspected a store found it in
'i
p Prohibited transactions.
a very unsainitary condition. He received from the owner
of the store canned goods and several gantas of rice. The
2, Possession of prohibited i n a t by a public officer.
sanitary inspector did uot report the, condition of the 1128. A sold office su'pplies to the Provincial Government. The
store to his; superiors. What crime was eoninlilted by Provincial Treasurer and A had secret agreement that the
the sanitary inspector? price of the supplies would be raised by P2.000 and that
amouut would go to the Provincial Treasurer. When the
-1- - .
w&h
. - by refrkining from doing something
iswag his official d u t y - t d o , t u , to reDort it supplies were delivered and the paymeut was about to
be made, the anomaly was discovered by the Provincial
to his ?,umLjor, in consideration of a gift (Art. 210, par.
Auditor who caused an investigation and as a result
3, R.P.C.).
the transaction was caucelled. Did the Provincial Treas-
urer commit any crime? If so, in what stage of exeeu-
1126. Having decided a ease in favor of the plaintiff, the i u d e
i tion? What is the liability of A?
i . . was given a gift by said plaintiff. The decision was
..xw
&#&, perfectly 1e::al and just and in fact when the defendant Both A aiid the provincial treasurer are guilty of eon-
:,qj;y appealed the case to the Supreme Court il was affirmed
,b~.',, suinmateJ fraud against the aublic -ty. This crime
. ;.
,.p.Ir..
An,* I
~ . %' .
. .
~ , ,i,,
I.
444
i
CIII~JUIiiALLAW REVIEWER CRII\.IINAL LAW REVIEWER
is consnmmatd by mere agreement, as long as the =Be ed was turned over to the cashier. Did that employee
Ucl-2 the government (Art. 213, R.P.C.). oommit any crime?
A is liable for the same offense, because he and the >,-because the Revised Penal Code expressly uroviks
provincial treasurer were in conspiracy. When there & that2 i s f l m o 3 w h e n t.he tax toll- voluntarily
conspiracy, the act of u e is-the act of all, and t h i s r u l e fails to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for anv sum
ap$& evpiAf the o f f e w is ordinarilv eammi t k d of money rollecied bv himy-0 (Art. 213, par. 2 ( b ) ,
public n f f i u x who takes &antage
(Viada: U.S. vs. Ponte).
-of
of his official uositian
1 . That the offender be n public officer: ''1131. The tax collector accepted from X a gold bar worth P500
2. That he should have taken advanrage of his office, that in payment of the tax in that amount which X should
is, h-e>itt,rvened in the transaeti3i in his official camcity. pay under the law. He turned over the gold bar to the
treasurer. Is the tax collector liable criminally. Explain
the nlaking of contra&, or &j €he adjustment or set&-
your answer. .,
ment of accounts relating t o n- ' ' y o
d
-s, o r k e Yes. He received a thing o r o b j e e t of a nature dif-
uy- other scheme. ferent from thatr-orp (Art. 213, par. Z ( c ) ,
4.. With B t to defraud tho Government. ,i R.P.C.). Under the law, taxes should be nGd ia l z l
Note: What constitutes the offense is the mere enterinx into t& currency.
an agreement with any interested party or speculator, w w -
t-!fraud the Government. / 1132. Suppose, the tax collector intended to own the gold'bar
means of &cxit, succeeded in receiving from the taxpayer Yes, because l e g , directly o r,-ni -b
than that fixed by law? -====
ofpayment other wise, things a I m f a natur_e
means of deceq (U.S. vs. Lopez). d i f f w r o m that rovided law is punished by €hi
Note: In n,-i M dr
s
ce
j is employed by the public R m & s G ( A r t . 213, par. Z ( c ) ,
officer in demanding an amoiinL larger than OP different from
that authorized hy lam. A mere demand for a sumlarger than ,
or different fmm that authorized by law is gu€ficien$. be the crime if the same acts were committed
The talrpayer need not pay the amount demanded.
by an officer or employee of the Buteau of Internal
It is g m w y that the public officer
difference or the whole amount collected f
of the
e ,
, Revenue or of the Bureau of Customs?
h w liable for another c r i m e G l % % & y
/ It would be B violation of the National Internal Revenue
Code o r of the Revised Administrative Code, as the case
.,1-30. An employee in the treasurer's office of a municipality
1 i. i;
may be.
:,,.., issued to B who paid FZO as tax a temporary receipt in
. ' ' a coupon bond paper, although he had official receipt {134. What is the special provision of the Revised Penal Code
. in blank form with him. The amount collected is the for frauds or deceits committed by any !publie officer
.. ' amount of th.e tax fixed, by law. All the amount collect-
~ ~
~ i .
who takes advantage of his .official position?
446 447
I / I
In addition to the penalties prescribed for swindling he did not have the 1-0 custodyf
I
and other deceits covered by Arts. 315 to 318 of the Re- ___- ~
he was not axcountable therefor.
~~ ~
vised Penal Code, the penalty 'of temporary special dis- Note: To be hahle forealversatmn oi P U ~ I C funds or vrop-
qualification in its maximum period to perpetua.1 special i e a t h e public officer&' must have the official custody of
disqualification shall be imposed upon any public officer public funds o r propertb @ the authority to collect or receive
I t , m , and &Wm
v-e the o&&im t o account fQxAhem
who, taking advantage of his official position, shall commit I to tine government. M W L
_,.,
any of sa,% crimes (Art. 214, R.P.C.). prccedins question, the crime committed by the mayor
I
wa?&heeaub.e he took oersonal moperty, belonging to the
1135. May the judge of the court of first instance IawfuUy municlpallty, w&ut the consent of the t r s s e r , its custodian.
'.
engage in agricultnre through his encargado in the prow I H l h a d t h e intent to gain, as the sG;fnetion or eniovment
ince where he is appointed? he derived from riving the b-to the persons building the
i chipel is sufficientgain. ,-
Yes because a-re ig_nnta transaction of s-
/
e-c n.
Notes: Commcree involves transaction of exchange or specula-
%n.
~
'/
The provincial treasurer of Rizal who qngages in com-
m ce in this City is &.Liable-- -t. t
his ju&&.&h.
,/"
1.137. May the mayor or the justice of the peace be held liable
3. .A Justice of the Court of Appeals who engages in com- for malversation? Illustrate and explain.
merce ill Rizal may be held liable, because h: is a N&& Yes, when the mayor, for instance, received from the
1-. and any arovince is subieet to his iu:isdietipn. (See
Art. 14 of the Code of Commerce, prohibiting justices and superintendent of schools a sum of money as rental for
judges, among others, from encaging in the commercial pro- the use o f a building belonging to the municipality and,
fossion.) instead of deliverine - the same to the treasurer, applied it
to his own use. In this case, t a g er- t h w y
1136. The mayor of a town gave to certain persons then boild- as the representative of the municipality and he had the
lug a chapel several beams of molam wood which were obli&on to account for it-to the government to which
in the premises of the municipal building and destined it was due.
to its use. When the treasurer, the custodian thereof. The justice of the peace may be held liable f o r malversa-
learned of what the mayor had done wit,h some of the tion if t -h € c h i s uersonal it t h e s , f&
beams, the former filed a complaint against the lat- sat- paid in his court and received bv him. He thus
ter with the provincial fiscal. If you were the provin- became accountable for them, that is, he had kac!u.p t
cial fiscal, would you prosecute the mayor for malversa- f o m to the governmat. Their misaunrooriatian iS.
tion? Explain your answer. G
a
-
- -
If I were the provincial fiscal, I w w prosecute
,.~':*+,+;.
,<.&&
:? the mayor for ion, because although the mayor
h'ote: Ilencr, the name of the Dublieof&a-QLn&im.
m u 1 in the crime of malversation. It i s the *of
inim;
the
L.. :
--.--
was a publie officer and the beams he gave away w e q d- of the public o f f s e held by the offender which dete&-
448 449
I
m w t DL~- M i . 5 sto
- to the $&n~&t$e of rnaiversatkn &.puhLicfunds ar Drouerty
r other person.
, b m b l e o f f i c e r ( U S . vs. Ponte, et al.; People
vs. Calauan, et al.) : and
During the preliminary investigation by the fiscal gf
/1138.
a theft case, the police investigators gave the evidence I # When a private p e r s p
by necessary &s aids a p@&&&%r
public officer ,r
in c a or
to him consisting of a wallet with several ZO-pem hills
. inside. The Piseal kept the eviclence, but later spent the -~ ~7
s#ex
e r m i t t i n z ~ ~ n & E h td as i n t 0
(People vs. Longara and Cinco, C.A.).
f a.
money. What crime was committed by the fiscal? Ex-
plain your nnswer.
1140. The auditor examined t h e books and accounts of the
@?->because he received the money lrom the municipal lreasurer or a municipality. The auditor found
police investigators hy reason of his office and he had that the treasurer had shortage in the amount of WOO.
the obligation under the law to keeu the same to be usad The auditor required the treasurer t o make good the
as evidence. Although the money belonged to the of- shortage witllin two hours, hut the treasurer could not;
fended party in the crime of theft committed by the ac- explain or make good the shortage. There being no
cused, the same was seized from the accused hy pnhlic evidence that the treasurer misappropriated the amount of
authority and deposited with the fiscal. Malversation is P700 or through abandonment or negli~ence permitted
c d e d h y the deuositorv of funds o r property attached, or consented to the taking of the amount by other person,
seized O P dGosited by public authority, even if such p r o p may the treasurer be prosecuted aind punished for mal-
e& -h to a urivate individual (Art. 222, R.P.C.). versation? Why?
N o t e : It will be noted that as a general rule, government funds Yes, the w e of a public officer to have duly forth-
or promrty
~. a-e Laken OP m;saaprwriated
..
~
by the offender in p u b l i c a d s or property with which he is
malvcmntion. The oveinment funds or ,,me& n i&de ? m e upoii demand by any duly authorized officer,
funds and tmst f u k r - . The trust funds are the
m c o u t s . ' f u n d s , Red Crass funds, Anti-Tuberculosis funds,
shall be ?)~.ii!za
f o o i a evidence that he ha:; D u t such missing
funds held by the municipal treasurer, and other funds funds or property t o s o n a l uses (last par. of Art. 217,
which, although not strlclly public funds, are impressed with R.P.C.).
the character of public funds when they are officially received
by an accountable public officer.
I 9. When may a private individual Bc heM li&le- for a&& (People v4. Tolentino).
f ' v - n ? But when there is no demand, tbere m u s t be affirmatiye
f- toshow aeum-n (17,s.7s. Acebedo).
J , In the following cases :
When he has charged, y-ii CapacitLwhatever, 1
urovincial or municiual funds, revenue o r th_e fault or negligence of the ~I%u% & tueh as, when it
p m (Art. 222, R.P.C.) ;. t+n during the commission of theft of robbery by other
I
I
persons.
460 I 461
I
1141. What kEud of negligence may make an accountable public agent was to sell sweepstakes tickets entrusted to him
officer liable for malversation? for salc, with tlie cihligation of turaiiig over the proceeds
To render negligence a basis for coiiviction of malversa- of the sale of said tickets to the treasurer of the Philip-
tion, the negligence of the accountable public officer must pines Charity Sweepstakes Office not later than one week
be positively and clearlzi shown to be inezeusabb, approxi-
c
before tlie corresponding draw. Ne received a total of
mating malice or fraud (People vs. Berms, C.A.). 171 booklets of sweepstakes tickets for the February
Note: In the case of People " 6 . Bernas, the accused, then a 25, 1951, draw, valued at P5,377.95. He accounted ~ Q I
municipal treasurer and having in his custody B number of and turned over only P1,417, thereby leaving a balance. ~i
sacks of government rice to be sold to the people, sold the of 83,960.95 unaccounted for. In spite of repeated de-- ...:,
execs:$ rice on credit to the employees and laborers of the
municipality, in violatlon of tho instruetion 02 his superior.
mands made upon him to account for the snnie, X failed
It was held that mhiie violation of the rules and regulations to pay the said balance. What crime w8s cornmitt,& .'
of the office is evidence of ncgligenea, in this case, the negli- by X? Explain your answer.
gence of the accused cannot Lo made the basis for conviction
of malversation. The accused m n t e d to avoid the possible loss The crime committed by X is malversation (People
that the government may suffer in view of the approaching vs. Angco).
harvest season, which might bring down the price of the riee
and HISO because there was a pending storm and he had no - -
X was an accountable uublic ofBcer and the nrnc%e~d.?
plnee to keep tho rice. Such baing the case,ec- t of the sales of the sweeustakes tickets were public fun&
?f the accused d u approximate malice or fraud. -1 for which he was acc-le. His f a m to account for
esGle. the amount of F3360.95, notwithstanding- de-
But when a disbur8ing officer of the Armed Forces of the ,, *'m&s, is evidence of misanbrovriation on h.is part.
Philippines, whose duty wa8 to deduct from the salaries of ,*-
enlisted men the premiums to be turned over to the GSIS. was committed by the collect,or of the Metro-
entrusted that work to his sergeant, and although he knew that
'%43. What.
his s,srgeant, who was receiving a meager salary, was sporting politan Water District (now NAWASA) who misappro-
n nice ear and living with his queridas, he did not take any priated il sun1 of money Collected by him from the cus:
step to cheek whether or not the sergeant was turning over tomers of the adid corporation? Expliiin your answer.
t o the GSIS the money deducted by him from the salaries of
tho enlisted men, until it was discovered by another perfion that The collector of the Metropolitan Water District who
the sergeant had misappropriated the money. i t was & misappropiiated the money collected from the customers
twm abandonment and ne~lipewe, agproximatinr malice of that corporation committed -1-
or fraud on the Dart of th ishur . f i cr =Ad, therefore '
m x r malversation. A n % e n
L if h e m The Netrouolitan Water District is a m n of the
get a ccnt out of the mismropriated funds (People vs. Torres, Philippi& Legislature. The law creating this entity classi-
m.). fies it as a public corporation, for the purpose of furnish-
c o r n o r lack of criminal inteat, when there is no ing adequate water supply and sewerage service to the
negligence, is also a defense in the e m of malversatjon.
Thus,tiiere is no criminal lia'bility for making 'payment through inhabitants of Manila and suburbs. It cannot be ques-
honerit mistake as to the law or to the fact-. At most, the tioned tinat the Legislature may validly create special in-
accountable public officer is civilly liabls for the damage caused.
I
strumenlalities or districts to aid the State in, o r t o take
charge or, some public os state work for the general welfare.
was a travelling sales agent of the Philippine charity Such agencies are qaasi-corporations or public corporations ' .
weepstakes Office. 13;s duty as such travelling sales for narrow or limited purposes. The officers and emulovees
452 453
I
of the Metropolitan Water District -1-a a d of such fund for election campaign. Is he liable for 2-
i a f u n d l r are public funds (People vs. Bustillo). legal nse of public funds? Why?
.h.m” ””t n.. __.~~ease of the Manils Railroad Corporation,
in the
R n t ..~
I ~
No, because in the felony of &gal ncp of ,-
although it is of ‘‘a quasi-pubiic character,” it was held that the public o f f i c e r , w g public fund or property under
its.treasurer, who t m I - h i s personal use a sum of money h.is administration, must an& e-t to a uublic use
from the funds entrusted to him for safe-keeping, was &$Y other than that for which such fund or pronerty w a s -
propriateLby law or ordinance (Art. 220, R.P.C.). He is’
liable f o r @ m n >
1144. The provincial treasurer required a municipal trea,R-
urer to render an accounting of the funds in his posses- 1147. The municipal council uppropriated P10,OOO for the pur-
sion. Believing that since there was nothing wrong chase of a garbage truck. Before the municipality could
with the c,ondition of t h e funds in his charge and that purchase m e , the Lions Club donated a garbage truck t o
he had no duty to render an accounting, the municipal the municipality. The lreasnrer, knowing that there was
treasurer did not render accounts far more than two no need to reserve the amount tor the puwose of a
months. Is the municipal treasurer liable for the fclonp garbage trrrelc, spent the money for the repair of the
of “failore of accountable officer to render accounts”? municipal building without any authority from the munic-
No, because that felony is committed by an accountable ipal council. Considering that there was no damage
public oE€icer “who is required by law or regulations to caused, do you believe that the treasurer is criminally
render a.ccount to the Auditor General or t o the provincial liable f,or@Iqal use of the public rnm@ Why?
auditor,” not to the provincial treasurer, for a period of
“two months after such accounts should. he rendered”
a because the crime is Committed even “if no dam-
a or_embarrassment to the public service has resuked.“
=
(Art. 218, R.P.C.). The penalty is a fine from 5 to 50 per cent of the sum mis-
1145. Suppose that the provincial tre;lswer w a s dismissed from
office because of certain anomalies committed by him,
-
applied. T e S e must be an ordinance appropriating that
amount, for the renair of the m>ieipal building before
the treasurer could law&lIy u s the money therefor.
and although he was not acting as the treasurer of the N d e : When the amount UppJied to ;i a public use had not bee3
province, the provincial auditor required him to render appvipviated by @ or mdinan e, the public officer applying
account, hut the former provincial treasurer refused to that amount is i s liable
m e f o r be u n d e r Art.
Art, 217, b u -
do so, can he be held criminally liable for failure to propriating puubbTl-8s.
render accounts? Why?
Yes, if ere IS a law or regulations requiring him to 1148. The contractor who constructed a building for the munie-
render m&t. The law (Art. 218) says, “whether in the ipal police presented his claim, with all the n e e w a r y
service or separated therefrom by resignation or any other ,papers duly approved by the proper officials, to the
cause,’’ if required by law or regula,tions, h~ehas to render treasurer for pzynient. The fund f o r the purpose was
aecount:r within two months after such accounts should be in the custody of the treasurer, but he delayed the pay.
8% i ment in the hope that the contractor would come across
&..
,,”.. , rentleered.
with a cut from the amount payable to him. Because
6 -An elective public officer had discretionary fund under months the treasurer did not make the payment,
for ~ W Q
‘his custody. When he ran for re-election, he spent part the contractor filed a complaint with the provincial fiscal.
454 456
I
457
I
formame of duty of the municipal president as regards traction of a guard leading to a prisoner’s taking advan-- L
the custody of prisoner is not in excess of his duties. hge a€ the situation is negligence. Such mistake or dis-7;;
Note that the municipal president was the person who was P traction of the guard may be dealt with administrative1y;j
aceusied of infidelity in the custody of prisoners. The reason only.
for this is that the l i i ~ n i e i p ~president,
l now the municipal The negligence of the guard which shows positive care’:
mqror, j, the head of the municipal jail. lessness short of deliberate non-performance of duty is il- ‘(
The m ~ is rguilty of infidelity in the custody of urisoner, Iustrated in the case of a guard who fell asleep while.,:
i4 he utilized the prisoner’? s a f o r domestic chores i
n
-
&
guarding the prisoner with the result that the prisoner
--
house (People YS. Evangelista, C.A. 38 O.G. 1 5 0 .
escaped.
1152. Is the chief of police liable for infidelity in the custody
of prisoner if he permitted the prisoner to sleep in the 1154. l\‘ould the gunrd of the jnil be hcid linble Cor infidelity
latter’s house at night and the prisoner a1wy-s returned in the custody of yrisnnw if (he priwaaf rvho e * c W d
to jail early in the morning? is not pct rnukted 11.v fiwL JiidRnwnt?
Relaxation of the imprisonment of the prisoner is con- Yes, hccause the lam in dcfininp the crime of infidelity
sidered infidelity. Thus, it was opined t h r t there is a in the custody of p-isoiier provides t w o & D enalties
real and actual evasion of service of senlence when the to be imposed on the public officer guilty of the crime.
custodian permits the prisoney to obtain b relaxation of The penalty of prision correccjonal in. .its medium and
his imprisonment and to escape the punishment of being maximum periods is m i posed&
, -’ heen sen-
deprived of his liberty, thus making the penrlty ineffectual, tenced by final i u d m e n t ; and the penalty of pr&ion COT-
although the convict may not have fled. Under this rule, reccional in its minimum p e r i o d , p s e the fupitive 2
a prisoner who is permitted to sleep in 11;s house every only held as a detention p a y f o r any crime o-
night and would go back t o jail during the daytime obtains
relaxation of his imprisonment, and thereby makes the
-
tion of law or municipal ordinance.
custodian liable for infidelity in the custody of prisoner. 1155. Map a @&e individual be held liable for infidelity in
Where the guard allowed the prisoner serving a 6-day the custody of prisoner?
sentence in the municipal jail to sleep in his house and
eat there, he is gnilty of infidelity in the custody of prisoner --
Yes, because the Revised Penal Code p w s e
vate person to whom the conveyance or custody of a pris.
committed with malice (People lis. Revilla, C.A., 37 O.G. oner or person under arrest shall have been confided, w h
1896). shall commit any offenses of infidelity in the custody 0:
prisoner. Hence. as long as the private ni-1 &
1153. What kind of negligenee is contemplated in infidelity in c k m t i i e conveyance 0 - i of a orison% gpjzg
the custody of prisoner through negligenee? sonunder arrest, if the escape o f the prisoner -2
The public officer who is charged with the conveyance under arrest is due to his connivance witl.lthepu’snne r g ]
or custody of a prisoner is said to be negligent when his p-er ari’est or to his n-ace, sxih arivate in.
laxity in the cnstody of prisoner shows positive careless- diE&ual is criminally iiable (Art. 225, R.P.C.).
Y
458 459
I
I t
L
CRIilfINAL LAW REVIEWER CRINIINAL LAW REVIEWER
..
"' ' criminal case kept by the fiscal but which came into his of infidelity in the custody of documents? Explain Y Q ~ ?
possession when he was typing the information. Then, answer.
he gave i t to the accused who in turn gave him F'lOU.
What crime was committed by the stenographer? Does
< - No, because the transfer cerrificate of titie &s@
yet-hned by -and, therefore, it- did not e w e &
the givin:: of the confession to the accused and receiving d m e n t within the meaning of' the 1a.w. In infidelity
BlOO from him constitute a separate offense? Explain in the custody of document, the decYmept must Ke com-
your answer. &
P th&s, it must be c a e of establishing a t
The stenographer is guilty of (infidelity in the e x $ or extinguishing an obligation. In this. case, before the
of document3be~usehe_was a uublic officer; the wn- t-raiisfer certificate of title is signed by the register of
confession of the-accused, w h u a d m u m enl, w m - deeds, it cannot establish any right nor extinguish an
f&ed o r a k u s i e d tQhim by r e m m of his of%c ' e: that obligation. wflJfl 9 clLdd/; WnsL
'
h j remoyed stlchdorumeat -of . e; and that
t u s of the said docnment from the r w r d O f t h e c a s e 6158. Is the destrnction, concealment or removal for an illicit
w u u r a l l y result in the damage o r prejudice to& purpose of peri.gdieals, pamphlets or magazines by the
' . public i n m t . postnmster who has the custody of the same by reason
The mla- of document i s n s t a c r i m e , u u k s of his office constitute infidelity in the custody of docu-
i s f o r an illicit uuruose, an-at to urofit by it is an ment? Explain yonr answer.
illicit puI'uose. It would seem then that the receiving. of No, because books, p e r i o s s , p a m m t s and m s a -
/
460 462
i
1 1 . .
..
CKIhIINAL LAW IU3Il:WER
/.’
116
,
. m a t c r h e is committed by tie pustw,a&e who w.d
a letter addressed by one person to another and after
opening the letter and finding a 50.peso bill inside the
letter he renioved the money and spent it for himself:
Explain your answer.
( /
a=,
.*b
--
The law (Art. 277) pu&&es any public afficer ch&
&,the custodv @ € m sor property sealed by mrmz
who shall b r u h e - s or permit them to &
In several cases decided by the Supreme Court, the opening closed papers, documents, (181‘ objects?
crime was held to bcfaithlessness in the custody of 6 c u - When the public officer is &&ed with the custody
mentor p a s The word “pauers” inrludes pBWX?lQUyp of (not merely entrusted with) closed panem, dfmme&.
d n a - = m m r h . os objects.
Thus, the treasurer of a municipality who received
1161. The stenographer of the court, for the purposc of helping from the PC corporal ciosed envelops containing election
i
i a person accused of a crime, put the record of the ease
among the records of decided cases, so that the CN
of court might not set the case for hearing. As a lesult,
the case was not tried for more than one year until the.
returns and addressed to the provincial treasurer, f o r the
purpose of putting thereon sealing wax, and who opened
them and read the contents thereof, was not held criminally
liable f o r opening such closed documents, because he was
clerk of eourt, upon complaint of the offended partp, not the custodian thereof [People vs. Lineses, C.A.).
lceked for the record and found it. Is the stenographer-
of the court liable for infidelity in the custody of docu- 1164. The Military Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces
ment? of the Philippines had a secret plan t o capture certain
The stenographer of the court is-liable for infidelity dissidents. An agent of the Military Int,elligence Service,
in the custody of documcut, becalm he did LuLhave t h e who was one OF those who planned the raid l o be made,
custody of the record of the criminal case by reason o f his mentioned it to a friend who happened to be a relative
office. ‘fhe stenographer is not the custodian of the record.
-I
of one of the dissidents. As a consequence, the dissidents
Note: If the clerk of court was the one who did it, he would were able to elude the soldiers who were seut to capture
have been liable for infidelity in the custody of document by them, Is that agent criminally liable? Why?
concealing the same, being a public officer who had the record
I by reason of his office. Yes, because having known a secret involving the gen-
7
’
important element of the crime of infidelity in the cus- eral interest of public order by reason of his official capa-
.. who-
of document is that the offender is a public officer city, he revealed it. The crime is called fivelation ot secret3
,<,
has the custodv of t h e a n -t by P ce. i 6 y an o f f i c e 9 A r t . 229, R.P.C.).
docunrent. He permitted a private person to open it,. ,judge, coniiclinp the accused of murder and sentencing’
I him t o deayn, revaled the same t o t k ~scesed@foe
causiig the breaking of the seal. What is the liability~ I
of the private individual, if any? f the promnlgation of the judgnlerrt. As a consequence, $;,
I
the accused jumped bail and fled to the mountains. He !P
The Revised Penal Code d m d h the a-& was never captured. Is the clerk of court criminally ‘ I
&k who8
- theseal, &
u there is conspiracy liable? Why?
betX6een him and the public officer.
/ 462
463
I
'committed by a puhlic officer who shall wrongfully aelive? to Note: The e ~ n m g i e s of open disobmzdience are:
another person papers or copies of papers of which he may 1. S h & f who r e f u s d t o execute t .
m ori!i&ment
. , ;
have charge and which should not be published (Art. 229, R.P.C.). of the court. ,.
2 . Mayor who refused to execute the order of the Governor. . '
to reinstate a policet?ian 1171. When is it not a crime to disobey the order of the su-
perior?
Disobeying the order of
liabio fur the k the order of the smer
o f that order w g & b w I t
No. This felony is committet by any judicial o r a Thus, if the cKief of police
ecutive officer who s N openly r e f u s to me@e Ah2 t o arrest X upon com
464 465
. ,. .. .,.,
,..
% .
/
condu&d by the fiscal. The chief of police forgot to The mayor i m l i a b l e for maltreatm'ent o€ p g
$e the service,of the subpoena and because of his if the latter i&tkcustodv of t h g d i c e . The, law,
ure to do so .the fiscal was not able to continue with 235) contemplates actual charge of the prisoner,
reliminary investigation. Is the chief of police crim- which is so merely by legal fiction. . .
.. for refusal of assistance? Why?
liablc 1176. A constabulary soldier went inside the., provincl
e chief of police is not criminally liable for the
of refusal of assistance (Art. 233, R.P.C.). with the consent of the warden arid then and:thqe<
has been held that the failure t o lend cooperatioll constabulary soldier tried to obtain information %om
the administration of justice o r other public serv- prisoner. When the prisaner refused to give any
ice must be malicious. Since the chief of police only forgot formation, the soldier gave him fist blows and kicked
him several limes, inflicting physical injuries. What
t o serve the subpoena, he did not act with malice.
was committed by the constabulary soldier. Explain
answer.
1173., Why is the refusal of a person without legal motive to
harge the duties of the office to The constabulary soldier committed
crime under Art. 234 of the Re- &- He _c&n&-be
-~ held liable for mal
r *?.~*a
onel-, b s u s e the prisoner was not under his chdr&'.He., .,(,A
d, the discharge of the duties O f a e . cannot be held liable for coercion eAher, b&..the,'pn&i$
1
m&er of dutx of the person elected ones was not beiw c o a e d by him @ @
- s!bbng$
i
o a p b l i e office is l u L d m h a I I Y
,/
/
against his will at the time he subjected t m e e . "
The physical injuries irere inflicted as an act of revenee : 1'
,., -
legal motive t - u or against the prisoner for not giving the desired information. -'!:
f the office to which he was appointed. ..
1177. The jailer, becoming angry with t.he prisoner under hls:.,si
.'.
,,', 4
!,
<. i ..,'* $*'
!
What are the ,two ways of committing the crime of mal-
treatment of prisoner?
charge, boxed mtl kicked the latter. Is the jailer k b l e
for maltreatment of prisoner? Why? ". 3
& becanse -maltreatment must z a *,i
fficer shall overdn. himself in the
of a prisoner or detentiun prjsowr
r @ by the & ~ U of Qpunish-
?&&.bnriized by the &tion, or ( 2 ) b d - .., prisoner b.v season o f personal grudge. .' 5%
.~;d
C R I M I X ~ LLAW REVIEWER
..
..
the trial of the case. Is the justice of the peace liable
,for disobeying the request for disqualification? Why?
f 187. How about a congressman who sent a note to a judce.~'
requesting the latter to decide the case in favor of his'.
, No. bocause the
. .. ' ' o n m b e i n s ,. ,
.'.'
leader who ix a party in the case? ...~., ~.,.,.
>.*
c . e d b y m h Q l 3'ty. Besides, the one re- NO, because the person who sent the note is not:an""
-I</
470 471
.c
.:.
I
:.. ~,
.,.
, .
iI
, . I
, ,,. ., , solicit or make immoral or indecent advances. 1 . When there is a @$&&f in the
It is also committed by a & who shall solicit or m e tim (Art. R.P.C.).
a,
~
under 18 years of age and a m , because i t .would _he 3. When the offender m d any of his
. . t h e o w r being a p m m - tioned in the definition of the crime of parriei
w . If the woman is under 12 wars of age, and thereis
.. L ', tsexual nx&&eae w e -
intercourse, the crime is- If the woman is married,
..* ,.,.
:.
.
~. i
. . '.. ', i t = s r m if thexad.cn or public officex lmQ%!Lher conceived the idea of killing her hushand,
to b a d d . a stranger, to kill him with a pistol furnished.
The public officer should ~1 perform acts of lewdnegs On of 4 . B shot the husband of A tb
When C g a v e thhe pistol to B, the former knew that
sister A had induced B to kill her hushand. What cri
was committed hy B and C? 'Explain .your answer;
t if thewoman is a m i t u t e , the cdme i m o m m i t t e d , B committed -because he k m the ds.e.as&$(
o @use agamst ehastita if t h 9
wn-
of &e & promise of reward. =is &
The public officer shvaM i e Oeslt with d&ninm.- a- m n the crime of murder, Et in the crime df *,d
<
p: w e . ~,';Lii$
;!#<&,~
i O s t h e wife is l a l e f o r f i a be-e a=@:
When i!l the killing of one's child not parricide? i.
! i n g circumstances which arise f m private re la^^"
When a person kills his c&Ld who is h d l a d i he I?
(' of the.offend& with the offend& party and which auali@$
,d- the crime is not parricide, hut infanticide. the crime shall a.ggravate the lia
crime as against, the principals, ac
. .. . When is the killing of one's grandchild or grandparent not to whom they are attendant. The
.. . ,.: parricide? being attendan
. , .
, .,
,*. I When the relationshipxis E& I-te. Hence, the to parricide as
killing of an ille itiniete randson DI- an illegitimate grand- ii
, - ,.
1194. Suppose, in the same case,'D, a stranger, assisted in
father is& or& as the ea%LZ?aL-he.
escape of A, who is guilt9 of parricide, what is the Iia
er, adopted parent, or ity of D?
!
ister not parricide? The Supreme Court of Spain, in its decision of No
Knd in the direct lice, that the straager who participated
tims in parricide. nequent to the commission of parricide would be liable
473
1
, . Ii
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
,, ' mstance of treachery. aidering th'at A did not surprise his daughter in
of 5exUal intercourse in his own house, do you
. AthehadPhilippines.
been married to @ in China befor-e
Here, A married. X. In a
came to
quarrel,. A
k i l l d R. 'What crime was committed by A? physical injuries, or must he be sentenced to des
for having inflicted physical injuries under excep
circumstances?
It is submued that A should be sentenc
of -0, he surprised them in
intercourse and he
tion with a-woman. A
' child was born of that woman, which undoubtedly was the
later, that child was al-
woman and married. She birth p_arent wiiwt..& is living. It is sufficient that the
illed p when the latter was tlYo2WUs -tawas then livingwith her rnEnts.
rime was committed by A?
, because E m a g r a n d c h i l a 1200. A surprised his wife in the act 0% sexual i n t e r c o 3 4 :
was illegitimate. .In par- another man, but the paramour succeeded in j.mpi"
u -.A , '.
475
. .
3,
.
. .. ,.,.,
,, _I
. .
.
., ,. .
., ~, ; ,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIFWSR
mour and overtook the wife in their house after the lapse
of certain time. In this case, the Supreme Court applied
.the provisions of Art. 247 of the Revised Penal Code in
favor of t'he accused.
t in your answer.
4T7
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW'ER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
e>,
A:.*' "
c o m m W by m e w s of exal a or fall o f a n
'- if the pilot did not die of explosion bnt died due
to the Fall of the plane.
Note: When a person had the izl~e&LkdUL another and to
accomplish his purpose, he used as means (1)inundation, (2)- . .
(3) p o k n , or (4) exp$o&n, tho cdme is murder
w,
It is also murder when B person killed another b y means
of (1) s h i m e k , (2) strivnding of a vessel, (3) derailment,
or assault upon a streetcar or locomotive, o r (4) f&of an
No, because killing a person on the occasion of any
airship. of the calamities mentioned in par. 4 of Art. 248 of the
,Code requires that the offender must take advantage of it
A set the house of B on fire, resulting in the death of /in comiqidng the crime. '!:
i
a child who was burned. What crime was committed N o d Killing a person on the occasion of destructive cyclone, ',,
b y A ? Explain your answer. ,&&e and other public calamity is also murder.
A committed a c-rime nf a r m with hmu.ude
..
When is the k i l l e r n o t i a b l e for murder, even if he had ,;,
' (U.S. vs, Burns, 41 Phil. 418), or plain arson and the
humicide absorbed in the crime of arson (People vs. Pa-,
premeditated hefore he coninlitted the crime?
,."
. , . 1
:.,.a
terno, et al., 47 O.G. 4600). It cannat 48 In the following cases: ,* '
ir
,'
t l L t z . e J W ' ' nnv 7) articular person by. means 1. When t.he pe~sonkilled i s d i f f e s n t from the' ,in:.:. :,
e. 1 tended victim. . ::+
, ,.
.. ,
480 481
$E
. .
i
ip
CRIMZNAL LAW REVIEWER
. When ihhe js his-, a s d n i . or b- ' ' i its gaximum period to death. What is the .proper penal-
eendant; because the crime W i c i d e . t y for A in case of conviction? Why?
.
When the v i e i s a child less than 8 A m L d d , ~. .The .penalty that should be imposed on A in case, a€
. because the crime is infanticide.
conviction is reelusion perpetuu, the medium of the penalty.
/:;
4 . When evident uremcdi&%tionis d-n in the for murder, because only treachery qualifies the crime to.
-information, but it is p-d-during the trial. and abuse of superior strength, nighttime. purpose
: ;' , 6 ; When the killing of the victim is by means of B0;Son,
jl ~ 1
for, craft and fraud cannot lye eonsidered even w
S, .because evident aremeditation is absorbed. generic aggravating circumstances, because they a
so&&iLtwa *=Y-
.;
~ . .
lZl8;:Is the killing of a person with ignominy murder? Why'!
* . .
'.
Note: But killinr R -
No, because w n y is && one of the aualifvina
a g g r a v a t i n ~circumstances of murder.
' s o n with- i8-r.
1223.' A killed his y i f e with evident premeditation and with
crueIty. What crime was committed by -A.? .Why?
t i ocn m willbe ..;.
/ ~ a ~ ~ i ~ E v i d e n ~ r e m e d i t aand
c $ i H g e s aggravatim circumstances, w e , , 2
. .;
~
--
ship between P a - d r t y ,
pyewnce of t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i a g _ e i r c u m s tsuch a n cas'
&e
e .treachery . >I
an,- cannot change the name and nature of the <
c r k a n d the qualifying circumstance shall bckea&$%z ':
generic avra- for the deter;
1&4.
i^hen
iahe.gropa pedy. . ,.
two ou more qualifying circumstances are vresente
~
the crime. Is A liable for murder? Why? bow may they be considered in the qualification of the
crime and in determining the proper penalt
Only o&them will qualify the crime
-
' 1 shall be considered as generic aggravating
/.
21. A was killed by a band. Are the members of that band '
which shall have the a c t o f r a i s i n g the nenalty to the,
liable for murder? Why?
By a band is not sa&ficdy mentioned in Art. 248 as
'
a qualifying circumstance in murder; but it may be con-
sidered either Was-We of suoerior streng-th,
: or @ as- a smed men-as r e g y d s the leader of $he
'. in which case, they are liable for murder.
A83
CRIMIWAL LAW REVIEWEX
.,.'.. :':*:
Note: The difficult question t o salve is when one of the w&& .g
' " ' - ~ ' p m t i Q i ion the part of the person performing or €ail-' ~25;
ing to perform such act. Hence, intent to ~kiJl -oxanalice
found in the body of the deceased was mortal and the oUl&
was only slight, which could not have caused the death of tkk :..
?
;,
: . crime charged is homicide, murder, parricide, or infanticide, to indicate a conspiracy between them, and death resulta,
if the jury have a reasonable doubt an to which struck:'
/
, . . in which the' death of the victim is an element of the of-
. . the blow causing death, it should acquit- them both."' . ":::,
.. . ' fense, there must be satisfactorv e.vid.mce o f A h e j & b f , j .Ti
Of eorure, when tlierp is conspiracy, both are liable for the :.:*
&&-of the victim and of his identity. death of the deceased. . ,,%
:.I ~*
Note: When the death pf the victim results from the usa Of
violence by the offender the intent to kill is conclusidy p m 1128. X and Y were brothers-in-law and not altogether friendly,-
surned, because in czimes against ~ e r s m athe. law considers although they were in speaking and visiting terms. One
t u e a r a t h e r than the intention. Lack of intention to com-
mit !so grave a wrong as that committed will only mitigate day, Y visited the residcnee of X , was receked .in a
'~'.1 , ~ I ,' the liability of the offender. friendly manner, but after a whse an altercation arose,
as a result of which %shot Y in the abdomen, inflicting
227. Without. any conspiracy or spontaneous agreement, A a wound that was necessarily mortal. Soon afterward:
and B 'dealt X blows with clubs which hit the latter on but within a few minutes, when no other person W:a+
the;J!ead. These blows, or at least one of them, which present, Y procured a knife and cut his throat, inflict;.
'' . ' on&ouId not be determined, caused the intracranial ing a ghastly wound, from the effect of which Y must
... h e r n o r h g e and crushing of the cerebellum of X, which necessarily have died in five minutes. 1s"X liable f o r
caused his death. Discuss the liability of A and B, ex- the death of Y? Explain your answer.
plaining: your answer. Yes. In determining the liability of the defendant in
,It i!3 submitted that A and E are guilty of the crime a case like this, the && is: "&&e?-, when the deukh
o?(GmJ It is a welllsettled ruk ]%this jurisdiction 00, the wound inflicted bu the defendant, &Lm&- ,,.
that w J m a v-ied as a result of oneof the wounds tribute t o thm_cueat. If it did, although other independent :1
r e h d from two uersons, a a n g independently of each causes also contributed, the casual relation between the
other a,nd the wounds inflicted hy them could have caused unlawful acts of the defendant and the death has been made
the &:t.h, and It could not be shown yhich c a u d the out. Here, when the throat was cut, Y was not m e r a y '
' . death of the victim, ressors are g m o f A e languishing from a mortal wound. He was actually dying
_c
crime of homicide (People vs. Peregrino and Mangco,
1
-and alter the'throat was cut he continued to languish;
from both wounds. Drop b y drop the life current went
e C X 3 3 O.G. 4504). :
485
.&j:*,2 j , ,
. ,
%
: +. , -. .&$from both wounds, and at the very instant of d a t h person who killed her was unknown.. Two
. ,. _. ..t)le gunshot wound was contributing to the event. . I f the
_..
pointed to X as the person who pushed' ihe' old
.,.:.,..a.! '' .
!
throat cntting had been by a third person, unconnected during the affray, resulting in her failing
'. . *., _ .. . with the defendant, he might be guilty; for, although a It appears, however, that the cawe .of
,, '. .., mdn cannot be MZed tivice, two persons, uiting inde- the stab wound on the side of her body:and the perso
. . . . mndentlv,, may contribute to his death and each be guiltY , who inflicted it could not be identified. Is X criminal1
of a hoinicide. is stiil in life, a n d a y liable for the death of the old woman?
',
-
he killed. but
x_.____..., if
~ . . " - a wound $v!ien
,, . ' other both may properly be said t o have contributed t o
by an-
'
Y 2 because h-t
ing a confusgl
of the old woman
tumultuous a f f w , and
his death." (Cited in U.S. vs. Abiog,~etal., spcpra). ascertained who actually killed her, and the person or ' ".
persons who h f m e d the-*es
1229. When the evidence is not clear as t o which bullet or b d -
b m d . In such case, the Derson liahb -ei
lets fired by the two defendants killed two persons, KhDcd v m u m n the victim. ,
how many crimes 'are committed by the two defendants?
., L
If there is n i evidence showing that the two vic- 1232. Must the person killed in a tumultuous affray be one ':'
tims died with more than one and different bullets and of those engiged in the free-&aIl fight? Why? ~<Pr
it is wifbin the scope of possibility that the two versons XO. The law does not require that the person killed.' I?:
were ki1.led by one only and the same missile, there is is one of those engaged in the free-for-all fight, because
I - -
only one crime of double murder, a complex crime (People the law (Art. 251) says, "and in the course of the a f f r a y . ',,',
vs. Bersamin Mirong, et al., G. R. No. L-3098,March 5, someone is killed."
..
",
1951). Noto: I f the one who caused the death in a tumultuous affray
Note: This ruling applies only whcn the positions of the %- is&wn, that person who caused the death will be liable for
_-
tims ~ ~ such
r te h u a c0-t by o n e x s a m e dug. ordinary h&de end will he sentenced to the penalty far the
crime of homicide, which is reclusion tempoval. If the person
' '
486 487
&:
.dl
1234. A wanted to commit suicide and confided his intention to ( 1 ) BY assistine another to commit suicide which is c o h j
s-ed. ,.ii
B, his friend. B suggested to him how to commit suicide
withoul. suffering much pain, by telling him tu put the (2) By his assistance t o a e r to the extent of'
do- ' .
barrel of his pistol into his mouth and fire it upward (3) By s s a another to commit suicide .which
so a s to destroy his brain. Then B left him done. A c=mp?ated.
.....,.. - followed the suggestion of B and sh,ot himself in the The third act punished, which is giving assistance to sGei
,I
,, manner indicated by B. Is B liable for giving assistaice which is not consummated, refers Lo the first act.
+& ..
<. t-kkle? Explain your answer. The preceding question iuvolves the 2nd act of giving as
Yes, because giving suggestion d o t h e m ? of ance'to suicide, because B went t o the extent of trying to
A himself.
ccmmii,ting suiclae is_a positive and direct eoooeratiop
--
amounting to giving assistance t o sukde.
But if B only gave his pistol to A who had told
he would commit suicide, and A %sed that pistol to
self, but he did not die, because of the timely int
, 1235. A, upon knowing that B would commit suicide, went to of the doctor, then the act of B is that one menti
the place where B was going to commit suicide. A stood
by and looked at the manner B would commit soicide. A
saw the actual commission of suicide by B. Since A did
not prevent B from committing suicide, is he criminallg
more descrying of pity than of ~,enalty.
liable? Why?
No, because mere passive attitude of n o t p r e v e n.t i.n g 1237. Wlien is the discharge of firearm (1)
the suicide d o z t c o a t e giving assistance t o de.
488
CRIMINAL LAW IlEVIEWEK CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
/
'!'
238; A, withoirt intent to kill, fired his gun at 3 who was
wounded, but only slight physical injuries were inflicted.
:What crimes were committed?
It would b e ' h impossible crime if the offender aimed
his firearm a t or against another person and pressed the
trigger, but the bullet did not ezptode because it .was
defective. This is an impossible crime, because the act
Illegal discharge of firearm and slight physical injuries. performed wouid be an offense of an illegal discharge of ..
One of the crimes committed is illegal discharge of fire- firearm; a crime against persons, were it not for the' ''*
;i^
,.' arm, because there was no intent to kill. Although the
employment of ineffectual means.
i . two crimes were the result of one single act, a slight phy-
i d injury, which is a light felony, cannot form a com- 1243. If the' discharge of firearm wils directed at the house ,
plex crime with illegal discharge of firearm.
I__
where the offended party was, but without the offender .:
actualiy seeing him, what is the crime?
1. 9: Suppose that in the preceding question A inflicted on B
.,
less serious physical injuries, what crime was committed? The crime would only be alarm, because i t produced
/
.. alarm or danger in the place. It is not illegal discharge . ,
CompIex crime of illegal discharge of firearm with less
/of firearm, because the firearm could not be discharged
serious physical injuries, both being less grave felonies.
at or against the offended party when the latter is not
240. ~Suppgsetlint i n .the question next preceaing B was kine& visible to the offender,
.. what crime w a s committed?
244. When is the killing of a child under seven years of age
Homicide, plain and simple, as the intent to kill is con- (1) murder, (2) parricide, or (3) infanticide?
clusively presumed when death resulted from the illegal
The killing of a child under seven years of age is mur-
der when the reiation of the offender with the child is not
illegal discharge of firearm? one of those mentioned in the definition of the crime of ' ' '
,, . , , 490 491
1 1
,.. . :. It is infanticide when the child. killed is less than 3 days 'was the result of .a negligent act on' the part of the of-
' ' ' dd, whether .or nat the o€€eader is related i o ihe child. fadex. T1.R vid.exe was ?& intentiona1ly-d by him:,
.
~
; i.
Note: The name of the crime is always infanticide whoever w--4kL%-. .
' is the killer, hut the penalty differs when the offender is re-
,, ,. 1248. Is there an impossible crime-
latcd ti) the child, as father or legitimate eandparent, in
which (case the penalty will be that far parricide. But if the Yes, if the woman is not pregnant, but the offender I
, . relation 02 the offender with the child less than 8 days old believes that she is pregnant because of her bulging ab-
is not one of those mentioned in the definitiod of the crime domen, and he used violence to cause an abortion. This is
of parricide, the penalty is that far murder. an impossihl? crime where the act performed would have 'i
The intention to conceal the dishonor of the mother is not been abortio:,, which is a crime against persons, were i t -',
an element of the offense, it being only a mitigating circum-
stance.
, not for the herent impossibility of accomplishing it. It ' ,
is impossible.,:p cause an
-:
f '
Note: In abortion, the age of the footus is immaterial.
. at the time he exerted violence on her he did not know consented to the abortion committed on her, the penalty
. . her to be pregnant and that as a result of the violence to be imposed on the offender is only lowered (from
. exerted the woman suffered an abortion?
, pri.yion n a y o r to prision correccional in its medium and":,,)
,x""/ Yes,, because the lack of knowledge of the pregnancy maximum periods),
of t h offended party is immaterial. What is considered
. : .. e crime of abortion is the fact that a pregnant woman 1255. 1s;Lhe woman who consented that another person should ' .
uffers an abortion because of the act of the offender. ce an abortion upon herself liable criminally?
This is in accordance with the provision of Art. 4, par. 1, +. She shall suffer the same penalty that would be
which says that a person committing a felony is criminally ed had she practiced an abortion upon herself. , '
liable for the result although not intended by him.
1256. A quack doctor, who tried to cure a pregnant woman . '
1253, A woman suffered abortion by natural'cause. The ex- suffering from stomach ache by giving her a certain
pelled foetus had already a human form and ahout six kind of medicine, caused abortion. It appeared that the
. months old. While the foetus was still alive, it was cause o f abortion was the medicine administered. What 4.
buried by the servant in the yard, as instrxeted by the is the criminal liability, if any, of the quack-doctor?
mother. Are the mother and the servant liable crim-
. : inally? . . quack doctor is liable only
The f o a e g a l practice
He is not liable for abor-
.. . . n-r ~~
No, because the foetus, in view of its age, did not have Gon, whether intentional or unintentional. It is not in-
I ,
.
'its own life, independent of that of the motber. A foetus tentional abortion, because he did not intend to cause abor-
,:. under these conditions had necessarily to suxumb a few tion; and it cannot be unintentional abortion, because. he
. ' , moments after its expulsion from the maternal womb. did not employ violence. l l a 'm is caused
The crime of infanticide was not committed, because by violence only.
in this crime the victim must be a child less than three
days old, but one who can subsist outside of $be maternal 1257. A, a stranger, ,poisoned a pregnant woman t o kill her.
womb. As a consequence, she died and the foetus 'in her womb
also died. What crr'me was committed by A?
,;.::
.. '"
There is no abortion in this case, because the expulsion
of the €oetus was due t o natural cause. w r , because A killed the woman by m mison.
N o t e : There are two kinds of abortion: (1) intentional abor-
It canmi be a complex crime of murder with intentional
tion, (,hat is, whet%abortion is intonded; and (2) *mintentiom1 abortion, because the abortion was not intended; and the
abortion, that is, when abortion is not intended, hut the abortion crime uf murder cannot be complexed 'with unintentional
is caused by means of violence. abortion, because tliere was no violence used.
The means used in inter.Lional ahortion i s *ither (1) via-
lenee, or (2) any other means, especially adrnlnistering abortive 125s. A pregnant woman who tried to commit suicide drank
.. substance or surgical operation (Art. 256, R.P.C.). poison. Because of the timely intervention of a doctor
Unintentional abortion is causcd by violence only (Art. 257,
. .,~. she did not die, but the poison taken by her caused-
R.P.C.).
1
'
i CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
herself? Explain your answer. to zccept the challenge. C, who was present, scoffed '. .
No, because in abortio Gticed by th? woman upon at and decried B in the presence of other persons for .':$ *-
' +- ba
herself, In this case, when she having refused to accept the challenge. Are A and C ',+
tried to commit suicide, she could not have f n t e n i JQ eriminafiy liable, A far challenging R to a duel and C ..,.:!
' . for scoffing a t or decrying B publicly for having refused
c_nuse an abortion an herself. s<+
t.
:
!
/' (Art. 258, par. 3, R.P.C.). must have. C is not liabie either, because scoffing at
or .decrying another publicly for having refused to accept, .
259. What circumstance will qualify the crime of aburtion a challenge to fight a duel presupposes the existence of
committed by a physician or midwife and what is the a challenge t o a duel, which is not present in the question.
reason of the law for imposing the penalties in their Note: Challenging to B duel includes (1) inciting another to
.. maximum period? give or accept a challenge t o a duel, or (2) scoffing at or de-
crying another publicly f o r having refused to accept a chal-
Abortion committed by a physician or midwife is auali- lenge to fight a duel ( A r t . 261, R.P.C.).
fied by abuse of his or her scientific knowledne o m s -
__-
sional skill (Art. 259, R.P.C.). 8262. Define mutilation and state the two ways of committing.
They incur a heavier-guilt in making use of their it.
7
126
kn w l a g e for the destruction of human life, where it
should be used only for its preservation.
. What is duel?
It i:s a formal or regular combat previously concerted
between two parties in the presence of two or more seconds
of lawful age on each side, who make the selection of arms
and fix all the other conditions of the fight.
Note: An agreement to fight which is carried out without the
him
A-
The term "mutilation" means the lopping or the clip-
ping off of some part of the body.
The two ways of committing mutilation are:
1 . By mutilating another f - s s e
either totally or qy-,
f o r ~ l c i i Q P .
E
--
of =se
of demiving
esi&hhxa n
, .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
1263. A and 8 fought each other with sharp boloes, With in- 1297. If any of the serious physical injuries wzas inflicted be-
tent to kill, A struck B in the lourer part of his body, cause of the injurious substance given to the offended
cutting his private parts. B did not die due to the party, what was the crime committed?
timely intervention of a doctor. What crime was com-
1. Th.e crime was administerinr infurious substance Qg
mitted b:y A? Why? bev-e iE the offender & a t the time he administered
F s r a t e d homicide, because A had .the intent to kill. * K e same to the offended party that i t w m US,
d'It is n@ mutilation, because it \ v u not the intention of & provided there kill (Art. 264, R.P:W.
A to deprive B of his essential organ for reproduction. .*"
2 . If there then it w a s &
en
/
Note: If there si-t t o kill on the part of the offender, murder because the injurious s u b s h s e having b
and thore i s n-to hurposc of depriving the offended of tl:e offended party, the E&C
.&M
*Y
party of a particular part of his body, the cutting of his
privnte parts or any other part of his body is anlv serious p m d tke s u b i e d e u h a s of the+.
physical injuries under Art. 263 of the Revised Penal Code, ' 3. It w a s ( S m m s h reel&%
izn- u e offender did not know of the injurious .'
264. What crime was committed by a doctor who removed the n a r e of the substance 01" beverQe, but h e J j d - w t ta&%
ovary of a woman SO that she might not beceme pregnant the necessary ~ e . c & h i ~ to avoid iniurv to anothcr.
again? 'Why?
1268. May the court permit the presentation of evidence of :
@util:itiod because the purpose of. the doctor in re- medical attendance in the case of serious 'physical in- ' :
moving the ovary of the woman was to deurivc-her of jnries? Explain your answer.
the'essemtial organ for reproduction.
While the law (Art. 263) 'does not mention medical a&
1265. A caught E stealing in his house. This being the third tendance in defining any of the serious physical
/Mmence of medical attendance m3y-b wxx&ed
time that B w a s caught stealing in his house, A cut all
the fingers of the hands of B. What crime was com- -
lish the 1ErmWh.si3, which 1s- 0
mitted b:v.'A? Why? &termining the seriousness of the physical injuries in
certain cases.
e t a b e c a u s e when A cut B's fingers, h a -
tion was to denrive him o f his fingers so that E! could 1269. In classifying serious physical injuries, what factors are 2
not steal again. taken into consideration? '_,
T'ney are:
1266. What crime was committed when in inflicting any of the consequence of the physical. injurie
I . The IrsxLL.o~ror
serious physical injuries, the offender has intent t o kill? inflicted (when victim becomes insane, "e.).
If the wounds inflicted are mortal, that is, they are 2 . The I= of a principal member of the body of th
sufficient +to cause death, it is either frustrated homicide, offended party (when he lost an arm, &leg, etc.).
frustrated murder or frustrated parricide, deyending upon 3. The i s o f the- of any principal member of
. , , the circumstances under which they are inflicted.
body of the offended party (when he lost the use of
If the wounds inflicted are not mortal, then it is only hand, arm, foot or leg, ete.)
:.:' attempted homicide, attempted murder or attempted pami- 4. The loss of any of the non-&cipal.~mgber of
&.>,?*$.>
..,, ,,,,,>: ,. cia% as the case m a y be. body of the offended payty (when he lost the sense of h
.-
+??q?~i.t$:<r
,F,:.;,.
,& :;:&; ',, 498 499
..,c' , ~.., .
' I
i
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER .i .
CRIMINAL LAW RNIEWER
. . ing of one ear or he lost one or two fingers, which map , ...,
from which the two molars were removed. He w a s nob- :&
also be deformity). incapacitated for the performance of his work. What k i n v :
5. The loss of the , p & o f any of the non-principal of physical injuries was inflicted? Why?
membei:
6. The incaaacity or illness of the offended party.
& % z z w because although there i s .$:
deformity, and the part of the body injured or the effect ..*.
When are serious physical i n i w 3 e s - a o m i n j u r y is not one of those specifically mention@ .
in the article defining the felony of serious physical in-
When of the serious ph,ysical injuries i&hflkkd od '
juries, there is loss oLa n o n - a r i n c i w r nf h-b..-J
under paragraph 3 of Art. 263.
1274. A boxed B in the back of his head. B did no€ need
medicine as RO wound was caused on his head, but he
was hit on the head by 6. There'was was not able to work for one week. After one week he
no break in the skin. Hence, no medicine w a s necessary. realized that one of his eyes could not distinguish one
But as a consequence, A could not prepare €or his lesson color from another. How would you classify the p h p
for two months, because he became dizzy whenever he s i 4 iniuries inflicted by A?
read his assignment. How would you classify the p h y s i d I
e c physical i n j u r a because the offended Party
injuries inflicted on him by B?
The physical injuries inflicted on A are classified as
-~
b d the use of an evq./ 1s not necessary that there is
comple&Jdidness of an eye, as t,he dirninuition of the
serious, physical injuries. "=offer of an a is sufficient. This is the opinion
The term "&relative t o incapacity, includer; schoOt of Viada; Cue110 Calon believes that there must be total
&< oTgreparation .for a arofession. Hence, a student, blindness.
.' who is injured by another and rls a consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted he could not attend his class 1275. A inflicted a wound on B in a l'ight. The wound re-
or study his lessons, is incaaacitated for the performance mained open for 27 days. B only cleaned it with warm
of the work in which he was habitually e n g a d . water and did not apply any medicine. B's wound did not
prevent him from performing his work. How would YOU
Wi.2. Classify the physical injuries inflicted by the uffendw classify the physical injllry inflicted by A on B? Why?
on the offended party whose Ieg injury required hos- The injury inflicted by A on E is6light Dhysical in>
pitalization for more than thirty days.
jury, because there y a s no medical attendance and the
That leg injury is a serious physical injury covered latter was not inmpacitated from h-k. The physicat
by Art. 263, par. 4, of the Revised Penal Code. The injury inflicted is not less serious or one of the serious
hospitalization for more than thirty days may mean $i&eF.
i
physical injuries.
i&ss-.or..iKcs.acity forJab.or f o r more .thm-tYirty~ days.
(See People vs. Mom AIi, et al., G.R. L-7431, May 30, 2276. In 8 4 a a r r 4 A shoved the face of B until the latter
1958.) fell on the f@r. B did not suffer any physical injuries.
For what cJxFy i s A liable? . Why?
273. A boxed B on the left cheek, causing the loss of'tW0 '
. . molars. Medicine was applied only once on B's gum
A is liable fL:d. s ' w bv ill-treating an- ,
;
I othes.
500
601
I
I /
I
1277. What are the crimes against Gersonal l i b e r t a The penalty shall h a w h e r e the kidnapping or deten-
tion is Committed for the PurDOSe of k t o r t i p raLlBQ?@e9enda
They are: V' nsotof the c - n e n t i o n e d &.nr%gnt in the com-
/Kidnapping and serious illegal detention. mission of the offense.
8. ,Slight illegal detention.
.~
.* 4 Unlawful arrest. 1278. A, €3 and C, pretending to be constabulary soldiers, told
. , & Kidnapping and failure to return a minor. X to go with them to the barracks f o r investigation.
A, E and C took X to a seclude,d place where the latter
f Inducing a minor to abandon his home. was detained for three days until he was rescued by the
,$!Slavery. real constabulary soldiers. What crime was committed
4. Exploitation of child labor.
4. Services rendered under compulsion in payment of ---
/"by A, 13 and C? Why?
because &
' L e b t s . ,/ ,
a d s G < n d serious illega-3
committed the crime simulating public authority. In such
/1278. What is the essenthl &men t or act tl!at makes the
-
case, the periohoL&&tion iLimmaterial.
offense of kidnapping and serious illegal detention? Is 1280. A policeman> together with several private individuals,
the period of detention of the victim important in the i kidnapped a person for the purpose of extorting ransom
determination of the crime? from the relatives of the victim. What crime was conl-
The essential element or act that makes the offense mitted by the policeman? Explain your answer.
of kidnapping and serious illegal detention is the deariva- The p+%ep, like the pri&teindividuaIs with whom
tion of the offended party of his lib& under any of
f o h instances enumerated in Art. 267, the illegal de-
tention. of the victim for more than five days being one
he was in cons i r g , committed&:dnauplns! a .
il@T?I&iif&-because hgAid-x& in h?:
c m y w k n he took mrt in the commission of the crime.
OE
of such instances. Having acted as a urivate i n d i y i i , he was not liable
The period of detention of the victim is imuortant, ,for arbitrary dete n b. n .
when n u of the other instances which a 'dy the
2
crime i m n t . 1281. A boy, 1 4 years old, was forcibly taken from the side-
The period of d e h h o.. & of the victim- nt, walk of a street and carried away in a jeep, but before
when any of the following is u r e m t : the culprits could cover a distance of one kilometer, they,
1. If it shall have been d-c simulating Dublie were overtaken by the peace officers who reseued the,
mityty; boy. What crime was committed by the culprits? Ex-
2 . If any serious physical injuries shall have been i& plain your answer.
f=d upon the person kidnapped 01- d e t n i n e d e i f -ts
I G=
& To kidnap is to carry off by unlawfu!:
t o kill him shall have been made. -
force. The intention of the offenders was to carry away
the boy by means of force.
3. If the person kidnappgd or detained. .shall Ije a
m a r , femaie,or public officer. i There are three ways of committing the c ime of kid-"
napping and serious illegal detention: -k I
502 503
ri
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REITEWER
I ',' The forcible taking away of the xi&m w e s i l & a l 1283. May a p r w individual, who Iddnwpped or detained or
. ', d m m (People vs. Undiana, 50 Phil. 6 4 6 ) . $0
otherwise deprived another of his liberty, not be held
criminally liable? Explain your answer.
1282. A and B, by means of violence, dragged and carried C, Yes, w h a h e kidnapping, detention or deprivation of
a Yyomm, to a distance of three meters from the place liberty is not ille@. One of the elemeats of kidnapping
where she was grabbed. rlfter having carried her to a i and serious illegal detention or slight illegal detention is,
distancme of three meters, A and B dropped C, because that the kidnaminc QLWQI&Q ' iIi-
of her struggles, and A and B did not persist in dragging N F a private person arrested and detained another
her away. A and B left C. What crime was committed u e? any of the instances where arrest without w t- Ja
by A a d'B? Explain your answer. authorized h y t h e R u l e s s f _ C o ure, the w l l e g a l .
P
& and B committed the crime of @insummated Brave
oercioQ eb- C-comoelled to do- ' a d t
h e r w i l l by means of violence. The acts of A and B do
The detention is n
Prevent her f r
1 1 when the aceused a d e d without
criminal inhnt, as when he locked up hi, wife in 3 2 w l n fn
.o. m.tide.
not constitute the crime of frustrated illegal detention, but 1284. A, together with other persons, f ~ m 3 l ytook a woman
rather that of consummated grave coercion (People vs. 27 y e a s age to a ear and carried her to another munic-
Marasigan, et al., 55 O.G. 8297). ipality for the purpose of m a d n g her. There was no
Nota: The ruling in the case of People YS. Undiana, 50 Phil.
impediment on the part of A or the woman to marry. On
641, and that in the ease of People vs. Crisostomo, 46 Phil. the way to the other municipality, A never touched the
775, arc not amlicable. woman. What crime w a s committed by A and his com-
I n the Undiana case, the accused dragged the offended party panions? Explain your mswer.
to a distance of 40 meters from the house where she was taken A and his companions committed the crime of-
i!legal detent103 because the victim is a f&e wh.3.W
d m d o L h .T k Tk +t !~e T F victim is a female, it
forcible abduction and there w a s - e n c e of lewd desiens. that the deprivation of liberty lasted morg
It would seem that had the information been for eonsummated The crime c a z e forcible t?hdu.& n,
foorcible abduction, the accused would have been found guilty because t l i m v s no lewd design, as shown by the f a t
of consummated illegal detention.
that he did not touch the woman a i anytime and that h&
I n the Crisostomo case, the accused were found guilty of i i i t e n t i ~ k i n zher f d b b w a s t o marry her.
consummated illegal detention, although they only dragged the
offended party along and took her against her will to a rice The intention to mamv the iv-n who is of age ,and
field where she was rescued by other persons. the &nze of any impediment on the part of either party
I t will be noted that in those eases the victims w g . u s m e d t u i T y negative the p r a e of unchaste designs.
by ather.persons from the accused; while in the instant case Note: But if A e n r w and && the woman on the way,
the offenders, after having carried the woman to a distanee or otherwise touched her body
-
of only three meters and dropped her because of her struggles, his companions would be liable
did not persist in dragging her away and volu ' . ' d ..
from furthering their purnose and left with=-
1
.I
1285. Su ,pose, in the preceding queslion, the female was onlJr;
sumg them when during all the time they wore in B position would the crime be the same? "i;i
to ,carry out whatever intent they criginaliy entertained for
there was no person present that could have stopped them No, because in s u e h s e the intention to m a
(People vs. Marasigan, et al., supra). k&g that the &cannot Five consent to the marria
KO4 505
1
CRIDflNAL LAW REVIEWER CRIXINAL LAW REVIEWER
by r x o D of her a e- s i ' s; and the detention is to be punished with a penalty one degree Iower
than that provided for the urindpal, because he is only
C & I E J Y Ob~ I ~
forcible a b d u c t i m .+ andna&
- i t is only in &&gbt illegal d & d iion
1266. A, B and C detained X for w a y s during which time where the person who shall furnish the place for t h e
X was subjected to physical violence, because he at-
tempted several times to escape. X suffered l e m i o u s _-~
perpetration of the crime is punished with the same pen.
altx as that f o r the..p-.
physical injuries. What crime was committed. Explain
your answer. A and B detained without legal ground X, a -&Or,
demand ransom. X was released w& i. t h d s , ,be
@ illegal detents baause the - d Qt fore the institution of any criminal proceedings, and
f.or moreith an 5 d a t h e r e w&n&simulation o w i c without attaining the purpose. Must the court impose
=
,a the o f w p a r t y w a s s t a p w i r , a a penalty one degree lower? Why?
femaleor a e r , there was no t o w t h €fended
p a a a n d the physical i n w n r M were-&&erious. - No, because the crime committed
- -s i
Note: T h s i m e is @&ht il&nal detentio@ when n a o f t a That privileged' mitiga&@ngcircumstance is ap-
the cireurnstan%that the crime of kidnavoing acd plicable only t o a case of &ght illegal detention.
ser;oUg illepal detention is nvesent (Art. 268, R.P.C.),
I ~1291. A, suspecting that B w a s occupying a part of his land,
1287. If the robbers, after taking p e r m 1 property by means tied his hands, forced t h e latter to ride in a jeep, and
of intimidation, compelled the victim to go with them took him to the municipal builNding for the puwose of
and put it restraint on his person, thereby depriving him filing a false charge against him and delivering him to
of his liberty, are the robbers liable also for illegal de- the chief of police. What crime was committed by A?
tention? Why? Why?
>, b,ecause the w e of the robbers was not to A committed the crime of Q Z i E V ~ t because J
deprive t&e victim of his liberty, but & t o Feventa h m d or detained another without authority-w
' reporting the matter to the authorties. or without reasonable ground therefor, but for the pur-
)
pose of deiivering him to the proper authorities.
1268. What is the s t k i p a t i o n and&bility of the person who
p e s t r a t i o n of ihe crime of 1292. IIow is kidnapping aiid failure Lo return a minor dis-
linguished from ordinary kidnapping and serious illegal
His uarticipa_tion i a nh
-t @ioi$E& & b detention?
h e a l > e ounished with the same uenalty provided for Both in the crime of kidnapping and serious illegal
the bq direct particiuation in the crime of slight detention, when the victim is a minor, and in the crime
i w W n . I of kidnapping and failure to retur a minor, the victim
is a minor under 21 years of age,/& while in kjdnauDin5
1269. What is the liability of the person who furnished the and failure to return a minor, the offe der is(
place for the pernetration of the crime of kidnapping with the custody of n minwJwEn/ k i $ p a . p e. ~ ~ ~
and serious illegal detention? Why?
I
I serious illegal detention tb o f f e n d s shoral8-n-o
The person who shalt furnish the place for the per- custody of the v i m . f i i d n s p p l n g and ser;tduhsa\rfie%
t petration of the crime of kidnapping and serious illegal detention the crime c nsists in deurivina the offended
506 607
1
I I
2
party of his libmiy, m e r y c o n f h h g h‘ u or-ng
restraint _on his oerson. n kidnapping an& failure to
return a minor, the crime consists in deliberately failing
I
.g
$010; that the city was a better place to live in; that
she. would take them with her to Manila; and that they
need not worry about the expenses incident to their going
to restore the &or to his p&s o r guxfiians. to and shy in that city as she wwld defray them all.
1293. A induced a’minor to abandon the home of his parents A was 19 year:! old and only a maid, while 1) and S
by proniishx to give him food, plenty of money and were both 14 years of age. Is A liable for inducing the
beautiful (clothes. The minor refused to abandon the minors to abandon their homes?
home of h!is parents in spite of the enticement. Is A 7. In view of the fact that m a n $
*“.j
criminally liable? Explain your answer. also a minor, i t cannot be sunnosed that A commanded
It is opined by a Spanish commentator that hte-e s-cendancy over D and S, a> to be able to orevail
of inducing, a minor to abandon his home is consummsed 0 4 .
by the mere induce&. HZce, it would seem t h u i n In order for an inducement of a minor to abandon
not necessary that the minor actually abandong h a m e the home of his parents or & i s or the person en-
because of the inducement. trusted with his custody to -titUte the crime penalized
N o t e : This opinion is correct, because the wime is committed under -221 of the Revised Penal Code, i t is essential
by inducing B minor to abandon the home of his parents or that th&ucmm t beactual, committed with erimirJal
gusrdinnr: QT the persons enhnsted with his custody. The law inte2t, and dctermiDd by a w i l l t o cause damage. The
(Art. 271) says, “shall induce a @erson under age x x x to
abandon the home,” which means that what ednstitutes th_e
representations made by A to D m d S highly praising
e&% si- the. s e t of induing, and tke i e a w
’ q of the home the City of Manila and her offer and promise to take
by-minor is not r e a k e d . them to that city d e do not constitute inducement.
The verb “to induce” means “to influence”; “-t ‘1 on”;
1294. A, a boy 13 years old, left his parents’ home and lived “to move h u e m i o n or i n f l u m e ” ; or “to incite by
with B. After sometime, C induced A to abandon the
-m (People vs. Paalam, C.A., 64 O.G. 8267-8268).
home OF B. Is C liable far inducing the minor to abandon
B’s home? Why? 1297. A and B kidnapped and detained X for a weelc t m @
No, because B w a m A‘s guardian nor a n e m n
/ the latter to wwk in x.plantation in Mindanao&bout
entrusted with A‘s cusbilg. sakry. Before A and B could board a vessel for Mindanao
Note: Art. 271, R.P.C., provides that t m which the W r with X, a policeman rescued X. What crime was com-
a-s, because Of the induce ent made by the eeused, must mitted by A and B? Why7
be the h a m of d wrent8 o7
ra- or the&on e n h x
with his eustodv. be- the purpose was t m e - h &
I
is kidnamed_or ckhned ‘ , tlle_crimecam-
1295. In the 8ame question, is B liable for A’s leaving his m=si slaverv if -se is t o enslave him (Art.’
parents’ home? 272, R.P.C.) .
& b s i M B =got entice or induce A-tQ abandon
t h d e &f his parents. 1 1298. A sold his nephew, 7 years old and an orphan, to B on
the promise of the latter to send him to school and to
1296. In a conversation she had with the n1inql.s I) and S,
treat him as his own child. But contrary to their agree-
A told said minors that Manila was a big city; that the r
609
508
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
ment, 13 compelled the boy to work in his house as sew ant^ [?lace. B e A w (Art. 275, par. 1) e s abandonment
without ,pay. What is the liability of A and B? of a person in %,e:
I_-
o& when such uerson, m n d in
A-was e- for slavery, because he had no inten-. an uninhabited- woun&d o i dying, is
tion to enslave t h m r when A snld,him. B would
be liable fpi- because his intention in purr ha sing^
fails to help 01% render assistance to another whom he
~-
the minor was'to enslave him, a i o d y his s u b s e m a t
act. has qm&?n?X& v+Qim&& or injnred. A intenti-
c
... ' , ,
510 511
CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
n
m n e uninhabited -t is thda&&ermn returned to his master. Is the servant liable for aban-
in the X&I w u render assistance. doning a minor? Explain your answer.
1304. A saw at the market place a child, 4 years old, who . Yes, because he abandoned a childless than 7 year4
was abandoned. A did not mind the child. Is A liable of axth&&v af which is incumbent upon him.
criminally? Why? cusk&, af the minar may be t s b o r a r y only.
Note: &t io constitute the offense, the abandonment must be
No, b 9 u s e the minor-under seven years af age ~s @Gnent,>
n m i d abandoned in an unsafe place. Art. 275, par. 3,
requires that such child is found abandmed and w e 130% What would be the crime if there is intent to kill when
is not l.&n to a safe dace,% to his farnib- the child is abandoned by the person having its custody?
i@X,ies.
If the purpose of the offender in abandoning the minor
/
,"'
' 1305. What i!i the purpose of the offender in committing the under 7 yearKOof age is t o cause hiri death, the crime COX&
crime of ahandonihg a minor? mitted i s either f-i the c- S
o s ; m a i f the child is 3 days o_r older and the offend
The purpose of the offender must be to avoid the obliga-
tion of caring for the minor under seven years of age, is not related to the child; o r & r m if the child
3 a o r older and the offender is the father or mother,
E
the custody of which is incumbent upon him.
w m r legithw& o r illegitimate o r legitimate grand-
to kill, l e f t h e r one-year old child in p s -
-
1306. A, w & M e n t
her bar,ong-harong which she abandodpermanently. The Note: In the crime of abandoning a minoy, the o f f e n d e r s h s y
child (lied of hunger a s no person saw the child since not have
---. the intent to kill.
. its mother had left it there. When she left the child, 1309. A, a pregnant woman, while answering the call of nature
she thought that someone would find the child there.
Her purpose was to avoid the obligation of caring tor the in a bamboo thicket, nnexpectedly gave birth to a child.
child. What crime was committed by her? As she was suffering from extreme debility and dizzi-
ness, she left the child in the thiclwt, where a n animal
G n d o n i n g a minor,) There are three responsibilities killed it. Is A liable for abandonment of a minor?
urovided by the Code, namely:
No. 'TkaanmlaUnmt thatthe_lsJv (Art. 276, R.P.C.)
& When the minor is deprived o&y. of t h e m k a n d p e s is ~ W i i i Z Z i a n d ~ b a on-n d
protection it needs bv reasQn of & C k & L W C ; m s t , r e - z - L i n t & x m t i o n of the axe a m -
4 When h u e is endangered; and t@ tuba ne& by rmiQp QF his klXk2&%
& When the minw dies, as a result of the-on- (People vs. BaEdian, 63 Phil. 530). 4 is exemDt from
n
i& criminal liabilitr,
T h e e no intent to kill o n e part of A, s h L t&c&d
not lxble for the h i g s e oLPanicide. c r i s L & a J A n t when she left the child.
1307. A told his servant to accompany his child, 6 years oId, 1310. A was entrusted in Iloilo by B wil,h her brother, a minor
to his grandmother who was living one kilometer away. 6 years old, to be brought to his mother in Manila, but
But the servant left the minor on the way and never A gave the minor t o the captain of the vessel, A's friend,
512 613
CRISSIKAL LAW REVIEWER CRlMlSAL LAW REVIEWER
to do it for him. Is A liable for abandonment of minor incurred hv an ascendant, g?laniiw~, 01- person entrnsted
by person entrusted with his custody? Why? with the custodysf-arrur u x s h a l l apain& k&
t&
,tl,lysi
It is submitted that A is&liabIe for abandonment @XEhllim in his servke (Art. 273, R.P.C.). Exploitation
of minor by person entrusted with his -custody, a of minors is committed by &H causing, (=employing,
-
o n h the person havine char= of the reaving or educutipn or (3)'delivering any boy or girl under 16 years of age
of a Ginaw-er
1-t
e ' r to-aala5licjnsti-
or other persou, without the consent of the one who
(or under 12 years of age, in case the offender is an
ascendant) to perform any d m e r o u s M aLb&mh,
entrusted such child to his care or in the absence of the &ysical strenwth, or c_o_ll_tartion; or to w o r k j n m S
latter without the consent of the proper authority, shall be o m w c h t , gmum.t, r m d k m , wild-animal
liable (Art. 277, R.P.C.). t ~ i . o, r m a ! . m g e r (Art. 278, R.P.C.).
Notn: Is Art. 276 applicable? That article punishss a ?- c.suL> 1313. When is inducing a minor to abandon the home of his
who shall ahandan a rh ild u w t c C L ~ the s m&ody
~
of\.w igincumbent U I .
parents or guardian a crime of exploitation of minor
It can not he abandoninrr a minor under Art. 2'76. because under Art. 278 of 1,he Revised O d e ?
.
that article - y when there is an-interruptior~ of the The act of inducing a mixor to abandon the home of
e n s and proteetin-" t h a w - Y er his parents or guardian is exuloitation of minor x!hedh?
affi. Under the custody of the captain of the vessel, SUT-
wznser t h m e and p r o t e a of a responsibjs-sm. a a o f the mi= is under sixteen yearse- and the
purD3e of the offer:dxis t o make the minor follow a a
1311. When is a person liable for the felony of indifference of acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker, d a r , wild-animal tamer,
parents;? or circus manage% q t o accompany any habitual v a a w t
* or beggar (Art. 278, par. 6, R.P.C.).
A person shall be &ble for that felony if he s b u - Note: Exploitation of minors is punished b s s e it endangers
&&I his chLldren by not +ins them the e d u c a t i o n d h - t u o r A a E y o f m .
I u t i o n in life r& a n w a -
(Art. :?77, par. 2, R.P.C.). 1314. Wbat, is the difference between trespass to dwelling and
Note: Hence, if the parents are so poor that they do not have violation of domicile?
the means to give their children the necessary education, they One of the ways of committing the crime of violation
will not be liable. of domicile is by entering any dwelling against the wil:
The parent is not liable under Art. 2 7 7 + r % e is working of the owner thereof, the offender not being authorize(
in another province or city and the minor and his mother 1.e:
judicial order.
::,'
.
,**':.
,
.
.,
i
hisminor
r&!iires
U him there. ~ I n that mse,
ceases.
'
~ l @ M u
'Ye
Ehieli their fit;rinninlife
fvho, under the metext of reimbursinc himself ot-f the latter's will.
.,
515
I 1 I
But the other way of committing vi( tion of domicile 1317. A was found by B inside the house of the latter. There
and the manner of committing trespass to dwelling are is no evidence as to the manner A entered B’s house.
not the same: while in the other way of committing viola- Is A liable for trespass to dwelling. Explain your answer.
tion of domicile, the offender enters the dwelling SUI=
reptitiously ; in trespass to dwelling, the offender enters Where there is w i d e n e e as-t.&L.he manner a person
&D the d.siellul
’ g of another, he cmnot be held liable
the dwelling of another against the latter’s will. But what
constitutes the other way of committing violation of domi- for trespass to dwelling, because to constitute the crime
cile is the refusal of the offender to leave the premises of t r e m i w - b Ay&i.ng e-t jnto the dwellingof
after having been required to do so. ae-r must be amin& the latter’s y& The entrance
-....the dwellinn of another is against the latter’s will
‘into
The offender in trespass to dwelling is any private
I
the window of the house of her master to make pmsible @remass to d@ A .havinsr entered the house of
the entrance of her suitor in the house through the B through the window. The e n b n c e was against the
window? What is the criminal liability of her suitor7 will of B. The fact that A had the intent to commit rob-
She is a I-p bv i n d i s n e ..n ' vn in the bery in the house does not m2,ke it attempted robbery,
crime of+3$aiified trespass t o dwellin& and her snitoy & tiiere being 110 overt act of the crime of robbery.
a-prMpal by direct nart i c i d n in the said crime.
N o t e : It has been held that when the entrance into the &el ling 1325. A, for unknown - d s e , entered t.he house of B through
of another is effectd t-the window, the crime committed the wi&ow. B upbraided A for entering his house
i u a u e d tres~asst o dwelling, because -t ewstrnctiue through the window. A stabbed B, inflicting less serious
im i - f physical injuries on the latter. What crime or crimes
were committed by A?
1322. At 10 o'cloclc in the morning, while the d E r of B's house d r e s p a s s to d w e l l i n p r i o u s physlcal i n j u r i y
was opened, .A entered it and once inside immediately When A entered the house of B, he had no intention to
pushed B when the latter asked him wli2t he wanted. inflict physical injuries on B or any other person. It was
What crime was committed hy A? Why? only when B upbraided him that A inflicted physical in-
A committed the crime ofG~nalifiedtresuass to dwe1j.J juries. There being -t ' @
-.n
et on the
ing & m e of the use of violence, ~ ~e h part of ~ A, h e m i t t e d c two different c?&~e S.
f& that the door of the hoyse o u WUiQXED an.d.&W
.. .
w a n g - p m l u l a h n to the CULL
'37. In 'qualified trespass
Note: If A-h&&he i n t e n t i m t o & a r injure 8 when he
entered ths house, he would be 1i:ible only for
to dweliing, when there is v m e or intimidation .h,Q p*il+ie%
mediatele after entrance, it is not necessary tl&dx.re
1326. A entered the yard of the house of B late in the evening
should he Drier prohibition or opposition to the entrance.
by jumping over the fence. The gate of the fence Wa9
1323. Is there a complex crime of trespass t o dwellincr y&h locked. B surprised him inside the yard. Is A liable
for other form of trespass?
h
e- or rape committed in the said dwelling? Ex-
plain your answer. No, because the place was inh&&d.
... . , I
619
518
t
I
..
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Note: Other form of trespass is committed when the offender
enters the closed premise< or tenced estate of mother while
either of them is uninhabited, the prohibition to enter t h o mme
i CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
I n the second ease, the threat made by A to inflict upon
the person of her husband G n g amauntinr to a criole a&?
promised some future harm to the husband of the offended
being manifest, and the trewasser not having secured the per- woman. Since a condition was impcsed by A, - b
mission of the owner oi caretaker thereof. Qn-t of the o u a s e w u immediate, because he at-
.. 1 tained his pllrpose the next day, t h e crime was-'
A threatenep a woman that he would kill her husband It will be noted that in the second case, there was no actual
if she would not have sexual intercourse with him. Be- nat-t when the pur== was a t the Doint of
beinn attaimd. In the first case, evcn a t the moment when A
Giuse of the threat made by him, A snceeeded in having was accomplishing his pu- the threat o r intimidation E
' sexual intercourse with her. What crime was commitfed actuul and continuing.
by A? Why?
p j b e c a u s e the t& made by A formed Dart of 1 3 2 m V h e n is a demand for money with intimidation robbery,
- e element of intimidatien that he employed to succced fl and when is it grave threats? Give illustrations.
i h i s i r n a l defie. The threai thpn cannot be considered A demand for money with intimidation i s. .m whep
-a ate and indeaendent &e. the intimidation is direct, Dersisteut and c&UlUlW until
otc: When a crime, specifically liunished f- 0 the offender succeeds in taking the money of the offended
element of another crime ac&dlv cornmi$&, u o m
__r party. .The ga.in obtained is immediate.
G b s o r b e d by the latter.
Thus, if A, a t the point of a pisto!, demanded money
1328. Suppose that in the preceding question, A threatened from B, threatening to kill the latter if he would not pro-
the wontian that he would kill her husband if she would duce his money, and B gave to A all the money he had
not have sexual intercourse with him, and the next day, with him, the crime committed by A is robbery with in-
timidation. The gain obtained by A was immediate.
the woman having agreed t o the condition imposed by A
to save her husband, A had sexual intercourse with her. It is w v e in1 s when the in_timidation is conditional
What crime was committed by A? Explain your answer. and merely p r o m s somefuture-m to the offend&
I n this case, A is liable for brave threatsJ because A par.ty 01: to a member of his family, i n , t h m e y
threatenepthe woman with the infliction upon the person c
demanded is& dd.b?ssl t-ff&r&either
^_
aersona)JY
Q?I through an intermediary.
of her husband of a wrong amounting to a crime, that is,
that he would kill him, imposing a condition, that is, that Thus, if A told B that he would kill him if the latter
she should have sexual intercourse with A, and A attained would not send him F1,OOO within twenty-four hours, and
his purpose. B a t the money the next day, A would be liable for
grave threats. I n this case, the. gain ohtailled by A S!ZU
Note: The crime committed is o p e , because wken the 05
fender had carnal kno ry&-te. as he got the money the next day.
%so anreed to it. Note: In\=ry with intimidation the t h & o r
t u c o n t r o l l e d her will a t the time of the sexual i n t e r m e. is directed0-0 the ers o t
Distinction of the two cases: -he t h B t - i m A e r s Q n , Lianar or
the first case, the threat made bv A ',as direct, of the offended party or th&.&anv of the
and continuinn until A accomDlished his 1)urpose. A fs3llily.
- had carnal -e of the woman 1,
- b~- y m q m
That is one of the ways whereby the felony of rape is corn- 1330. What i s the stage of execution of the felony of grave
mittea. threats if the offender does not attain his purpose? Why?
620 621
I
inations, because he was immoral. Is B liable for light or light threats. If the offender fails to give bond to
threats?,. Why? keep the peace, he shall be detained for a period not ex-
/because B did n-ake a thwk&-commit a n g . ceeding 6 months, if prosecuted for grave or less q a v e
It -nig to file an administrative complaint with felony; or not exceeding 30 days, if prosecuted for a hght
the Supreme Court against a man not fit to become a felony.
lawyer.
1439. A told B that he would kill the latter. What crime was
Note: Both in grave threats and in light threats. the threat
m&bethe offen- bo- commit an a t- w PI
the o n l y e n c e is that in grave timeats the monp amounts
. committed by A?
It depends. If A u t in the heat of anger and
t o h e , while in ]-eats the m g which the offender subsenuent acts of A s a d that he did not persist in
threatens to commit b-e.
-
the idea i n a d - i n the threat, i t is other\ light threat1
Ife
~~
on the part of the father. This element of intent to gain 1341. What crime was committed by a person who prevented
and that of intimidation make the crime of robbery with another from doing something not prohibited by law or
intimidation. M ~ J Qie , pain was e. compelled him to do something against his will, w i m
Note: 13ut W
violence or intimidation? Explain your answer.
e offended party did not issue a cheek then
and there, or if the check ivns issued s o m e t i e r , it would
beWt-L intimidation o Fv When the element of violence or
committed IS unjust v m o n
is not present, the
1338. What is bond for good behavior and how is it distinguished!
from bond. to keep the peace? 1342. May violence, a s an element of grave coercion, -eb
Bond for good behavior is a bail which the person. ployed urn-, instead of directing i t against the
making the threats may be required to give, not to molest. ’ person of the offended party?
’ ‘
the person threatened, or if he shall fail to give such bail, Yes, as when the owner of a house destroys its door
he shall be sentenced to d e s t i e v o (Art. 284, R.P.C.). or’windows for the purpose of making the actual occupant
Bond f o r good behavior is an additional penalty ia vacate it. This may be c o n s i d e r e d \ p m e a C ! because
grave threats and in light threats. the law (Art. 286) merely says, “any persqn who, x x x,
Bond to keep the peace is a distinct penalty which is shall by means of violence, x x x, c . h i m to & s o m e ~:
.,: &posed
- in cases involving crimes ,other than grave threats thing against his will, whether i t - b e right or wrong.” In ’.,’<
-.\:a
> Y
624 625
E
I
i
the given case, the violence employed on the things Was 3 . The act of preventing a member of Congress from
felt by the occupant, thereby affecting his security. attending the meetings thereof, or from expressing his
opinion or from casting his vote, by means of force or
1343. When may a person who prevented another f r o m doing intimidatioc, is a violation of parliamentary immunity d e
something even by means of violence-riminally liable? fined and penalized by Art. 145 of the Revised PenaI Code.
Note: When the Revised Penal Code specifically defines and
When t.he act sought to be prevented is w h i t e d by
law, as preventing a thief from taking one’s propertfir, t h e
. . act of taking another’s property being prohibited by law.
/ e e s a d c o m m i t t e d hy pEwxting another from doing
a particular act, the offender should not be punished for grave
coercion but for the crime specifically punished by the Code.
There is no grave coercion committed if the person
using violence or intimidation has the rig& ity 1345. When may a person who compelled another to do some-
t o m - act. thing against his will, even by means of violence, not
Thus, a private individual has the right, to prevent. criminally liable? Illustrate.
ail0 4 from taking and carrying away his property, and. When the =on com- has the authority of law
’
/tk” exercise that right he may use such force as is neces-
sary to exclude the intruder from the enjoyment or disposali
. . of his property.
or right t o compel a n d e x to do something against his
will.
L
xm9w&
b force is not grave coercion, but the crime of a u d -
‘ng of legislative bodies under Art.
143 of the Revised Penal Code.
ever was already constructed by B on the lot. What
crime was committed by A? Explain your ,answer.
A is liable forigrave coerclo2 because he compell<d B
2 . The act of hindering or preventing a person from --
to do something against the latter,s I t h a t , I&ng
joining any lawful association or from attending any Of t h ~ c e .I t is not a defense on the part of A that the
its meetings, is not grave coercion but the crime of urQ- lot belonged t o him and that E had no right to occupy
hibition or w r r u p t i o n of peaee€ul meetinAs under Art. it and to build anything thereon, b!xalise ‘&e law saal6
131 of the Revised Penal Code. “whether it be right o r wrong.” The law does not permit
626 627
~
.. m y person to comuel another to do something against his 1349. What is the difference between graire coercjon and gram ,,
.:
:, wilJ whether it be rivht. JSLIXU . ng. threats when there is only a condition imposed without !
a demand for money or intent to gain?
.. Note: The destruction of B’s small house is not a separate
offense of malicious mischief, even if it was destroyed by reaeon Inrgrave coercio4 the e-v or -dation must :
of ha,te or revenge, because there was only one criminal i m l g e be persistent and c&tin&p and the effectof the violence
-.. in the doing of all the acts of A which produced the different or intimidation is immediate. On the other hand, ‘ i n i
reau1ts. s h e intimjdation only promises some future harm,
aecausa It IS condltiocal, and t h e n d w t I?E~-
1347. A saw B about to enter the farmer’s land to occupy dFwdiak&€&.
the same. A by means of force prevented B from enter. ,, N v t c : Thus, if the accused threatened the complainant that
ing his (A’s) land. Is A liable for grave coercion? if he would not pay his debt he would be taken to the camp
No, because the owner or lawful possessor o-hing where he would be killed and the following day the complainant
delivered the amount due the accused, it was held that the ac-
bas the right t o exclude any person from the enjoympt cused cannot be punished for grave coercion (People vs. Romero,
thereof, and for that purpose he may u s e s u c h force a_s et al., C.A.). The reason f o r this ruling is t h a t the intimida-
may prevent an actual tion was mede the day before the complainant delivered the
’.
- be reasonably necessaiy to
--
or threatened unlawful physic-a1 -1
-__
j1
his ,property (Art. 429, Civil Code).
or u s u r p a t i o l r ~ f amount duo the accused and that at the time the amount was
delivered to tile accused there ~ - 1 sno violence or intimidation
employed on the complainant.
Note: When a person is @ma& in possession of another’s
property, whether le& or illegally, the owner Cannot W A 1350. What stage of execution was reached by the offender
t h c u s e of viole~tlcelawfully compel him to give up the property if the offended party in spite of the violence or intimi-
and take possession of the same himself. If he does SO, he is dation did not accede to the purpose of the coercion?
liable for n.
~ . . . The crime of Lgrave coercion1 is consummated. The
B u t if them la n e u & possession of the prwerty, and ~
there is 0 9 a threatened u n l a w f f h y s i c a l invasion Qr usurpd- Supreme Court held in the case of Punzalan vs. People,
t&. of one’s property, the owner of such property may use 52 O.G. 7609, that the fact that a n individual was mal-
force reasonably necessary to repel or prevent it. treated for the purpose of compelling him to confess a
crime which was attributed to him, constitutes the crime
1348. A warned D not to report for work as there was a strike of consummated grave coercion, even if the agents of the
of Iahorers. But B reported for work. When B was going authorities who carried out the maltreatment d i d a c e o m -
bome from his place of work, A boxed him several times, plish their purpose to draw from him a confession, which
saying, “Did I not tell you to refrain from working?” it was their intention to obtain by the employment of such
What crime was committed by A? means.
.
Dvsical k i ur.i. . ~ A is not liable for grave coercion,
1361. How is grave coercion distinguished from illegal de-
because in that crime, the-&. of preventing by force must tention?
b m d e -at the offended party w a u n g or &Q&.
to do the act to be prevented. In \grave coercion1 the offended party is G t dd-
of his liberty for an appreciable length of time. Although j.)
Since B had already done t h e 2 t to be urevezted, and
the commission of the crime of grave coercion ‘affects the ;,;i
physical injuries were inflicted on him, he could be made
security of the offended party, there is no detention of,’?$
>; liable for physical injuries only.
629
E28
. ..
,s
the offended party. In \ S e d 'd.@@ there mu-
d e M k m L l 'b xty 01- on the person of the
timidation commits & Uand, therefore, liable for m-
just vexaticn, b w e et-en in & se ht-r haslLIight
' !.
.^
other persons seized the woman and took her to his house right and the law urovides for a procedure to compel a
. . where she was kept not behind closed doors but only watched
L
a
Note: The crime committed is n
to defraud and i m the ffcnded party w e . '..
n e m y that the correspondence eo- a secret of .';:;
/ -
frn"*g---- ~.
I
.,,
,., mot+
c&d
person. The f& that the correspondence is & .:::j
i n 3 L e m a e is an indication that the writer, a s ' y
53. What is unjust vexation? well as the addressee, dges not want any other person ' , ~
&st vexatiG{ includes any human conduct which," to read its contents. .. . .)1/
w a d , ho- u&ustlv annoy o r i ngocent oerson_s. of the addressee or writer, even if he was informed of I
Note: The a&of the offender must be &at. The creditor the cor,tents of the correspondence, he is not liable crim- .,.!:;~
.., . seizes the property of the debtor without violenee or in-
who inally.
.,..,.
L'
. ., \. ,:.:,
'
.
630 631
. , : ~
:' ?,.
~
,,~. ...
...~.
:c<:
~~
.IF,.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMXNAL LAW REVIEW-
..
$
On the other hand, even if A h i d t h e .intention of benefit of the person in charge, employee or.work<
discovering the secrets of the writer or addressee but i f of the establishment. i
...,.. there is n o evidepce that h e w a s actually i n f o a e d of&
.. -; eo,- be is not criminally liable either. hat are the two general classifications of robbery?
Note: Thus, in the case of People vs. Otto, Jr., 50 O.G., They are:
C.A., 3127, although he was informed of the contents of the
eableprrm when he opened the same, since he had no inten- 1 . yR
r- with violence against 01' intimidation
tion to know the contents thereof, he was aiquitted of the ,/ of versons.
charge of discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence. ,' 2 . R & b x b y the use of-e unon things. , .
In the ease of People YS. Singh, 40 O.G., C.A., Sup. 5, 35,
there was no evidence that the accused oDened the telegram,
because he claimed that he put it in the pocket of his trousers State briefly the different forms of robbery with vi&nce
b '
which wvaa subsequently taken to the laundry and the telegram against o s intimiddim of mrsons.,
was last. He was also acquitted o f tho charge of .discovering They are:
secrets through seizure of correspondence.
The law does not require that the offended party be (prej- 1. Robbery with homicide.
udiced. 2 . Robbery i i 5 k . m ~ ~
Revea-the secret is n ~ a element
n of the offense; it 3. Robbery with mutilation o& aQy of the serious
, .. only i n a s u e s the penalty. physical jnj'llries-
4 . Robbery wgh violence, w u t inflicting any of
1557. Is the accused liable for revealing secrets with abuse of the serious physical injuries.
office, if he did %reveal the secrets? 5 . Robbery with intimi&&llanly.
No, because the r w of the secrets is an e!s& 6 . A m t e d or fru&&d robbery with homicide.
of the ol'fense. ,,/ 7. €$yecution of deeds by means of violence or in-
i timidation.
1358. Is the accused liable if he learned the secrets through
another and revealed them? .'I"
1362. State the different forms of robbery by the uae of force
No, b w e he d m t l e a r n t h e s&s of h- u p a n a 9 .
. cipal or master in &s-caacity as manager, empbXQLor They are:
S a
Note:
.
the principal o r rnsster is +necessary.
-
1, Robbery c o m d in an nix-e, .pat
-0
,!.&ding or e x e devoted to religious worship, after an
/' unzwful entry or by the breaking of doors, wardrobes,
'.'. 1359. A was an employee of a manufacturing establishment. chests, or any other kind of lock or sealed furniture or
He learned the secret of the industry. Hie resigned receptacle inside the building, or by taking such furniture
and used the secret of the industry for his own benefit, or objects away t o be broken or forced open outside of
without revealing it t o others. Is A criminally liable? the building (Art. 299, R.P.C.).
Why?
2 . Robbe1.y similarly committed in a n uninhabited place
N d l e e a u s e the act constituting the crime of revelation or in a 7;ivnte building, which is n&an inbbikdhouse,,:;!
of industrial secrets is revealing the secrets of the industry public bm dmg, or edifice devoted to religious worship:,:$ ,. .,,
o-n$udic%of the o G e r thereof, not using the secrets (Art. 302, R.P.C.). ,.:,..a
, ,
532 533
CRlMJiVAL LAW REVIEWER CRIDlINAL LAW REVIEWER
1363. A entere8d the house of B through the window and once that house, took them and carried them away, the
.,,
. . inside took money and jewelry belonging to E after in- committed by him was theft only, not robbery, b
timidating him with a pistol. What kind of robbery was he did not enter the building by any of the means me
committed by A? Why? tioned by the Revised Penal Code.
A committed Yobberv with intimidat'10% because & If the locked or sealed furniture or receptacle wa
, ' t w A used force upon things by entering the house $ the
i& building when it was found and then and
of B through an o m not i n & e a for entrance or it was broken open and the contents thereof were taken, :"
egress, when it is accomnanied by intimidation, the latter the crime is \theftbecause it was not broken open inside
element supplies the controlling qualification of the robber): the building where it was kept.
committed. But when the locked or sealed receptacle was taken
The reason for this rule is to be found in the fact that f m the building and n-b autside, the taking of
robbery nccompanied by violence against or intimidation 4ts contents is- '
of persons is considered graver than robbery committed /
by the use of force upon things, in view ok the greater d 6 5 . A broke the wooden gate of the stone wall around the .'"'
disturbance to the order of society and the security of premises of B and once inside took from the yard of B
the individual. building materials *-hich were lying there. What crime
was committed by A? Why?
1364. When is the use of force upon things in taking personal 1Theft,lbecause although h m open the &e,
'
property be1ongin.g to another ,with intent to gain theft not enter thehouse with f s r c & u m n th ings. H e m
. . , - '-
or any kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle entered the car through the oped
inside the building, or did not take such furniture or object the handbag. What erimc was eonlm
away to be broken or forced open outside of the building, A c o m m i t t e d L y b e m e the
even if there was force upon things, the taking of per- building._Jprrobbery y the use of
was only &
sonal propert belonging to another with intent to gain
not robbery.
Thus, if A climbed the wall of a house, broke the glass
,'
,' breaking the door or window, the place entered after b r
ing must be a building.
' ' /',
.,. of one of its windows, and after creating an opening he 11367. A removed the radio of B from the e
',..- merely inserted his hand into the opening and reached 7 begair to leave the place. On the
for the wallet containing money bills which was lying on having recognized the radio, B ask
the table close t o the window sill. the crime committed was gotten it; hut A drew out and opened his knife
. , r,' :., . only theft because A did not &a w w threatened to kill B. What crime or crimes were e
1 mitted by A? Explain your answer.
if 13, while outside a vacant house, removed by , . A
* isti& and seaarate crimes
pieces of board from the wall of
.-- -
a n d k r a v e threats.1 The crime of theft was alrea
634 535.
I
I
1 I
I / _ . -
I
. ..j j
.7.
seriauri physical injuries defined in pars. 1 and 2 of Art. 263
inflicted by reason of the taking of pewma1 property.
yen if the taking of the personal property belonging to an-
other IS already complete when the rape or inte.itiona1 mutila-
tion is Committed, the crime is still robbery with rape or with
intentional mutilation, And even if tho taking of the personal
property belonging tn another with intent to gain is already
J of force -upon things.
. .:
.
5
. . of the stolen property or to do away with a vitness, the of- with' v i o l e m uersons, b-se the mere sna&hi n g . .
fonder!, are liable for the special complex crime of robbery of personal property from the hand of the offended party ,::
+th homicide or with serious physical injuriey. -v on the nersQn ,U ' '
on the thing taken. It is a rule that to constitute robbery
1368. When is taking or asportation complete in robbery? with violence against persons, the violence must be on3h.e
Illustrate. PeLSxof , -on the thing tagen.
It depends on the kind or class of robbery committed. Note: But if in snatching the handbag, the culprit dragged
tlie hand of the victim, the crime istrohberv with violence
::
If the robbe_ry is committed with violence against or
intimidation of persons, thg taking or asuortation is m- against nerson.
d e t e from the moment the o f f g d a- -
s% of th- ev& he u d - o p u o r t u n i t y 2 is .the nature of the intimidation as a constitutive
dispose of the same. element of robbery? \. 0
536
I
I
i
/
* i 6,*
latter would not give money, is liable for & r- to gain, did with intimidation seize the stolen property#
t k i l i , he succeeded in geitinsc mnn ey. stamps the crime committed by him a s robbery. Until tlie$
1371. While A was looking for his lost pig, he happened to policeman has taken charge of the stolen property in the!;
pass by the house of B and saw under the latter's house manner prescribed by the adnlimistrative law, i t is the 1,;.
a pig. A. told B that that was his lost pig, but B said property of the owner, and not held in trust by the police-
. . that the pig belonged to him. A unsheathed his bolo i
i m a n ( U S . vs. Sana Lim).
and threatened B with bodily harm, unless the latter
a:. would give to him the pig. Afraid that he might be 137d Suppose that the policeman in the preceding question ar- '
injured, B gave the pig to A. A was prosecuted for rested X and took the tires and later sold them and spent
robbery with intimidation. During the trial it was es- the proceeds of the sale,. for what crime is the policeman
tablished by the prosecution that the pig really belonged liable? Why?
to 33 and that it was not the lost pig of A. If you were Tbe policeman is liable fortmalversationl because hz&g
the judge, would yon convict or acquit A? In case you lawfully seized t n in the performance of his dyty,
decide to convict him, of what crime will you find him he had an obligation t o a c c o u n t . & ? d h m tQthe Govern-
guilty? n ~ n Although
, the tires were private property, &e
Since a believed in good f a i t k that the pig was his, t h g were seized b L h b as an' agent of public antho&',,,,+;,,
even if his claim later on appeared to be untenable, his misappropriatimof the same m&e-.bL . liahlefor: . i
.,, , . . .,.
being no intent t o gain on his mrt, he should be found malversation (Art. 2 2 2 ) . :
'. <
guilty of ( ~ W iOnei of the elements of robbery In the case of US. vs. San Lim, the Supreme Court::!
to the policeman, the latter threatened him with arrest crime, and then by means of threat of prosecution and;:,
and prosecution unless he would give hini the tires. The a imprisonm.ent, obtained money from such person who waS&
<:
.!.. . policeman t.oolc the tires but did not arrest X. Later, the
$.., ,I
released in consideration of the money given. What crime;$
..*,
. ,, .. ... policeman sold the tires and spent the money for his
~. I was committed by the voliceman? Explain your answer% .''~$g
:.>. ,?.
." . own benefit. Is the policeman liable for robbery? Ex- / w b e r v with intimida ' because the threat of prose-&$
,plain your answer.
i
I
c a n and i m n r i s c n m n t ? u sufficient intimidation;*$" ":
Yes. When the policeman took the tires but did not and there was intent to gain on the part of the polic+d
arrest X, he did not act in good faith in the performance I man when he t o o k the money of the offended pa
. of his duty. He had the in ' and the threat
&f;arrest and prosecution -which is an in- b75. Suppose that the person threatened w i t i arrest and
&imidation, to obtain possession of the tires made him liable secution by the policeman really committed a crim
@&@&::&.
638 639
4
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
It is true that in the case given the intimidation' pro-
*.thepo1icc:man did not arrest him because of the money duced immediate effect, but the demand f o r personal prop-
given to him, what crime was committed by the poliee- erty may he disregarded and the threat may be considered,
.man? Explain your answer. as not subject t o a condition. I n such case, the crime-i$
(Gt-1 b-se the n-p U W grave threats of the third form.
p s a n he refrained from performing his duty be. The crime committed by A is not robbery with in;;
s , . cause of e n e y . timidation, because one of the elements 0-ei-y &,&+t,:
thegemonal g r m t y must' belong to another. Since thb
:1376. Suppose, it is not clear from the evidence whether t h e property belonged tu him, A c& be guilty of robbe$,!
offended party had committed a crime when he was as no one can be he. -for robbery o
asked to give money by a peace officer, when is it robbery
and when is it bribery?
a. This is not an impossible crime ,wh
formed would have. been a n offense aga
When the money was given v m l y by the of- property, because when the act performed also constituteii
fended party, the peace officer is guilty o@
l 81=
-) a violation of another provision of the Revised Penal Code,
., ,, .
, ,
,
When 'there was threat of arrest and prosecution and impossible crime cannot exist.
'
the offended party gave the money, it is- &is submitted that A is not liable for grave+
:..
,
&awe he had intent to gain. In grave coercion,
,.'. '1377. What crime is committed by several persons who, by fender-@intent to gain.
~ : , i , means of intimidation used against the owner of a smaU
' ' house, succeeded in removing the small house from t h e /;379. A broke t h e o f tho drawer of the desk of B and
t.herefrom the .pistol of B for the purpose of ushg
' , lot of the owner and carried said house to the lot of t h e killing E. But due to the t i K e L b t m e n t i o n of c,
stopped_& the G t e r w-L?lbleto use $he..&
The crime is C o b k v w ith intimidation] Although a A liable for robbery by the use of force upon t
house ma- ce-d as real property when attached Why?
to the wound, the m n t it-is rem0ys.d from the ground ' No, because A never had the intention of deprivi
,' and ca&ed away it ceases to be a real property and be- 11 of the ownership of the pistol with the ch
comes pemonal proaerty One of the &g.&s of r m r y permanency, but only to use i t temporarily t o
is personal property -b (People vs. Kho Choe). In robbery, as iil theft, the :
ment of taking means the act of depriving anoth
possession and dominion of a movable thing coupled.
evolver, threatening to the intention, at the time of the "talcing" of the t
watch from B. When OP withholding it with the character of permanency.
4
he watch he had taken
from B was his own property which he had lost a week 1380. A, a passenger of a taxi, ordered the driver 'to stop
before. What crime was committed by A? the taxi and at the p i n t of a gun took all the mo
in his possession. A alighted from the taxi and 'told
driver to go away. After thirty minutes, the
turned with a policeman in his taxi and having point
540 541
I
. . ,-tb A as the person who had held him up, the policeman 1382. A picked the pocket of B, taking his wallet,with .money,.
to arrest him. A shot the policeman who was killed bills inside. B chased A, bat the latter stabbed,,? who
result. What crime was committed by A? Explain died as a consequence. What crime was committed?
your answer. Why? . . . .,
Robbery with homicide, because the homicide was com-
It is submitted that A committed robbery with homi-
mitted by reason of the robbery, that is, to defend .the,
the direct assault to be considered only a s an ag-
possession of the stolen property.
ating circumstance, because there is no such special
lex crime of robbery with homicide with direct assault, 1383. A passer-by noticed three persons. inside ' t h e house of
,, .. ugh the single act of shooting the policeman who another taking personal property. The passer-by asked
, I
-was in the performance of his duty produced the crime them why they were there. One o€ them shot and billed ,: 1
. ., of direct assault with homicide, and the homicide resulted him. What crime was committed? Why?
by reason of the robbery, under the law (Art. 294, par. 1,
; : ..
R.P.C.) the crime committed is r g b b r y with lmrau~&.
Robbery with homicide, because the homicide was com-
. ' In the case of People vs. Maugulabnan, et al., the Supreme
mitted on the occasion, or by reason, of the robbery.
Court held that it is *necessary that the homicide be
produced on the occasion of the robbery; it is sufficient
1: 1384. would it be robbery with homicide if a robber killed' ,
his companion, another robber, on the occasion or by
that homicide r e g e d by reason of the robbery, inasmuch reason of the robbery? 'Why?
as it is only the result, without reference or distinction Yes, because in robbery with homicide, it is only t h e ' '
as to the circumstances, causes, modes or persons inter-
, . vening in the commission of the crime, that has to be
,
.
& without reference o r distinction as to the persons :'
intervening in the comnlission of the crime, that must
taken into consideration. be taken into consideration.
Note: Hence, when in the commission of robbery with homicide,
other crimes, such as less serious o r slight physical injuries 13S5. If parricide is committed on the occasion or by reason of
OP direct assault, arc also committed, those other crimes do the robbery, what is the crime committed? Why?
not form part of the special complex crime of robbery with The crime committed is robbery with homicide, be-
homicide. l,
'
,,,,,+use tiy p , m "homicide" in that crime should be. con-
1381. While ransatking the house of the offended party, one
of the robbers in the house dropped his pistol to thc
. .. ,floor.' It iexploded and the slug fired hit the floor of
*s in its Eeneric sense as to include-parricide, o-r
murdei or infanticid%
A, B, C and
.'
, ..~ ,.;
the second story of the house, resulting in the death
of an inmate then sleeping there. What crime was corn.
1386. I), all armed, entered t h e house, of X-where ,
the latter, his wife and child lived. They took persohd
.:~", property inside the bonse, and then A killed X, while D
~.,.
' ' mitted? Why? raped X's wife, and C inflicted serious physical injuries ' :
with ' ide. on the child. How many crimes were committed by . ,
them? Explain your answer. ,,i,.:.
- Even if the homicide supervened by mere accident&
- long a s it resulted on the o c c a s i o n s by reason of the
xobbery, t h e x e committed is robbery with homicide
.A, B, C and D committed one special complex crim
of roEeLy-with-homicide, the r s c and the physical in
, a
542 543
*
1 1
panied by rape, the offender should be prosecuted and q'? is ;<companied by rape.
t-l , .,,
punished ;or robbery with homicide, not for robbery with k,!
r a p e p u s e the provision of the Code for robbery with $ / l b I . Is there a complex crime of
rape is designed for a crime,involving bs-rsity and yj rape? Explain your answer. ,.
harm than that involved in robbery with homicide. Y/ None, because the Revised Penal e (Art. 294) pen-"
/-
':.
/i:
138 . A, by means of force and intimidation,B ran
succeeded in rap-
away as soon
.-ahzes robbery accompanied- &y attcmmoted rwe.,
It cannot be a complex crime under Art. 48 of the Revised, '.
ing B, a 'woman, in a secluded place.
as she ~ : I Sreleased by A, leaving her handbag containing Penal Code, because a r o m c a n n o t be a necessary means
money. .A picked up the handbag of B from the ground to commit an attempted rape, just as an attempted rape' ,:~
and carried it away. Is A liable for robbery with rape? necessary means to' commit robbery and $&
~. Explain your answer. -_
cannot be the resglt of a-s-ingle act (Eeople' , '
There are two distinct and separate crimes
No, because the igtention of A was to rape 13 and attempted raE.
t h e ' i k o f gain came to.,.his.,mind only when B had left 1
A
her handbag. There "%$yo distinct and separate crimes wmplex crime o f robbery with frustrated
of =e a n d a t comm' ked by A. d murder? ..
Note: In rohhery with rape, the offender, .ke,hza committing
.~ rape, must have the intention to take personal property belong- Yes, under Art. 48, if the frustrated m y d e r js_ll :::
,I,,. ~ ' , necessary means for .commii%hg-the.x&bery. This crime :'t
644
545
l o
~.%:::
,. .
. '
.__/
..
CRIHINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER
. '.. . /:U.,
&by Art. 294 which punishes robbery with
homicide, which must be c$xummated. serious
L__. physical.__-
inju-rjcs.
Note: A t t e e o r frustp&L-robbery with s-physical
,
.
.
.. injurieii is a complex_crime under Art. 48, the serious physical
... . ,
. . injurie:i'%heing necessary means foor committing the attempted
~, .
-: '.-:. or frustrated robbery.
(>.
Art. 297 punishes at&eF-pLtd.,p_r fmst~$t$d_mrbp;ry with
&'?,I .
homicide, not with' serious physical injuries.
with serious physical already complete wh
with serious. phy- physical injuries inflicted thereafter can pot be
: . s i c d injunos.
dividing the lept, they could nut agree and ;ought each juries inflicted by A
, other. 4 ,who was holding his-hnlo, struck B, hitting scribed in paragraph
...,,
*.,. . .. the latter on and cutting his"outer ear. Then, both of
. r
would be the crime eo
.them left with the loot. What crime was committed
I It would be robbery with' serious physical- inju
., by A and B? Why? The law (Art. 294)
, ,- " A and B are liable for @ becauseI ,
t&y-entered the nection with serious
.' m-
wif-~.u~using-force-.np~~"-t~~~s. A is liable also
for serious plhxsv.al..injuriq not robbery with serious
physical injuries, because the physical injuries that re-
.. sulted in BLB..deformity was inflicted upon a pssLn-,ze:,:
s-le for the commission of the offense.
Noto: The serious physical injuries described in pars. 3 and
/-
4 of Art. 263, amon6 them deformity, must be inflicted upon
persons &-ponriblc for the commission of robbery, in order
that the crime may be classified as ~ ~ , b ~ ~ r y . . ~ i t h . , ~ ~ , r i o ~ ~ ~ h y ~ i ~ l
injuries.
.,. .
-+..,.894.
. A took a sack of rice from a ' truck which was parked
.on the side of a street. When the driver. noticed A, he 1396. A, with intent t o take the money of B, hit the latter ~ . i
'r. chased him. After running tu a distance of several
' ~ .,
on the head, inflicting less serious physical injuries,
:' meters, A. dropped the sack of rice, drew out his knife,
opened it, and struck the driver in the arm, inflicting
What kind of robbery was committed by A, if after in4
juring B he took the money of the latter?
::z
.. ..
.' ,
physical injuries which incapacitat&l the driver for' labor-
RLbBry with violence~.aga&s~.psxsons. It is not rob
for two months. Then A picked up the sack of rice and bery with less serious physical injuries, because W
'ran away with it. What crime or crimes were wmmitted physical injuries~inflicted on the occasion of the
.-by
,. :A? . ]Explain your answer. are only less&ous or sl&&t, such physical injur
:. .,
,.J,,
. 546
i
.i
547
i
1 I
I
r~ and E liable? Explain your answers. / Had A de,mmded money while pointing the'pistol at
. .. ,
A, 13, and D are liable f o i ~ e r y - w i t k - l r m i c i d ebe-
, / B, it would have been a t , . e d . x o b b e r y with homicide I'
cause they w e r e w s e n t a t the commission of the rob-
bery bz&a>,d and n_ot,.one.of them attempted to-prevent
the commission of the homicide.
C is liable only for &ejx..by a band, because he
attempted toarevent the commission of the homicide by
f+Q ,
b 9 9 . A bought a car from B for 85,000, which^ he did no
!j
;fi-pay. Sometime thereafter, A brought with him a P I 6 . ~ <
pared deed of sale and a t the poiut of his revolver asked ..,::
I3 t o sign it. When B refused, A shot B to death. What ':
! ) crime was committed by A? Explain your answer.'
E is also liable for robbery by a band only, because A committed a,ttempted robbery with homicide, because, :'I
he was not present at the conmission of the robbery with intent to defraud E, A, by means of intimidation, '.'
by a band and, therefore, he cannot be punished as prin- /' tried to compel E to sign a document. Having failed
.~
cipal of the assault committed by the band, which was his attempt, A committed attempted robbery, a n d
,I_
not. contemplated in the agreement. the homicide was coromitted oil the occasion or by,.re
'.! i
.. , Note: As to the liability of E, a similar question wns con- of an attempted robbery, he should be held liable f o r
special complex crime. '
,., .. The two kinds of robbery by the use of force upon b ~ ~ 2 ~ @ : ' o f . f ; p ~When n ~ the locked furniture , ji
,~, things am: ,of-
or chest is in the house or building from w h i c h the .... . ,: ; ..~
e' . 1. Robbery by the use of force upon things committed fender wants to take personal property, it is necessaq,&i@
'. *'in a n q ' a b i t e d b s e , &c. building, or edke-devoted
to religions worship; and
G o h b e r y by the use of force upon things committed .. ...-
._
committed did not reach the f r
in a n &habited* or in a pdwLe_building.
The servant in the house, taking advantage of the ab-
.' sence of the owner thereof, bzk9..+open.-in that house
p, .
l o s e h e s t and took monep and jewelry therefrom
and spent the money for his own benefit. What crime
was committed by the servant? Why?
The servant committed r&bb).y--by. .th.e-used,ox.ce
upon things,,. because he b ~ ~ ~ s . p e n . . a . . ! o ~ ~-chest
..
a guest in the house of B, tried to.brreak open the 1405. .suppose, a policexnan upon complaint of B followed .A ;
eked wardrobe in the room given to him by B. . A to his- house and before he could forcibly open t h e re.,".;
.,.
. .. . ....
Y
560 651
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWFIR CRIMINAL LAW REVIE'WR
,. was placed under arrest, wha is the stage entering through an openi
... ,, o f execution reaihed by A in the. commission of the or egress, the offender mu
crime? Why? @b.the house or building
..... . y w o f his body iiicluding
/
Consummated ~. robbery by the. use of force upon things
committed in a n inhabited house was committed-by A, he took personal property
, , . _._.
., , ~r? ,,because i .~9 5 n o t necessary that the receptacle taken from 407. While under the house, A broke the floor, and after. :.
, t h c o u s _ e . be.actual%.opened outside, as the intention to
creating an opening he caused a small boy, seven years ;:
~~~.~~.js..sufficient.
old, to pass through the opening and enter the house,
Note: It will be noted that when the offender (1) breaks a Once inside the house, the boy took personal. belongings,;?
door ( p i e the building), wardrobes, chests, or any other
kind o locked or sealed furniture or receptacle inside a build- of the owner of the house. Once in possession 'of the'
ing where they are kept, or (2) takes such furniture or ob- personal belongings taken by the boy from the
' '
jects away t o be broken or forced open outside, it is %ot ?e- A sold them and gave the boy a part of. the proce
.. q u i 4 that the offender should enter the building by any of the sale. Considering that A did not en
. the means specified in subdivision (a) of Art. 299, which arc: do you believe that he 's liable for robbe
, .
1. Through an opening not intended for entrance o r egress;
2. By breaking any wall, roof, pr floor or breaking any
of force upon things? iE xplain your answer.
, ~ , . door or' window; Yes, A is Laiae-for robbery by the(use
3. By using false keys, picklocks, or similar tools; things. Although A did not enter the house
4. By using any fictitious name o r pretending the exercise opening in the flo which was broken by him,:
. ,, ~ ., of public puthority.
~
If the offender enters the building by any of the said means,
,ypLiral,_byisd i,on in the crime of robbery
use, of force upon ngs a&ua!ly>ommitted by t
there is nu question that the taking of personal property from
the building is robbery by the use of farce upon things, even
The fact that the boy, who was only seven years
. . exempt from criminal liability, does not alt
if he does not break open a locked or sealed furniture or
rccept.acle. , that A, as principal&induction, is liable criminal1
/
the crime committed.
1406. A climbed a tree near t h e , window of the house of B
and from the tree, with a bamboo pole which he used. 1408. A, servant in the house of B, broke the wall
A succeeded in getting the coat of B, which was hanging a bedroom from the storeroom and through
by the wall inside the house near the window. A waUet ing thus created he entered the storeroom and
' .
: .
. , '
with money in the amount of PlOO was in one of the
,
. ,
not enter the building through the window. Even if A 09. A, for the purpose of entering B's house,
was able to get the coat, with the wallet containing money in lifting the sliding door from its g r ~ v
in one o,f its pockets, from the house through the window, pushed it inward, thereby opening it. On
inasmuch a s he used a bamboo pole to get the same, with- took personal property. Is A liable for robbery? W
out entering the house, the crime committea Is theft. To No, because the door 'wasnot broken, that
!:Constitute robbery by the use of force upon things by of the door remained intact. A is liable f
,, .
I
652 653
'
.+.*
A, a friend of the servant in the house of B, had an agree-
,
,,. i
, .ment with that servant that late in the evening when 1412. A knocked at the door of the house of U who O p
*'"' B and-his family would have retired and slept, the servant I and, being a hospitable person, B invited A to en
,. '.:-would ,drop from the window a white envelope contain-
j:
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW. R J W L T E R
'.even though the occupant thereof was temporarily absent I n robbery by the use of force upon things i
therefrom when the robbery was committed. The penalty place or in a private building, the circumstance
$5-
. . f o r robbery in an inhabited house committed by the use carries arm at the time of the commission of
.i,,of force upon things is based on the value of the property material. There is no gerson i n the place who
taken and on whether or not the offender carries arm
1415. A and B entered the storeroom of a public s c h d ;
%(Arts.
L.; 299 and 301, R.P.C.). through its open door. Once inside, they found. a.
$$:I'
_:.
.'
7*:,
Note: It is not^ necessary to consider the garage as a dependency box tied with a piece of wire. They untied it an :y .<?,
of the house of B, because it is a separate building. To eon-
valuable things iherefrom. What crime was comiiiit&&fi
,*,..&I
%.,,:
>' ,
stitute n dependency, the building must be contiguous to the ~,
. ._
kr, principal building, it must have a n interior entrance connected
by A and E? Explain your 'answer.
8 ' ' t k r s ~ i t h ,and it C u s t form part of the whole. It is submitted that the crime committed by A and E
.,, is robbery by the use of force upon things i n &:public
;:.:.Distinguish
~ ,, the two kinds of robbery' by the use of force building. Although the carton box was only t i e f g i t h j , ?
upon things a s they are defined in Art. 299 and Art. 302 piece of wire, it may be considered as s u r to a
of the Revised Penal Code? qecept&<: The gumgse of its custodian in tying i
In robbcry by the use of force upon things under a piece of wire is t o _ P r e s e m d s x o ~ s which'
,
Art. 299, the crime is committed in an .inhabited house, the purpose in sealing fufniture or receptacle.
p s i c .building or edifics--dgvot& to religious worship: Note: Suppose that the property taken by A and 8 was c
taincd in a closed box, would the crime Committed b y A:a
in robbery by the use of force upon things under Art. B stiil be robbery by the use of farce upon things?
.
302, the crime is committed in an ..@nhab&eLplace o r
4: in a pri.irat.e.. builsg:~ In robbery by the use of force upon things in an inha
place, public building or edifice devcted to religious'wo
In robbery by the use of force upon things under the law (Art. 299) u?es the phrase "loeked or xc&$ furn
Art. 302, the manners of entering the building are the or receptacle." If the box is neither. locked nor sealed, the.
opening of the box and the taking of tho contents therefroni
same as those mentioned in Art. 299, with the only excep- with intent to gain may be considered theft*-.
.
. .7'
tion of uS:mg_aag.-€iGt%ious&name. or p&.endhx&3he-es~erT
'
-~
cise of public authority. 1416. A and B entered a warehouse through its open door'dnd''''
In robbery by the use of force upon things in an in- once inside they found a closed box but not
habited place, public building or edifice devoted to religious locked. They broke it open and took the contents th
worship,. the penalty is based on the value of the property of. What crime was committed by A and .B? Ex
taken, as well as on ,whether o r riot the offenders carry your answer.
arm at-the time of the commission of the crime; i n rob- It is submitted that A and E committed robbery
bery by the use of force upon things in an uninhabited the use of force upon things in an uninhabited place
place or in a private building, the basis of the penalty .' a private building (Art. 302). because the warehouse'
is only the value of the property taken. slot inhabited. Even if the box was not locked or sea!
Note: In robbery by the use of force upon things in an un- the breaking of the same and the taking of the contentd
. inhabited place or in B private building, using any fictitious thereof with int&t .to gain was robbery, because
e or pretending the exereisc of public authority cannot be . bery in an uninhabited place or a private build
means of entering the building, because there is no person law (Art. 302) :,uses ,the phrases "sealed or, close
the p!aee who can be deceived.
tule or recepta%fe" and "closed or sealed rec
556
CRIMINAL.XAW .REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER
. .
receptacle ih an uninhabited JCode which provides that the,-. shall
order to take personal prop- penalty next lower in degree when the rohb
erefrom with intent to gain is robbery. in the taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood
ence to robbery by the u s e ’ of force upon
a warehouse of a crate mntsin-
ecause B crate is a closed rbeep:
(Art. 303, . R.P.C.).
1419. A and B removed and carried away from .C’s’
ed a. warehouse through an open door and once after breaking a wall thereof, nine cavanes o
de he lifted and renroved a closed Imx containing Val- There being force upon things only and the^',.
rsonal property and carried it outside. Before taken consisted of cereals, must the penalty
ould break it open outside of the warehouse, A was lower? Why?
ed by the guard. Is A liable.for attempted, frus- No, because the quantity of the palay fak
or conqummated robbery by the use of force upon that the same was not kept by the owner as ’
in a n uninhabited & w e or a private building? or taken by the robbers for the purpose..
n your answer. Note: Hence, the penalty is One degree lo
It is submitted that A is liable for consummated rob- pohu is taken for the purpose
the palay is of big quantity it is not intended to
ery by the use of force upon things in an uninhabited , by its owner as seedling.
a private building. When a closed or seal&d re-
is taken from a n uninhabited place or a private 1420. Is the posscssion of false key punishable by thg
and carried outside, it is not necessary that it Penal Code? Explain your answer.
open in order that the.of€ender may have pro- It depends upon the kind of f d s e key
felony as a consequence. Art. 302, par. 5 , re- possession of the accused, If the false key found,
y that the “closed or sealed receptacle has been possession is a genuine key, stolen from
rem2ved.” The last part of the provision which states, any key other than that intended by the
“even If the same he broken open elsewhere.” does not in the Ioclc of the door of his house, the possession
: hidieate an element of the offense. the Eame is not punished by law. But if the &.US&
. found in possession .of picklock or a simi
by,.m&ms -of threat and intimidation against criminally liable for possessing the same.
’
om the latter‘s camarin about fifteen sacks of Note: Art. 305 of the Revised Penal Code merely de
h an opening made on the floor of the cam- keys, without any penalty for the possession,of the
138 A and B are prosecuted and found guilty, the other hand, Art. ,304 of the Code punishes .the
enalty be one degree l,ower in view of the fact of picklocks or similar toole. H
bbery consisted in the taking of cereals? Why? in possession of picklocks or sim
No. The crime committed was robbery with intimida- i4il. What are false keys?
tion, ‘even,if there was force upon things, because when
he ‘use of force upon things and violence against o r
,’ . False k w s shall be deemed to include- .
dation of persons concurred in the commission of 1. The ’ tools mentioned in
y, the ,latter element supplies the controiling quali-
. ,. (picklocks o r ’ similar tools specially adpp
fication.oi the robbery. The article of the Revised Penal mission o i robbery).
558: 559
:-
’. ,
. ..’ I
’, , ,,.,
.. at least four in number, who form a band of robbers for Before they could commit any robbery, they were arrested
the purpose of committing robbery in the highway, o r and when investigated they confessed to the foregoing ..,
kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or t o facts. Are they liable for consumnlated brigandage? Ex-
olitain ransom, or for any other purpose to be attained pIain your answer.
by means of force and violence (Art. 306, E.P.C.). Yes,. It is not necessary that they actually c o d h d
robbery in the highway.
,
4. ,What crime is conlmitted by the brigands who eomnlitted
The main object of the law is to prevent the formation
kidnapping to obtajn ransom? Explain your answer. of such bands: in fact the heart of the offense cofisists
It is submitted that the brigands committed kidnap- in the formation of the band by four o r more armed per-
ping, not brigandage. The law (Art. 306) provides that son8 conspiring together for the purpose of robbery, etc.,
“if the act or acts committed by them (the persons guilty and such formation is sufficient to constitute a violation
of brigandage) are not punishable by higher penalties: of the law. It would not be necessary to show, in a
(they shall be punished by prision mayor in its medium prosecution under it. that a member or members of the
pwiod to reclusion tem;oo~uZ in its minimum period) ; band actually committed highway robbery, etc., in order
otherwise, “they shall suffer such high penalties.” This
6
,, convict him or them.
m.eanS that if they actually committed a crime punishable
by a higher penalty, like murder, kidnapping with a de- p<Ina presumption
what crimes does the Revised Penal Code establish
from the mere possession of firearm with-
mand for ransom, or robbery with homicide, they should
out license as t o t h o participation of the offender in those
ri(
be prosecuted and punished f o r such crime. crimes?
. A, B, C, D and E, all armed, committed robbery with The Revised Penal Code establishes a presumption from
the mere possession of firearm without license as to the
hitimidation in the highway. Are they brigands? EX-
plain your answer. participation of the offender in the following criples:
/
661
560
.. .. . .,,.
,~., .. ,
. .
.,. .
CllIDlINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMJNAL LAW REVIEWER
1. In brigandage. I€ any of the arms carried by any 1430. The servant of B, wliile ’ cleaning the latter’s bedroom,
of the armed persons be an unlicensed firearm, it shall found on the bed B’s wallet containing P100. The ‘servant
be presumed that said persons,are highway robbers or picked up the wallet from the bed and dropped’it Lo t h e
bfigands, and in case of conviction, the penalty shall be ground from the window intending to go down for it
’, imposed in the maximum period (Art. 306, as amended later. The son of B saw the wallet when it fell on the
,., by Rep. Act No. 12). ground and picked it up, thereby frustrating the hope of , .
2. In illegal assemblies. If any person present a t the the servant that he would be able to get the wallet later:,
meeting carries an unlicensed firearm, it shall be pre- Did the servant commit attempted, frustrated or con-
sumed that the purpose of said meeting, insofar as .he is summated theft? Explain your answer.
. . ,.. ,,
concerned, is to commit acts punishable under the Revised The servant committed consummated theft. In a juri-
; ’ Penal Code, and he shall be considered a leader or or-
dical sense, the consummation of the crime of theft takes
.ganizer of the meeting (Art. 146, as amended by Rep. place upon the voluntary and malicious taking of. the
, , Act No. 12). property belonging to another which is realized by the 1
Note: In Art. 146, there must be B meeting, whether the group material occupation of. the thing whereby the thief places
is in a fixed place or moving: in Art. 306, there must be a it under his control and in such a situation as he could
band of robbers. dispose of i t a t once (People vs. Naval, et al.).
14228. If an individual, who knew that a group of persons was N o t e : This ruling applies ~ I s uto the meaning of “taking” i n
robbery with violence against or intimidation of any person.
a band of brizands, harbored, concealed or assisted in the
But when the placr is surrounded by B fence or wall and
escape of the brigands or profited from the property one has to pass ii cheek pcint before going out, the taking
taken by such brigands, is he a principal or an accessory? of personal property is not complete before passing through
Explain your answer. the check point. Titus, iu the ease of People VS. Dinio (C.A.).
it was held that in crder to make the booty subject to the
Under the law (Art. 307), he is a principal in the eontrol and disposal of the culprits, the articles must first
crime of aiding and abetting a band of brigands. Such be passed through the M.P. eheck point. If the stolen artidea
person is liable as principal in the crime if he (1) know,. were found in the pojsessioii of the culprits by the military
ingly. and in any manner aids, abets or protects a band poiice at Ihe check point, the crime committed was frustrated
of brigands; (2) gives them information of the move- ,. theft because Lhe timely discovery of the articles in the Po*
. ..
ments of the police or other peace officers; or ( 3 ) ac.. $ session of tho culprits by the military police prevented the
culprits from placing. the articles “under their control and
quires or receives the property taken by such brigands : in such B situation” as they “could dispose of them a t once.” . .
(Art. 307, R.P.C.). I
. , offender, who took the personal property of another with ouse and then and there removed the fom,
intent to gain and without the latter’s mnsent, should the four tires with him and left the jeep.^:
be able to carry it away? Explain your answer. eeuted and punished for the theft o
No. The law (Art. 308) uses the phrase “shall take theft of the four tires? Explain you
’
personal property of another.” The law does not require
, that the personal property taken should be carried away st be prosecuted and punished for theft of,’*
:..; ’_
i
by the offender. ffcctively deprived the owner of the
563
:.- CRlhIIXAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
/
his wallet. Finding that it was empty, he threw the \., ,.
1
wallet away. Is A liable for theft? Explain your answer. 1435. A gave B, a janitor in his office, P320, with instruction
. Yes,heeause t h s a l l e t which he .extracted ..fE.nnbe to pay A's insurance premium to the insurance company.,
pocket ofBhasl-
-.. some
... .... ..value and A&&b..far &he._theft B, instead of paying it t o the insurance company, spent
; : of the wa,llet. It wo-he. necessar3rfo~ilmake the money. Is B liable for theft? Explain your answer;:
i%Tf%&allet
*__---~ -
or to dispose-of _ t h ~ - . s a m ~ . t o . . c o , ~ ~ t ~ t ~ Yes. Although E did not take the money, for it was
the crime
h-mn*.
of theft. ~. received by him from A, he was liable for theft, because,:
only the p h y s i c a l , p r . m a t e r ~ ~the
~ ~money ~ a~s f. '
~ s ~w
1433. A and IB were roommates in a boarding house. A, tr&$EFrZTto h i m , 13 did not receive the money as a
taking advantage of the fact that B was sleeping, took bailee but as a servant. Sin-B did no&
the latter's watch from the table f'or the purpose of sell- juridical possession".of th_e,monex,..he ..W@~J&!&fO&
ing it. A went out with the watch to look for a buyer, es;a&,.. b&&~-
ust:
: I :
but on second thought he decided to return the watch. Note: It will be noted that in theft the offender does-
When A returned t o their room to place back the watch
on the table, B saw him carrying his watch. A admitted
to B that he took the watch f o r the purpose of selling
it, but that he was returning it because his mnscience
was bothering him. B now asks you whether A' can be Servant, domestic, or employee who misappropriated the thins
he received from his master or employer is liable for theft,
prosecuted and punished for theft. Give and explain your not for estafa.
opinion. i
664 565
i
I
, . .Note: A s , - . is not n ecess% Th- 1440. The crime of theft is defined in Art. 308 of the
~
.e v & o r s?:g&i!m :~:;
O ~ t " ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ L s m - t ~ k i n ~
ot ier s property besu_fficjen$., @n.~ But to eonstitch th
Penal Code as the taking of personal property of
th%-tWbe coupled wiwl ,the intention at the time of with intent to gain "without violencc against or
I i, the taking or the thing ~ h h o l d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t k , t ? ~ ~ timidation
~ ~ ~ of ~ persons
~ ~ ~n , ~ ~
pe2z"""y.
against A, and had him arrested and lodged in jail. Whiie days (Art. 263, par. S ) , o r that the offended party has ' i
A was in jail and after the Court of First Instance ltad become ill or incapacitated for labor f o r more than
decidcd the civil case against him, B entered the land, days (Art. 263, par. 4 ) , or the violence consists in infli
ing less serious or slight physical injuries, and any
took the pfllay and carried it away. Is B liable for theft?
them is inflicted after the taking of the personal property
'
Why'?
is complete, the crime of theft as a separate and distinct .,;<
Yes, because
- - , his
~ ~ claim ,of.~
~ .-., .. .,~.,~
.ownership
.. l . Lwas not in
__.,~__~_, ....;.good
.,,. crime is committed. The physical injury inflicted con-, ,
f_iLh, Tli=must ..be-b.ma .fi&-r&jioJaua&rshiP, to stitutes another crime. (See similar question in robbery .. .
show
pIyi.,~ll_,
la% of intent to..,gain.
'i under Art. 294, par. 4.)
If the intimidation takes place after the taking of the" .
d~
$439; A s A was appruaehing his car parked on the side of
' a street, he saw B opening the door of the car. A con-
cealed himself behind the electric post and stood there
personal property is complete, the intimidatidn may con- "8
stitute a separate crime, such as grave threat; 'and will' ,. .
t o see what I3 would do in his ear. A saw that once not quali€y the crime to robbery. ,. *
inside the car B bsgan to remove, as in fact he succeeded
I When the force upon things is not used by the offender
in removing, his radio. B went out of the ear with the to enter a house or building or to break open a. lackea
dio and started walking away when A collared him and or sealed furniture or receptacle in the house or building;
,; -:
" ~"
566 667
E
. '
O P after taking it away therefrom, the taking of the per- 1413. A is prosecuted under an information alleging that h e ' ,
sonal property, notwithstanding the use of force upon committed theft, without force upom things or violence
things, is theft. against or intimidation of persons. But during the trial,
Note: Thus, if A picked the pocket of B and having taken the fiscal proved without objection from the defense . . '
ths latter's wallet A yam away and that the taking of the personal property was accomplished
threatened him with a knife, by A with violence against and intimidation of persons.
w w y z - A used, Can the conrt declare him guilty o f robbery? Why? I
ep
- , t a k i n g o f B's wallet.
ioleze&p.inst or intimida-
If X broke the wall of the house of Y and after creating
a n opening X inserted his hand through such opening and
g e 3 i n the information, E n -
reached f o r some personal grcperty of X and took i t with in- &e-perp$nal proptrty belong- '
tent to gain, X is liable f o r :theft onl?, b::$yecc_he..~did not ,. . to gain
,-.*,--.- to robbery.
enter the house of Y.
M found a locked chest on the street. M took it to his house 1444. While a truck loaded with bolts of textiles was passing
and broke it open. In this ease, M was liable fcr theft, be- along a street in Manila, a bolt fell from the truck. A
, .x chest
cause he did not take ,the-lacked __~
..xfrom. the house d.it.i policeman saw the bolt when it fell from the truck. See-
o m 3 He did not hAe,gk-&..og$$ m the house of its Owner. ing that X was approaching the place where the bolt of
textile was lying, the policeman hid himself behind
1441. A cut some of the stakes of a corral and, after creating
parked autoniabile and observed what X would do with
an opening, A entered the corral, took and pulled away the bolt of textile. X picked it up and carried it with
the carabm from the said corral. What crime wa6 com- him. The policeman 'suddenly came out and placed x
mitted by A? under arrest, accusing him of theft as a finder of lost
~ I _ It depe5ds. u e mrral had a roof, th~e-t&n!~t. property. Is X criminally liable for theft? Explain yo?
: '
:b
the carabao, after, breaking some.,..of. the,.stahes, would
b%ZGl%rwby the use of force upon..things. If the corral
, answer. & e--.-
No. To be liable for theft, the finder of lost property ,;
had no top OT roof and iQvas not ,-,g~e_nd?.3Cy of a" mU~s~a~.c2n-_o~portuIlity to deliver the same to the local
"....~~house, the--crime committed is qualified theft?
ighabited
,/
authorities o r to' 'if< bieiYd-and' li6 'aid - n o t - d a - s T ~ X is 2
because the,.,cQrral.without a t o p o
~r r.oof ,is not..a building. not liable, because the policeman irnm&&ely placed him
In robbery by the use of force upon things, the offender under arrest. X did not have the opportunity to deliver
must have entered a house or building, tii; property to the local authorities o r to its owner. ,
--..* I .,-. ~ , ...,.-. ._ .,,. ,
%
W'
1442. A, servant in the house, having caught B, a trespasser, 1445. A found B a walIet containing P100. A gave it to c
tied B t o the post of the house after employing violence be delivered to R. Once in possession of th,e wallet' c.
on him. After sometime A removed B's shoes from his took the money and spent it. What crime was commit
feet and took them. What crime was committed by A? by C? Explain your answer.
Why? C committed theft,
, Theft, because the violence used by A was entirely and its contents to C,
' fbreign to, or had n o connection with, the fact of the
568 669
. \
CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
9'
? .cious mischief (Art. 327, R.P.C.).
"' Yes. Although the domestic
' ' hunting wild birds or animals a crime of theft? s o d propertyfrom his master,
It is theft when a person shall hunt wild birds or ani-
als upon a n inclosed estate or a field where trespass is
bidden or which belongs to another, without the con-
its owner (Art. 308, par. No. 3, R.P.C.).
a person liable for theft for catching fish in
Y.4.52. The servant in the house of B stole the watcli Of
A person is liable for theft for catching fish in the theft? Explain your answer.
brook or stream, if that brook o r stream is in an jnclosed
estate o r a field where trespass is forbidden or which be-
longs to another and that person catches fish therein with-
out the consent of its owner (Art. 308, par. KO.3, R.P.C.).
670 671
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIIWINAL LAW REVIEWER
672
i
7)
i
I
meaning of the term should be taken i n Such person was not liable for usurpation, because'the
e, so as to include crabs and shrimps. real property belonged to him and he had no intent to
gain. I n usurpation, the offender must have the intent,
1462. What crime was committed by R person who entered and to gain 'and the real property or real rights in property,
another after pulling down should not belong to him.
his small nipa house there,
consent of the o m e r ? Ex- 1464. What crime was committed by a person who altered
.,-,: .,
1,
plain your answer.
The crime committed was anosr&r_m of t r e s p 3 s
~ - the boundary marks or monuments of towns, provinces
or estates?
(Ark 281, R.P.C.), becaw$ the."..p l a g was a fmced esfate
~
-
1466./" was indebted to B in the sum Qf P10,OOO and, when of misappropriation or conversion of the money, goods .or..
..,,
the debt became due and demandable, A sold his house other personal property received by the offender.
and lot worth 815,000 and spent all the proceeds of the
d e . ' Is A liable for fraudulent insolvency? axplain your
The elements nf -.tu! a by means of a g e :
1.J2-d there must, be a -dense,
,'
fr;uadulentnct
answer. or fraudulepicmms ;
I '. There being nothing stated in the qurstion that his 2. '$& such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraud-
house an.d lot were the _only property of A or that B ulent means must be B a d e or executed o m :
was ac&ally prej-udizdl A is not liable for fraudulent in- taneouslv w j i the c o m a h i m u L t h & a u d ;
solvency.-Tmmportant element of the crime of fraud- 3 . JM'the offended party must have r.elkxLm -the
..
ulent insolvency is that the act of ~~XIIXW with his prop- false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means; and
*,i
erty by the offender resulted in the prejudice of&?s creditors. 4 . #at as a result, the offended party suffered damage
Hence, it is important to show that the sale of his property
by the offender at the time that his debt was due and 1468. What are the other forms of estafa with abcse of con-
demandable resulted in the prejudice of his creditors. fidence? , ...
1467. What' are the two general classifications of estafa 01 Estafa with abuse of confidence includes:
swindlin:$, m d give the elements of each? 1. Estafa committed by altering the iubstance, quan-
tity or quality of anything of value which the offender
The .two general classifications of estafa or swindling
shall deliver by virtue of an-obligation to do so, even
are: (1) estafa with abuse of confidence, and (2) estafa
bv means of deceit.
T6e
elements
c-"..-
. e.,. m with ~b%~--?f,~c~nfi~~~e by
.
.-...of
though such obligation be based on an immoral or illegal
consideration (Art. 315, No. l ( a ) , R.P.C.).
2. Estafa committed by taking undue advantage of the
misappropr1it;mg or converting The property of ahother signature of the offended party in blank, and by writing
any document above such signature in blank, to the prej-
yrbt m a e y ,=d& or other personal -YU udice of the offended party or any third person (Art. 315, '
who has so received it, or denial on his part of such money,, goods or other personal property be received by ,:
receipt ;
is/
3 That such misappropriation or conversion or denial
c'
the Injury of an&heE; and
i
1l
the offender?
The money, goods or other personal property must be
received by the offender (1) in trust, (2) on commission,
. .
676
1 671
ClZIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW ICEVIEWER
' (3) for administration, or (4) under any other obligation Was only an extension of that of the latter. The juridical ',
involving the duty to make delivery of, or to return the rgnained with the owner. Such person,
pmsss>.io~nn_tbereof :, .3
quasi-contracts not having the juridical possession of the motor vehicle,
,.. . committed qualified theft for disposing of it with intent . ":
to gain and without the consent of the owner (People vs.
The offender d o e s & Isaac).
the offended party.
But if the motor vehicle was pot ouerated as a r d a r
-___
to he delivered
--- $g a third persp,pr to be returned to its owner.
In estafa, thed$!ix$Fy pf,the thing to the accused. should
passenger vehicle and, therefore, not subject to the rules
and regulations of the Public Service Commission, the :
not carry with it the transfer of ownership. . Thus, in contract contract of lease isia1i.d and the person who received the .,,'
o r k l i or loan of money, since the ownership of the think or motor vehicle has acquired ~juridka! possession of the same.
of tho rnoney is transferred to the buyer or borrower, the latter If he sold the motor vehicle to another person and used
cannot be held liable for estafa for failure to pay the purellase the proceeds of the sale for his own benefit, such person
prico 01' to pay the loan. is liable Tor estafa with abb_u_se._ofconfidence.
1470; State the reason why in estafa with abuse of confidence
by misaplpropriation or conversion, the ;law requires that
1472. A, who was buying merehandise in the market for re- ,,
the money, goods, or other personal property should be sale at his retail store in the barrio, told B, the owner
"
received by the offender under any of those transactions. of a stall in the market, that he w b leaving in his stall ..
the merchandise purchased from another stall while he
~
"
The reason is that, in estafa with abuse of confidence was buying other merchandise at another .stall. in the '
the offender who misappropriated or converted to the market. 13 agreed to look after the merchandise. When
prejudice of another the money, goods or other personal A returned for the merchandise and asked B for it, the
property must have juridical po-s&n of the property
he receiv'ed; and when money, goods or other personal latter plenied having received a n y , merchbndise from ,A .; '
_ ,
erty and its owner, the same relation as was occupied by did not commit the crime of estafa even if he sold the
1 ,
.. ...~ $,. ,
ment between A and B that the former would sell to the A is not liable for any crime, because .the thing that
.,
.. ' latter the horse, and that A received from B an advance h e - ~ r ~ ~ ~ e ~ t ~he d e
.:,:, payment of 8500, A cannot be held liable fol estafa with had received from B A received a pig from €3 a n d . A .
abuse of confidence for selling the horse to c. p f o m K e T % T Z S e s h e E O to C. In estafa, the, thing
to be delivered must be the same thing that +he offendq.,;.
received from the offended party. . , .,
A ic n&&bl& did n o t take the_
"_
_I__
--..,. P50 fram,.B. .without. .t
cause he never delivered the horse to B. He is civilly
liable to B only €or the return of the P500 and for dam- 147i. A purchased a pair of shoes from a store where B was
ages, if there are any. a salesman. The purchase price o f the pair of shoes
was P45. A handed lo B a 100-,peso bill. As there was
eceived a radio' from B to keep the same for trial no small change in the store, B went out of the store
r five! days, at the termination of which A bound with the IOO-p.<so bill, after telling A that he was going I
himself either to return it to B or, if he desired to retain to look for a small change. B returned, but when A
it, t o pay the initial sun1 of 890 and the balance on asked him for the change, B denied having received any
installm~mts. A sold the radio and did not pay any moue) from A. What crime was committed by B? Ex.
amount to B. What crime was committed by A? EX- plain your answer.
d a i n your answer.
B committed theft. When he received the 100-peso bill
from A, h ~ w q u i y s d ,?&_the
. ~.hxsical-ormak&al+m-
session of the money, The juridical possession of the
money was not transferred to E, beyuse there was no
-. .\
680 581 3
I
.- ?
,;. .i
, . ,. 1
.?. c
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
or else to give back to A the equivalent in bills or coins The test does .not apply when the person who received the,: .,
of smaller denominations (People vs. Aquino, C.A.; US. thing is a servant 01 employee of th
vs. De Vera). man?. or employee could not-suj&-
~-
the thing !h r G e X d .
.-.
.. ._
1478. A gave to B money in the amount of BlOO to be delivered 1480. May a person be held liable for estafa with abuse Of
to C . When he was in possession of the money, B did confidence, even if he did not benefit from the thing he
, not deliver the same to C and instead spent i t for his had received from another? Explain your answer.
own benefit. What crime was committed by B? EX- Yes, when he disposed of the thing he had received to
plain yoix answer. the prejudice of another he may mot have benefited from
;. ;.,, B committed estafa with abuse of confidence. He re- the thing. In this way of com-itting estafa with abuse .’
. .ceived the money under the title of commission, wiVn the of confdencc, the offender only used or disposed of an-
obligation to deliver it to C. Having acquired juridical other’s property as if it were his own. The offender uses
possession of the money, he committed estafa with abuse or disgoses of another’s property without right to do SO.
of confidence when he misappropriated it. -_--_...--by cq.uersh
This is known as estafa
Note: Thcs, in the cane of People VS. Flores (C.A.), where
$479. Suppose that in the preceding question, A gave to his i the accused received il ring from the offended party to sell
servant the money to be delivered to C, but when he under the condition that she was to return it the following
was in possession of the money the servant did not deliver day if not scld and wUithQyt;uqiauthauty ’ to & e A L t o a E U k * ,
it to C and instead spent i t for himself, what crime was agmt, bnt in violation of that instruction she gave i t to a
sub-agent who, in turn, delivered it, to a third person i n pnY-
committed by the servant. Explain your answer. ment of the cloth that said suh-agent\hzd ohtained from said
The crime committed by the servant is qualified theft, third person, the accused Sonverted it to the prejudice-of the
because his possession of the money was hut=e555X offended party and was held liable f o r ssiafa. even if she did
of the possession of A: In other w o r d s , w e r v a n t did nottbp-nefit from the ring, In giving it to a subagent, with-
oat authority of the owner, the a2cused~dispose
n ~ a ~ ~ 6 i ~ u F i tpossession
K c d of the money. Having a s if . i t were her. own-~~pmq&y. The accused
- acquired only the physical or material possession of the to give the ring to the sub-agent.
money, the servant is guilty of qualified theft for having Art. 315 uses the phrase “ t o t h e prejudice of knother,” not . ;
spent the money for himself. It is qualified theft because “with intcnt to gain,” as in theft o r robbery. . .,
..
’.?
the crizrie was committed by a domestic servant.
Note: When it is not certain that the offender received a thing
1481. When is an agent who gave to a sub-agent the personal ‘‘j
under a transaction transferring juridical possession to him, property- belonging to his principal,.&Jable for estafa
because there is no clear indication that he received it in trust, with abuse of confidence, if the sub-agent misappropriated
on commission, f a r administration, o r under a quasi-contract 1 the property?
or contract of bailment, the t e s t i s : Did-&h$,-_awner of Gh
thin&!&pm+&deliuery -of%c-same-tLt& ..of&$,%-e~~ec& When the principal adj-&i@,Lthe agent to deliver
the immediate return of the thing .ddi~eh~$J-..If ,s,p,..,~h~~,te~~, the personal property to-a sub-agent and the agent
~.
582 583
I
I / I.
, .+ .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKlMINAL LAW REVIEWER
. ._.
., livered it to a sub-agent for the same purpose of selling C, B converted the watch t o the prejudice of C, not
the same on commission basis a n m e r e is -evidence the prejudice of A, the owner of the watch.
of c@nivance, collusion or corZSgiraey bet.wzn_.the-agent Note: Who can be the complaillant against B for estafgl'
- .. sub-gg.en$. t o , $&ri+Wl the p&cipal, the agent i s
and th.e ....- Either A o r 6 , and it makes no difference that the party p
udiced was C and not A.
not Iia.ble for estafa if the sub-agent misappropriated it
If C is the complainant, for what kind of estafa most'
(People vs. Munsayac, C.A.). be prosecuted and punished? B is to he prosecuted and pUniahedz
f o r esiafa by m c m f _ d e e d L . h e e a u s e he falsely pretended
1482. If an asent, who received personal property from his to be the owner of the watch, when he pawned i t to C."'.Brrq
principal to be sold, f o r y h , sold it on credit, is that if A is tho complainant, B would be liable for 'estafa With,
P
agent liable for estafa? abuse of confidence.
. .
I n the case .of' U.S. vs. Morales, et al., 15 Phil. 236,
i t was held that the act of the agent in selling the jewelry 1484. When may the agent who received money from
I' principal withhold the application of the Same to. th$
on credit and taking promissory notes from the purchaser
agreed purpose, without committing estafa with
for the purchase price, is &&sstafa, ther%b$n&,no_'evi-
of Confidence?
denee of conversion .of, the property to_tke_benefitof~the
_-.. ,
w d q -Of,some other^ perso-?. When the agent in good faith retained the money whic
he had received from his principal for the purpose of
But in the case of U.S. vs. Panes, 31 Phil. 116, where sary self-protection against his principal in civil C
the accused also sold to another on credit the jewelry he versies arising between the two with reference to the
had received from the complainant to be sold on commis- or related matter, such agent is not liable for estafa.
sion and for cash, it was held that the accused was guilty reason for this rule is that the agent acted without
of estafa. The 'decision was based on the rule that 'k.. inal intent.
appI)z.iakg >?-O~:;S ..gwn_use,,i n d u d 5 n 0 t - d ~C C K V ~ ~
to one's p g p a d a d v a n t a g e bllt every &te.mpt t a a e 1485. Explain why partners are not liable for estafa
ofae.-mop&y of-another. without right" (9 RCL 1275). abuse of confidence, if the money or property hv
It i.s submitted that the Panes case states the better rule. is that which is received for the partnership?
' ~. Partners are not liable for estafa with abuse of
3. May it person be held IiabIe for estafa with abuse of fidence if the money or property was reee'
confidence even if the party prejudiced is not the owner partnership, because when two or more person
.. of the! property misappropriated or converted7 Illustrate. selves to contribute money, property, or in
Yes. For instance, A gave his watch. to B t o keep it common fund, with the intention of dividing
while A was taking a bath in the sea, .md then B left among themselves, a contract is formed, called
with the watch without waiting for A. When A learned ship, and when money o r property was invest
: that 13 had pawned his watch to C for a loan of P50, partner in the risks or benefits of the busines
:~ A went to C from whom he recovered his watch, with- , . partnership, even though he had reserved th
out reimbursing C of the amount he loaned to B. / / conveysd only the usufruct of his money or property, tEe
B committed estafa, because he received the watch \,, !I?., duty to return it devolves upon the partnership 'and no$
from A for safekeeping. He pawned it to C without 'I upon the partner who received it directly from him. S u d
'.
' right to do so. When A recovered it without reimbursing being the case, the action that lies with the partner,
. , .
584 585
. , 1Ii ;r"
I
i .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER ClllMINAL LAW REVIEWER
furnished the capital, for the recovery of his money or court because up to that time the ociginal trust relation
property is not a criminal action for estafa, but a civil __ -_
may be cczny&ed by the parties intocan or&zsrY credi
one arising from the partnership contract for a liquidation debtor
._ situation, thereby placing the .complainant
~~~
of the partnership and a levy of its assets, if there should toDe1 to-izdsion the original trust. But after the insti-
-
be any. tution of the action in court, the offended party may no
f l t when money or property had been %wived by a longer divest the prosecution of its power to exact the
crimiiial liability, as distinguished from the civil. The
partner for specific purpose and later he misappzopriated
it, such partner is guilty o f t a f a . crime being an offense against the state, only the
can renounce it. x f k & & o nis not- of the means
Note: The reason is differed if the charge against the partner n@ed by the Penal Code whereby criminal^ li.&&i
is theft. The reason why B partner is not liaole for theft if
he takeii the property of the partnership is th-t 2 partner is be extinguished; hence, the role or’ novation may only b
prcsumed co-owner of the assets and property uf the partner- ecther to prevent the rise of criminal liability or to cast :
ship and if any of such assets or property i s taken by a doubt on the true nature of the original basic transaction,
partner, it is not clearly and truly the property of another. whether or not it was such that its breach would not give
rise to penal responsibility, as when money loaned is made ;
1486. Does the mere failure to return the thing received for to appear as a deposit, o r other similar disguise is resorted
safekeeping, or on commission, o r for administration con-
stitute the crime of estafa? Why?
I to. Even in Civil Law the acceptance of partial payments,
without further change in the original relation between
No. There must be evidence that the person who re- the parties, can not produce novation. For the latter to
ceived it either (1) misappropriated it, or (2) converted exist, there must be proof of intent t o extinguish the
it to the prejudice of another, or ( 3 ) denied having re- original relationship, and suck intent cannot be inferred
ceived it (US.vs. Bleibel; People vs. Nepomnceno). I
from the mere acceptance of payments on account of what
is totally due. Much less can it be said that the accepb
1487. Is criminal liability for estafa affected by novation of anee of partial satisfaction can effect the nullification of
contract? a criminal liability that is fully mature and already in
the process of enforcement. Thus, this Court has ruled
The c ~ n d - l i & i l i t y for estafa is ~ o affected
t ~ by
compi*omise or e o n of contract, for it is a QQ&L I that the offended party’s acceptance of a promissory note
e* which must be prosecuted and punished. by the for all or part of the amount misapplied does not obliterate
Government on its own motion even thou&comp&k%!re- the criminal offense.”
p&ioz should have been %axe of the &=%suffered
by the o€fended party (People vs. Benitez, G.R. No. L- 1488. A borrowed a typewriter from B to be used by the former
15923, June 30, 1960). for three days. After three days, B sent his brother,
C, who was living with him, to A to get back the tppe-
In the recent case of People vs. Nery, G. R. NO. G writer. C went to A and got the typewriter, but C
19567, Fcbruary 5, 1964, the Supreme Court held: “Ac- ~01dit and spent the proceeds of the sale. What crime
-
cused contend8 that there is no prohibition in the Penal
was annmitted by C? Is he criminally liable? ExplaW-
Code t o prevent the parties to a contract to novate it
so that any incipient criminal liability under the I‘irst ! your answers.
, avoided. The n s a n ~ _ t h e o r qmay perhaps C committed estafa with abuse of confidence, ljecause
the .filing of the~.sriminal information in he received the typewriter from A upon instruction of B.
-J
686 E87
I I
I
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER i CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
’ Therefore, C received it from A under the obligation in- 1491. What crime was committed by a person who sold to ’ ,”
another 1,000 tins on the assurance that they contained .I
., volving the duty to make delivery of the same to. B. C
acquired juridical possession over the typewriter. When
I
1J opium, when in fact only sixteen tins eontained opium, ,’’
;_ he misappropriated it, he committed estafa with abuse while the’ others contained only molasses, that person :-I
‘..of confidence, with B as the offencied party. But under having received the full purchase price far 1,000 tins of
Art. 332 of the Revised Penal Code, C is not criminally opium? . ,
.<
liable, because B and C were brothers who were living Tiiat person committed e e f a with unfaithfulness, be-
together a t the time the crime of estafa was committed
by C and, in such a case, C is exempt from criminal liability.
_-
cause he altered the sub_stance of the thing which he should. ,~
have delivered by virtue of an obligation to_d.o,_%h ¥ , i ;
though
..- su_ch-ogjpjion u-as based on an immoral or ill& ’:.;
1489. Suppose that C, in the preceding question, went to A
,.;,t, .
-----
consideration. There is d G x e caused to the offended ‘ 2
: without the knowledge of I3 and told A that he was party.
sent by his brother B t o get back the typewriter and
.. once in possession of the typewriter C sold it and spent 1412. What are the elements of estafa by taking undue ad- ~\:,
: the proceeds of the sale, would C be criminally liable? vantage of a signature in blank?
.. . Explain p u r answer. The elements of estafa by taking undue advantage of
.
Yes, C would be crimhallyliable, because he commitked a signature in blank are:
e&& by means of deceit, because B did n o t a u t g g b e C 1. That the with the s m e of the offended
.,.
to get the typewriter and when he _renEse.n&d to A that party be inn-blullr;
he was authorized by B to get the typewriter, he thereby
2 . That the offended party s
made false uretense, which is a f o m ~ . o j M t . In this
case, Art. 532 of the Revised Penal Code is not applicable, to the offender:
hecause the o-dy is..Bwho is not relat-C. 3 . That above the signature of the offended: part
Art 332 provides that “no criminal, but only civil, lia- a dscument is written by the offender; and
hility shall result from the commission of the crime of 4. That the document so writtext c x s i e ~ ~ o n ,
theft, swindling or malicious mischief committed or caused ai* cgtzs~es-danzageto, the offen&dd?tY.
mutually” by the relatives mentioned in that provision.
It will be noted that to be exempt from criminal liability, 1493. A, who was leaving for the province, entrusted
any of those crimes must be committed by a person against A’s secretary, a blank piece of p
his relativc, or caused mutually by the relatives, men- thereon, with instruction to B to prepare
.~, tioned in :raid article. his signature in case C would pay his debt.
was already in the province, B ,typewrote a p
i490. ,What are the elements of estafa with unfaithfulness? note for P1,OOO above the signature of
.. The elelnents of estafa with unfaithfulness are: him (B), and later he resigned and aske
1. That: the offender has an onerous obl&&ion to de- A ‘was forced to pay B because of the .promissory
liver something of value; i What crime was committed by B? Expl
.:-,
-*>.
--4i..
.*~~
.;.+ ,
2. That he alters itssu?Jstance, quantity or ‘quality;
I
B committed estafa b y r m d m a
~ . , . , , . ’ 3. That there e
..vi’,. ~ s-i or p m c e caused to anoyfler. s i g & a & w f the offended party i
688 589
I
, .
590 591
I
I',., ,. ..
:
.
, %.ll 1
.,~27
'
$,#;,:
"'-. <,
..
t .,'.... ,
.."
w:<,* CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
i .
cause of the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent should be proved and established by acts distinct from;"'$
_:. means. and independent of, the mere non-compliance with the :.
promise.
4 . That as a result, the offended party suffered dam-
age. There ,must be a showing that when Y received the
money, he had no intention of rendering the service con-
1498. A, having known that B was sent by C to get a sum tracted by him. Since i t was not shown that Y in fact
of money from D, went ahead of B to D and represented possessed no influence or that his inaction w a s due t o his
to the latter that he was B, sent by C to get the money. lack of influence, he cannot justifiably he held guilty of
deliberate misrepresentation. His failure or inability to
. D gave the money to A, believing the false representation
made by the latter. Once in possession of the money, render the service could have been due to a change of mind,
if not to a lawful cause. 3 6 - p e r f o r m a n e e on his part
A spent it for himself. What crime was committed by
A? Explain your answer. and his failure to return the money gave rise only to
liability (People vs. Wilson Yee).
/
a,
A committed estafa by means of deceit, using ficmous N o t e : In estafa by m a n s of deceit, the representations made
name. D was induced to part with his money because must be false.
of the false representation made by A that he was E.
D was damaged or prejudiced. 1500. A represented to B that he had influence with the Pres-
ident and told B that if he would give him P500 he wodd
1499. Y, an immigration broker, told C that he (Y) could help work for Itis appointment a s justice of the peace. B
. the M t e r bring his family into the Philippines, because gave A H500. Later, it turned out that A was not even
he had influence in Malacafiang, the Bureau of Immigra- known to the President. Is A liable for estafa by means
tion and the Department of Foreign Affairs. Upon these of deceit? Explain your answer.
representations, C entered into an agreement with Y Yes, A is liable for estafa by means of deceit, because
for thi! entry of his family for permanent residence in he falsely pretended to possess influence. The false repre-
the Philippines. C gave P2.000 to Y . After waiting for sentation made by A that he had influence ind&B @.-
a long time without hearing from Y, C went to the p x t wch- hi>~~
~ ~ ~ lthereby
e y , c a G c L d m a g e t o the latter.
Bureau of Immigration to check on the papers for the
entry of his wife and child, but he found that no such 1501, A offered to sell to B twenty cavans of rice at P25 a
papers had been filed. Is Y liable for estafa by means cavan. B agreed t o buy the rice. A asked for advance
of deceit? Explain your answer, payment of P200 from B, who gave the said amount.
No. From the fact of non-compliance by Y with his A promised deliver the twenty eilvans of rice the next
part of the agreement, it cannot be concluded that his day, but no rice was delivered to B, because frum the
representation that he possessed influence was false. There beginning A had no rice to sell. What form of deceit .. .
must be evidence that Y's pretense of influence was not was used by A to defraud B?
true. In the absence of pioof that his representation was A used that form of deceit, by falsely pretending to
actually false, criminal intent to deceive cannot be in- possess property.
ferred. A mere promise t o perform a thing is not a repre- Note: The phrase "by means of other similar deceits", after+<;
sentation which constitutes a deceit, and failure to comply the enumcration of the different forms of false pretensewfd3f
with such promise does not change its character. Deceit subdivision No. Z(a) of Art. 315, includes such form of dw,$t$
693
592
P ,
"I ,
ni-:=
a&= the defendant h a ~ h % + d y a<qg!y&
_ the thing, there 1s
case the offended party suf&@-damage
&e drawer of the check to deposit the amount necessary y?
.-
from the h e n . to cover his check within- three. ..(3l_aaJrsfmm receipt '
of notice from the bank and/or the payee or holder that
i::
'Ji/502. A borrowed P5?DO_from B and after two months when said check has heen dishonored for lack.,or insufficiency
the la+ demanded from A the payment of the loan, of funds shall be ~ ~ ~ i ~ u . . f a c Z e - e v i d edec_eitcon&i!L+
n~~..~~. ,~
__---
(,.
A falsely pretended that he was expecting to receive ing false pretense o r fyaudule.ntact.. (Art. 315, par. 2 ( d ) , .,+::!
from the Army the sum of P6,OOO as his backpay within as amended by Rep. Act No. 4885, approved June 17, 1967)
a period of one month and because of that repyesentation, 3 . By obtaining any food, refreshment or accommoda-'
B, did inot ...press
.-. the immediate payment of the loan. tion at an hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house; lodging,
After
'r
one month when B did not receive the payment of house, or apartment house, w&ut paying therefor, with
tfie loan, he went t o the omresponding office and inquired injent.~to_defrau-d, etc. (Art. 315, par. 2 ( e ) , R.P.C.).
whether or not A was entitled t o a backpay. It turned
out that A was not entitled to any backpay. Is A liable 1504. A, 'a goldsmith and jeweler, substituted a diamond stone;
for estafa by means of deceit? Explain your answer. of lesser quality than that which he received from I:
, . No, 'because when he made the f u r e t e n s e , A did when he ( A ) made the ring for B. What particdar.;;,',.;
not receive anything from E. The loan of P 5 a w a e b : form of estafa. was committed by A?
,tained by A from B without any false.pcet.ea* I n estafa . to the
Estafa by altering the quality of the thing pertaining
offender's a r t or business.
by mea% of deceit, where theoffender makes a false $re-
tense, the.Jizw. requires that the f a k . w & p e should be
"escuted -prior_to.
-.. or @multaneous~ll with the commission 1505. What are the elements ,df estafa by postdating or isSUiW.
o m a u d . " As stated in the question,-the false pretense a check?
. ..$
/
.made h:y A was after he had received tke sum of 8500 They are : >
from B. 1. That the offender ctdated-_a-check, or a* .!'
twin oayment of an o b h e n ;
1503. What are the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on 2. That snch post&dati-ng or m k l g a check was ~QIE
estafa by means of deceit committed by means .of fraudu- ylien the offender-fikno fugds-in the bank, or his funds.
lent acts? depositcd theiein were n m € i c i e n t t o cover the amount
The provisions of the Revised Penal Code on estafa of the check.
by means of deceit committed by means of fraudulent acts
,. are, as follows: 1506. D w the amendment of Art. 315, No. 2 (d), by Republic
Act No. 4885, approved June 17, 1967, change the rule
594
I , i I
.
. . ''
i
:,
. that there is no
estafa if the check was postdated oir is- In a case where the accused issued a check to Lee Hua
sued in payment of pre-existing obligatioq? ' Why? Ilong in exchange f o r 84,000, but the check was dishonored
No. The phrase "By postdating a check, or issuing '
by the bank for lack of funds, i t was held'that the ac-
such check in payment of an obligation" in Art. 315, eused was guilty of .et& ($ng Tek Lian vs. Court of ,'
No. 2 ( d ) , is not changed by Repnblic Act No. 4886, ex- Appeals, 87 Phil. 383). Note that, the accused was able
cept that the word "such" is replaced by the article "a" to obtain the F4,000 because of the check he issued.
in relation to the check issued. Exception: When the check i s s d ' i s Q ' i n Davmnl
This kind of estafa is committed by means of deceit, of~an~~obli,ga_tion."When post-dated checks are issued and
specifically by fraudulent act. The fraudulent act of post- /'iiitende,d'
-. . by the parties only as promissop notes,
dating ii check or issuing a check in payment of an obliga-
. is n_o_ .e?.@& even if .there . a r e . n o _ s u f f i c i e n t _ f ~ .i~
'
tion should be the efficient cause of the defraudation and,
as such, should be either prior to, ~. or s i m d k e o u s l y with, bank to cover the =me (People vs. Roque Obieta,
52 0. G. 5224). . ,
the a& of fraud.
Hence, as before the amendment, the act of postdating When the clieck is isaced by a , gmraL.or, there is ,.EO
a check o r issuing a check must be made in payment of estafa. When the accused was persuaded to act merely
some obligation contracted by the accused at the time as-, p a r a n t o r by guaranteeing by means of a .check the
he issued and delivered the check. payment of the materials ordered by snother person, a
Thus, when.? check was_i_Ss&uel in_pay-ment of a de!?$ fact which was kiiown to the vendor of the materials,
c o ~ f e d ( ~ r i o ~ - . t q s u c l l _ i s s u a n cthere
e , is -fa> eFn and the check issued was dishonored for lack of funds,
if there is n a n d in the bank to cover ,the amount of the accused is not guilty of estaf8. The 'check wa&
the chock (People vs. Lilius, 69 Phil. 339). igsued iri-mnt of an oJ.&zah. (People vs. Suarez,
When check is issued in. substitution of a pwmissory 2 C.A. Rep. 982)
note, i t i.s.. in.- payment of pre-existing obligation. Thus,
when a person purchased merchandise, signed a promis- 1507. When does the act of postdating a check or issuing a check
sory note therefor, and on the date of .maturibj he gave in payment of an obligation constitute the crime of estafa?
' a check for the amount stated in the promissory note, When the offendey had no funds..in.the bank, or his
but the check was dishonored by the bank for lack Of -_/-
596 597
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWEi3
The different forms of estafa committed through fraud-
of such cii:ciimstances". These phyases are n o t found in ulent means are:
the provision as amended. 1. By i-&another, by means of deceit, o-t
any document.
: 1509. When does t h e presumption of dereit in estafa by postdat. ~ .~
2 . By resorting. to some fraudulent-pr~ac~cet o i w
ing a check or isvuing a check arise?
sxcess in a gambling game,
When the (Islc_qf~-the check fRiled to deposit the 3 . By rynoving, co.n&Lng o r destroying, in whole ',
amount ~ ~ ~ s s atol cover
l y his check within three (3.) days or in part, any cTu't regard, office files, documents o r
from &&eip&.of no>ice.. from the .bank and/or the pa= any other papers.
or hoidm that said check has been dishonored for lack (Art. 315, No. 3:a), ( b ) , ( c ) , R.P.C.)
or insufficiency of funds, such failure of the drawer shall
be prima facie evidence of deceit constituting false pre- 1513. If a person caused another, who did not kn,ow how to read, ,, '
tense 01' fraudulent act on his part. to affix his thumbmark on a document containing sti-
pulations different from those which the other person
,1510. A goldsnlbth received from B a ring made of gold and thought the document contained, when will it be estafa
through fraudulent means, and when will it be falsifi- ,
. ,,;
diamond $;tone, to be remodelled and transformed into a cation? Explain your answer.
.new ring of modern style. Once in possession of the
It is estafa through fraudulent means. when the of-
ring, the goldsm'ith removed m d took the diamond stone
and aepla.ced i t with a stone of inferior quality when
fended party was induced to affix his thumbmark on the :
document by means of deceit, that is, the offender made
the ring was remodelled. When it was deliveM to R, statements which deceived the offended party as t o the
he found out that the stone was different and of in- nature of the transaction embodied in the document.
ferior quality. What cr'me was committed by the gold- It is falsification, when the offended party made state ' ' .::
sm'ith? I3xplak your answer. ments to be embodied in a document, but the offender in
The goldsmith coniinitted estafa by means of fraudulent preparing the document attributed to the offended party
acts,'that is, by altering the quality of the thing pertain- 'statements different from those made by the latter. .
ing to his art o r business. 1514.- During the trial of a criminal case for estafa, A tes
fied that he signed a conveyance sf his hereditary interest
1511. A, after havirg occnp:ied a room and ordered meals three to the accused, thinking that the document contained
times a day in an h,&l foir one week, surreptitiously a power of attorney. On cross-examination, A admitted
removed his baggage from the hptel witfiout paying for t h a t the accufied made no such misrepresentation. Is the
his food and accommodation. Is A liable criminally O r accused liable for estafa? Explain.
only &illy? Explain your answer. No. The accnsed did not induce A to sign the do
A is criminally liable. He committed estifa by means ment by means of deceit. The remedy of A would be a:,
of fraudulent acts. civil action (U.S. vs. Barnes, 3 Phil. 704).
1515. When is the removing, conceal$?, or destroying of ,.
1512. .What are the forms of estafa committed thyough fraudll- court record, office files, documents or any other pape
, lent means? . '..
699
698
... I
I
\
.
.~'
.,. .
,
court to recover the 81,000 from A. A borrowed the
' , record from the clerk of murt and once in possessio11 of
the agent would be answerable for the acts of his co-
conspirator (People w. Nepornuceno, C.A.) .
the same, removed the promissory note from the record
and took it with him. What crime was committed by ,1519. To establish the liability of the defendant in th
. ' A? Elxplain your answer. of estafa, is ' i t ,necessary that there should be a demiyd
made by the comphinant to the defendant prior
A committed estak&ongh fraudulent means, because instit tion of the criminal action?
he wmwed a d o h n t from the c o m L w K d with i&nt
to_lleikaud. By removing the promissory note attached estafa with abuse.of confidenee, by misappropriation
t o thc complaint, A deprived. B, of his .evidence of A'S or conversion, demand by the complainant to the defend-
' / ant t o return the thing received or to account for the
indeht,edness, thereby defrauding B.
same Qsssary, only when there is no evidence of &
1517. Is material damage to khe offended party necessary in appropriation or c m s i o n of the thing received. Demand
t h e X x n e of esmfa? is necessary in such a case, because the failure to return'! ,'
GOO 601
5
. . . .. .
., .,
. ,
,,.
I
...
CllIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
,:. . B that he was selling i t for PIO,OOO. B agreed to buy No. A is not liable for other forms of swindlin
.. . it and asked A to execute the necessary deed of sale. did not stah? in the d e & o L d e that the p r m d Y
.. )
.._
.
',
,1
-. '
A
to
asked B to give a down payment of P5,OOO, promising
return the next day with the deed of sale. B gave
m m b r a n c e . To constitute other forms of sw
byTlsposlng of real property, knowing that the
A P5,OOO. But A never showed up until he was arrested encumbered. i t is necessary that there must be
,. .,
r. by certain detectives upon complaint of B. When in-
vestigated, A admitted t o the detectives that he mas nof
re;oyesentation- by the o f f d e r that the real property' is . ..,
free .~
. from__%cumbrance
~ (People vs. Buencamino, t i.a
,:,
, . , the owner of the land which he sold to B, it being the Note: Although Dimgraph No. 2 of Art. 316, R.P.C., s t a t e a ' ~
. . . property of C, who never authorized him to sell the same. ' that the crime, is committed "nlthough such encumtrance be '
not recorded," in solpe eases the Court of, Appeals held that
Is A liable for other forms of svindling? Explain your thc encumbranee must be legally constituted.
answer.
Thus, .it was held that an attachment or a mortgage of a
.. No, A is not liable for other forms of swindling. In piece ' o f land, which i s not registered, or a usurious loan ':
: order that the crime of other forms of swindling may with equitable mortgage, is not an encumbrance an the property. . .
he committed, it is necessary that the offender, who is
not the Owner of the real property, shouldDprescnt that 1522. A pledged his watch to B, his roommate in a d o l d t o V ' ,
to secure a loan of P25. One. evening, when A was going .:
'
k e is the owner thereof (People vs. Lotivo, C.A.). A
did not represent to B that he was the owner of the to a dance party, he wanted to wear his watch WMcb.,
he .had pledged to ,.B., Taking advantage of the fact 'i
'
land he was then selling. His statement, that he was sell- that .B was sleeping, A pulled the drawer of the table:'
ing t.he land to B is not a misrepresentation. It is true of B where the watch had been placed by B and took.>
_. , ,. I that he was not authorized by the owner to sell the land,
the same, wore it, ana went to the dance party. When
, .. ' b u t A n s r - r s p r e s e n t e d to E that he was authorized A returned to the dormitory, he met B a t the door. B
, ,
to se'il the land. Hence, there was not misremesentatian angrily took the watch from A. Is A liable' for other:.
* ode& forms of swindling for wrongfully Wring his personal
. Note: A i s not liable for estafa under Art. 315, because &re property from its lawful possessor? Explain your answer.:
wils nritber false nreteEa2 nor ,fraudulent act.
Deceit by false pretense requires that there he a false r q r - No. The law '(Art. 316, par. 3, R.P.C.) requires th;ae
- . . scntation t o a matter of fact, a positive assertion of falsehood. the wrongful taking of one's pers- from 1tS
Art. 315, par. 2, enumerates the fraudulent acts and the act lawful possessor m>st..rplt in the ~ ~ ~ @ o f . A E & k r
of A i s not one of them. or any third person.. B was nO_t preiudiced, because he
,2521. A, the owner of a piece of land, sold the same to B for i&%veTcd the-wat.ch. The prejudice must be c e
"
'
~
wl~ole.world. After 13 p&d the purchase price of P5,OOO As there is no actual damage- caused, thkre is' no bas,?
and had in his possession the deed of sale, he went to .^..
for fixing the amount of the fine a s a part of the penaltf;
.".
the office of the Register of Deeds QI~IYto find out that .%$
the kind which he purchased from A' had been mortgaged (Castillo vs. People). .;Ij
602 603
I
:. 1529., What crime was committed by a person who, knowing that of the purchase price of the car, the same having, been; :'
-: he hadl no money with him, rode id a taxi and when
' purchased fqord B. C knDwing that the automobile had
. . ' he reached his destination he could not pay the fare? been mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law in Manila '
, . in favor of B, with ,the consent of A, took the automobile:. , 'a
,. .' , , The crime committed was other_rdeLelts (Art. 313,
: R.P.C.). This case is not covered by Arts. 315, 316 an& to Cebu where it would be used there by the family of
,' ." 317 of the Revised Penal Code. Any person who shall
'
C. There was no written consent of B t o the removal ' '.
of said automobile to Cebu. Is C liable for removing
,' defraud or damage another by any other credit not men- ,..,
' . tioned in those articles is liable for other deceits. a mortgaged property under Art. 319 of the Revised
Penal Code? Explain your ;u!swer.
1530. What crime was committed by a person who made'fore- Yes, because this crime can be committed by any per-
cast of what would happen at a certain future time? son who removed any personal property, knowin
Explain your answer. the same had been mortgaged under the Chattel Mo&.
None, because to constitute other deceits (Art. 318, gage Law, to any province or city other than the o n e " .
2nd par., R.P.C.), it is required that the interpreting of in which it was located a t the time of the execution of
.. ' dreams, making of forecast, os telling fortunes must& the mortgage, without the written consent of the mort- ,'i
for m m a i n . Since that person did not make any f ~ ' gagec.
~
,..,, . profit or gain in making the forecast, lie did not commit Note: When the accused transferred his residence to a
other deceits. province and he removed in good faith to that provin
property mortgaged by him under the Chattel Mortgage
' . AChattel
mortgaged his piano in the City of Manila under t h e he is not crirninaliy liable since he could not just le
property t o anybcdy else. It was for the best interest
Mortgage Law in favor of B to secure a loam the mortgagor and the mortgagee that the forme+ k
---of P500,. Thereafter, A removed the mortgaged piaqo to property in his new residence. There is no criminal 3
606 607
, . ,.
.,
.~.
, ,... , ., ,, .
*,-?
. .
-
., ' "
. .
-
i_
i
.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
, ..
13, A mortgaged his jeepney t o B under the Chattel Mort. ing, farmhouse, warehouse, hut, shelter, or vessel in port', ,+?. ./
.,@?:
gage Law. A sold the same jeepney t o c after securing ,
was Occupied, at the time of burning any of them, by . ':'*f
a letter from B consenting to the sale of the jeepney one o r more persons, the extent of the damage caused .
to c, .because of the promise of A that after the Sale to the property is immaterial. The reason for tliis is
%
:
of the jeepney he would pay the amount of .the loan he that the law considers the kind, character and location
.,,
' hecute A for selling personal property mortgaged under elusion temporal to reclusion perpetua provided for other &,$ ,
' the Chattel Nortgage Law? Explain your answer. . form of arson when there was no person inside tha~'3i
Yes, because the consent of B was only contained in house when it was burned, but the culprit thought that '.<
a letter. Under the law (Art. 319, par. 2, R.P.C.), the it was occupied by one or more persons? ~~
consent of the mortgagee must be written on the back of Yes, because the culprit showed an utter disregard ' '
".the mortgage and noted on the record thereof in the office \ to human life, although there was no actual dangbr to ,:,,':j
of the register of deeds of the province where the property any person. This view is supported by the fact that,even. , ::i
is located. I n order that the personal property already if there were persons in the premises but o f whose pres-,, 'a
, ,pledged under the Chattel Mortgage Law may be lawfully ence the offender was not aware, the law prescribes e,: ~'iq
sold or pledged again, those requirements must be COm- lesser penalty. It is not the actual presence of a person::
plied with.
1534. May a perwn be held criminally liable for removing, Sen-.
-
in the premines that aggravates the felony, but the knowl::
edge or the belief on 'the part of the offender that there <;$$
w w i i i the building which he burned.
ing or pledging a personal property--mortgaged, under ,:a#
the Chattel Mortgage Law, even if there is nL&m!!g@
caused to the mortgagee? Explain your answer.
Yes, because the Code (Art., 319) do-es-notxequire
that there should .be damage caused to the mortqagee. A person, intending to burn a wooden structure
The penalty is awesto mayor or a fine amounting to twice lects some rags, soaks them in gasoline and places them
the value of the property. This form of penalty indicates boside the wooden wall of the building. When he i s about
that the hasic, of the fine is not the damage caused but to light a match to set fire to the rags, he is discov
the .value of the property involved. by another who chases him away. This is attem
arson.
1535. What is arson? If that person is able to light o r set fire to the
Arson is the x@icious dest;uctiL% of p29RfXty b m . . but the fire is put out before any part of the buil
x&,.of
But if before the fire is put out, it has bilrped.
the building, it is consummated arson,
roper penalty? Why?
No; because in destructive arson, as well as in other
oms of arson, where the offender knew that the build-
- 608
. .
. .
."~ CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
*w
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
When the U u e of the pw-erty hugxed is..&and
.. .the burning isAEe a t a time or under-cimr&ances ,' , erty of another person was burned o r destroyed as. 8'
which clearly excl.ude_ajl- danger of the fire spreadieg, result (Art. 325, R.P.C.).
the act shall be treated and punished as malicious mis- However, A is liable for setting fire to property ex-
' chief, and not arson (Art. 323, R.P.C.). clus' ely owned by him, because the thing burned was
_.,
*?.
building-' in a? inhabited place (Art. 326, R.P.C.).
1540, A, as an act of revenge to the people in the Io~vIand
.
, ,\
near the dam, dug a hole on the side of the dam and . /-Bp
1543. A was the owner of a sugarcane plantation, and B was '
ti
-buried in i t a high power explosive and caused it to the owner of a rice plantation which was adjacent to :,
y::;. ,,:,'explode, thereby breaking the dam and causing flood in the sugarcane plantation of A. A burned his sugarcane ";
, t h e town where properties were damaged. What crime plantation to remove the leaves of the sugarcane before
was committed by A? Explain your answer. harvesting the same. Suddenly, the wind blew towards ._ .:
'
A committed crimes involving destruction, because he the plantation of B from the plantation of A, so t h a t ,
caused destruction of the property by means of explosion tho fire spread $0 the ricefield of B. The rice yhich :' ,;
and inundation.
N o t e : Tho other means that the offender may use in causing
destruction are: (l).) discharging of eleebic current, (2) sink- for intentional arson?
ing or stranding of vessel, (3) damaging of engine of vessel, It is submitted that A is not liable for arson,'because
\{~~? (4) taking up rails from railway track, (5) changing of rail- there was neither intention to cause damage nor negli-
wsy signals, ( G ) destroying telegraph wires and posts or those
gence on the part Of A. It is true that there was actual
k~ of any other system, and (7) other similar effective means
of dcslruction.
1542. A, who htad a small house, and B, his neighbor who had
8 a new bil: house, burned his own house in order to cause
the destruction of B's house. But because of the timely
arrival of the fire engine and the firemen, the house property of another an
j .' of B was not burned at all. The house of A was eom-
pletely destroyed by fire. Is A liable for arson by burn.
ning his own property as a means to commit arson?
~.. ~- .
.... No, because in arson by burning one's own- property.
as 'a means to commit arson, it is necessary that the prop-
, .
. -..,
,
. ,
6 i
, ., . , ,
..
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
e' e
No, because the law provides that malicious mischief 1548. A, a good friend of the defendant in
, ,_,, is committed by any person who sbLcidiberately-cause went to the office of the clerk of court and bornowe&' '
.. to the property of another any damage. This phrase the record, pretending t~ be a lawyer who wanted to
, ;.. means that the offender should act under the impulse of study the case. When the clerk of Lwurt left the'.offic%~
.. . -' a specific desire to inflict injury to another. According A removed the confession of the accus
. . to the.8upreme Court, "it follows that, in the very nature introduced by the prosecution as evidence,
, malicious mischief cannot be committed through pocket and,left the office. Is A liable for special
nce, since culpa and malice are essentially ineom- of malicious mischief for causing damage t o the r
of the court? Explain your answer.
It is submitted that the record damaged
passing by the side of a brand new automobile, and removing the written confession of the a
picked up a nail from the street and scratched the side covered by the provisions of the Revised Pena
.: ..
. ,,...,. of the car with the nail from one end to the other end
~
613
,, .
....
, .,~ ,
CRIhlINAL LAW REVIEWER c :
' .;
I must be damage actually caused which at least must be
,&&cation with multiple homicides.
However, if the possible damage could be estimated, .
liable for attempted special case of Malicious mis-
' 1553.' In what .felonies are the spouses, ascendants, descend
A or relatives by affinity in the same line, brothers
'sisters, and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if li
. ..1550i What crime was committed by a person who took from d together, exempt from criminal liability?
a,.' ,. -the Nationnl Museum the original of the "Last Farewen"
t
d They are exempt from criminal liability if thk
:/4"8..
i/
of Dr. Jose Rim1 and sold it to another for Pl;OOO? mittcd or caused mutually by them is theft, swindling , ,..
.t.i.
', . ~ Why?
'
i
..f ~
oz estafa, or malicious mischief (Art. 332, R.P.C.). .' ..
It is submitted that that person is not liable-for spe- 1 1 5 5 4 . A and B are son and father, respectively. A told 'their . - '
cases of malicious mischief, because he did .not cause
t o the property of the Natiord Museum. That
$> sewant ta, steal the watch of B, A's father. The servaht ,,i
7
I
i! e watch of B without the latter's consent and gave , .
person is liable for theft.
6
c
to A who sold i t and spent the proceeds of the @e:
Is A criminally liable? Is the servant liable? ,.
51. Several of the laborers of the Manila RaiIroad ComPanY b
A is not criminally liable because the crime committed ' ~ :
who declared a strike, cut dolvn a telegraph post, causing
the cutting of the telegraph lines. Because the com- by him, as .principal by induction, was theft and because ~ ' , '
of his relation with the offended party he is exempt from
munication between stations was disrupted, a collision
, .
of two trains resulted. Are those laborers of the Manila
Railroad Company liable for damages and obstruction to
criminal liability. a~$&J A ~ . "S9f6
But 'the agmption established by the Code for relatlves
,.
i. partpf the laborers, they should be held IiabIe for crime8 in-
yofiring destruction.
614
. .,
CRIMINAL LAW RWIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
/ es,' !&cause the money which he stole did not be- document which caused damage to the father. The %on
. ' , long to hjs father. The money belonged to the company.
dcrimo of theft.was not committed against the father.
exemption applies only when the theft, estafa or
icious mischief is committed or mztually caused by the
mentioned by the Code (Art. 332).
husband criminally liable for takiag from the barons valued at 8300. It was completely burned.
e the jewelry of his wife, which was inherited barong-barong was situated in a place 500- meters f
from her parents, after opening the said ward- the nearest house. Is A criminally liabl
11 a piece of wire? Explain your answer.
No, because the crime committed by the husband was
d therefore he is only civilly, but not criminally,
>and broke open the chest and took therefrom iminal liability f o r malicious mischief comm
~
' '
'If is submitted that the son is criminally liable, be- No, because although the jewel
. ' session of the administrator,' it b
cause the crime committed was falsification of a private
616
..
house of his said sister, A saw 1566. A surprised his wife in a room of a hotel with:
,took therefrom a 20-peso man ,while bnth of them were already undre
illy liable? Why? were not yet performing the act of sexual
qimindJy liable, because brothers and sisters when they were thus surprised. Did the married
hers-in-law are a m 2 2 from criminal liability for and the man commit adultery?' Why? Explain 90
ng the crime of theft, swindling or malicious mis-
ief only wh_en..they areE%i&=.
with his sister.
A was not liv- A .
answer
be woman did not commit consummated ad
merely commenc,ed the commisbion of adultery .d'
overt act and did not perform all the,acts of
ook the coconut shell full of 20-centavo coins belong- which would produce it, by reason of a
to his mother, and carried it to a place behind the the timely discovery by the husband o f the
ere A broke it open and took all the contents. her spontaneous desistance. She was liable for
swer.
inally liable in this case? Explain your an-
adultery. ,'
man was also iiable for attempted a
liable, because the crime com-
. Ihe woman was married.
k 2 ' that
theft, the coconut shell contain-
similar t o a l&ed or sealed receptacle. Note: There is n&&~&e,Lad"'k~w, I r e c ~ ?of the
of t!?e felony.
whose marriage is bigamous, in the sense
that she married a man who was already married, be 1567. A, knowing that a married woman and her paramo
.,. . held liable for adultery if she had sexual intercourse would have sexual intercourse in' the conjugal home, ':
stood by the gate of the yard to watch f o r the r e t u r n > $
with another man?
of the husband'and to warn them just in case the hus- :
This question is not yet settled. In the case of U.S.
:. ' vs. &lata, it was held that until the marriage is declared band would. be coming. The married woman and . h e r
to be null and.void by competent authority in a final judg- paramour succeeded in having sexual intercourse. Is A
ment, the offense to the vows taken and the attack on liable for the crime of adultery cummitted by them
the family exists. Explain your answer. ..,wq
.~
But in the cases of People vs. Mendoza and People No, beca,use of Ithe nature of the crime of adu1tery;'j
-Is
vs. bragon, it was held that a subsequent marria% COD- ' yhich is prosecnted and pmniahed upon the complaint'$$
tracted by any person during the lifetime of his first-spouse ' . . the husband against his wife and paramour, and since it'::
". is illegal a n d ,void from its performance, and no judicial myst be understood in the restrictive sense, other person$&
is_&misa% to_e&a~bli@ it is^ ln.va!idity, ' a s distin- c p n o t be included in the complaint./!dy, A parti-;;
guished f rom mere annullable marriages. cipated in the commission of adultery as an
;.. , .' IIence, in the light of these recent decisions, the phrase but legallx.he c&.be p=c&ed as such f o
in the law, "even if the marriage be snbsequently declared of adnltery.
618 619
;
1
\
I,,
621
CRIllfINAL LAW REVIEWER
/ w i t h her at noon time, a
575. The husband, whenever his wife was not in their con- but would always go home in the evening a
jugal dwelling, used to have sexual intercourse with
~ female semant. Is the husband liable ?or concu-
their
- - .~~ / stay Witlt his wife and children until the next
Is A liable for concubinage? Why?
binage? Explain your answer.
No. He is not cable for concubinage, because the
/ No, because he did not cohabit with her. The
"cohabit" means to dwell
..:; >. &id was W t a m m . kept in the conjugal dwelling band and wife, for certain
.I
(People vs. Hilao). It is necessary that the woman is month, a year, or longer. I
taken by the accused into the conjugal dwelling as a . his house with his family, h
concubine (People vs. Eacon) . o@riomag in the. manner-
But if the female servant was under 18 years of age
and she wa~.~-a-&rsin, he would be liable f o r q3!@5! ,= What are the limitations upon the right of the
seduction.
1576. 'A and B, huzjband and wife, respectively, had legal separa-
pmtY t o institute crinlinal pros
of a d u l t e r y d concubinage, e n in the
tion, the husband keeping the conjugal dwelling. He t z h? ; :F& k; the kuilty parties must be
brought into that house a new woman and there they
lived as husband and wife. The neighbors were aware That b o r she has not con- to the offen
of' the illicil: relations between the two, which were the 0' pardoned the offenders.
kbject of xossips and talks in the neigRborhood. Are
._
...LA --._the .... woman liable for concubinage? why? p 3 0 . Does the acquittal of one defendant operate as a
; Yes. Although it may be said that the h>me of A for the a uittal of the other in the crimes of ad
t o be a conjugal dwelling upon his legal =Para- or con&age?
tion from his wife, he is still liable for concubinage, be- -6,
because in adultery the man may not know t&(;<: '.44
cause he had sexual intercourse with the other woman ad is married and in concubinage the woman maX@
that the man is married. There is no ioin%;$,,,&#
.i .I
1581. A .lvoman was sIeepingt When she wolte up, she found:';
a man on top of her with his'priwte part in her private
..j ,- concubinage? Explain your .answer. part. Realizing that it Gas futile to resist and t o scram''' :ti
.~
Yes, because that is k&in-~~~~>~ig the conjugal for help, She consented until the man accomplished hfs
' $1
dwelling and scandalous circumstances are .nataecess=v sexual desire. 1s the man liable for rape? Why? >?*
The home remained the conjugal dwelling. Of A and his YSSs,because when he began inserting his private pa@
i4
wife, even if the latter senarated from him. into the Private part of the woman, s b * u n ~ w & ..:
S&Q%ebaslecp. The crime of rape is consummated from
the nlQInent the private part of the man is in the ]ibis ?:'
622 623
. .,.
*-..:
' tablish the crime of rape?
There is no fixed rule as regards the degree of force
kannot be held liahle for rape, because of the matrimonial
consent which his wife gave when she assumed the mar-
riage relation, and the law mill not permit her to retract
in order to charge her husband with the offense.
But if the husband is a principal by indispensable co-
,
'9
.. or intimidation used in tha commission of rape. It has operation or an accomplice, or a principal by induction,
i-
been held, however, that as long as it was the cause of he may be held liable as such for rape of his own wife, ''
-','
sufficient.
2
the woman's fa' ure to resist the act of the man, i t is
t when the victim is the offender's daugh-
ter, the rl_gree of Eorce-.o.r &timidation used nesLn.ot-be
irresistible in view of the ascendancy and.-aathority that
because the e g e of the husband is a personal .one
and even though in marriage the wife gave Up her body
to her husband she is not by him, to be m d to
Another.
,' d'
F-.~
he exercises over his daughter.
N o t e : But strong evidence m d indications rf preat weicht lf a man raped a wanian and thereafter me&
will alone prove force and violence in rape. Consent and not eliminate a witness against him, must he he pmushed
. . ~.
.: , .,
physical force Is the common origin of acts hetvreen man and
woman
for two crimes or for one crime only? Explain
Whcn the woman i i nnder twelve gears of ape, the sexual He should be punished for one indivisible, special eom- .A:
'jntereourse with her is always raw, even if she is the one ,,.I' plex crime of rape with homicide,
./
who liroposos the sexual intercourse. /'' was committed by reason of the rape
In rape, the r e z - o f the woman is .immaterial.
" 1587. A young lady while sleeping was approached by another
15 When ir. the use of drugs a constitutive element of woman and inserted her finger into her private parts.
rape? When the young lady woke up, the oilier woman laughed
Use of drugs may give rise to rape, if-wmm .k&. at her. hat crime was committed by the other woman?
cLmes p ~ 6 m X T c Z i ibe.&ause_.of the. .drug and wh&e-un- Whf
c&us the ma_n has sexual .intercourse with her. But le other woman committed acts of lasciviousness be-
if the drugs only'\excite-&-liE.. se~ual.i?&si$o there is' .%E cause the offended party was then unconscious, being'
' , rape committed i n having sexual intercourse with her. asleep, when the other woman performed o n , her acta
.
~~
/"of lewdness. .~
1584. For the purpose of the crime o i rape, when is a woman / , *, .i
i
said to he deprived of reason? 1588. A, while passing on the sidewalk, in front of the window'
'.
'./
A woman is deprived of reason at the time of sexual of a house, saw a woman about twenty-five years old,,,
, ..
intercourse, if she is insane or imbecile or sufferiw $TO& , ,.*. ' ' lyhg on the fIoor near the sliding window under the'
illness which diminishes the ex&ss- of h e m p a w e ? window sill. She was reading a magazine then. A G-:
such as feeblexhdedness or mental abnormility or defi- serted his hand into the opening and held the 'p
; ciency. parts of the woman. The woman screamed for -,,
624 626
E.
I
CRIMINAL LAM' REYIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
: ,. I I . and hef companions in the house caught A. What crime.^ Yes, because the boy was under twelve years old and
.: ' ,~: was committed by A? Explain your answer. the woman performed acts of lasciviousness on him. In , .
1 ., , .
It is submitted that A committed acts of lascivioos-
I
I
acts of lasciviousness against the will or without the can- , '
%" sent of the offended party, the victim may be a person, ' ::
..,:,
. , ., ~' ness. Although A did not use force or.intimidation to I
acts of stealthily embracing, kissing and holding the girl's receive, attentions from him. One day, A forcibly em-
. breast constituted acts of -lasciviousness.
- braced'her and kissed her a number of times and took
other unwarkanted liberties with her person. IS A liable '.,
r .
1589. .A, becoming angry with an ugly and dirty woman, for the crime of acts of lasciviousness? E x p l h your
. grabbed her by the neck with his left arm, touched her answer.
' ., breast and private parts in a public place, only to put No, because a ~lv- cfs an-ses.are no
her to shame. A had no desire to satisfy his lust. Is ci~v>nns (US. vs. Gonez).
A liable for acts of lasciviousness? Why?
,: . . \_
Yes, because the motive is immaterial in the
.~ crime
~ ~ . of
.- l$,93. What are the elements of qualified seduction? .
.,*,
acts of lasciviousness. The essence of lewd- &in-& The elements of qualified seduction are: *?
.,q
very act itsalf.
1. That the offended party is virgin which is pre-.?,:
.,
1590. A, who wanted to satisfy his lust, by means of force sumed if she is unmarried and of good reputation;
" ' 2. That she must be over twelve and under eighteen, ,
tried to embrace and kiss a woman but the latter re- ,: , I
sisted and prevented A from touching her breast and 7' ,'..years of age;
' . ' private ,parts and from kissing her. Is A liable for at- 3.. That the offender lias sexual intercourse with her;
' tempted or frustrated acts of lasciviousness? Explain and
gour an!iwer. 4. That there is abuE-ofauLh>rity, c m i c e or&-
It is submitted that it being his intention to perform t i ~ ~ ~ $ hpni pthe part of the offender.
acts of lasciviousness and that he commenced the com-
mission of the crime directly by overt acts b r t he did not 1594,. What makes the crime of qualified seduction?
: perform all the acts of execution. A is liable for attempted In qualified seduction, the acts would not be punishe
,.. acts of lasciviousness. .were it not for the character of the person committi
There i u f3wt-d acts of lasciviousness in view the s e e on account of the excess of power or abuse
con€idence of which the offender availed himself (
,.. .
.., of the nature of the crime.
vs. Arlante).
' 1591. A woman, thirty-five years old, called a bo>, seven years
6595. Who could be the offenders in qualified seduction?
of age, in her r,oom and then and there played with' his
,
,
,.
.
. private parts. The boy enjoyed it. Is the woman liable , Any of the following may be liable for qualified sednc-
- i.
.,d!;. for acts of lasciviousness? Explain your answer. tion :
. , 626 627
,,.:tj ,
~ :
.. .,
8
6
girl under 12 years old.
c . Teacher, and
d. Person who, in any capacity, is entrusted with 1598. The mayor of a town had sexual intercourse with his
"
the education or custody of the woman seduced. secretary, a widow seventeen years old. Is the mayor
1.~ liable for qualified seduction? Why?
6.':
...
a :
2. Those who abused confidence reposed in them:
a. Priest,
b. House-servant, and must be
-
No, because in qualif&L&uction
-- the o f f e u
In this case, the woman is a widow
C. Domestic. and therefore n a o n g e r a yirgin..
,..
3. Those who a+usLdLtheidationship :
.. 1599. One afternoon the teacher and his pupil, a virgin four-
a. Brother who seduccd his sister, and teen years old, were aIone in the classroom, the class
b. Ascendant who seduced his descer.dant.
- having been dismissed already. The teacher kissed and
embraced the girl, touched her private parts and her
1596. The mayor of a town succeeded in having sexual inter- breasts. When he was abaut to lie with her@the parent
course with a girl who was seventeen years of age and of the girl surprised them. The teacher admitted that
a virgin at the time when that girl was asking the mayor he wanted to have sexual intercpurse with her. Is the
to help her secure a job. The mayor did not make any teacher liable for acts of lasciviousness with the consent
promise of marriage as he was a married man. w h a t of the offended 'party or attempted qualified seduction?
crime was committed by the mayor? Explain your answer. Why?
The mayor committed qualified seduction, because he It is submitted that the crime committed was a m t e d
was a peason in P U I ~ Q & Land he had sexual inter- q u a w e d u c t i o n , not acts of lasciviousness with-the con-
course with a virgin
I__.. . undcer-eighteen years..,
over t ~ 9 l v eand sent of the offended party under Art. 339 of the Revised
of age. Penal Code. The crime of acts of lasciviousness .with
the consent of the offended party wouid have been the.!
1597. A girl, eleven years of age, went to the office of the crime committed by the teacher, &aA&~e--bA3&-;'.
justice a'f the peace to find out if her brother would be te&n to-hcvyLsexual interc~oursem1.h .her.
tried in connection with a case pending in the court of
said jusi.ice of the peace. The justice of the peace, with 1600. What crime was committed by a pokeman who pretend-
the consent of the girl, had sexual intercourse with her. ed to be arresting a girl, fifteen years old and a virgin,
What crime was committed by the justice of the peace? for .vagrancy and then the girl was taken t o a certain.
, Explain your answer? house where he had sexual intercourse with the girl witli.'
Although the justice of the peace was a person in her consent?
public authority, since the girl was under twelve years The policeman committed the crime of qualified seduc-
old when he bad sexual intercourse with her, the crime tion
.-L because he is a person in p-uhlicltuthority.
committed was rape. One of the elements of qualified Note.: It would seem that the term "any person in public aui
seduction is that the offended party must be over twelve thority" does not refer only to persons in authority. It includes
and under eighteen years of age.
I - a3spperson e x ~ i ~ g _ p ~ b lauthority,
person iq authority.
ic although as agent of
*'
628
629
CRIMlNAL LAW REVIEWER /' CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
1601. May qualified seduction be committed even if the girl ,'f605. Suppose that she was a widow, what would be the crime
is no lcinger physically virgin? committed by the brother?
Yes, because as long-as she is..unmarried_ and %woman Qualified seduction. In qualified seduction by a n as-
of & a p n t a t b n , she i e c s i d e r e d a virgin. Thus, in cendant or brother, the virginity of the ascendant or sister
the case of US. vs. Casten, the Supreme Court held that ,' seduced is not required.
even if the defendant had prior sexual intercourse with
the girl, since that girl did not have any relation with J1606. What are the etements of simple seduction?
other men but only with the accused, she was swla The elements of simple seduction are:
7 ~ v w n in the ey%.of the law.
1. That the offended party is over twelve and under " '
'_ 1602. A, virgin and seventeen years, old, was living in the eighteen years of age; ., .
..
. . house of B and his wife, C, a first cousin of A. While 2. That she must he of good reputation, singIe or
A was sound asleep in a room adjoining to that of the -
w%w ;
spouses B and C, she was suddenly awakened because B
3 . That the offender ha$ sexual intercourse with her;
-
was on ton of her. For fear o r shame and because C.
and
her consin, had just given birth, A did not scream for
help, so B succeeded in satisfying his carnal desire& 4. That it is e e d by m~ of- %$
Is 13 liable for rape or for qualified seduction. Explain Note: D S usually takes the forni of unfulfilled Dramiee of ,.,~
your answer. mzrage. The promise of marriage must be the =e that :
@ the woman tokgive~.up.herself_ to the man. A promise of ,*
B committed qualified seductta. 'Even though B was marriage after the sexual intercourse cannot be considered. a .' .
,pat clearly o r formally..entnlsted with the c&ody of A, deceit if the man subsequently refused to comply. with his
since she was serving i n the house o f , B and the latter promise. The promise of marriage by a man whom the girl,
took advantage of his authority and abused the confidence h e w to be married cannot be a deceit, because the girl opght
,'
and trust reposed in him as head of the family and master to know that B married man cannot marry'again while '?he
,/ firat marriage is existing.
of the house, B was criminally liable for the crime of
qualified seduction.
1694. May the man who is willing and ready to marry the girl,
,' B is n&l&&lG_fonape. It is true that s e e x i s t e c ? , sixteen years of age, whom he seduced be held liable for
.but her-rssistance was no_t__te.naci:o I
. . struggie did not tax her' powers to i' simple seduction? Explain your answer.
i Yes, because the willingness of the man to marry th
603. What crime was committed by the father who had sexua)
intercourse with his daughter, forty years old and a i' girl may still amount to deceit not by itself .but by th
attending circumstances v m u c h - s , as whe
the man A m that the girl cannot lezally consent to
Qualified seduction, by an ascendant who seduced his marriage, and yet he makes a proniise of marriage to
descendant.
virgi,nity required in simple seduction? Explai
What crime was committed by a brother who had sexual
intercourse with his married sister, knowing her to he swer.
No, because in si_mp!e seduction the offended party ma
be a widgw o x t w e l v e and uwLebghteen-JLears-df
630 631
I i .. ...2 ~ e - F, ’ .
-...I< . ~.
,
I
,,..
,. .
L , &
,:T
a t is the difference between acts of lasciviousness I - of a married woman with her. consent? Explain’
answer. ..,,
against the will or without the consent of the oftended
party znd acts of lasciviousness wiih-&hLcons.ent. of the No, because in acts of lasciviousness with the consent
offended party? of the offended party,’ the offended party is either, (1) a
:> I n acts of lasciviousness against the will or without virgin, (2) F wido=-,.of good reputation, or (3) , a sister
the consent of. the offended party, the c r k e is committed or descendant of the offender.
. .
by the qse offorce.or-intimidation, or when the offended Note: A married voman can be the victim of acts of lasciviom! ,1
@&y is de$:ked-!eason or Qtherwise u e o u s , or ness, if the offender ,uses force or intimidation, or if she was r,
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious when acts Of 18s-
when the offended party is under twelv-e. yeais-efage. / chiousness were performed on her person (Art. 336).
In acts of lasciviousness with the._consent. of the offended ,/
a,., ;.. . ..
--
of either sex; in the other, the v&m is a woman.
In both crimes the offender performed a n a$&h!d,
B in the latter’s house. A rich Chinaman, a good friend
of B, one time paid a visit in the house of B and saw
. ,’ .
-
ness on the person ,of the offended party. the girl. The Chinaman whispered to B that he ma8
632 633
., ..
-?-t." CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
7
d the Chinaman. Is B liable for attempted or con- /"e committed by promoting. or- facilitating-the corzupt& I
. su imated corruption of minor? Explain your answer. of minors of either. mx,_
B in liable for consummated corruption of a minor,
ecause he a t least promoted the corruption of the girl 1617. What is the difference between white slave trade and
slavery?
.i
' ~ '
with abuse of confidence, which the girl gmWd-i=hinl
as head of the family and master of the house. In cor- White.@ve trade is a crime against chastity, coni-
ruption of minors, i t is not necessary that the unzhaste mitted by a person who engaged in the business of, or
acts~shall have beeen & ? ? o r that the woman should have profited by, prostitution or enlisted the services of women
- acceded to the proposal. ,. for the purpose of prostitution (Art. 341, R.P.C.).
ga~.ery is a c i h e against Uxxty, committed 6y a
, /1615. Suppose that A, the girl, was living in the house of B's person who purchased, sold, kidnapped, or detained a hu-
brother and the Chinaman saw that girl and the China man being for thkpurpose of enslaving him (Art. 272;i~, .
man talked to B and the latter induced the girl t o have ..
sexual intercourse with the Chinaman by giving her qh R.P.C.).
'
9
White slave trade may become the crime of slavery$
P100. and the rirl acceuted the money and asreed to
p f the woman to be assigned to some immoral traffic is$
~ ~I
'(
spend the n i g h t w i t h the Chinaman, is B liable for cor-
purchased, sold, kidnapped, or detained (Art. 272, par. 2,
ruption of minor?
No, because it is np_t habitual. for B to promote or
,/ R.P.C.). In such a case, the penalty for slavery is higher.',
fac.ilit,ate the prostitution .or c o r r u p t i o d mi-nors and he / k L What are the elements of forcible abduction?
did not act with abuse of~-authority
..~~. o r abuse~ofc~n&&n?4 The eltments of forcible abduction are:
the girl not liZng with him. ,l', The person abducted is ,~ny&ornaGL reg&&? of
Note: But if the father or the master proposed t o his daughter sier age, civil status, or reputation.
or servant that the latter should satisfy the lust of another,
/
the 6 1- makes him &&bAor corruption of minors / 2. The abduction is against her will.
because there is abuse of authority or _a&Ie_Af_.cmfidence. 3 . With lexd..designsl
A pimp or the owner of th; house of prostitution who
proposes to a minor that she satisfy the lust of another is - -. .was. e-0-mmitted JJy-_.A_.whoF-wi-
What .crime
liable f o r corruption of minor, because there is habituality '4 of two companions, forcibly Lo.ok and carried a marria ''
in, the act.
..
intercourse with the married woman after forcibly ah-
ducting: her, what crime is committed?
Forcible abduction with rape. Rape can be committed
/---itted.
162d. Snppose, in the same question, A did n!&.k?E& the i,,
/
~
against a married woman. girl a t anytime, can he and his Companions be pro-
N o t e : Rape may ahsorb forcible abduction if the main objective secuted criminally? If so, for what crime?
was t o rape the victim (People vs. Toledo, 83 Phil. 777). Y?. They are liable for kidnapoing and serious illegal
detention, bewuse that would become a case of kidnapping
the intention to contract marriage on the part
of thc! person accused of abduction evidence of lewd o z o m a n which was not prove11 to have been corn-
,
'
'
design and when does it negative lewd design? mitted with p i c h a s t e designs. Abduction, being one of
,the ways by which illegal detention can be committed; , '',
The intention to contract marriage may, on certain ,)' especially quaIified by lewd intention, the kidnapping of
occasions, constitute lewd designs in the crime of forcible a woman w&h-altL_unchaste designs must, according t o
,'
or consented abduction, as in the case of a b d g o n of a Via& and to our Penal Code, be considered as illegal
" ' , .*, where the offender that she c m m U x
detention.
g m e m e n t to the marriage. ,,.But whenAhe woman
'.
is of.:gcand, therefore, could give consent to the mar-
riage and there is no legal impediment between her and
,/ le24. What is the
tkk abductor and the abductor did not perform any inde-
u e s s , the intention to marry will negative
_- ,.
of other persons, forcibly took and
carried1 in a jeepney an unmarried woman, thirty years
of age, from the City of Manila to Pasig. R i d . On the
way, l.he man kissed and embraced the woman against
her mill. In Pasig, the man tried to arranze the marriage 1. Rape.
between him and that woman. But because she. refused 2 . Acts of lasciviousness a m - t h e will p or without
.. . to marry him, the solemnizing officer did not perform the
the consent: of the offended party.
marriage ceremony. The woman who was rescued by her
. Qualified seduction of a sister by a brother, or of
;"
relativ,es filed a complaint for forcible abduetion against
the man and his companions. Do you believe that a descendant by an ascendant.
eompla.int for forcible abduction will prosper? Explain 4 . Forcible abduction.
your answer. . .,
1 6. Can there be a complex crime of rape through kidnap-
Yen, because although A had the intention tQ-maKry ping? Explain your ansx'er.
the y m a n - w h o could give her c c n ~ n t -to the marriage
637
636
, ._ ,!:.$
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Suppose that in the same question the original purpose cajolerp- and deceit that they would only
of the accused was to kidnap the woman, but later succeeded in taking a girl who was a
when the woman was already under his control and gin and sixteen years old to a joy ride in his automo-
deprived of her liberty the idea of raping her came to bile as far as Tagaytay City and then returned to
his mind, and then and there raped her, what would Manila. Is A crinu'natty liable for taking the girl?
be the 'crime? Why? No, because there was no Iewd design.
Two distinct crimes of (1) kidnapping and serious il- 1632. A induced l3, a girl sixteen years of age and a virgin,
legal detention and (2) rape. The accused tWL.&f-
to go with ,him to the hotel where they had sexual
ferent
__.___criminaii.nt.ents.
~-- intercourse. There was no promise, of marriage made
@ by A to her before the sexual intercourse. Afterwards,'
What are the elements of consented abduction?" the girl was returned t o 'her home. What crime wm
The dements of consented abduction are: . . committed by A?
1. The offended party must be a &kn. Consented abduction, because according to the decisions
I____
i.
2. She must be oyer tye& and un~dzc&!&een_y_e's of the Court o€ Appeals, citing recent decisions of the
,' . of-age. Supreme Court of Spain, the &king of-a-xirgn, need
3 . The taking-away must be wJ&hsr-c.onsent, &e? not- have. the character of permanency. N o matter how
s o s t a t i o n or c&ry from the offender. short is the taking away, the crime exists.
4. ?'he taking away must be with lewd designs.
1633. Suppose that in the ,same question, A succeeded in having
1629. A, who was the sweetheart of B, a widow 17 years of sexual intercourse with I3 in the hotel, because of promise
age, through cajolery and enticement succeeded in hkiW of marriage, and then refused to fulfill the promise,
' what' is the crime?
her way with lewd designs. Is A liable for consented
abducti,on? Explain your answer. -
It. is still consented abduction, the s$ple seduction
I which is p u n i s h T T w 3 awesto muynr being-ed in
.. No, because i n consented abduction the offended Party
must be a virgin. the crime of consented abduction which is punished with
p&sio% coweecional in its minimum and medium periods.
i
1630. A, who was courting a girl eleven years and six monthtf The crime of consented abduction is committed. when
,/- old and a virgin, after solicitation and cajolery, took
~
the cpnsent of the @ n a n m l e to being t w is
'..
her away to a certain town and in a house there they due to- honey&
-~ promises.of ..maxrJzge of the offender: The
638 639,.
I ,
1
~
public trial (Samalin vs. Court of First Instance, 57 Phil.
evidence of lewd design. 238).
Note: But where u 15-year old girl was induced to leave her
home and later forcibly violated bp the four accused, they are 1636. A girl was raped when she was eleven years old. The
guilty of consented abduction with rape (People vs. Amante, girl refused t o sign and file the complaint against the
49 Phil. F79). The reason for the ruling is probably based -man who raped her. Can her father sign and file the
.. on the fact t h a t consented abduction cannot absorb the serious
offense of rupo.
complaint for rape committed against his daughter?
.. Yes, because the rule now is that when the offended
1
In what crimes against chastity is sexual intercourse party is a minor and she does not file the complaint, this
with the offended party not necessary? may be done by her parents, grandparents or guardian
In the following crimes: in the order named.
1. Acts of lasciviousness, either under Art. 336 or
under Art. 339. 1637. A was the victim of qualified seduction committed by
B against her when she was seventeen years and eleven
2. Forcible abduction.
ntonths old. Three months after the commission of qua-
3 . Consented abduction.
lified seduction, the father of the sir1 took her to the
4. Corruption of minors.
fiscal's office to file the necessary complaint against her
1635. What crimes cannot be prosecuted except upon com- seducer. The girl refused to sign the complaint. c a n
plaint. of the offended party or of her relatives men- the father sign the complaint f o r qualified seduction -to
tioned by the Revised Pcnal Code? State the reason be pled with the court? Explain.
which underlies this requirement. Yes. She did not yet reach her 21 years at which'
be prosecuted upon com- majority begins. Alone, therefore, she was without capa-
city to protect herself (see Tolentino vs. De la Costa, 66
Fhil. 97).
Nota: It is a rule now that if the offended girl is already of
age (21 years), and is in complete possession of her mental
, and physical faculties,no one should dis- her-
duction r e t o avenge the wrong %iiTGTiSiizx&sion. of her usrent%",*
anLotker-_reiatives mentioned .in..tbe law.
r
i639. When
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
pardon'before the filing of the complaint may be a ground But if she has no parent to concur with, her, as, for
/"I
/
for the dismissal of the case. stance, when the u&n&r is her father and her mother
is already dead, s h e m e can pardon the offends.
640. Explain briefly why in the prosecution of the offenders /
for the crimes of adultery and concubinage, both the 1643. May the father done legally pardon the offender who
guilty parties, if they are both aIive, should be in- raped his daughter eleven years old?
cluded, and in case the offended party desires to give No, because the pardon must be &Kan$ed db,&-by
pardon that both offenders have to be pardoned? . ~- -. -.
the offended ~ party, and it is._o-n& when she is &d or
The reason for the requirements is that. in the first otherwise
-. ..~incapac&died to grant it that her parents, grand-
case, the Code recognizes the fact that the %c&j.-mly /parents or guardian may do so for her.
judicially speaking, .&:e the &.diy%.ual.a&in .itself
does no~_co.nstiWe_the.felony: and, in the second -case, / 1644. A, knowing that B, a boarder in her house, was in
' love with her daughter 16 years old, left the house to
the Code :speaks (Spanish text) of pardvn of the adulterous enabl? B t o sedriee her daughter. When A was away.
act itself, which in effect is a pardon that extendsxto~~both B had sexual intercourse with A's daughter. When the
1.
defsndants (People YS. Mendez, et al., C.A.). husband of A learned of the crime committed by B and
of the cooperation &ven t o him by his wife A, the
1641. Art. 344 of the Revised Penal Code provides that the husband filed a complaint against A and B. What is
offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution for i the criminal liability of A?
' adultery and concubinage if he or she shall have con- She is an a c E p l i c e in the crime of qualifiedseduction
sented to the offense. Is there any difference as to ,/ but to be punished as.principa1
\..~.. (Art. Tm.
their effect between prior consent and subsequent con-
I .
sent to the offense? Why? /'UM. What is the civil liability of persons guilty of the crimes
No, because prior consent is as effective as subsequent against chastity?
t,o bar the offended party from prosecuting the Persons guilty of rape, seduction or abduction shall
(People vs. Schnechenburger, et al.). ~
also be sent.enced:
(pardon) whioh bars the __ . ., . tine offended woman.
1. To i&mnify
the offense' is that made
2. To aclmno~~~ledge~th~.of~s~ri-ng,unless the law should
preyent him from so doing.
eleven years old and the victim of rape 3 . In kvery case, to suaport the offspring.
pardon the oifender? Explain yonv .~
The adulterer and the concubine may also be sentenced
t o indemnify for damages caused to the offended spouse.
642 643
I
/
Note: Subsidiary penalty cannot be imposed for non-payment The owner of the house took care of the child. Are
of thc civil liability for moral damages, because they arc not
A and her sister criminalIy liable for abandoning that
imposed by the Revised Penal Codc.
child? Explain your answer.
1647. What are the crimes against the civil status of person? No, There are three provisions of the Revised Penal
Code that may be considered in connection with the ques-
tion.
’?&::&ion o f births, sitbstitution of one child for It cannot be a crime against civil status by conceal-
another, and concealment or abandonment of a legitimate
ment or abandonment of a child, because the child aban-
doned was not legitimate. The child must be l e m a t e ,
c h i l k i i r p a t i o n of civil status. to constitute the crime. It cannot be the crime against
3 . Bigamy. security by abandoning a minor under Art. ,276, because
4 , Mwriage contracted against provisions of laws. the child who was found by the owner of the house was
5. Premature marriages. not deprived of^ the care^ and pyotection. which it needed.
6 . Performance of illegal marriage ceremony. S& is not liable for the crime against security under
Note: Tho crimes from No. 3 to No. G are called illegal mar-
A r d 2 7 7 , because she was the mother of the child. The
riages. person liable for abandonment of minor under Art. 277
~
is one having only charge of the rearing-or education of
8. A, woman without a child, pretended to be pregnant ~\ 1 2 minor.
when in fact she was not, and on the day of the sup- I 16 0. A had six children .with his first wife who died. A
posed delivery, with the consent of A’s husband, took married B, n poor woman. When l3 gave birth to a child,
the child of a poor widow who could not support that C, the sister of A’s first wife, to preserve the property
child, the purpose o f A being to rear the child like her own of the family for her six nephews, caused that child
and for its own benefit as that child would be the uni- to be taken to the door of a convent where the sisters
versal heir of A’s property. Is A liable for simulation found it. What crime was committed by C? Explain
of birth? Why? your answer.
d
644 645
I 1 I
i
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER i CRIMINAL LAW REVIEVER
She committed the qige ,,against-civil-status by_cc,n- tracting the second marriage with C, he is liable f o r
c&ng o r abandoning a,\@ltimate~khiidl because the pur- bigamy, because he contracted that marriage before his
pose of C was t o cause that child to lose its civil statu,% marriage with €3 had been legally dissolved.
If A is prosecuted for bigamy €or having contracted
1651. Why is substitution of oiie child for another made a the subsequent marriage with D+e is not liable, because
crime? -when he mdrried D, his marriage with B had already
Substitution of one child for another is made a crime,
because such act would create a f&c..si.viL.status for one
child and w& cause the loss_.of the civil status of the
other and vice versa.
I been legally dissolved by. the death of B; and his mar-
riage with C, being a bigamous marriage, was non-existent
His marriage with C may be considered the first mar-
riage, for the purpose o f the crime bigamy. But the first
marriage must be valid in order to hold a person liable
1652. IIow is usurpation of civil status committed? . for bigamy for contracting a second or subsequent mar-
*It is committed when a person represents himself to
be another and assumes the filiation, parental or conjugal
rights of the latter.
1653. A, who was courting a girl, told her that he was th 1I /
1656. -riage.
A .was married to .R. One day, A succeeded in per-
suading a minister t o authorize a marriage between
him and C, promising to bring the marriage license the
son of B, a millionaire, which was not true. Is A liable
f o r , uslirpation of civil status? Why? i next day as the treasurer was out of town. The min-
ister performed a marriage ceremony between A and C
646 647
I
1658. May the crime of bigamy be committeu through ne@ 1 It depends. If they knowingly ,and falsely vouched
ligence? Is good faith a defense in bigamy? Explain for the capacity of ei’cher of the contracting parties, they
your answer. are liable as accomplices. If they merely acted as attest-
ing witnesses, they are not liable.
This is not a settled question. The Revised Penal Code
provides that the crime of bigamy is also committed by 1661. May a pekon who contracted a bigamous marriage he
a person who contracted a second marriage “6efore his held liable for bigamy even if he did not have any
absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead by sexual intercourse with the victim in the bigamous mar-
means of a judgment rendered in the proper proceedings.” riage?
In view of this provision, it would seem that the crime
of bigamy cannot be commitred through negligence. Yes ( U S . vs. Eernardo, G. R. 13102, unpublished).
Sexual intercourse is not an element of the offense.
On I-he other hand, under Art. 83 of the new Civil
Code, marriage subsequently contracted during the life- 1662. What are the crimes against honor?
/‘
time of the first spouse is not illegal and void from its Th4y are:
performance (1) when the first spouse had been absent A’. -Libel by means i f writings o r similar means.
for seven consecutive years a t the time of the second
2 . ,Threatening to publish a libel and offer to prevent
marriage without the spouse present having news of the
such publication for a compensation.
absentee being alive, or (2) if the absentee, though he
.3, Prohibited publieation of acts referred to in the
has been absent for less than seven years, is generally
course of official proceedings.
considered as dead and believed to be so by the spouse
present at the time of contracting the subsequent mar- 4. Slander.
riage, or (3) if the absentee is presumed dead according 5 . Slander by deed.
to Arts. 390 and 291 of the new Civil Code. ti, I;icrimiiiating innocent person.
It i;3 submitted that in view of the provisions of Art. 7 . Intriguing against honor..
83 of the new Civil Code, good faith may be a defense I
1663. What crime is c o n d t t e d by a person who ,published
in bigamy. Bigamy may be committed through negligence libelous article against the government which undermines
or imprudence.
, or weakeiis the confidence of the people in the govern-
ment?
1659. Is the person who contracted marriage with another
Seditious libel. This is not an ordinary libel defined
wlio was already married also liable for bigamy?
and penalized uuder crimes against honor. Seditious libel
It depends. If he or she knew that the other ‘was i s one form of inciting to sedition. It is a crime against
alrcady married, then he o r she is iiable as accomplice public order.
in the crime of bigamy. If he or she did not know that
the other was already married, then he or she is not 1664. What imputation may be considered defamatory?
liable. An imputation may be considered d&f&m&ry when it
!’,1 imputes-G-another (1) the qcmgi%ion_oLa_crime, (2) a
‘1660. Are the witnesses to a bigamous marriage criminally 4 vice or defect, whether TealLorimaginary, or (3) any
Q
liable? ag; bmission, condition, status, or circumstance, if any
648 643
I , I
of them ,t.egd~ to cause the dishonor, discredit, or con- Yes, because the sending of that letter to the husband
tegpt-of the offended party. was defamatory of his wife, since the wife was defamed
and tlik 0.ublicity was made^ t o the husband.
~....~.
of the different kinds of imputations
~
660 651
I
motive for making it. 01‘ other official proceedings which are not of confidential
nature, or of any statement, reDort or speech delivered
1674. If a person in publishing a latory imputation against in said proceedings, o r o€ any other act performed by
another has the intention ’ure the reputation of the public officers in the exercise of their functions.
) p latter, can he successfully good intention and justi-
1676. What are the kinds of privileged communication? 1679. It is a rule that if there is no malice in fact on the
Privilege is classified as either ab‘solute or qualified. part of the writer of the privileged communication, he
652 663
l i
is not criminally liable for libel. What is the basis of found guiity of bribery a s charged. Is A liable for
his exemption from liability? libel? Why?
The exemption from liability is predicated upon the Pes, because by g a g the ,pxL@Jeged.communicatian
fact that it is the duty and right of a citizen t o make u ~ ~ e s s a r y . ~ ~ ~the i ~ i t ~ character of the-com-
b lp:ivileged
mimication was.-.desi;r.oyed. Malice in !act having been
a complaint of any misconduct on the part of public offi-
cials, which comes t o his notice, to those charged with shown by the unnecessary~publicity.given by A to his
supervision over them. Such a communication is quali- komplaint against the $seal, he c_annot claim good. inten-
tion and justifiable, motive for publishing it.
fiedly privileged and the author is not liable for libel,
even though the charges contained therein are not sub- But i t has been said that when the accused proves
stantiated upon investigation. his imputation against a public officer, he renders the
public canse a serviee and should be acquitted. In this
But the author becomes liable f o r libel, if the charges case, i t is said that it is immaterial that the offender
were made maliciously and that thcre was no reasonable did n o t act with good motives and justifiable ends.
ground for believing them to be true. /
1682d’A Senator, during a privileged speech in the Senate
1680. Does this rule apply to n conimunicatian involving a mentioned the nanies of certain persons, some were public
person not a public officer? officials and Ihe other private individuals, allegedly in-
Yes, as in the case of a written complaint to the volved in influence peddling to the detriment of public
interest. Suppose, the statements were false and the
ecclesiastical authorities against a priest or pastor for acts
persons mentioned wp?e not really involved in influence
requiring disciplinary action. In the case of U.S. vS.
Caiiete, the Supreme Court mentioned the fact that the
American and British courts have extended the qualified
privilege by analogy to include a case in which a member
of a church makes a complaint against his minister fn
&,I
2,
4
peddli ’g, do you believe that the Senator was liable for
libe .Why?
No, because a Senator or a Congressman enjoys ab-
solute privilege. For any speech or debate in Congress,
tFey cannot be questioned in any other place.
their common ecclesiastical superior.
N o t e : The communication to he privilcsed must be made to the 16S3.,/Are the reporters who published the spseech in the news-
persons who have the power to furnish protection or t o give ! papers liable for libel?
remedy.
Hence, a cammunieotian to the Secretary of Justice, seeking If the matters published are a fair and he-stakmmt
to hnve the improper dismissal by t h o court of a robbery case of the Senator, made iu good faith, w&h:o.uLany-coments
is meaningless, because the Secretary of Justice was not the or. remarks, the reporters, as well as -the editors of the
~
proper authority who could give the remedy. newspapers, are not liable.
16Sl. A w r o t e a letter t o the Secretary of Justice denouncing 1684. /Suppose, the editar of a newspaper published an editorial
a provincial fiscal for alleged bribery, stating therein
that he saw the fiscal receive money from a party in-
terested in a case then under investigation by him. A
I
I
commenting on the statement of the Senator, stating that
those people ought to be hanged, would the editor be
held Iiable? Why?
showed copies of said letter to his friends. After b- Yes, because the editor made a comment or_r_emark
vestigation by the Department of Justice, the fiscal was on the s& of the Senator made in legislative proceed-
654 655
I
interest and the .people are entitled to know the state or 1691. Is there self-defense in defamation?
progress of the proceedings in criminal cases. Yes. While it is trne that in self-defense, retaliation
/
A 89. In a c r i m i i a case where a married woman was accused
-’
659
/
CkIMINAi LAW RZVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
were nj,tr_answers and were absolutely unrelated to 1696. A, a woman murried to D, used to write love letters
A's imputations upon thein. i to B. These letters were stolen by C' from B. Then,
C showed the letters to A, demanding P1,OOO from her
R&M.ioGivindictiveness cannot be_~a..basisof self- and t!ireatening to show them t o her husband D, unless
defense even in defamation (People vs. Rayo, et al.) .
'_ yr:r,I
I
-.
I PI1 ,':. _, , ,://!' .i
' ; L I
she paid the amount. A gave 1*1,000 to C in exchange
'6 1693. What :;e the different means by which libel may be for the letters. What crinie was comniitted by C? EX-
committed? plain your ansyer.
They are by means of (1) writing, (2) printing, (3) C committed the crime of threateningLpublish a libel
lithograph, (4) engraving, (5) radio, (6) phonograph, and offering t o prevent its publicaticn for a compensa-
(7) painting, (8) theatrical exhibition, ( 9 ) cinemato- tion.
graphic exhibition, or (10) any other similar means. 1697. A told B in a room where they were the only persons
1694. A broadcasted defamatory matter by means of the.radio Inside that the latter stole the jewelry of C. What crime
without reading from a script. What crime is com- was committed by A?
mitted? Unjust vexation. It is not slander, because there was
Most courts in the United States held that it is slander. no publicity.
It would be libel if the broadcast. was made by reading 1698. A told C, in the absence of X, a woman, that one time
from written material. she climbed on his back and rested in his arms. Con-
But since the Revised Penal Code mentions radio as sidering that X was not present, was A liable for slan-
one of the means of committing-the crime, there seems der? w h y ?
to be no question that it is ,libelcl Yes, because A imputed to X lack of morality, and
Note: A defamation through amplifier is not libel, but .Wd the fact that X was absent is jmmaterjal. It is sufficient
defam&ion, because it is not similar to radio which i s Of p e p
manent nature as a means of puhlieation. that there was publicity which was mafie when the i m p u b
tion was told t o C .
1695. What is blackmail? What is extortion? Are their
punishable by the Revised Penal Code? 1699. What are the kinds of oral defamation?
I n common parlance, blackmail and extortion They are: (1) grave oral defamation, which is of a
synonymous, although the latter term may have the serious and insulting nature; and ( 2 ) simple slander.
signification. Blackmail, in its metaphorical sense, i s
1700. What is the difference between the two kinds of oral
unlawful extortion of money by an appeal to the fears defamation?
of the victim, especially extortion of momv by ihreats of
Words of a similar tenor uttered under analogous cir-
accusation or exposure. Extortion is committed by ob- 1 cumstwces may constitute either (1) grave oral defama-
taining property from another without his consent, induced
by wc,ngful u s $ . o f f e a r (U.S. vs. Eguia, et al.). tion or (2) simple slander, depending on the intention
They are punished by the Revised Penal Code as lght OP the offender and the circumstances under which they
thce.at.;, a crime against security, and as threatening. to
/
are uttered.
publish a libel and offering t o prevent its publication f o r Thus, the imputation of unchastity to a woman which
'. ordinarily is a grave oral defamation may be considered
compensation, a crime against honor.
660 661
I 1 I
''.
simple slander when the intention of the offender is to Slander by deed is a felony against honor, committed
correct an improper conduct of tine woman. So, also, an by any person who shall perform any act not inclxded
" ""
.
I
~f.:? imputation involving the honesty and integrity of a per- and punished as libel or oral defamation, but which &a!
??) son is ordinarily grave oral defamation, hut when uttered cast dishonor, discredit, or contempt on another person
during election time i t is considered as simple slander, (Art. 359, R.P.C.).
. because it was uttered during the period of excitement Slazder by deed is of two kinds, namely:~(1) slander
' when feelings were running high. An imp2tation which by deed where the act is not of a serious nature, which
i: . is highly defamatory, if made in the heat o l anger, may is called simple slander by deed; and (2) serious slande?
,. .
.. be considwed as simple slander. by deed, where the act performed by the offender is of
a serious nature.
1701. If the defamatory imputation is directed against t,wo or
more persons, is there only one crime of libel or slander 1703. What is the criterion for determining whether slander
or as many crimes a s there are persons defamed? by deed .is of. a seri~ousnature?
,. . In the case of People vs. Del Rosario, et al., i t was Whether a certain act constitutes slander by deed of
held that for each person libelled, there must be one in- a serious natnre or not, depends on (1) the social stand-
formation, even if the several persons libelled are men- ing of the o€fended party, (2) the circumstances under
tioned in one article. The decision in this case is pre- which tine act was performed, and (3) the occasion, etc.
dicated on the theory that in libel or defamation the Thus, slapping a priest while saying mass in the church
policy of the law is to redress the injury to the individual I
is a serious slander by deed, because there certainly could
rather than the injury t o the peace and good order of
society. However, in the case of People vs. Aquino, the Iiave been no other circumstance under which greater dis-
honor, discredit and contempt could be cast upon him
Supreme Court abandoned the theory of redress to the
before the faitnfuls over whom he held so high a dignity.
injury to the individual and indicated the rule a t com-
In'such a case, the defendant may also be prosecuted
mon law, according to which "a libel on two or more pcr-
for the crime of o€fending the religions feeling.
sons contained in one writing and published by a single
act constitutes but one offense, so as to warrant a single But slapping a prostitute in the presence of another
I indictment therefor," This rule is based on the reason prostitute is simple slander by deed.
that the law makes the publication of libel puiiishable
as a crime, not because of injnry to the reputation but 1704. If a big and husky fellow in a public place assaulted
because the publication of such articles tends to affect a person who could not fight him because of his small
/ size and weak physical eonstitutiou, i s the offender liable
injurious the peace and good order of society.
This is the reason why in the case of People vs. Aqulno, for slander by deed, assuming that 110 physical injuries
it was held that if the utterance was made but once against . were inflicted?
a family of lawyers designated by their one surname, not It depends upon the purpose of the of€ender. If his
separately mentioned, there is only one offense. purpose in attacking the offended party was to place him
in ridicule or to cast discredit or cuntempt upon him,
,'1702.What is; slander by deed and what are the two k* ,,, then it is slander by deed. However, if the offender had
i... no such intention, because he was only. provoked to a$-
of slander by deed? i ~ ~ f '
&I.: 6
662 663
I
I
i
!I
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER i( CRl;\IINAL LAW Rl3V’IEWEIt
‘ d
sault the offended party, it might constitute ill-treatment 1708. State the venue of aetion, whether criminal or civil,
only, if n,o physical injuries were inflicted. for libel. -.
,. ,
Note: .A party to an agreement to marry who backs out, after The criminal o r civil action for damages in ‘eiise of
the agreement NBS made known to the public, cannot be held libel shall he filed with the court of first instance of the
liable f o r the crime of slander by deed, for, otherwise, that province o r city (1) where the libelous article is printed
would be an indirect way of compelling said party to go into
a marriage without his or her free consent, and this mould and first published; or (2) where any of the offended
contravene the principle in law that what could not be done parties actually resides at the time of the commission of
directly can not be done indirectly; and said party has the the offense. Where one of the offended parties is a public
right to avoid the evil of going through 8 loveless marriage, officer and the other a Drivate individual the action may
pursuant t o Article 11, par. 4, a i the Revised Penal Code be filed with the court of first instance of the province
(People vs. Hernandez, 66 O.G. 8465).
or city where the public officer held office, or where
the private individual actually resides, at the time of the
1705. When is kissing a girl and touching her breast in public
slander 6,y deed and not acts of lnsciuiousness? commission of tbe offense. -
When the acts were performed without lewd designs 1709. May the offaided party file a civil actEon for libel in one
by a rejected suitor t o east dishonor on-thegirl (People court and a criminal action for libel based on t h e same
vs. Valencia, C.A.). publicntion in anotber court? .
No, becaus? the court where the criminal action or
1706. Who are liable for libel? civil action €or damages is first filed shall acquire jurib-
The following are liable for libel: (1) any person who diction to the exclusion of other courts.
shall publish, exhibit or cause the publication or exhibition
of any defamation in writing or by similar means, (2) the A wrote and published a statement that B is a b a s h d l
author or (3) editor of a book or pamphlet o r (4) the If .B shall have decided to hring a criminal action against
editor or publishing manager of a daily newspaper, maga- A, must the prosecution be conmenced by filing’an in-
zine o r serial publication (Art. 360, pars. 1 and 2, R.P.C.), farmation or by filing a cmiplairrt?
and (5.) any other person or persons who have something It should be by information filed by the fiscal, be-
to do wiYh the publication or exhibition of a libelous matter. cause the imputation does not involve the commission of
a crime vhich cannot be prosecuted de ofin’o. There is
1707. A received a letter from B, a woman and A’s sweet- a ease where the Court. of Appeals held that a n imputatiou
heart. C happened to get hold of the Better of B and
which does not constitute a crime, like the imputation
as it contained a statement of their meeting in a hotel, that the offended party in a bastard, shall be prosecuted
C showed it to D. Is C liable for libel? Why?
upon complaint signed by the oflended .party. With due
Yes, because the person liable for libel is the 0- .respect, I submit that there is no legal basis f o r the
puhlkhe~d,exhibited or caused the publication or exhibition ruiing.
of defamation jn..writing or by similar..means. It will Nota: In the case of People vs. Santos, et al., 52 O.G. 205,
be noted that although somebody else composed the libel- it was held that a libel attribntine a defect or vice, real or
ous letter, and the one who published it had nothing to !d imaginary,.which does n o t constitute a crime but brings into
do with the making of the same, the mere act of publish- /I disrepute, scorn, o r ridicule or tcnds to cause the offended.
-
.>
ing that. letter constitutes the crime of libel. 1 party dishonor, discredit, or contempt, does not come under
,e..
664 665
I : I
J
CRIMINAL LAFV REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
'_ .. ;the last paragraph of A d . 360 and the information filed by was not considered. It was a private communication made
the fiseiil is enough to confer jurisdiction upon tho court.
by one person to another.
'. i
1711. %,,Asaid publicly that B wcls in possession of a firearm In view of this decision it wouId seem that if there
without License. If B filed a criminal action against is good motive and justifiahle end, proof of the truth is
"'
A for defamation, may A prove the truth that B was not absolntely necessary and, therefore, the same may
in possession of firearm without license? Explain your be dispensed with.
. - answer.
1714. In what cases is proof of the truth admissible in the
Yes, because proof of the truth of an imputation of trial of x case involving defamation?
. . an act or omission constituting 'a crime may be admitted,
In the following cases:
, ' , a s the State is interested to know the commission of the
,crime to the end that the guilty party may be punished. 1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a
, , .
crime, regardless of whether the offended party is a private
1712. A s i d in the presence of other persons that B is syphili- individual or a puhlic officer.. . . .
. . , tic.
If B has decided to file a criminal action for .&fams 2 . When the offended paaty is a government employee
tion against A, may the latter prove the truth that B even i f the act or omission imputed does not constitute
' mas syphilitic? Why? a crime, provided it is related to the discharge of his
No, because proof of the truth of an&putation not official duties.
I. z-0c a crrme shall nXbFadmitted. The State is Note: Thus, if A published an article that the treasurer of
not intermted to know that B is syphilitic. a city frequented the Jai-Alai and horse races, in violation of
a regulation prohibiting amountable pnblic officers from gohg
t o those places, if the treasurer filed a complaint against A
1713. Suppose that A told his sister that B, who was courting f o r liSel, A can prove the truth of the imputation, because both
. her, was suffeking from gomrrhea and B filed a eom- public interest and the good of the service demand that such
plaint egoinst A for defamation, can the latter pirove a puhlic officer should be barred from the service.
the truth of his imputation if it was made by A with \
. . g o d motlva and for justifiable ends? Explain your 1715. In or& to discomage A, who was engaged to marry
answer. B, the accused wrote a letter to A in which, referring
to B, he said: "We have always considered each other
, Under the law, if the defendant proved the truth of a s wife and husband for five yeais now. Can she still
the imputation and, moreover, that it was published with have the pride t o marry another man? She is my wife
good motives and for justifiable ends, the defendant shall when she is near me but 'yours when she is near you."
be acquitted. When accused of libel for writing the above letter, the
. However, in the case of People vs. Chaves, the Court . accused testified that he wanted t o break-off the engage-
of Appeal!; held that an imputation that a person has a ment of A t o B s o that he could marry lier for himseIf,
contagious disease might, under ordinary circumstances. and contended that he should be freed from criminal
be defamatory, but loses such character when. made with liabiiity having been actuated by good intentions and
good inrention and justifiable motive. In this case, the justifiable motives. Is this contention tenable?
truth of the imputation that the husband was suffering No, because &&m&e&in$ntations impired by.&&
, . from gonm-rhea with which his wife was contaminated, seeking. motives ar,e..ineompatible with gs.&intmEons.
GGC; 667
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
J
1721. A , v the commission of murder by B. After the
commission of the crime, B left the place and proeeed-
ed to a ditch where he threw the murder weapon. A,
who saw J3 when he threw the murder weapon into the
ditch, hid himself behind a tree until B went away, and
immediately thereafter took the weapon from the ditch
and after sometime buried the said weapon under the
house of B. A reported to the police the fact that the
murder weapnn could be found under the house of B.’.
Is A liable for incriminating B by burying the murder
669
I
weapon under the house of B and reporting it to the whispered to B that C was the concubine of D. What
police? Why? crime was committed by 4, intriguing against honor or
slander? Explain your answer.
No, because B was not an innocent person. What
363 considers as a felony is the doing of a n ~ ~ a s
The crime of slander was committed by A. It is not
which directly imiminates or imputes to an ,&noceniL intriguing against honor, because A did not use means
which consists in some tricky and secret plot. He availed
pgson the cozimission of a xrime.
directly of spoken words to ridicule C. Intriguing against
act of falsely and maliciously charging a person honor is almost akin to slander by deed, in that the of-
in the justice of the peace conrt with a crime of theft fender, does not avail directly of written or spoken words,
/constitu,te the crinie of incriminating innocent persun? pietureg or caricatures to ridicule his victim.
/
Why?
are qwdsi offenses?
No, because the crime of incriminating innocent per-
son is li.mited to planting evidence and the like. Quasi offenses are those felonies committed t h o u g h
3.J imprudence and negligence. :;I
1723. What crime was committed hy a person who f d s e b
I . accused another of the commission of a crime? 1727. What are the quasi offenses penalized by the Revised
Penal Code?
- If the false accusation was made under &h before
a competent officer authorized to receive and administer They are:
oath, the crime was W r ; , If it was not under oath 1. By committing through reckless imprudence any act
. .and the purpose was to e&dishonor, discredit -on, or which, had i t been intentional, would constitute a grave
contempt of, the offended party, it is e i h d i b e l 01 or 1css grave felony or light felony.
sla-nder, depending upon whether it is in writing o r orally 2. By committing through simple imprudence or neg-
made. ligence an act which would otherwise constitute a grave
Note: It is necessary in lihel or slander that the offender has or less serious felony.
i,
the intention to injure the reputation of the offended party. 3 . By causing damage t o the property of another
Thus, it was held that if the matter, charged as libelous, is
only an incident in an act which has another objective, Sueh through reckless imprudence or simple imprudence or neg-
8s t o prosecute the 0ffende.d party, the crime is not lihel. ~ ligence.
' 4 . By causing through simple imprudence or negligence
1 1724. What is the difference between intriguing against honor some wrong which, if done maliciously, would have eon-
and orcdinary defamation? stitnted a light felony. ' ' .-I
670 671
I ; I
I
i
Where the death of the victim was entirely due to his own
A person who failed to pay proper attention to fore- fault in siddenly darting across the road as the truck, which
see the consequence is negligent. He may have foreseen was “going slowly,” came abreast of him, something which
/’
the consequence, but if he did not take the necessary pre- the accused, as driver of the truck, did not reasonably fore-
caution to avoid it once it is foreseen, he is imprudent. see or could not have reasonably foressen, the accused i s neithw
guilty of homicide through simple negligence nor of civil negli- ’
1729.
,-,. What is reckless imprudence? ence or quasi-delict (Feople v.q. Calbefigan, C.A., 69 O.G. 3792-
3793, citing U.S. vs. Knight, 26 Phil., 224; and US. vs. Tayong-
Reckless imprudence consists in vdg&ily, b u t - tong, 2 1 Phil., 4161..
. , ,~ out_malice, doing or failing to do an act, from which
.///
material damage results, by reason of inexcusable lack 1y2. If a driver of an automobile, which was following another
of precaution on the part of the person performing or vehicle, overtook it and took the left side of the road
failing t,o perform such act, taking into ccnsideration his although he saw a rig coming from the apposite direc-
employment or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical tion and thereby colliding with and destroying the rig,
condition and other circumstances regarding persons, t i e is the drivex guilty of damage to property through reck-
and place. less imprudence or through simple imprudence? Why?
,1730. What is simple imprudence? The driver is guilty of damage to property through . .
recklefis imprudence, becanse the damage impending to be
Simple imprudence consjsts in the 15ck of precaution cause$mas immediate and the danger was clearly manifest.
displayed in those cases in which the damage impending
/i
to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly hat is the fiature of the penalty provided for damage
1733.
manif est,. .// to property through reckless imprudence or simple im-
1731. What is the difference between reckless imprudence and prudence cr negligence?
simple imprudence? When the reckless imprudence o r simple imprudence
In both, there is lack of precaution on the part of the or negligence resulted in damage t o property of another,
offender. While in reckless imprudence the damage im- the penalty is only a fine, not imprisonment, ranging from
pending to be caused is immediate and the danger is an amount equal t o the value of said damage to three times
clearly manifest, in simple imprudence the damage im- such value, but shall not be less than twenty-five pesos.
pending to be caused is not immediate and the danger When death and physjcal injiiries are caused, the penalty
1
is not clearly manifest. is imprisonment.
Note: Negligence or quasi-delict in the civil law, which is the Note: Penalts is fine, when arson through reckless imprudence
omission to exercise the diligence of a good father of a f a d 7 , resulted only in damage t o property.
which ia required by the naturc of the obligation and corresponds
The first garagraph of Art. 365, pursuant to which “any
with the circumstances of the persons, of the time, and of the
place, is 2es8 than criminal negligenee. Criminal negligence, person who, by reckless imprudence shall commit any act which,
besides being a violation of a civil right, also affects the public had it been intentional, would have constituted a less grave
felony,” Bhali suffer the penalty of “awesto mayor i n its mini-
order and the public safety. The so-called simple negligence
in the Bevised Penal Code, being criminal negligence, is more mum and medium periods,” merely eslnblishes a general rule.
than civil negligence, a quasi-delict. Where there is no simple The same is subject to the exception found in the third para-
negligenee in the criminal law, there may be a quasi-delict i n graph Of the same article, namely, when the execution of Said
.. act “shall have only resulted in damage t o the property of.
the civil law. But where there is no quasi-delict in the civil
law, there can be no simple negligence in the criminal law. another, the offender shall be punished by a fine ranging from
672 673
I. 1
., t
/' ,*-,~*
..,. . .
_I.^-
_~...,.
.
'
'
CkIMlNAL LAW REVIEWER
,. .
~
"+
z.:- . e n i t y , t o avoid the injury or damage caused h&he
:-
"
consent of the defendant, and who was crashed 'againd:i
been suff W t k c a r e f u l and_c a u t i ~ u s ,the negligence of the concrete post of the hospital gate when the yehic
y.':;.,. t h e injured party will not relieve him of criminal respon- passed through it, the Court of Appeals held that n
sibility.
can be punished for not taking precaution to prev
G -What is the meaning of the w g % & $ i t h 'ref- 'juries to persons who .act at his back.
vp+3
erence
,: . '
to crime through negligence?
What is the classification of election offenses?
, The rule states: "An automobile driver who, by the
,..
n/.-,.. negligence of another and not by his o y negligence, is ' Violation of any of the provisions of the Revised E l
:*.. .." suddenly placed in a n emergency and compelled to act in- tion Code i3 either (1) serious election .offense, or (2).re
.{,: '.
, ,stantly to avoid a collision op injury, is not guilty of negli-
-07-
&. gence if he makes such a choice, which a person of ordinary
3o .i:.:~ prudence placed in such a position might make, even though
~
..
$i&:-xnhe. did not make the wisest choice." .- . ..
.. .,
674
. .
, ,..
1 . 1,,, . ,,
, -
4 , ..
, ,. .
... ,
... . CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
,: .1 The principals, accomplices, and accessories shall be The rules relat,ive to the repeal of penal laws are:
criminally responsible for election offenses and for attempt
t o commit the same.
fendes in whole or in part: of the penalty a h
1740.. What are the penalties for election offenses?
The penalty for serious election offenses is imprison-
' I
ment of not less than one year and one day but not more (US. vs. Soiiman, 36 Phil. 5).
, . ','.::&han five years. The penalty for less serious election
* , ' . .offenses is imprisonment of not less than six months but 2 . The general rule is that the repeal of a penal-law
does not obliterate criminal liability, but when.the reB@
not more than one year. In both cases, the guilty party is absolute, and not a reenactment or n o t a repeal by S-.
,shall be further sentenced to suffer disqualification to hold pliq.ntion, ?LOT is there aby saving clause, the offense-ceases
,a public office and deprivdion of the right of suffrage to be criminal (People vs. Tamayo,, 61 Phil. 2551: ' , ,
: . .~ for not less than one year but r o t more than nine years. 3. Where the repealing law who
. If he were a foreigner, he shall, in addition, be sentenced
to deportat,ion for not less than five years but not more the acts which constituted the offense defi
c a n ten years which shall be enforced after the prison
term has been served. If an entity is found guilty of
election offenses, it shall be sentenced to pay a fine of k n e e persons charged with violations of the old law
not less than F5,000, but not more than FlO0,JOO. to the repeal (People vs. Sindiong & P a
Phil. 1000).
ll,4l.:Who can make preliminary investigation of violation of
:" the provisions of the Revised Election Code? 1744. What are the different effects of repeal of Wnai law?.&
The Court of First Instance has the exclusive original The ifferent.effects of the repeal of penal l a w ~ a r e : :,
'
jurisdiction t o make preliminary investigation of viola- A t h e repeal makes the penalty lighter in the new "
I' tion of the provisions of the Revised Election Code. law, the p.ew law shall be applied, except when the f-
...
. . ..%, . Note: The other offense is violation of the Anti-Subversion A d . . ' fender is a habitual delinquent or when the new law is
The Court of First Instance has the exclusive original juris- made not applicab!e to pending action or existing causes
, ,: . diction to make p?eliminary investigation when the penalty for of a c t i o d .,<
the violation of the Anti-Subversion Act is from prisiOn mayor
, J:+
to death. /If the new law imposes a heavier penalty, the law'
in fosce at the time of the commission of the offense shall
the prescriptive period of election offenses?
on offenses shall prescribe after two years from
be appli (r' . a;?
&;he new law totally repeals the existing law so
of their commission, b u t if the discovery of such that the act which was penalized under the old law is no' ,'
' '
offenses be made in election contest proceedings, the period
' longer punishable, the crime is obliterated.
~
676 677
i
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Definitions
.
No person should be brought within the terms of c r h - :>y
_T
, : , :‘text. In ease of a conflict between the Spanish text and Law Dictionary, Rawle’s Third Revision4 VOI..;~
.’. ?* *the English text of a particular provision of the Revised
-& !
I
.’.* . ~,,
,:.: .; .
The Spanish text i s controlling, because the Revised Criminal 12w is that branch or division of lam which i?;
.’ .--
.,/ Penal Code was approved by the Philippine Legislature
. ,. defines crimes, treats of their n z h r e , and provides for,
+
b. +in its Saanish text.
-T ~ ~~
their punishment (12 Cyc. 129). . I
, .
..,:.’ : The clause, “sufVieddo privaeion de libertad,” was
- ’ > -,:erroneousl:i
I
’.prisonment,” in Art. 157 of the Revised Penal Code. This is a maxim, which means that there is no
Considering that the Spanish text is controlling, the Su- where there is no law punishing the act. , i
the sentence, even if the pen.alty is destierro, because 4. “Actus non facit reum nisi k e n s s a a ” .
there is deprivation of liberfy in that penalty, though This is a maxim, which means that the a c t does.,
,partial, as the convict is not free to enter the prohibited the person a criminal unless his mind b e ’ c
/ . ,,
area.
. . What is ‘wo” or IS"?-'
..
H
It is 3 misapprehension of fact on the part of-t$&$c,$&?$
owing lack of intent or malice i n the doing ofthe:zact-.:~,
,,,
678
,, ..%
I
'/-L
aused, indemnification of consequential damages and, f
penalized by the Penal Code.
a t the rate of one day for each 2 pesos and 60 centa
Special law is a statute enacted by the Legislative subject to the rules provided by law.
branch, penal in character, which is not an amendment I
to the Revised Penal Code. r: . 16. Plurality
' .-fo
, .
. .
Imputability, defined. ?€%urality of crimes consists in the successive
1 by..,the same individual of different criminal
uality by which a n act may be y of which no conviction has yet been declar
its author or owner. It implies 'I
, ,&
..
I
.
. .
I:
/ ~,
]i:
responsibility, for a man cannot
e consequences of a crime unless
he is guilty of it (Albert).
,I'; from one criminal resolution.
:;q
I Error ,in personae is mistake in the identity o
/'
,i
cessory penalties, defined. victim.
-
Principal penalties those expressly 'imposed by the Praetor htentimem means that the injurious rem
court in the judgment of conviction. greater than that intended.
Accessory penalties -those that are deemed included in
imposition of the principal penalties. 0. Proximate cause, defined. -//
Proximate cause is "that cause, which, in natural
15. Subsidiary penalty, defined. continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient inte$?e$
680 I 681
0
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIhIINAL LAW REVIEWER
Definitions Definition8
g cause, produces the injury, and without which the re- Parole consists i n the suspension of the sentenc
u l t would not have occurred.” a convict after serving the minimum term of the inde
.minate
. Com~pl~expenalty, defined.
penalty, without granting a pardon, prescribin
the terms upon which the sentence shall be suspende
I t is a penalty prescribkd by law cornpixid of three If the convict fails to ohserve the conditions ,of
’. distinct penalties, each forming a period; the lightest pf parole, the Board of Pardons and Parole is authorize
them shall be the minimum, the next the medium, and tg direct his arrest and return t o custody and thereafter
the most severe the maximum period. to carry out his sentence without deduction of the time
a t has elapsed between the date of the parole and the;
Amnesty, defined.
It is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion .~
I ,.: ,.
’
I or a general pardon for a past offense, a d is rarely, if ined. , , ’~,.
.(
ever, exercised in favor of single individual, and is usually A prejudicial question is. one that may arise in a ci$:
: exerted in behalf of certain classes of persons, who are
. .. . or administrative case wherein it must first be settled
”
subject to trial but have not yet been convicted. before a criminal case in which it is involved can be tried.
-Pardo.n; defined. It is based on a fact distinct and separate from the
,’ , / crime lout so intimately connected with it that it deter- ‘9
It is an act of grace proceeding from the power en..
~
682 683
.7‘
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWFA CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Definitions Definitions I .
;. ‘,..5
.’$
policy or interest (Cramer vs. U.S., 65 S. Ct. 918, April d the means taken in prosecuting it, are legally j u s t
23, 1945). proper (U.S. vs. Addison, 28 Phil. 580). t4’.’,
.T
(I.
37. “ T u m u l t u o u s ” , ~ i ~ d .
31. Aid and comfort, defined.
The disturbance shall be deemed tumultuous if caused
, .. The phrase “aid or comfort’’ means an act which
1
by more than three persons who are armed or provided
’ . strengthens or tends to strengthen the enemy in the con-
. / with
. means of violence. ,~
?
A nation or power which takes no part i n a contest
of arms 5:oing on between others is referred to as neutral k,’1-A “RiQe$. defined.
riot is a violent confusion in a crowd.
1 ,
.. (Burril, L.D.).
33. “High seas”, defined. $I. :Charivari”, defined.
,, , It means any waters on the sea coast which are with-
3 The term “charivari” includes a medley of discordant+--. ?.’
’voices, a mock serenade of discordant noises made on kettles,. ,;;
,
out the boundaries of low-water mark, although such waters
may be in the jurisdictional limits of a foreign govern-
ment (48 $:J. 1207; footnote 13-a).
i tin, horns, etc., designed t o annoy and insult.
41. Counterfeiting, defined.
4%
7. , .
A service mark is a mark used in the sale o r adver- 52. “Narcotic drug”, defined.
tising of services to identify the services of one person
and distinguish them from the services of others, and in- By narcotic drug is meant a drug that produces a condi-
cludes without limitation the marks, names, symbols, titles, tion of insensibility and melanchoIy dullness of mind with ,
designations, slogans, character names, and distinctive delusions and may be habit forming.
features of radio or other advertising (Art. 188, 3rd par.,
53. Gambling, defined.
subaivision 4).
It is a game or scheme, the result of which depends:;$+
48.Yhfair competition, defined wholly or chiefly npon chance or hazard. .i:
contrary to good faith by which any person shall pass off 54. Lottery, defined.
the goods manuf&ctured by him or in which he deals, or It i s a scheme for the distribution of, prizes by c k e e .’
his business, or services for those of the one havjng estab- among persons who have paid, or a s e e d to pay, a valu-gi:
,.
lished goodwill, or committing any acts calculated to pro.
~
I~~
~.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW.ER
CRININAL LAW REVIEWER
Definitions Definitions
./
, .
the foetus in the uterus, or the violent expulsion of the
defided.
foetus from the maternal womb which results in tlie death
, . of the foetus. It is a clause in the indictment or other
j,
.> .,
.:
..
62. Duel, defined.
If.is a formal or regular combat previously concerted
. ~, taining an averment
ing word o r statem
is explanatory of
t is the office of
to define the defamatory meaning which the p
on the words, to show how they cam to have th
. between two&rties in the presence of two or more seconds
of lawful age o side, who make the selection of arms
4
ing, and also to show how they peato to the p
(Bouvier’s Val. 1, 3048).
fix all tlie conditions of the fight.
E89
688 . .‘i
I
;. , voluntariness is general intent: whereas, in some partic- i defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code. &e
of of particular or specific intent is re- I term mala piohibita refers generally to acts made criminal
certain crimes against property, there
t to gain (Art. 293 -robbery; Art. 308 - /by special laws. .~
i
.
kill is essential in frustrated o r a t Intent, distinguished from motive. "
(Art. 249). In forcible abduction (Art.
1 Motive is the moving power w!iich impels one to
intent of lewd designs must be proved.
I for a definite result. Intent is the purpose to use B
ntent to commit the crime and intent to penpetrate the ular means to effect such result.
act, distinguished.
!
/Attempted or frustrated felony, distinguished front:
A person may not have consciously intended to commit
crime; but he did intend to commit an act, and that act
is, by the very'nature of things, the crime itself (U.S.
vs. Go Chiso, 14 Phil. 128).
j, ' .
possible rime.
(8' In both, the evil intent of the offender is not
c.omplished.
In the first (intent to commit the crime), there must (,&)<But while in impossible crime, the evil inte
be criminal intent; in the second (intent to perpetrate ,! the offender cannot be accomplished, in attempted or
i
''
' ' the act), it is enough that the prohibited act is done ,freely trated felony the evil intent of' the offender is pos
of aceompiishment.
i ( y f r n impossible crime, the evil intent of the 'offen , ,
. Mala in se and nmla prohibita, distinguished. ' ! cannot be accomplished because it is jnherently impossibf; .,.,
, There is a distinction between crimes which are mala of accomplishment or that the means empl
ul from their nature, such as theft; rape, offender is inadequate or ineffectual; in a
-homicide, etc., and those that are mala prohibita, or' wrong frustrated felony, what prevented its accom
I merely because prohibited by statute, such .as illegal pos- the intervention of certain cause 'or accident in
session of firearm. . the oflender had no part.
Crimes mala in se are those so serious in their effects
on society as to call for the almost unannnous condemna- 8. Frustrated felony, distinguislie,d from attempted felon$ ,"
tion of its members; while crimes mala prohibita are vio- (1) I n both, the offender has not accomplished hie
lations of mere rules of convenience designed t o secure a crimina? purpose.
more orderly regulation of the affairs of society (Bowlers ( 2 ) While in frnstrated felony, the offender has peri
Law Dictionary, Xawles 3rd Revised). r
formed all the acts of execution which should produceit&$
(1) In ac$,~.inala in se, the intent governs; but in felony as a consequence, in attempted felony the offen@
those mala pdiiibita, the only inquiry is, has the law been merely cuniniences the commission of a felony directly .b$
overt acts and does not perform all the acts of .:execuY
, I ,
691
F 9
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
, ,
Distinctions Distinctions
, . .. .
-'.7. Distinguhh frustrated felony from consummated felony. While the imbecile is exempt in all cases from criminal, .
,
,^ .- liability, the insane is not so exempt if it can be ahox$?. ...;
I+,'
,.,~ In both stages of execution, the offender performs all
that he acted during a lucid interval. ' .-
,., ,(
. . the acts of execution.
<:.., :i: But while in consummated felony the fdony is pro-
. ,.,. 11. Entrapment and instigation, distinguished.
... .
. ,,,
duced, in frustrated felony the felony is cot produced. There is a wide difference between entrapment and
"
In ,,consurnmated felony, all the elements necessary for its instigation, for while in the latter case the instigator prac- , ;
. execution and accomplishment are present; in frustrated tically induces the would-be accused into the commission 5
i felony, not all the elements of the felony are present. of the offense and himself becomes a'colprincipal, in e&
trapment ways and means are resorted t o for the purpose
8. Distinguish conspiracy as a felony irom conspiracy as a of trapping and capturing the law-breakers in the exeeu-
manner of incurring criminal liability. tion of his criminal plan. Entrapment is no bar t o the
In both, two or more persons come t o an agreement prosecution and conviction of' the lawbreaker. But- when
concerning the commission of a felony and decide to com- I there is instigation, the accused must be acquitted (People
mit it. Hence, the definition of conspiracy in Article 8 \
vs. Galicia, 40 O.G. 4476).
applies to both.
i 12. Distinction between justifying and exempting cireum-'
When the conspiracy relates to crimes other than treason, stances. . " .~.
,
rebellion or sedition, it is not a felony but only a manner (1) A person who acts by virtue of a justifying eir-
of incurring criminal liability. When the felony is com- 1 , cnmstance does not transgress the law, that is, he does
mitted after the conspiracy, the act of one offender is the not commit any crime in the eyes of the law, because
act of all the other offenders. there is nothing unlawful in the act or conduct of the
Even if the conspiracy relates t o the crime of treason, . actor. The act of such pei'son is in itself both just and
rebellion or sedition, if any of the latter is actually com- lawfcl.
mitted, the conspiracy is not a separate offense, but only In justifying circumstances, there is neither a crime. .
a manner of incurring criminal liability in treason, re- nor a criminal. No civil liability, except in par. 4 (caus-
bellion o r sedition. The offenders are liable f o r treason, ing damnge to another in state of necessity) of Art. 11.
rebellion or sedition, as the case may be, and the con-
(2) On tho other hand, one who acts by virtue of an
spiracy is absorbed. exempting circumstance is not wholly exempt from civil
1
When conspiracy is only a manner of incurring crim- $
liability (,Art. 101).
inal liability, it is not punishable. i
In exempting circumstances, there is a crime but no
criminal. There is civil liability, except in pars. 4 and 7 -
9. Imputability distinguished from responsibility. (causing an injury by mere accident; failing to p e r f o m
'
While imputability implies that a deed may be im- an act required by law when prevented by some lawful I ,
puted to a person, responsibility implies that the person or insuperable cause) of Art. 12.
must take the consequences of such a deed' (Albert). ._
, .,~
13. Ordinary mitigating and privileged mitigating' circumj,,?
,
692 693
3
i
, -
' . CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CXIMINAL LAW llEVlBWEK
Distinctions Distinctions
9%
' ~ - .
4 Oi%dinarymitigating circumstance is susceptible of
being offset by any aggravating circumstance; while privi-
i
( 2 ) Passion or obfuscation cannot give rise to an ,ir-
resistible force, because irresistible force requires physical .i
694 695
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Distinctions Distinctions
..+. ,
,
, ,
. ~ . . >
,. *...
buse of confidence and obvious ungratefuluess, distin- Anypne of these aggravating circumstances majr &$i- ;1
tate tKe commission of the crime. .',;.,+. ."',.. L :,;
~ I
d
In treachery, means, methods or forms of attack are;;;
In abuse of confidence, the offended party must have ,/' employed by the offender to make it impossible or hard,$
confidence in the offender: in obvious unpate-
for the offended party t o put up any sort of resistance
the offended party extended some favors t o the
(People vs. Ducusin, 53 Phil. 280; People vs. TurnBob,,,
who should be grateful t o him.
With the aid of armed men, distinguished from by H
t 46 O.G., Sup. 11, 190).
' In abuse of super.ior strength, the offender does not
,
. ., ~ . , . @
!:
employ means, methods or forms OP attack, for he enjoys e!
superior 'strength of wbich he takes advantage. . ..
By a band requires that more than tbr% armed male-
X'
factors shall have acted together in the com%ission of an In means employed to weaken the defense, the offender, ?~
. .
. ,' , offense. Aid of armed men is present cven if one'of like in treachery, employs means but the means employed
the offenders merely relied on their aid, for actual aid only materially weakens the resisting power of the of-
is not necessary. The armed men givinp the aid need f e w ? .party.
not be more than three, as two armed mer, would be suf-
Distinguish accomplice from principal in general.
ficient.
An accomplice is one who does not take a direct part
0. Recidivism and reiteraciou, distinguished. in the execution of the act, who does not force or induce
The circumstance of rejteracion may be distinguished others to commit it, o r who does not cooperate in the corn-;
from recidivism, as follows: mission of the crime by another act without which it would
not have been accomplished, yet cooperates in the execu-
(a) In reteraci6n, it is necessary that the offender
Gf the offense by previous or simultaneous acts (Pe&
shall have served his sentence for the previous pffense;
le vs. Silvestre, 66 Phil. 353).
wheress, in recidivism it is enough that a final judgment
has been rendered for the first offense. 3. Distinguish an accompIice froni a principal by direct
(b) I n reiteracion, the previous and subsequent of- participation.
I
fenses must not be embraced in the same title of the Code; (1) In both, there is community of criminal design.
whereas, recidivism requires that the first and second
Ey the overv?helming weight of authority; the same
offenses be embraced in the same title of the Code. community of purpose and intention is necessary to justify
(c) Reiteracion is not always an aggravating circum- the conviction of an accused person in the character of
stance; whereas, recidivism is always to be taken into accomplice that is necessary to sustain conviction in the
consideration in fixing the penalty to be imposed upon character of principal (PeopJe vs. Tamayo, 44 Phil. 83).
the accused. ' . We must bear in mind that unity of purpose and of
' .
~ ;: Note: Xeiteracibn or habituality should n o t be considered a3 ,' action must exist, not only among the principals them-
aggravating when the penalty would be death.
selves, but also between the principals and the accom-
chery, abuse of superior strength, and means em- /" plices, and t h i t what distinguishes the latter. from'.the:
to weaken the defense, distinguished. former in that accomplices cooperate in the execution of
696 697
.. .,
' 1 , ., j:
,,>,c,
, '.,I_
"I\)
;:,"!
CRIMINAL LAW REVlEWEll CRIAiINAL LAW REYIEWEH
Distinctions Distinctions
..
the offense by previous or simultaneous acts other than (1) Pardon by the Chief Executive extinguishes the
, ,
. . those which would characterize them as principals, pur-
criminal liability of the offender; such is not the case
,. when the parcion is given by the offended party.
- suant t o article 17 of the Revised Penal Code (People vs.
. ~.. . Maiiala,c and Viacruces, C.A., 46 O.G. 111). ' ( 2 ) Pardon by the Chief Executive cannot include civil
(2) As to the acts performed, there is no clear-cut liability which the offender must pay; but the offended
-.
, distinction between the acts of the accomplice and those party can waive the civil liability which the offender must
' ': -
(3) Previous agreement os previous understanding is ,Executive cannot grant pardon before conviction.
, required of principals, but not between a principal and
:
:,, an accomplice (People vs. Aplegido, et al., '76 Phil. 571). h-d'/ real nr material Dlurality . .n g
. . .., . ..
crd.
24. Distinpish an accomplice from a principal by cooperation.
I
'
/
,
sion of the crime of murder by a previous act which, df the acts performed arise from one crimina1 resolution.
however, cannot be considered indispensable for the rea-
son that even though the offender did not lend his dagger 28. Ellity of crimes, distingnished from recidivism.
o r pistol, the murderer could have obtained it somewhere In recidivism, the accused must he convicked by final
else or from snme other person. I n such a case, the CO- judgment of the first o r prior offense; in plurality of
eration of the offender is that of an accomplice. ' crimes, the accused successively executed different criminal ,.
'
The cooperation of a principal is indispensable, that
is, without which the commission of the offense would
not have been accomplished. 2 'J- 'nqnsncy, distinguished from recidivism.
(I) A s t o the n&rn.es committed-In recidivism, it
,
id)
.I.
.1
25. Accessory, distinguished from principal. sufficient that the accused at the time of
(I) The accessory does not take direct part or conper- J have been previously convicted by final judgment of
other crime embraced in the same title of
ate in;or induce, the commission of the crime.
habitual delinquency the crimes are specified.
(2;) The participation of the accessory in all cases al-
ays takes place after the commission of the crime. (2) As to the period of time the crimes
--In recidivism, no perind of time between
Pardon by the Chief Executive, distinguished, fmm par- conviction and the last conviction i s ' fixed
by the offended party. 'habitual delinquency; the offender is found guil
.. 698
CRlMINAL LAW RET'iEWER
CRIXINAL LAW REVIEWER
Distinctions Distinctions
>. .'
granted to classes of persons or communities who may be
,?of the crimes specified within ten years from his last re-
guilty of political offenses. . . .,
,i
lease or last conviction.
( 2 ) Pardon is exercised when the person is already
( 3 ) .As t o the number of crimes committed.-In reci- convicted; amnesty may be exercised even before trial or
divism, the second conviction of an offense embraced in investigation is had.
the same title of the Code is sufficient; in habitual de-
linquency, the accused must be found guilty the third time (3) Pardon looks forward and relieves the offender
p.?.,-,.. ' or oftener of any of the crimes specified (People vs. Ber- from the consequences of an offense of which he has bee
nal, 63 Phil. 750). ,convicted, that is, it abolished or forgives the punishment
.;..
and for that reason i t does "not work the restoration'
( 4 ) As to their effects.-Recidivism, if not offset by
the rights to hold public office or the right of suffra
" .
.~,, ,,, / a mitigating circumstance, serves to increase the penalty
only to the maximum; whereas, if there is .habitual delin-
quency, a n additional penalty is also imposed.
, ~ ' , '30. Distinction between a fine with a minimum.and a f i n s
. . .
unless such rights be expressly restored by the terms
the pardon." On the other hand, amnesty looks backvpa
and abolishes and puts in oblivion the offense itself; it
overlooks and obliterates the offense with which the:;
without. a minimum. fenaer iri charged that he stands before the law precis
(1) In both, the law fixes the maximum of the fine. as though he had committed no offense (Earrioqui
et al. va. Fernandez, et al., 46 O.G. 3031).
(2) Whcn the law fixes the minimum of the fine,
the court cannot change that minimum; whereas, when
Thus,-
,. .
the law does not state the minimum of the fine but only (a) Pardon does not alter the fact that the accused.
~~,'.
the ma.ximum, the court can impose any amount not ex-
ceeding such maximurn.
v i s a recidivist, because i t produces the extinction
only of the personal effects of the penalty (U.S.,
vs. Sotelo, 28 Phil. 147).
( 3 ) When the law fixes both the minimum and the
maximum, the court can impose a n amount higher t h a n (b) Amnesty makes an ex-convict no longer a recidivist,
. the maximum; whereas, when only the m-ximum is fixed, because it obliterates the last vestige of the crime
It cannot impose an amount higher than the maximum. (US.vs. Francisco, 10 Phil. 185). ,
(4) Both do not extinguish the civil liability of the
I
31. Causes of extinction of criminal liability, distinguished offender (Art. 113).
front causes of justification or exemption. (5) Pardon, being a private act of the President, must
Extinction of criminll liability arises from causes be pleaded and proved by the person pardoned; while
which occur after the commission of the offense; while amnesty being by Proclamation of the Chief ,Executive
the cmses of justification or exemption from criminal Iia- with the concurrence of Congress, is a public act of which
bility arise from circumstances existing either before the the courts should take judicial notice (Barrioquinto, et' al.
commission of the crime or at the moment of its con- vs. Fernandez, et ai., supra).
summ,ation.
;.. 33. Conditional pardon, distinguished from parole.
32. Amnesty and pardon, distingnished. .
(1) Conditional pardon, which may be given at any
(1.) Pardon includes any crime and is exercised in-
..'?~.,
,. time after final judgment, is granted by the Chief .Ex-
.,
.. . dividually by the President; amnesty is a blanket pardon
700 701
'I
i
.
,fi
''
co hitting the crime and distinguish them from the cir-
consisting in the material execution of t h e
act or in the means em,ployed to accomplish it.
1
captured, gives himself up, goes to a foreign country with:
which we have no extradition treaty, or when he commits:
a crime before the expiration of the period of prescription.
The circumstances relating t o the persons committh3 (3) The period of prescription of crime which has been
the crime are: (1) mitigating and aggravating circum- interrupted may commence to run again when the proceed-~..;
stances which arise from the moral attributes of the of- z ings terminate without the accused having been conyi&di,
fenders, ( 2 ) those that arise from the private relation
' of the offender with the offended party, and ( 3 ) those or acquitted or are unjustifiably stopped for any rkasons
not imputable to the accused ; whereas, the running:g$t@~
'which arise from other personal causes. ,..., ~i"
702 703
.. . .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Distinctions Distinctions
/'
r
period of prescription of penalty which has been inter- In the €irst, the detention is illegal from the beginning:
upted shall commence to run again when the convict
evades the service of sentence again.
;
I
in the second, the detention is legal a t the beginning, but
the illegality of the detention arises from the expiration'
of the periods of time respectively specified by the Code
~--
~.
,
%.
,
37. Espionage, distinguished from treason.
Treason is committed in time of war, while espionage 1' Art. 125), without the person detained having been de-
livered to the proper judicial authorities.
may bo committed both in time of peace and in time of
'
war. Treason is limited t o two ways of committing it-
levying war, and adhering to the enemies giving them aid
/'
41. Rebellion, distinguished from treason.
(a) The levying of war could constitute treason when .
o r comfort; while espionage may be committed in many performfd to aid the enemy, as such would also constitute
'
ways (Com. Act No. 616). Treason is committed usually ail adherence to him, giving him ajd or comfort. IIence,
by a citizen ; whereas, espionage is generally committed ! where the purpose of the offenders in levying war agaihst
. . the constituted authorities is the delivery, in whole or i n
',,. by a foreigner.
part, of the country to the enemy, then it is treason.
38. Piracy, distinguished from mutiny. Otherwise, the mere act of levying war to overthrow
In piracy, the persons who attack a vessel or seize its the Government would constitute rebellion.
cargo on the high seas are strangers to the said vessel; ' f b ) Rebellion always involves taking up arms against
while in mutiny, they are members of the crew or pas- be committed by mere ad-
sengers. him aid or comfort.
While the intent to gain is essential in the crime of
/
i '42. .Propsal to commit rebellion, distinguished from inciting
piracy: in mutiny, whether the offenders merely intend
to ignore the ship's officers o r are prompted by a desire to rebellion.
to commit plunder, is immaterial. (1) In both, the offender induces another t o commit ,,
rebellion.
9. Piracy, distinguished from robbery on the high seas. C2) In proposal, the person who proposes is decided.to
When the offender is a member of the complement or codmit rebellion; in inciting to rebellion, it is not required
a passenger of the vessel and there is violence against or r the existence of the crime.
intimidation of persons or force upon thiEgs in taking the (3) in proposal, the person who proposes the e x e c u t i g '
property in the vessel, i t is common robbery; if the of- of the crime uses secret means; in inciting to rebellion;
fender is an outsider, i t will be piracy. the provocation is done publicly.
.Both in piracy and in common robbery on the high
sedsi,,there is intent to gain and the manqer of committing 43. Sedition, distinguished from treason.
1 .i
t crime is the same. Treason, in its more general sense, is the "violation
by a subject of his allegiance to his sovereign or liege;
40. rbilrary detention by arresting and detaining a PerSOR, lord, or to the supreme authority of the State." (Centy$
istiriguished from arbitrary detention by delaying the 3 Dictionary) Sedition, in its general sense, is "the raising..
delivery of the person arrested l o the proper judicial of commotions or disturbances i n the State" (U.S. vs.
authorities. Abad, 1 Pbil. 437). .. , .
704 705
I
Sedition, distinguished from rebellion, I official like the town mayor, it is sedition (People vs.
In both rebellion and sedition, there must be public et a:., G. R. L-6803,Nov. 29, 1954).
uprising. While in rebellion, there must be taking a m ..
against the Governqent; in sedition, i t is sufficient that association, distinguished from illegal assembly,'
the public uprising is tumultuous. (1) In illegal assembly, it% necessary that'there. i s4
While in sedition, the purpose of the fiffenders may, an actual meeting or assembly of armed persons for th@:
be political o r social; in rebellion, i t is always political. purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable under?
Specifically, the purpose of the offender in rebellion
is any one of the following: 1 the Code, or of individuals who, although not armed, are ,
incited to the commission of treason, rebellion, sedition; '
(1) To remove from the allegiance to said Government or assault upon a person in authority o r his agent.
o r its !aws (a) the territory of the Philippines or any part Such requisite is not necessary in the crime of illegal
thereof, or (b) any body of land, naval or other armed association.
forces; or . . In illegal assembly, it is the meeting and attend-
(2)
( 2 ) T o deprive the Chief Zxecutivc or Congress, wholly I ance a t such meeting that are punished.
or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives. In illegal associations, it is the act of forming or or-
The object of the offenders in sedition is any o f the ganizing, and membership of, the association that are
following : punished.
(1) To prevent the promulgation or execution of any (3) If the purpose of the meeting is to commit crimes
law or the holding of any popular election; J punishable by special laws, such meeting is not a n illegal
( 2 ) T o prevent the National Government, or any pro- assembly.
vincial or municipal government o r any oublic officer there- In illegal association, the purpose may include the com-
of from freely exereking its or his functions, or prevent mission of crimes punishable by special laws, because when
the execution of any administrative order; the purpose of the organization is contrary to public morals
(3) To inflict any act of hate o r revenge upon the the cts which are contrary to public morals may constitute
person or property of any public officer o r employee; imes punishable under the special laws.
I (4) To commit, for any political or social end, any act / '
Rehellion, .
distinsuished from a violation o f the Anti-
of hate or revenge against private persons or any social Subversion Act.
class; aad
When the purpose of taking up arms against the Gov-
( 5 ) To despoil, for any political or social end, any ernment is to overthrow and supersede the existing govern-
person, municipality os province, or the National Govern..
ment of a11 its property or any part thereof. ment, i t is rebellion; when the purpose is to establish in
the Philippines a totalitarian regime ana place the Gov- .:
If the purpose of the uprisirig is not exactly against
the Government and not for the purpose of doing the things
ernment under the control and domination of an alien power#. :
it i s a violation of the Anti-Subversion Act.
defined in Art. 134 of the Revised Penal Code, but m9reIy !
t o attain by force, intimidation, or by other means out- I
E 47. Illegal association under the Revised Penal Code, .dis-.;::
side of legal methods, one object, to wit, to inflict an act tinguished from illegal association under the Anti-Sub- ,'
of hate or revenge upon the person or property of a public version Act.
706
7 707
.-,
I ,i
:. _,
:
1
or injury t o the right of other person nor does it disturb
or is contrary to public morals, it is an illegal association the public order; it is merely an infringement of the:terms,
,
'
r
.
%
, . under the Revised Penal Code. If the purpose is to over- stipulated in the contract between the Chief Executive and
throw the Government to establish in the Philippines a the criminal.
totalitarian regime and place the Government under the
Evasion of the service of the sentence is an attempt
'. control and domination of an alien power, it is an illegal
s: I,.: a t least to evade the penalty inflicted by the courts upon
G association under the Anti-Subversion Act.
0 . . . criminals and thus defeat the purpose of the law of either
@:'Direct
L I
assault, distinguished from resistance. reforming or punishing them for having disturbed the
/
, .. ,. public order (Alvares vs, Director of Prisons, 80 Phil. 43).
(1) In resistance, when force is employed against an
ent of a. person in authority, the force is not serious, 51. Distinction between use of fictitious name and concealing
there is no manifest intention to defy the law or its true name.
I
icers. 'In direct assault, the force employed must be
(1) In use of fictitious name, the element of publicity
,:,, ,..;
serious.
~
must be present; in concealing true name and other per-;.. .
,. .' If the force consists in laying hands upon a person
."' sonal circumstances, that element is not necessary.
' in authority, such force, even if not serious, would con-
(2) The purpose of the offender in use of fictitious :i
/
. , stitute direct assault.
<
),; ~, name is to conceal a crime, to evade the execution of a
k,, (2) In direct assault, the person in authority or his
I, judgment, or to cause' damage; in concealing true,,name,
agent must be engaged in the performance of official duties
' -''merely to conceal identity.
o r that he was assaulted by reason thereof; but in resist-
ance, the person in authority or his agent must be in the
actual performance of his duties.
y/? istinguisb perjury from false testimony in judicial pro-'
ceeding.
49.' -Inciting t,o sedition or rebellion, distinguished from pub- Both false testimony in judicial proceeding and per-
lie disordcer. jury are perversions of the truth.
For a speech or the displaying of emblems or placards While false testimony is supposed to be given.under
3 -
t o constitute provocation to commit rebellion or sedition, oath in the course of some judicial proceeding, perjury-.
i t is necessary that the offender should have done the act is any n,iilful and corrupt assertion of falsehood on some
.5 ;, : with, the idea aforethought of inducing his hearers or material matter made under oath and not in judicial pro- ..
!.
readers. to commit the crime of rebellion or sedition. 1
ceeding.
I.
But if they are more or less unconscious outbursts Perjury is an offense which covers false oaths other
ich, although rebellious or seditious in nature, are not . than those taken in the course of judicial proceedings
(US. vs. Estrafm, 16 Phil. 621).
entiondly calculated to induce others to commit rebelIion j.
sedition, it is only pubiic disorder. False testimouy in judicial pr6ceeding contelaplates. an.,::
i. i actual trial .where a judgment of conviction or ac
iolation of conditional pardon, distinguished from eva- is rendered, and not merely a preliminary invest
on of 13ervice of sentence by escaping (People vs. Bautista, C.A., 40 O.G. 2491).
,.
708 709 ,,, ..
,2:
>*
<'- , ., ,,
53. Trade-name, distinguished from trade-mmk. I In this regard, the two felonies a.re similar. . ~. .I
Trade-name is a name used in trade to designate a r But they differ in that i n bribery the offender re-
, ' particu1a.r business of certain individuals considered 88 frained from doing his official duty in consideration of a~
: an entity: whereas, trade-mark is used to indicate the gift received or promised. This element is not necessary
origin or ownership of the goods to which it is affixed. e crime of prevaricacion.
1.
,. Direct . .
-.
One of the distinguishing characteristics of a trade-
name is that, unlike trade-mark, it is not necessarily a b
tached or affixed t o the goods of the owner (U.S. vS.
Kyburz, 28 Phil. 475).
i 5
,/" bribery, distinguished from indirect bribery.
(1) In both, the public officer receives gift. .
(2) While in direct bribery there is an agreement be-'^:
"'*$
,.-,
,.,
tween the public officer and the giver of the gift or present; ,:
64. Infringement of trade-mark or trade-name, distinguished i indirect bribery, usually no such agreement exists.
from unfair competition. (3) I n direct bribery, the offender agrees to p e r f o m
..,
(1) 'Unfair competition is broader and mrre inclusive;
infringement is of limited range. In unfair competition,
the trade-mark or trade-name of another m&y be involved.
(2) I n unfair competition, fraudulent intent is an es-
sential element; i n infringement, it is not necessary (Al-
I
/p os performs zn act constituting a crime, or not-consti-
tuting a crime but unjust, because of the gift or promise.; ';
in indirect bribery, it is not necessary that the officer
should d o any particular act or even promise to do an
act, as i t is enough that he accepts gifts given t o him,,.
r
,' hambra vs. Mojica, 27 Phil. 266). by reason of his office. -
.i,
(3) In infringement, the infringed trade-,nark or t r a d e
name must be registered in the Patent Office (Ogura VS. 57. Distinguisb indirect bribery from direct bribery of the ,.
second form.
Chua, 59 Phil. 471); in unfair competition, it is enough
-ff& g"&+]h 'EA%?&-&d!.i&eSl. o n the x-oods or service The case of People vs. Pamplona, C.A., 51 O.G. 4116
of the offended party. &&h +&z4fi+&mZfrs, a.cae-.d-direct bribery under the
(4) In infringement, the same particular class of goods 2nd paragraph of Art. 220, because there was an W e *
or service is involved: in unfair competition, different / ment between the public officer and the giver of the gift
; and that the act which the public officer executed did not
classes of goods or even nou-competing goods may be in- constitute a crime. But in direct bribery under the 2nd
volved. I
paragraph of Art. 210, the act executed must be unjust.
(5) In fraudulent use of trade-mark, the offender US@ In the Pamplona case, where it was held that the crime
the trade-mark of another manufacturer or dealer in sell- ,', . committed was indirect bribery, the act executed by the
ing his goods: wheseas, in unfair competition, the offender accused (preparing the voucher) was not unjust.
gives his goods the general appearance of the goods of an- t
other manufacturer or dealer and sells the same. I 58, Maltreatment
! -
of prisoners, distinguished from grave CO-
ercion.
55. Prevaricacion, distinguished from bribery.
The third form of direct bribery (Art. 210) is COm-
In extorting a confession or in obtaining an informa-
J tion from the prisoner by means of violence, the act is
mitted by refraining from doing something which pertains .. similar to that of grave coercion; but the difference lies.:?
to the official duty of the officer. Prevaricacion (A&
"
208) is committed in the same way. in the fact that in the crime of maltreatment of prisoners"
710 711
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIFWER
Distinctions Distinctions
’/
I
,,
.. . the offended
i,.~:: party is a prisoner. If the offended party develops that the detention is unlawful, then the offense”
is not a prisoner, because he was only under arrest and committed is unlawful arrest.
not et placed in jail or booked by the police, the offense In any other case, the detention a€ the offended party.
. I : , w uld be grave coercion. ill render the culprit, who must be a private individual,
liable for other illegal detention.
‘59 Attempl.ed and frustrated homicide, distinguished from
physical injuries. !f Slavery, distinguished from kidnapping or illegal detention:
When the act or manner of committing the offense is
In both, physical injuries are inflicted.
Where the intent of the assailant t o kill his, victim is by kidnapping or detaining the offended party, the crime
clear, the act of the accused in inflicting physical injuries of slavery is distinguished from kidnapping or illegal de-
1
.’/.?’
tention by the purpose of the offender. If the pum’ose
upon the offended party constitutes the crime of attempted is to enslave the victim, i t is slavery; otherwise, it is
or frustrated homicide, not merely physical injuries. kidnapping or illegal detention.
60. Abortion, distinguished from infanticide. I 64. Abandoning a minor, distinguished from kidnapping and
A mother, who had aborted for taking “pociones amat- failure to return a minor.
gas,” buried near her house a living foetus. The expelled (1) In both, tho offender has the custody of the minor;
foetus had already a human form and about six months ( 2 ) In abamdoning a minor, the minor is under seven
old. But it did not have jts own life, independently of years of age; in kidnapping and failure to return a minor,
that of the mother. It could not subsist by itself, out- the victim is any minor under 21 years of age;
side the maternal womb, A foetus under these conditions (3) What is punished in kidnapping and failure to
, . had necessarily to succumb a few moments after its ex- return, a minor is the deliberate faiZure to restore the
pulsion from the maternal womb. minor to his parent or guardian; in abandoning a minor,
HeZcl: Abortion, not infanticide, was committed. If it is the abandoning of the minor endangering his life
/)
the foetus (I) could sustain an independent life, after /which, is punished.
its separation from the maternal womb, and it (2) is
killed, .the crime is infanticide (People vs. Detablan, C.A., 6$. Exploitation of minors, distinguished from inducing I
I 40 O.G., Sup. 5, 30). J minor to abandon his home.
(1) If the purpose of inducing the minor t o &an&]
’ 61. Mutilation, distinguished from ordinary physical injuries. the home is to follow any person engaged in any of t$
The mutilation must have been caused purposely and callings of being an acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker, dive!
1 wild-animal tamer, or circus manager, o r to accompan:
deliberately to lop or clip off some part of the body; this
special intention is not present in the other kinds of physical any habitual vagrant or beggar (Art., 278, par. 5), it i
injuries. exploitatim~of minors; if there is no such purpose, it‘!,
* inducing a minor to abandon his home under Art. 271.,1
62. Unlawful arrest, distinguished from other illegal detentibn. (2) In inducing a minor to abandon his home,;@
.. . If the purpose of locking up or detaining the offended victim is a minor under 21 years of age; in exploiki”8
. party is to deliver him to the proper authorities, and it of minors, he must be under 16 or 12 years.of::aget:.jag‘ ,.
I.
,. . , !
.,. ’
., . ,, 712 713
I’
:1
. !.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CKlirliNAL LAW REVIEWER
Distinctions Distinctions
66. Trespass to dwelling, distinguished from other forms of intimidation only promises some future harm if the condi-'
': tion imposed is not complied with by the offended party>;.
trespass (trespass to property).
(1) In trespass to dwelling, the of€ender is a private In grave coercion, the violence or intimidation is intended
person; in other forms of trespass, the offender is any produce immediate effect.
person. to extort money, distinguished from robbery w$h
( 2 ) I n the first, the offender enters the dwelling house intimidation. ..
' . of another; in the second, the offender enters the closed
I n both, there is intimidation against the offended party:
premises or the fenced estate of another;
The purpose, which is to obtain gain, is likewise identieat
(3) I n the first, the place entered is inhabited; in the
The differences are:
second, the place entered is uninhabited.
(1) In robbery, the intimidation is actual and
( 4 ) In the first, the act constitnting the crfme is en-
mediate; whereas, in threats, the intimidation is cond$
tering the dwelling against the will of the owner; in the
tionai or future, that is, not immediate;
second, it is entering the closed p r m i s e s or the fenced
estate without securing the permission of the owner or ( 2 ) In robbery, the intimidation is personal: while '
caretaker thereof: threats, it may be through an intermediary;
. (3) In threats, the intimidation may refer t o the pe~$
,.;/
( 5 ) In the first, the prohibition to enter is express or
implied; in the second, the prohibition to enter must be son, honor or property of the offended party or that 0;
' '. manifest. his family; while in robbery the intimidation is d'
only to the person of the victinl;
" $7:. ,.Grave
.... cocrcion, distinguished from unjust vexation. ( 4 ) I n robbery, the gain of the culprit is inimecIiatF
Where the first and the third elements .of the Crime whereas, in threats the gain of the culprit is:not'~@i
of grave epercion under paragraph 1 of Art. 286 are present, mediate (People vs. Moreno, C.A., G.R. No. 43635, Apa
but the second element thereof, which is th? use of vie-
knee upon the offended party in preventing him from
doina; or compelling him t o do, something azainst his Will, violence, distinguished from grave coereior
, .,
is lacking, the crime committed by the axused is light (1) In both, there is violence against the
i
coercion o r unjust vexation under the secund paragraph party.
?'
~
714 715
CRIMINAL L.IW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER - ,~.,.
, . ~.
..t
/
Distinctions Distinctions -,
>I
..z,..
.,,. A ,~
Brigandage, distinguished from robbery in band. ..
...,.><?., r the crime is grave coercion (PeopIe vs. Zanoria, et al.,
' '
.<
,$&$**:,., .' Both brigandage and fobbery in band requee that;,&!
1C.A..
,,.:.,..:~;;'.i 53, O.G. 5 2 6 6 ) .
offenders form a band of robbers. There must be at least
four armed men. : 7:
Robbery, distinguished from bribery.
(1) It is robbery when the victim did not commit 8 In brigandage, the purpose of the offenders is any'of
. ,crime and he is intimidated with arrest and prosecution to the following: (1) to commit robbery in the highway, 01
deprive him of his personal property: it is bribery when (2) to kidnap persons for the purpose of extortion o!
the victim has committed a crime and gives money or gift to obtain ransom, or (3) for any other purpose to be a t
to avoId arrest and prosecution. The reason is, when tho tained by means of force and violence. In robbery
victim did not commit any crime, there is nothing that band, the purpose of the offenders is only to commit e
would have required the public officer to exercise his duty particular robbery, not necessarily in the highway.
o r function. On the other hand, if the victim committed If the agreement among more than three armed mer
a crime and the public officer accepted bribe, the latter was t n commit only a particular robbery, the offense it
thereby agreed to refrain from doing something which it not brigandage, but only robbery in band (US.vs. Feli,
was his official duty to do. ciano, 3 Phil. 422).
(2) I n robbery, the victim is deprived of his money I n brigandage, the mere formation of a band for an3
or property by force or intimidation; in bribery, he parts of the purposes mentioned in the law is sufficient, as 11
I .
with his money or property in a sense voluntarily (U.S. would not be necessary to show that the band actuall~
vs. Flores, 19 Phil. 178). committed robbery in the highway, etc. In robbery i 1
band, i t is necessary t o prove that the band actually com.
./
Robbery by execution of deeds by means of violence or itted robbery, as a mere conspiracy t o commit robber>
intimidation, distinguished from grave coercion. is not punishable.
If the offended party has no obligation to execute, sign
or deliver a document and, ruitb intent to gain, the bf- 4. Estafa, distinguished from theft.
fender compelled him to execute, sign or deliver the docu- In estafa, the offender veceives the thing from thc
ment by mcans of violence or intimidation, the crime com- offended party. The offender does not take the thine
mitted is robbery. without the consent of the offended party. I n theft, th(
CI When the offended party has obligation under the law offender takes the thing without the consent of the o$
t o sign, execute or deliver the document, i t will, be grave fended party. In theft, where the offender receives thi
coercion if violence is used in compelling the offended party thing from the offended party, the former acquires on!:
to sign, execute or deliver the document. the physical or material possession of the thing. In 'estafa
Thu:;, a person who bought and fully paid the price the off nder has the juridical possession of the thing h(
rece' ed from the offended party.
.
of a car and compelled the seller by means of violence
or intimidation to sign, execute, and deliver the correspond-
ing deed of sale, would be guilty of grave coercion, not
robbery, since there is no intent t o defraud. But if he
' j"
stafa with abuse of confidence, distinguished from mal
75. versation.
( 2 ) Both are continuing offenses. individual 01' even' a public officer who is not officially
(3) But while,& estafa, the funds or property are entrusted with the document. I .
z,
! ' ~,
private, in malversation they are public funds or ProPeW- ') In estafa, there is intent to defraud. This element'
required in infidelity in the custody of documents.
. __. . (4) In estafa, the offender is a private individual or
, -
even a public officer who is not accountabie for public
funds o r property; in malversation, the offender must b e d estafa
Violation of chattel mortgage law, distinguished from. .
by disposing of encumbered property.
a public officer who is accountable for public funds o r
In both o-Cfenses, there .is the selling of a mortgaged.
property.
property. In estafa (Art. 316, par. 2), the property in-
(6) In estafa with abuse of confidence, the crime i s volved is real property; in sale of mortgaged property
committed by misappropriating, converting, or denying (Art. 319), i t is personal property.
having received, money, goods or other personal property:
But to constitute the crime as estafa, it is sufficient
in malversation, the crime is committed by appropriating,
that the real property mortgaged be sold as free, even;,
taking or misappropriating, or consenting or, through
thoogh the vendor may have obtained the consent ,of 'th5
abandonment or negligence, permitting any other person
mortgagee in writing.
to take the public funds or property.
/ (6) While malversation can be committed through neg-
ligence; estafa cannot be committed through negligence.
Selling or pledging of personal property alre
or mortgaged is committed by the mere fail e to obtaip
d i di
719
I
/ ..
0. Acts of lasciviousness, distinguished from attempted rape.
The manner of committing the crime is the same, that
. is, force or intimidation is employed, or the offended party
is unconscious or deprived of reason, or under 12 years
Revised Penal Code is the offense. When
motivated, such taking constitutes kidnapping under
267, as amended, Forcible abduction is against chas
kidnapping is against personal liberty (People
c la, 53 0. G. 384).
,
ii
, i s not
.VS.
.
of age.
T,he performance of acts of lascivious character is com- / Criticism. dist.inguished from dcfam a t'ion.
.*
.e . ' mon to both.
The differences are:
Criticism deals only with such things a s shall invi
public attention o r call €or public comment. It does n
(I) If the acts performed by the offender clearly in- foliow a public man into his private life nor pry unt
.,.;.. ,.. .
.
,>I
;'
. .
,:J S . Acts
tion.
of lasciviousness, distinguished from unjust vexa-
./
cast upon h:m before the laithfui over whom he held SO
c mmitted is acts of lasciviousness (People vs. Panopio, high a dignity (People vs. Nosce, 60 Phil. 895).
A, 48 O.G. 145).
The act of slapping the teacher, who refused to dance
<
,:.
',I
. Forcible abduction with rape, distinguished from kidnap- with the accused, constitutes slander by deed, in view of
the shame and humiliation she must have suffered at being
ping.
When the violent taking of a woman is motivated slapped during a dance where many people were present
(People vs. Roque, C.A., 40 O.G. 1710).
y lewd designs, forcible abduction under Art. 342 of the ' ,
721
720 , ,
..>I
".
I ,
i.4
',
..
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Distinctions
AUGUST, 1946
,
. jury.
I i
1. (a) In 1945, a citizen of the Philippines was accused be- ''
(1) Incriminating an innocent person is committed by fore the People's Court of treason against the United States for .
performing an act by which the offender directly in-
having aided Nazi forces in the Buropean theater of war. Should
,~ . criminates or imputs to an innocent person the commission the case be dismissed after the inauguration of the Republic?
of a crime; in perjury, the gravamen of the offense is the Give reasons. (h) What is war treason?
1 , imputation itself, falsely made, before a n officer.
(a) No. Treason, as it is defincd in the Revised Penal
',. . ( 2 ) Incriminating an innocent person is limited to the Code, is committed by any person who, owing allegiance to the
i,.;~,. act of planting evidence and the like, in order to incriminate United States or the Government of the Philippine Islands, n o t .
. I,
an innocent person; while perjury is the giving of false being a foreigner, levies war against them o r adheres to their.
.,,.
,: ., statement o r the making of false affidavit in cases in enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the Philippine
"/ .: : ., which the law requires the making of affidavit (People Islands or elsewhere.
1 ,: ":,
~ .. vs. Rivera, 69 Phil. 236). While it is true that after the inauguration of the Republic,
Falsely accusing a person, made under oath, is perjury. levying war against the United States or adhering to ,her
. . ..,.
.
~;'Jd
..
t is not incriminating an innocent person.
722 723
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
.,.,
2. A person under nine years of age. 2. Tlhat the crime be committed in contempt of or,witl
3 . A person who acts under the impulje of an uncontrollable insult to the public authorities.
fear of an equal or greater injury. 3 . That the act be committed with abuse of confidenh
4 . A person who acts under the compulsion of an irresietible or obvious ungratefulness.
force. 4. That the crime he committed in consideration of a price$
5 . A person who, while perform'ng a lawful act with due reward, or promise.
care, rauses an i n j n w by mere accident without fault or 5. That the act be committed with evident premeditation.
nte:ntion of causing it.
/' 6. That craft, fraud, or disguise be employed. .)I
. %
::. ' b) The seven circurnstanccs which mitigate criminal Ilabii- 7. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or meane. ,@
:,:,:&y are: be employed to weaken the defense. ,n :
"
.-?I
.. suffering some physical defect which thus restricts his bellion. The PKM or Hukbalahap organization has a knoG
. ~. means of action, defense, or communication with his fel- purpose of overthrowing the Government by force of arms:
Iow beinEs. There was public uprising and taking arms against the G o v e d
7. That the act was commtted in the immediate vindication, ment, as shown by the fact that the Huk returned the fire when
0% a grave offense to the one committin? the felony, his the MP's fired at them upon their refusal to surrender th&
spouse, ascendants. descendants, legitimate, natural, or firearms.
adopted brothers or sisters, o r relatives by affinity with-
in the same degrees. IV. ( a ) What is the duration of reclusion perpetua? (.b).
What is the duration of arresto mayor? (c) What is the range..
(e) The ten circumstances which aggravate criminal liability of arresto mayor in its nicdinm degree?
are :
(a) Reclusion perpetua has no fixed duration. Any person
,.~ 1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public
sentenced to reclusion perpetua shall be pardoned after under-
position. going the penalty for thirty years, unless such person by reason
724 725
&i.i,
.....i'
y-ea..~flhis
.I*$. .*,
'?""by~the
. .
CRIMIXAL LAW REVIEWER
nar Examinations in Criminal Law
VIII. Define: (1) publir officers, (2) indirect bribery, (3) ,:,
destierro, ( 4 ) alternative circumstances, (5) infanticide, . ( 6 ) , br/-
Yes, the Fiscal can still prosecute X for damage to
gandage, (7) concubinage, (8) probation, (9) white slave traffic;
the payment, because while
the civil liability arising from and (10) treachery. , , >.
,
an 'offense, such compromise shall not extinguish the public (1) Public officers are those persons who, by direct
a&on for the imposition of the legal penalty (Art. 2034, C.C.). vision of the law, popular election o r appointment by comp
1 . ., .i .
~ .. ..
. % ,, . . ..
. . . 727
726
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions ciple o f non-delegation of legislative power and was contrary
in t h e Government of the Phil'ppines, or shall perform in said to the guarantee of equal protection under the Constitution.
o r in any of its branches puhlic duties as an em- ( 9 ) While slave traff:c (trade) is a crime against cha&y,
or subordinate official of any rank or class. committed by any person who, in any manner or under any
is a crime committed by any public pretext, engaged in the business of prostitution, or profited by-
to him by reason of his office. prostitution, o r enlisted the services of women for the pumme
a penalty which prohibits the convict to of prostitution.
designated in the sentence, nor within (10) Treachery is an aggravating or qualifying circum-
which shall be not more than 250 Stance; and there is treachery when the offender commits any
from the place desimated. of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods,
are those which must be taken or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and
into consideration as aggravating o r mitigating according to specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising
and the other conditions from the defense which the offended party might make.
IX. A messenger was sent to the Post Office by his em.
against person, committed by any ployer to buy a money ordcr. Instead of buying the monex ,,
than three days of age. order, the messenger spent the money on biniself. What crime
( 8 ) Brigandage is a crime against property, committed by has been committ,ed?
more than three armed persons who formed a band of robbers The messenger committed the crime of theft. When he re- ' ,
for the purpose of committing robbery in the highway, or kid- ceived the money from his employer, the messenger acquired.'?$
papping persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom. only the material or physical possession of the money. His-;.:
other purpose to be attained by means of force and misappropfiation of that money constituted theft, not estafa. 'Y
,?.:
is a crime against chastity committed by X. By using identical facts as far- as possible, distinguish: ,
a mistress in the conjuga: dwelling, or (a) rebelllm from treason, (b) frustrated homicide from phy.
had sexual intercourse, under scandalous circumstances, with sical injucies, and (e) robbery from coercion.
s.woman who was not his wife, or cohabited with her in any (a) Rebellion is distinguished from treason in that in the^',;'.
other place. The concubine is liable for the same crime, t o former the purpose of the offenders in resorting to public up#
suffer the penalty of destierro, if she knew a t the time of the +sing and taking arms against the Government is to overthroy+g
of the act that the man was maiTied. it, by force of arms, or specifically: (1) to remove from the
which was provided in the Probation Act allegiance t o said Government or its laws, the territory of the .',
a suspension of the sentence in certain cases Philippines o r any part thereof, or any body of land, naval or :
after conviction. In that Act, the Legislature decreed that in other armed forces, or (2) to deprive the Chief Executive oz,.:
certain cases no punishment ut all shall be suffered by the Congress, wholly or partially, of any of theIr powers or
convict as long as the conditions of probation are faithfully rogatives; while in the latter, the purpose o f the offenders i ~ t
observed tiy him. The Probaton Act was declared unconstitu- levying war against the Government, which must be done in t$e$
. . .._,"'.
.'S
tional, on the ground that said Act was violztive of the .prin- of war, is t o collaborate with a foreign enemy. r,
728 729
CRIXINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Rar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
.. .
(b) In frustrated homicide, the physical injuries are in- imputation, Jeopardy means exposure to conviction, ;or- sit-:.j:
d by the offender with intent to kill; in physical injuries, uation of an accused person when being tried; thus, no pernor@'$
there is no intent t o kill on the part of the offender. shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the Same..::
~,~,,.~
, -.
~.
,,:' , ,~$(., (e) In robbery committed with violence against person, the offense. ,,.%
der had intent to gain; in grave coercion, the offender (b) Rafael del Pan was a member of the Code Committee :'
other to give personal property by means of created by Act No. 1841, who prepared the "Correctional Code!' ;
.
*f l9l6. / /-a
IIL'A gave R policeman 8300 with the 'request that the 'j
..
, .
.
latter leave his post on the Eseolta so that he (A) could steal
NOVEMBER, 1946
a jeep parked nearby. The policeman accepted the money and, ';
i
surprises his wife in an act of adultery. He apparently acceded to A's proposal but after leaving the Escol@
ded revolver at her and pulls the trigger, but he immediately returned hy another way and arrested A in the
2:'
'
yes defective and does not fire. What criminal
responsibility, if any, is incurred by the man?
None. Had the man inflicted upon his wife slight or less
ground of entrapment? .
act o f stealing the jeep. Can A defend successfully on the
'.
serious physical injuries, he would have been exempt from to the prosecution and conviction of the lawbreaker.
punishment, the same having been inflicted under exceptioIla1
circumstances. Even considering the act of the man as con- IV. (a) How is criminal liability t.oi.dly extinguished? (b)
stituting an impossible crime, the means employed being in.. w h a t i?. the difference between justifying and exempting cir-
effectual, I submit that he should be exempt from punishment. cumstances?
The oEfense of less serious physical injuries and impossible (a) Criminal liability is totally extingnished-
crime being punished with almost the same penalty, and the 1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties;
law (Art. 247) does not punish less serious physical injuries and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished
when inflicted under exceptional circumstances, i t is believed only when the death of the offender occurs before final judg-
that the commission of an impossible crime under such cir- ment ;
,
/
cumsta ces should not be punished.
I. (a) Define or explain: corpus delicti; mutiny; charivari;
malice in law; jeopardy. (b) Who was Rafael del Pan?
2 . By service of the sentence;
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty
and all its effects;
4. By absolute pardon;
. ...
(a) Corpus delicti, in modern sensa of the term, means the 5. By prescription of the crime:
,' actual commi::sion of the crime charged. Mutiny is the unlaw-
6. By prescription of the penalty;
ful resistance to a superior officer, or the raising of commotions
and.disturbanees on board a ship against the authority of its 7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided '.
commander. The term "charivari" includes a medley of dis- in article 344 of the Revised Penal Code. . ,
cordant voices, a mock serenade of discordant noises made on (b) The difference between justifying and exempting cir2
1; kettles, tin, horns, etc., designed to annoy and insult. Malice cnmstances may be stcted, as follows: (1.) A person who ack ,
..
'in.ilaw
' ~ % .
/ t
is malice which is presumed from every defamatory .by virtue of a justifying circumstance docs not transgress the.' ..
~,I
~
731
I
I
not opium.
, . He d'd not commit estafa, because there was no abuse of VIII. (a) What is the difference, if any, between illegal.
or deceit. The polkernan took the money through d tention and arbitrary detention? (b) Slate five ( 5 ) ruler;,
. .
g verniqg subsidiary imprisonment. .
commit coercion, because the policeman had intent (a) The difference between illegal detention and arbitrary
detention is that while the fcrmer js committed by privatc.
individual. the latter is committed by public officer.
!/ VI., (a) What are the elements of oonsented abduction? both cr'mes the offended party is deprived of his libe
(b) With respect to damage to property, may criminal neg- the offender, the former is a crime against liberty,w,h
ligence be distinguished from "civil" negligence? latter is a 'crime against the fundamental laws ,,of the '8%
-. . .' (a) The. elements of consente.&labduction are: (1) the of- (6) The five rules governing subsidiary imprisonment
:-, ,.
$ended,party,must be a virgin; ,&?,she must be over 12 and
..
1 ,~,
733
732
I
!
/'
CRIMINAL LAW REVIElVER
CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWER Bar Examinations in Criminal LRW
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
, ' 4.
If .the principal .penalty imposed be prision corseccional
or a?r&o and fine, he shall remain under confinement until his
for oux criminal law has general application. As a general nile,
all person living or sojourning in the Philippin
not fall under any of the exceptions. . ,
fine and pecuniary liabilities are satisfied, but his subsidiary
imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of the the following questions have already" b
sentknce nd in no case shall i t continue for more than one and if so, indicate the view ad
year, a no fraction or part of a day shall be counted against by the Philippine Supreme Court: (a) Is poker a
the $er. chance? ;(b) Is it possible for a minor between 9 and
When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the of age to act with discernment in respect of quasi-
imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if t h e (e) Can writs of attachment be issued in-eriminal cases?,,
have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave Philippine courts have jurisdistion over crimes committed
shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony. foreign merchant vessels while anchored in Philippine
the principal penalty imposed is higher than p k k o n (e) Can'a person be charged as an accmmplice in the crime,
no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed npoxt adultery?
(a) This question has not been resolved in this, jurisdiqtion
principal penalty imposed is not to be executed However, in the opinion of the Department of Justice, .19
by. confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of it is stated that poker'is not a game of chance, f o r the play
' : f&ed duration, the convict, during the period of time established
to win.
a greater degree of skill rather than chan
receding rules, shall continue to suffer the same de-
as those of which the principal penalty consists.
The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may ('e) Yes. A criminal court having jurisdiction over, several: y.
have suff,ered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him actions arising from the offenses charged is permitted to i s s u e "
'' .from reparation of the damage caused, nor from indemnification all the auxiliary writs necessary to carry such jurisdiction, into:!
effect (Eraiia vs. Panzani) .
nsequential damages in case his financial circum-
~ ' ? ~ n ~ ~improve;
~ u l but
d he shall be relieved from pecuniary (d) Yes. An offense committed aboard a foreign merchant..
, .,..?,:
. , our.,:
vessel while anchored in Yhiljppine waters is triable before
court. But crimes not involving breach of public order ~m ','
IX. An alien was arrested because he entered Olongapo ita mitted aboard a foreign merchant vessel in transit are not triable3
order to obtain confidential information relative to the disposi- by our courts. Smoking opium constitutes a breach of public
tion of U.S. Armed Forces in that reservation. He has turned
order.
,. . over to the Philippine Governlnent afterwards. May the alien
(e) No. However, in the decision of the Supreme Court
be successfully prosecuted for espionage?
of Spain, June 3, 1x74, i t was held that if a person perfoms
Yes. Although, the offense was committed within a base the acts of an accomplice by informing the accused of the ab-,\
against t h e security of the United States, i t is also an offense sence of the husband of the ma,rried woman and by watching
against the security of the Philippines. Under the Base Agree- for his .return, sflid person cannot be punished as an a
i ~ ment between the Philippines and the United States, our civit plice because of the nature of the crime of aduItery which i s ' -
court has jurisdiction over such offense even if committed with- punished upon the complaint of the husband alone ag
:.--
., . _,_ .in. a base. It is no defense that the offender was an alien, .:. ,
.. . .
734 735 , ii '1
., .,
..,,
I
!
736 737
.;’
I
I
f ,,,*
,
'CPIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CILIMINAL LAW REVIEWER "- ,~
Rar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Cxaminations in Criminal Law \ ' , '
alternative circumstances.
. .:. Justifying circumstances are those where the act of a per-
.;" ~~
ny person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in Aggravating circumstances are those/ which, if attendant in '
$
'CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Crimina! Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
. (a) Distinguish between generic aggravating. and qua- Accomplices are those persons who, not being
ircurnstances. (b) Can a qualifying Circumstance .be (Art. 17);cooperate in the execution of the offense
without having been alleged in the information? Why? or simultaneous acts.
The effect of a generic aggravating cir-umstance, not Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the co
ny mitigating circumstance, is to increase the penal& mission of the crime, and without having participated
d be imposed upon the accused to the inoximum period, I.
either as principals or accomplices, take part s u b s e w
t exceeding the limit prescribed by law; while that commission in any of the following manners: (1) by p
ying circumstance is not only to give the crime its themselves or, assisting the offender to profit by the
per and exclusive name but also to place tlx author thereof of the crime; (2) by concealing o r destroying the bod
such a situation as to deserve no other pcnalty than that crime or the effects o r instruments thereof, in order to prevent'
ecifically prescribed by law for said crime. its discovery; and (3) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in''
' .. A qualifying aggravating circumstance canrLot be offset by
~
the escape of the principal of the crime, provided the accessor)r:
a ..mitixating circumstance; a generic aggravating circumstance acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the suthor'
.A ; may be compensated by a mitigating circumstance. ! of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or a n at-
tempt to, take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
(b) No, because a qualifying circumstance i s an element of
habitually guilty of some other crime.
the offense which it qualifies. It is a rule that every element
(b) The folluwiug are criminally liable in the commission
1
of the of ense must be alleged in the information.
of a crime: for grave and less grave felonies, principals, accom-
V (a) Who are considered principals, accomplices, and ac- plices,. and accessories; and for light felonies, principals and
accomplices. '
: ' ,.
, .E ries in a crime? (b) Who are criminally liable in the
,*':: commission {of a crime? (e) A band of malefactors composed
,~
(e) All of the eight persons, if a t least four of them are
of eight persons, through force and intimidation, enter a house armed, are liable for robbery with rape as principals. When
one night. Three of the hand station themselves a t the door more than three armed malefactors take part in the commission
, .of the house t o prevent the entry of any persons who might of robbery, any member of the band who is present a t the c
, ' come to help the person attacked, while three of the band search
mission of the robbery shall be punished as principal of
. . of the assaults committed by the band, unless i t be shown'thafi
2 ', the house aind take away therefrom money and jewelry belong-
I
, -
3 ' ; jng to persons living therein, and the remaining two of the he attempted to prevent 'the same. The degree (period) of the
band rape two women who live in the house. What crime or penalty t o be imposed is the medium period of the penalty for.
. , crimes have been committed, and in what capacity did each the crime of robbery with rape.
"'. of the ma1e:factors participate in the commission thereof. State The penalty is not the maximum period of that correspond:.
for what crime they should be penalized, and the degree of the ing to the crime committed, because it does not appear that an%,
penalty to be imposed. of the arms used in the commission of the offense is an. & I
licensed firearm; and the fact that the crjme is committe&"
(a) The following are considered principals: (1) those who a band does not raise the penalty, since by a band does
,take a direct part in the execution of the act; (2) those who qualify t h e crime of robbery with rape.
force or induce others to commit it: and ( 3 ) those who
te in the commission of the offense by another act with- VI. (a) I n what cases are 'accessories not penalized?
ch it would not have been accomplished. While A was coming home one evening, he was attacked ~' ~.
r
741
I
@%;$;y 2
., .~
/'
,
--,,
'
,. . * ed by I1 who had been lying in wait for him. C, brother / (b) Penal laws have retroactive effect in so f a r a5 they
af B, and I) a first cousin of B, came to the scene and saw the favor the person guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual crim.
Jde& body of A. Upon the suggestion of C, the cadaver of A inal, and-the penal laws do not provide that they are not applicable
, :was
*.~ buried by B, C and D to prevent the discovery of the to p y d i n g action or causes of action. .._;
crime. B, C, and D are caught. What is the criminal respon- "Yes, because the law (Art. 22, R.P.C.) states that pend
sibility of B, C and D? laws ahall txyvc retroactive effect, "although at the time OX? the
(a) Accessories are not penalized in the following cases: o f such l a m a final sentence has been pronounced
if they are such with respect t o their spouses, ascendants, des- the same."
cendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters,
is parricide, a d how is i t distinguished
or relatives by affinity within the same degrees, and they take from homicirle and murder? (b) A intends to kill B, a stm'ng
quent to the commission of the crime in any of the kllls C, his father. What crime did A commit
What is the period of prescription in crimes7
body of the crime or ,' (a) Parricide is the killing of the offender's father, mother;
thereof, in order to prevent its dis- o r child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, o r any of his ascend;
. ...
or his spouse, who must be legitimate: " ;
or assisting in the escape of from homicide and murder in that, in
the accessory acts with parricide the victim must be any one of the relatives menti:nf,%
abuse of his public functions or whenever the autlior of the In other words, the relationship of the offender w i t h . t h e ' v x d
crime is guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an a$tempt is' the essential element of the crime of parricide. '.
.the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
guilty of some other crime.
lf the victim is not any one of the relatives mentioned ig
the definition of parricide, the killing is homicide, or murded
a principal, having taken direct part in the execu- if any of the quaiifying circumstances of the crime
constituting the crime. Although, he took part
(b) Parricide, the victim being the father of the of
subsequent to its commission, by helpiltg in the burial of the
The fact that A intends to kill a stranger and kills his
of A, B cannot be held liable as accessory, because he by mistake does not change the nature and name o
as principal in the crime. It merely affects the penalty to be imposed on the o
being a brother of R, is exempt from criminal liability. period of prescription in crimes is,
cousin'of B, is liable as accessory.
reclusion perpetuu or red
VII. (a) Can an accused be punished under a law enacted in twenty years; crimes punishable
after the date of the conmission of his crime? (b) When do prescribe in fifteen years;
'penal laws have retroactive eifect? D,oes such retroactive effect able by a correctionaI pena,lty shall prescribe in ten
benefit a convict who is serving his sentence? the exception of those punishable by arrest0 mayor,
prescribe in five years: the crime of libel or other sim
(a) Yes. The general rule, however, is that only that pen-
fenses .shall prescribe in two years; the offenses of o
81ty prescribed by law prior to the commission of tine felony
.;,%:may be imposed, and felonies are punishable under the laws in famation and slander by deed shall prescribe in
:1 force-at the time of their commission.
light offeuses prescribe in two months.
!r.;?*<</-
742 743
I
i
P+
robbery and theft. (b) What a r e .the es- of committing the offense are: (1) by ma
estafa? (e) A property owner in a province by means of writing, printing, lithography,
gent a gold bar to be taken to Manila to be graving, radio, phonograph, painting or theatrical or :cine
amined by a. goldsmith, later io be returned to the owner, graphic exhibition, or any similar means: and (2)
stead of fulfilling the order of his principal, the i.mputation orally.
nd converted the value thereof to his own (b) A is guilty of slander by deed. He performs.an-a
a t crime has the agent committed in this case? which casts dishonor, discredit, or contempt upon
.-
is committed by any person who, with intent
any personal property belonging to another,
ce against, or intimidation of any person, o r
A'' AUGUST', 1948
',Using force upon anything. I. ( a ) hat is the scope of the Revised Penal Cod
~' "-!Theft is committed by any person who, with intent to gain
ing the.dpplication of its provisions? (b) What are the
lolence against, or intimidation of, persons nor of a felony? (e) Do civil coorts have jurisdiction .
shall take personal property of another with- committed by persons subject to military law? ,
'
. (a) The ecope of the Revised Penal Code regarding:.
of estafa are: (1) deceit or abuse application of its provisions is stated in Art. 2 thereof,.
follows:
or prejudice capable of pecuniary
Except as provided in the treaties and laws of prefere
only the physicpl or material application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced
only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its
the custody of personal prop-
,;. its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outs
temporary purpose or for a
jurisdiction, against those who: (1) should commi
short period, the juridical or constructive possession remains while on the Philippine ship or airship; (2) 'should
in'the owner. The fact that the offender was the agent of the
~..
,o&er of the gold bar does not make him liable for estafa. In
counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippi
or obligations and securities issued by the Governm
vs. Contreras, the Court of Appeals mentioned be liable for acts connected
where the agent was said to be guilty of theft. into these Islands of the obligations
defamation defined by the Revised Penal above: (4) while being public
of committing the offense. (b) A, a an offense in the exercise of
commit any of the crimes ag
of B, his fiancee, cuts her hair off.
shaving her hair entirely. Of what crime is A guilty? law of nations.
.. . (b) The elements of a felony are: (1) there must
( a ) Defamation is defined by the Revised Penal Code as a
public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or de- act or omission; (2) the act or omission must
fect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, by the Revised Penal Code; and ( 8 ) the act or omi
or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or eon- be committed by means of dolo o r CulrJa.
1 ,tekipt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory (e) Yes. Civil courts have concurrent jurisdi
o t o n e who is, dead. military courts or general courts-martial over cri
745
.
CRIMINAL L A W REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Elar Examinations in Criminal L R W Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
by'soldiers of the Philippine Army. Even in time of war, the and that of attempted crime: A, with intent to kill, shot
civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the military eourtS but missed, B.
or general courts-martial over crimes ccmmitted by soldiers of (b) As a general rule, light felonies are not punishable ,',;
the, Philippine Army, provided that in the place of the com- when they are not consummated. But when the light felonies,.."
mission of the crime no hostilities are in progress and civil are against persons o r property, they are punishable even If,,
courts are functioning. they are in the attempted o r frustrated stage.
When the person subject to military law is a soldier of the Some light felonies w e bettinglin, sports contests, intribming
armed-forces of the United States stationed in the Phil:ppines, against honor, slight physical injuries, and theft where the
amount involved docs not exceed 85.00 and -the offender acted '
the provisions of the Base Agreement between the Philippines under the impulse of hunger, poverty, or difficulty of earning
and the United States app1Y.
a 1:velihcnd for the support of himself o? his family. The first
Our civil courts have no jurisdiction when (1) the offense two light felonies are not punishable when they are not con-
is-committed by any person within any base, except (a)' where summated. The last two light felonies are punishable even if ,:.'
the offender and the offended party are both Philippine citizens they are not consummated. 1 '
(not members of the armed forces of the US. on active duty) ( e ) The offer of a bribe which is declined is an attempted
o r (b), where the offense is against the security of the Philp- crime. When t h e erime requires the intervention of two persons
pines; (2) the offense is committed outside the bases, but the to corpmit it, it is either consummated when the offer or
offender and otfended party are both mentbers of the armed' proposal is accepted, or attempted when the offer or proposal
.forces of the United States; and (3) the offense is committed is declined or rejected. But in a case decided by the Supre&$-..
outside the bases by any member of the armed forces of the Court, it was lie18 that where the defendant fails to c o r k p t a.
United States against the security of the United States. public officer, because tine latter returned the money given by' '.
In time of war, the United States shall have the right to the defentlant, the crime is frustrated corrupticn of public of- .,
exercise exclusive jurisdiction over any offenses committed by ficer. With due respect to the Supreme Court, I submit that it
should have been attempted corruption of public officer. ,.
members of the armed forces of the Gnited States in the .:
Philippines.
111. (a) Explain the difference between a justifyi
' .. a. (a) Define (1) consummated crime, (2) frustrated an exempting circumstance. (b) To what class do the
crime and (3) attempted crime, and give an example of each ing circumstances belong: (1) self-defense, (2)' acting
class (b) Are light felonies which are not consummated pun- compulsion of an irresistible force, (3) accused being
ishable? Mention a few of the light felonies covered by your years old and (4) acting in obedience to an order given^ by
answer. (e) Is the offer of ,a bribe which is declined ai1 at- superior for some lawful purpose. (e) Menti'on four mitii:
temmpted or frustrated crime? ing and six aggravating
.~ circumstances.
. (a) Same answer as in No. I1 (a) o f 1947 Bar Questions. (a) Same answer as in No. IV (b) of 1946 (November
Example of consummated crime: A shot B who died as a Ear Questions.
consequence; that of frustrated crime: B was mortally wounded (b). (1) SeK-defense - justifying circumstance, (2)
by A who had the intent t o kill, but due t o the timely and under compulsion of irresiatible force - exempting circum
sble:,,isurgicaloperation and medical treatment B did not die; (3) accused being eight years old - exempting circum
747
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWFA CIZIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
~~r Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinatiqns i n Criminal Law
/
'--offender had ,voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in
authorit or his agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed (c) I would accuse the defendant of rape with homic
his lty before' the court prior to the presentation of the
e$d ce for the prosecution.
The six aggravating circumstances are: (1) that advantage the rape.
be taken by the offender of his public position, (2) that the
mmitted in contempt of o r with insult to the public
in relation t o Art. 385 and Art. 249 of tlie Revised Penal Code.
orities, (3) that the crime be committed in consideration
reward, or promise, (4) that the act be committed V. (a) Is habitual delinquency a crime? What
of confidence or obvious ungratefulness, ( 6 ) that, person hahitnal delinquent? (b) Describe briefly' the
e committed with the aid of armed men or persons tion. and sc,ope of the Indeterminate Sentence L
or afford impunity, and (6) that the crime be benefits of said. law applicable to all offenses and offend
n the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earth- Is the application of the same mandatory? (e) How i s
mic, or other calamity or misfortune. liability. arising from crime extinguished?
) What is a continuous offense? Assuming that the (a) Na, habitual delinquency Is not a cri
cts constituting the same are performed in different places, a fact or circumstance which, if present in a gi
shall acquire jurisdiction? (b) What is a complex rise t o the imposition of an additional peaalty.
A was kidnapped in Manila and murdered in Batangas,, A person i s ' a habitual delinquent if within
court o,f first instance shall have jurisdiction to try the years from the date o f his (last) release or last eo
nappers? (e) Defendant forced a girl to have sexual inter- the crimes of (1) serious or less serious p
e with him at the 'point of a gun. Sufferiqg from gonor- !(2) Tobo, ( 8 ) hzcrto, (4) estafa, or ( 5 ) falsi€ication;he is f o
he infected the girl, who later complained btense pain in
and as the result oE peritonitis she died. Of what
guilty of any of said crimes a third time 01% oftener.
(b) The Indeterni'nate , Sentence Law covers crimes-.
~:,:;,
nies would you accused him and why? bhable either by special law or by the Revised
ontinuous offense is a sicgle crime, consisting of the application of the law, the court must, instead of
ries of acts but all arising from one criminal resolution. fixed penalty, determine two penalties, referred to in
e courts of the different places where the facts consti-
the continuous crime are performed have concurrent
749
CIlIMINAL LAW IZEVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal L a w
Bnr Examinations in Criminal Lnw
(a) False testimony is committed by any person tvho,;-be"
is punished by a special law, the court shall under oath and required to testify as to the truth of a ce
t o an indeterminate penalty, the maximum matter at a henrinx before a competent authority, shall
exceed the maximum fixed by bhe special . the truth or say something contrary to it.
shall not be less than the minimum
The forms of false testimony are: (I) false testimony*
criminal cases, (2) false testimony in civil cases, and (3) fa
by the Revised Penrl Code, the
to an indeterminate penalkg, 'testimony in other cases.
be that which, in view of (b) Perjnry is a crime committed by any person who,
be properly imuosed under ingly making untruthful statements and not being incIu
and the minimum term of the provisions for false testimony in judicial proceediigs, s
testify under oath, or make an affidavit, upon any mate
matter before a competent person authorized to administer
Law are not oath in cases in which the law so requires.
The elements of perjury are: (1) there must be stateme
under oath or affivadit upon a material matter; (2) before a
competent officer, authorized to receive and administer oath;
(3) willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood by the of:
fender; and (4.)that the sworn statement containing the falsity
is r e q u i r y law.
from confinemerlt o r evaded sentence (7) those who violated the prosecution must prove which of the two state- ,.
false, and must show that statement to be false by , '
the t e r n s of conditional pardon granted t o them by the Chief other than the contradictory statements.
Executive, (8) those whose maximum term of imprisonment
does .not exceed one year, (9) those who, upon the approval VII. ( a ) Distinguish arbitrary detention from '' illegal de-
of the Iaw, had been sentenced by final judgment, and (10) those tention? May a public officer wrest without warmnt? If so, . .
senteneed t o the penalty of destierro or suspension. Discuss briefly the principles govern,.
The application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law is circumstances. (c) What is a search
mandatory, except in the cases specified therein, for it employs requisites for issuing a search wag
the phrases "convicts shall be sentenced" and "the court shal1 rant? '.: .&W
sentence the a'c.cused to an indeterminate sentence".
arising from crime is extinguishes 4n the
answer as in No. VI11 (a) of 1946 (November) 3
4
-A+
obligations, in accordance with the .. :*.
A public o€fficer may arrest without warrant in the 'follow- %
:
ing instances: (1) when the person to be arrested has commit-.:.$
What are the forms of . -.&
ed, is actually committing, or is about to commit an offense'.,..;.,
(b) What is perjury; in hi, presence; (2) when an offense has in fact been corn;!@
prosecuted for perjury mitted, and he bas reasonable ground to believe that the persofg.
to be arrested has committzd i t ; and (3) when the person *&
statements? .+&
.*,,;y
, _.*
750 751
I
I 1
.
' , . , J
/ CRIXINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
ing h m t o search for personal property and hying i t before ruin; (4). on occasion of any of the calamities enumerated Here?
the court. jnabove, or of an eartiguake, ,eruption of a volcano, destructive 2
' . The requisites for issuing a search warrant are: (1) i t cyclone, epidemio, or any other public calamity; (5) with evident21
must be issxed upon probable cause; (2) the probable cause premeditation; (6) with cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanl$z ''i
must be determined by the judge or justice of the peace, (3) in augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging or scoff-:::;
the determination of probable cause, the judge or justice of ing at his person o r corpse. ' ,*..
!
752 753
I I ,
4
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER ., CIEIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
.,-.;
.I
:
king the personal property of another with Concubinage-
e to the mind of the offender after he had (1) That the man must be married.
( 2 ) Tha e committed any of the following ad
Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;,
b , Having sexual intercourse under scandalous.'
circumstances with a woman who is not his
cases, i t was held that the taking of the personal wife:
f the deceased was theft, not robbery. c. Cohabiting with her in any other place.
(3) That as reg'ards the woman, she must know
him to be married.
T
'.i
/
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Lrw Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
.-...
' ' . : ( ) No, because- (b) No, because the husband acted under the justifying
(I.) There is no joint criminal intent although there circumstance of defense of a relative. Since the armed ma3
is joint physical act; was engaged in a. murderous attack in his own home in the~pre4,
(2) Thus, one of the parties may be insane and the ence of his wife whose life was exposed to peril, there was un:
l o t h e r sane, in which case only the sane coulcl be lawful aggression on the part of the deceased. Considering thf
nature of the unlawful aggression (murderous attack), I assums
that the means employed by the husband was reasonable. l2.m
is nothing mentioned in the question about provocation by thd
wife in which the husband took part. All the three requisites
m o n s guilty of rape, seduction, or abduction, shall
of defense of relatives are present.
/'
Wbere the defendant set fire to a sack. and ram
,, . To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law should pre- kerosene oil which he had placed near one of th6
posts and partition walls of the house, and the burning of whid
:::
,,,:: .. 3. In ever case to support the offspring. was immediately noticed and ,prevented by another. %?!a1
,':j. .The adulterer and the concubine may also be sentenced, crime, if any, has been committed by the accused? State Y O &
a separate civil proceeding, to reasons. (b) Does the fact that the oEfended party had he&
to the offended spouse. a person of an unchaste character constitute a good defense'?
of rape .cannot be sentenced to the charge a€ rape?
offspring, because the law prevents him from
I (a) It depends upon whether or not a part of the housi
doing so, was burned. If no part of the house was burned, the crime .OM:
mitted by the accused is frustrated arson. If a part of the posh
ATJGUST, 1949 and partition walls of the house, even how small that part.??,
is burned, it is consummated arson. I n arson, i t is not neces.
and demands sary that the building set o n fire is completely burned. .-.;.
It is Prustrated arson when no part of the house was bu
because the defendant already performed all the acts of I
756 757
1
",/
.~.. f
'
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
. d
' ( d V h e n he cohabits with her in any other place.
. ( . A person charged with the crime of frustrated homi-
eide may he found guilty of the crime of unlawful discharge
of the possession of his property, the malefactor is responsible ;'
to the owner either (1) for the return of the property or (2) for' '
the payment of its value if it cannot be returned, and tkiri
of firearms against another, when the prosecution fails to prove whether the sroperty is lost or destroyed by the act of the ~.
intent to kill on the part of the accused. The essential element malefador or t h a t of any other person, o r as a result of any
' . of frustrated homicide is that the offender has the intent to kill. other cause or causes ( U S . YS. San Kupang, 36 Phil. 348; see
When the offender shot at another with any firearm without Arts. 1268, new Civil Code).
. .intent to kill, he is liable for discharge of firearm. (b) No. The agent in good faith rekined the funds for
the purpose of necessary self-protection against. his principal.
IV. (a) What crime, if any, was committed by the police- There is neither misappropriation nor conversion of the money
who arrested an innocent person, charging him falsdy received, nor denial of having received the same. This element
having violated the opium law for the purpose of extort- of estafa with abuse of confidence is lacking.
g money,, which was given? State your reasons. (b) If the
: property stolen or robbed is contraband, such as opium, will
the defendant he exempt from criminal responsibility? State
VI. (a) If the treasurer of a corporation took large sums
of money from the cashier working under him, for his-own
-:I your reasons. personal use, leaving in lieu thereof his personal checks with
. . (a) Robbery with intimidation of person. Falsely charging instructions not t o deposit them on the current account of the!
an innocent person with having violated the opium law is a form Company, until the end of the month, what crime, if any, -\vas
of intimidation. The policeman, with intent to gain, took m.oney committed by said treasurer? State your reasons. (b) When
:''1,, from the offended party by means of such intimidation. the complainant signed a notarial document, which had heen
, ' (b) No. In theft and in robbery, the personal property misrepresented to him by the defendant to be a power of at-
taken by the defendant may be contraband, such as opium. All torney, when in truth it was a deed of sale of certain property ',,
,~ tliat.the law requires is that it he personzl property, belonging
belonging to the complainant, what offense has heen committeq $
hy the accused? State your answer.
t o another, and taken with intent to gain.
, .
(a) Estafa. This is not a case where money was exchanged.:,
V. (a) If the cattle stolen by the defendants have died for the checks drawn against existing funds and available for
from rinderpest, while in the possession of the constabulary immediate prezentation to the bank for payment; and since, .the
during the pendency of the trial in case of conviction. are the checks were not to be deposited on the current account of.
758 759
I '.'
CRIMINAL LAW I~EVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal. Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law -
company until the end of the month, there was a t least tem- (b) No. The killing of the thief cannot be legally con.
porafy prejudice caused to the company. I n - th? case of U.S. sidered as murder qualified by evident premeditation, becap88
Vs. Sevilla, it was held that the crime of estafa was committed there was merely a threat which is not of a direct and specific
even if the accused had no intention to permanently misappropriate character. Between the time when the defendant made the threat
the fund!: to himself, because the law is clear and makes no dis- and the time when the thief was killed by him, there was no act
tinction between permanent and temporary misappropriations. performed by him manifestly indicating that he clang to 'Gt
(b) Estafa. The accused committed estafa by inducing an- determination to commit the crime. That requisite of evident
other, by means of deceit, to sign any document. The elements premeditation is not present.
of this form of estafa are: (1) that the offender induced the VIII. (a) And from the fact that the defendants who werti
offended party to sign a document; ( 2 ) that deceit be employed soldiers that had mutinied, had deliberately planned to atGc5
to make him sign the document; (3) that the offended party the town, using their firearms, for the killing of two per ,,. ))
personally signed the document: and (4) that prejudide be caused. who had volunteered to help in defending the town, ean,::th$
Although, the question does not state that the defendant culprits be legally found guilty of murder, with the
induced t.he complainant to sign the document, it could be in- circumstancc of premeditation? Sfate your reas
ferred from the fact that the defendant made misrepresentation during a quarrel, the defendant endeavored to kill
t o him. Since all the elements of the crime are present, the but by mistake killed another, will his mistake i
offense of estafa was committed by the accused. man instead of another relieve him from criminal responsibili
B for homicide? Reasons.
. . VII. (a) What crime, if any, has been committed by the
(a) Yes. For premeditation to exist, it is not nec
policeman and janitor, who aided the defendant municipal treas-
that the accused planned to kill a particular person.
urer, in removing the safe from the municipal building and its
was held by the Supreme Court that a general attack
contents afterwards? State your reasons. (b) In case of an village having been premeditated and planned, the kil
undetermined victim, considering the threats made by the dc- any individual during the attack was attended by the aggravatin;
fendant who had lost a fishing-boat that either he or the circumstance of evident premeditation, which qualifies the c r i d
thieves would be turned into ghosts, can .the killing 'of the t o murder.
thief afterwards be legally considered a s murder? State your
(b) NO. This is a case where .the wrongful act done
reasons. different from that intended. Under Art. 4, paragraph'l
( a ) The policeman and janitor, who aided the municipal . , the Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is incurred
treasurer in removing the safe from the municipal bnilding and person committing a felony, although the wrongful act
, if+ contents afterwards, committed the crime of malversation. different from that which he intended. When the defen
'.Even private persons who participate as eo-perpetrators in the deavored to kill his adversary, he was committing a felony.-,.;
' offense of? malversation can be penalized for the coinmission of killing of another person was the direct, logical, and neces
such crime. When the law clearly defines rt crime, as it has consecpence of the felony committed.
here defined the crime of malversation, those who in any way
participati? therein must be principals, accomplices or abettors IX. (a) Is the accidental killing of a bystander, w
thereof. Since the policeman and janitor took direct part in the fendant was acting in self-defense, punishahle? If
gxecution of the crime, they should be held liable as principals. what crime? State your reasons. (b) If some of the d
760 761
I
ants. attacked the deceased, one of them inflicting mortal wonnds, original document, falsified or imitated by the defendant? State
while the other two inflicted wounds which were not mortal, your reasons.
but all of them helped in burying the victim, what will be the (a) If the employee charged with misappropriation in :S
.criminal responsibility of the accused? Reasons. criminal case is acquitted, such acquittal has no effect
(a) No. This is another case where the result was not in- any subsequent civil sction based on the same misappropri
tended by the defendant. In order that a person may be held because in case of fraud, and there is fraud in misappropriation,!
"criminally liable for the result not intended by him, it is abso- a subsequent civil action is an independent civil action (Art:.33,?
lutely necessary that he committed a felony, and that the result C.C.), which may be instituted although the defendant is
was the direct, logical and necessary consequence of the felony held criminally liable.
1: ,
,.,.committed. While the defendant vras acting in self-defense, he (Is) In falsification of a public or official document, it
was not committing a felony, for the act of such person was not necessary that there should be an original document falsiy
in accordance with law, so that he is deemed not to have trans- or imitated by the defendant. In enumerating and describi
:. gressed the law. the eight different acts of falsification, Art. 171 o f the
>
(b) If all the defendants who attacked the deceased, includ- Penal Code mentions "genuine document" and "genuine o
'',:ing the other two who inflicted wonnds which were not mortal, only in acts of falsification by altering or intercalating
.?,were in conspiracy, they are principals, because they participated ment or by including in a copy a statement contrary to,
.hthe criminal resolution and they took direct part in the execu- ferent from, that of the original document.
tion ,of the act. But if the other two, who inflicted wounds Therefore, it is only when the act of falsification
which were not mortal, merely concurred in the criminal pur- in making alteration 01- intercalation or in including in the
-pose of the others, then those two are on14 accomplices. The a different statement that there should be an original docu
fact that a11 of them helped in burying the vidkn does not make
them accessories, because they o r some of them already participated AUGUST, 1950
as principals and the two of them as accomplices. Accessories
are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime I. (a) What relation do the generic circumstances h
and withont partcipating therein, either as principals or accom- the 'imposition of ~penalties? (b) Name two exempting and two.
plices, took part subsequent to the commission of the crime in aggravating circumstances. ( e ) Give the reasons underlying the:
any of the manners enumerated in Art. 19 of the Revised Penal provision of the law that one who kills another in self-defe
Code. is exempt from criminal liability.
X. (a) While it is true that a civil action may be maintained (a) Generic circumstances or mitigating and aggravati
by an employer to recover money misappropriated by his em- circumstances shall be taken into account f o r the purppse of
ployees, without the prior institution of a criminal proceeding, diminishing o r increasing the penalty in conformity with the,,
nevertheless if a criminal prosecution based upon the same mis- following rules:
appropriation is in fact instituted against the emcployee and he (1) Aggravating circumstances which in themselves const
is acquitted, what would be the effect of such acquittal upon tute a crime specially punishable by law o r which are incl
any subsequent civil action? Reason your answer. (b) In the by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty th
commission of the crime of falsification of a public or official for shall not be taken into account for the purpose of incr
document, is it necesary that there should have been an ing the penalty.
r
763
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
bg
t
(2) The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravat--
c’wmstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it
mus of necessity accompany the commission thereof.
(3) Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise
from the moral attributes of the offender, or from his private
relations with the offended party, or from any other personal
I ’the Philippines do not apply in Hongkong. If ymu’were the
judge, would you acquit or convict hint? %‘Thy?
If I were the judge, I would convict William Lee. Art. .2
of the Revised Penal Code provides that except as provided in
the treaties and laws of pyeferential application, the provisions of
that Code shall be enforced outside of the jurisdiction of the
Philippines against those who should counterfeit any currency
-.’.
1
i gation and security is punished by the Revised Penal Code. It
only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution
is not necessary that there be a treaty between Great Britain
of the act or their cooperation therein.
and the Philippines protecting our currency against falsification ’:
(b) The two exempting circumstances are: (1) An imbecile in the territories of Great Britain to enforce the provision of t h e ,
or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a lucid Revised Penal Cnde against William Lee who counterfeited in
interval; (2) A pemon under nine years of age. Rongkong our one-peso currency notes.
!. The two aggravating circumstances are: (1) That advan- 4 The “treaties” mentioned in Art. 2 of the Revised Penal
tage be taken by the offender of his public position; (2) That
the crime be committed in contempt of or wilh insult to the- / Code have reference to agreements that may be entered into by
and between the Phi!ippines and a foreign country against the
public authorities. 1 application of the provisiom of the Code to offenders and crimes
(c) The reasons underlying the provision of the law that I mentioned in said Art. 2, when committed in that foreign country.
one who kills another in self-defense is justified and does not
.. incur any criminal liability are stated, as follows: “Because i t 3 111. Juan and Pedro, disappointed jobseekers, agree and plan:
~ y o u f dbe quite impossible for the State in all cases to prevent. t o assassinate the Head of the State: Juan would watch the^,
aggression upon its citizen (and even foreigners, of course) and Chief Executive’s movements, would tell Pedro the opportune.
offer protection to the person unjustly attacked. On the other time and place for the assassination, and would furnish Pedro:
a .45-caIiber pistol; and Pedro would shoot the intended victW4
hand,
an cT o t be conceived that a person should succumb t o
it 1 aggression without offering any resistance.”
unlawf at the time and place to he indicated by Juan. Fortunately,;;
!
11. iUiam Lee, a resident of Hongkong, counterfeits there
one-pe o currency notes of the Central Bank of the Philippines.
There is no treaty between Great Britain and the Philippines~
protecting Philippine currency against falsification in the ter-~
the plan is discovered by the vigilant agents of the NBI, w h o
immediately arrest and investigate Juan and Pedro, and ,the$
voluntarily confess.to the foregoing facts. If you were the f i 4 f
to whoni the NBI agents present the case, what action
you take against Juan and Pedro? Why?
wad$
..‘.,...%;+>,+& 3
: zitories of the former. Later, William Lee comes to Manila on- If I were the fiscal, I would droll. the case against,
;$:, a business trip and is arrested and prosecuted here for the crime and Pedro, bkcause they merely agreed and decided to.co
&committed in Hongkong. His defense is that the penal laws o f a felony, which is not treason, rebellion o r sedition..;i
.. t , ’,
764 765
I
cbnspiracy i s ' n o t a felony punished by the Revised Penal Code' your answer. (b) What premature marriages are punishable
or any other penal law. Conspiracy alone, without the execu- under the Revised Penal Code?
tion of its purpose, is not a crime, except in few and rare ( a ) No. C is not guilty of parricide, even if be aided B ,'
eases, that is, in treason, rebellion, or sedition. in killing her husband, because the private relation o f B with .,'
her husband, which qualified the crime t o parricide, was not
IV. (a) Give an example of subornation of perjury. (b) attendant to C who was a stranger (Art. 62, R.P.C.).
Can the suborner be penalized under the Revised Penal Code? (b) The premature marriages which are punishable ,.
(c) Define libel under the Revised Penal Code, and give its the Revised Penal Code are those by-
essential elements. (1) A widow who married within 301 days from the date
. .
(a) A, accused of physical injuries, paid B PlOO to testify of the death of her husband, or before having delivered if
.in his (A's) favor in a preliminary investigation to be con- she was pregnant a t the time of his death.
ducted by a fiscal, even if A knew that B did not know any- (2) A woman who, her marriage having been annulled o
thing about the case. B, under oath, testified falsely before dissolved, married before her delivery or before the, expi
ttle,fiscal in favor of A. This is an example of subornation of the period o f 301edays after the date of the legal s
of perjury.
:i. (b) Yes, the suborner (A) can be penalized under the VI. (a) Are there persons exempt from liability
Revised Penal Code, as principal by inducement in the &me Of ling (estafa)? If so, who are they? (h) Distinguish sedition
perjury. from rebellion.
.. (e) Libel is a public and malicious imputation of a crime, (a) Yes. The persons exempt from liability for swindling'
o r o f a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, are:
condition, status, or circumstance tending t o cause the dis- (1)Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or re
honor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, affinity in the same line;
or to black'en the memory of one who is dead. ( 2 ) The widowed spouse with respect to the prop
,IIts essential elements are: belonged to the deceased spouse before the same
passed into the possession of another; and
.'.. ,. , (1) There must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice
(3) Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law
or defect, real or imaginary, o r any act, omission, Condition,
in-law, if living together.
status, or circumstance.
..,.;,
"..' . ( 2 ) The imputation must be made publidy. These y r s o n s are only civilly liable.
, .
,, , (3) It must be malicious. (b)' Sedition is distinguished from rebellion, as follows:
(4) The imputation must be directed at r. natural or juri- (1) As t o the roanner the crime is committed. - In s
dical-person, or one who is dead. tion, the offenders rise publicly and tumultuously, emplo
( 5 ) The imputation must tend t o cause tne dishonor, dis-
force, intimidation, or other means outside of legal metho
credit or contempt o f the person defamed.
In rebellion, the offenders rise publicly and take arms again
the Government.
t V. (a) A was killed by his wife I3. C, a stranger, aided -
( 2 ) As t o the objects o r purpose of the uprising.
1, B in killing her husband. Is C guilty of parricide? Reason out sedition, the object of the uprising is any of the followi
i.'
766
I
:..,:. .
,.,
.,.,, ,
(a) t o prevent the promulgation or execution of any law or him from bad bargains, protect him from unwise investme
the holding of any popular election; (bb) to prevent the
B relieve him from one-sided contracts, or annul the effects o
National C:overnment, or any provincial or municipal govern- foolish acts. Coui-ls cannot constitute themselves guardian of;
ment, or any public officer thereof from f-eely exercising its persocs who are not legally incompetent." (Vales vs. Villa,
/
' ' or his functions, or prevent the execution Lf any administra- Phil. 769)
~..: tive order; (a)t o inflict any act of hate or revenge upon
the person o r property of any public officer or employee; PI. (a) A surreptitiously placed a firearm in the premises.,
(dd) to commit, for any political or social. end, any act of of B and informed the police agajnst B for illegal possession.
,.' hate or revenge against private persons o r any social class; of Nrearm. What crime did A commit? (b) Give two exam+.,
I and (ee) t o despoil, for any political or social end, any perssn, ples of a complex crime. (e) What can mu say about the.
.municipality or province, or the National Government of all its penalty for a complex crime? ~ ,.
property o r any part thereof. '
(6 committed the crime of incriminating innocent per-
." In rebellion, the purpose of the uprising is any of the fol- son, because he performed an act which directly incriminated
lowing: (1.) To remove from the allegiance to the Govern- or imputed to an innocent person the commission of the crime.
ment o r its laws (aa) the territory of the Piikejpines o r any of illegal possession of €irearm.
part ther of, or (bb) any body of land, naval o r other armed
iJ
+The two examples of complex crime are:
:*, forces; or (2) to deprive the Chief Executive or Congress,
.I who o r partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives.
U A , with intent t o Bill, shot a t B; the slug fired Trom
A's gun hit B, Idlljng him: and the same slug which passed
through and through B's body, hit and seriously injured C
VII. Elvaristo Flores, a collector of antiques, saw in a
" ,~
,
who was standing behind B. This is a complex crime of ,.,
"Chinese store a silver coin tor sale, which according to his
.2>?, catalogue (of antiques is worth $100. The price askeB by the homicide with frustrated homicide.
..&owner was P8. But by false representatiops he convinced the .L2) Pr falsified a check f o r P500 by counterfeiting the
...
.:%,.' owner to sell the coin to him for PI.
~
Several days later the signature of B thereon and presented i t to the bank f o r pay-
seller found out that the real value of the coin was $100 and ment. ' A received F500 from the bank. This is a complex
he engaged you as his counsel. What would you advise your crime of estafa through falsification of commercial document.
i
"' client? Reason out your answer. 4 e ) The enalty for a complex crime is intended to favor
:ii;
were the counsel engaged by the seller, I would advise the cnlprit.
forget the whole thing, as Evaristo Flores committed In di ecting that the penalty for the graver offense shall.
.
Being the owner of the silver coin which he offered be impo ed. in its maximum period, Art. 48 could have had no. .:'
er knew or ought to know the real value of other 9 rpose than to prescribe a penalty lower than the ag-
found out later that the real value of the gregate of the penalties for each offense, if imposed separately.
$100, that was his own fault for which he can have The reason for this benevolent spirit of Art. 48 is readily ''
768 769
I
i
There are two ways of committing the crime of direct a@
the first view I have stated is the
saults. They are:
(1) Without public uprising, by employing force o r in-
. A, who was a cashier in a department store, falsified
q timidation .or the attainment of. any of the purgoses enu-
memted/b;f defining the crimes of rebellion .and sedition.
National Bank in 'the amount of PZOO
by forging the signature of his friend B, who had only PlOO Without public' uprising, by attacking, by
deposited in the Bank in current account. A bought from the fore or by serious!y intimidating or by seriously res
store wherein he was employed certain goods and merchandise person in aufhority or any of its agents, while engaged
amounting to F150 which he paid with the falsified check the perfor nce of official duties, or on the occasion of su
(which he endorsed) and received as change 850 in cash. After
several days A stole the check and concealed it. At the end
of the month A was found short in his accounts in the amount ' "Ik;fis the crime of illegal association d
of €200. For what crime or crimes can A be prosecuted? f r o that of illegal assembly?
A can be prosecuted for a complex crime ef estafa through The distinction between the crime of illegal associat'
i, fdxification of commercial document, because the falsification
.,:e and that of illegal assembly may be stated, as follows:
::"of"the check was a necesasry means for committing the estda: (1) In illegal assembly it is necessary that there '
stealing and concealing of the cheek is not a separate actual meeting or assembly of armed persons for the pu
I
;<. ~' ,
I .
770 771
I
'I,. or. of.individua1s who, although not armed, are incited to the resolve the issue in accordance with the decision of the. Supreme:
:'<: commission of treason, rebellion, sedition, or assault upon a Court. .,
pkrson in authority or his agent. In the case of People vs. Hernandez, el al., 52 O.G. 5606;
quisite is not necessary in the crinie of illegal 89- the Supreme Court held that there is no complex crime of ie-
.IC- bellion with multiple murder, arson and robberies. The reason
'* .:I
illegal assembly, ii is the meeting and attendance for the ruling is stated, as follows:
ting that are punished. One of the means by which rebellion may be committed,
associations it is the act of forming or organ- . .in the words of Art. 135, is by "engaging in war against, the
embership of, the association that are bunished. forces of the government" and "committing serious violence72.
e purpose of the meeting is to comm'it, crimes . in the prosecution o€ said "war". These expressions imp$ 'j
by special laws, such meeting is not an illegal as- everything that war connotes, namely: resort t o a m , requisi-'
tion of property and services, collection of taxes and contribu-' :
tions, restraint of liberty, damage to property, physical., in-, '1
egal association, the purpose may inclucle. that of
juries and loss of life, x x x. Being within the purview'.of:
. . imes punishable by special law% because when
"engaging in war" and "committing serious violence", said re-
' ~'
the purpose of the organization is contrary to public morals
sort to arms, with the resulting impairment or destruction ofW
'&e acts hich are contrary to &blic morals may constitute
/";
life and property, constitutes not two or more offenses, but;
crimes unishable under the special laws. q
3 only one crime--that of rebellion plain and simple.
'
, ,: 4. Whal. are the essential elements of the crime of forcible
abduction?
The essential elements of the crime of forcible abduction
are:
i
4
Inasmuch as the acts specified in Art. 135 constitute one.
single crime, it follows necessarily that said acts offer no 'oc-'.
casion for the application of Art. 48, which requires therefor-
the cominission of, at least, two crimes.
,(1) The pel'son abducted is any woman, regardless of her A mere participant in the rebellion, who is not a public
age, civil status, n r reputation. officer, should not be placed a t a more disadvantageous posi-
tion.
(2) The abduction is againiit her will.
,,
>
.
. ( 3 ) Witlith lewd designs.
I ,
', . you were the Judge called upon to decide the case, how woulil ' 7. What is the distinction between habitual deliquency and
habitual delinquency and recidivism When b, reason or on the occasion of the rape, a homicide,
J'
*- been previo ly convicted by final judgment of another crime shall be reclusion perpetua.
embraced ihe same title of the Code; in habitual delinquency' When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim
t h e cri s are specified. has become insane the penalty shall be likeaise ?'ecZmion per-
( As t o the peiiod of time the crimes are committed. - petm.
In r cidivisrn, no period of time between the former convic-'
//
tion and the last convietion is fixed by law; in habitual de-. 9. (a) State the npeessary elements of the crime of h-
lenquency, the offender is found guilty of any of the crimes
viction.
ten years from his last release or last con-
(i
custody of documents. Tliey are:
(1) Removal, concealment or destruction of documents
any of the crimes specified. (Art. 226).
( 4 ) As to their effects. - Recidivism, if not offset by a (2) Officer breaking seal (Art. 227).
mitigating circumstance, serves to increase the penalty only (3) Opening of closed documents (Art. 228).
to the maximum; whereas, if there is habitual delinquency, an
additional penalty is imposed.
1
/;
Since the question does not specify the form of infidelity
in the custody of documents, I suppose that the elements of
@ the first form of the crime of infidelity in the ccstody of
When and how may rape he committed.
documents axe the ones called for.
ape, may be committed by having carnal knowledge of a
under any of the following Circumstances: The elements of the first form of the crime of infidelity
j in the custody of, documents are:
(1) By using force or intimidation:
6..
:t (2) When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
4 (1) That d e offender be a public officer;
(3
?&% unconscious; and (2) T p d h e r e be a document or papers removed, destroyd;
or conceded ;
(3) When the woman is under twelve years of age, even ,,.
i though neither of ;the circumstances mentioned in the two (3) The said document or papers should have been eon-
shall be present. fied or entrusted to such public officer by reason of his office;
(4) That damage or prejudice t o the public interest, or td
a third person, should have been caused.
two or more persons, the penalty (b) The mere act of affiliating with, and becoming
ber of, the commu~~ist party of the Pldlippines is spy!
, , . I
,yuni: under the Anti-Subversion Act. Althouxh,- . -wior t u or incomplete exenipting circumstance, and that the offendei!'
the enactment of the Anti-Subversion Act membership in the had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that corn--
communist party is a crime under the Revised Penal Code. it mitted.
being covered by the crime of illegal associations, after the Aggravating circilmstances are those which, if attend
enactment of the Anti-Subversion A d affiliating with, ana in the commission of the crime, serve to increase the pe
becoming member of, the communist party of the Philippines without, however, exceeding the maximum of the penalty
should be punished under the mid Act. vided by law for the offense. The examples of agg
. . circumstances are: that advantage be taken b$ the
10. IInto how many classes are circumstances affecting of his public position, and that the crime be- committed
criminal liability divided? Define and give examples of each. contempt of o r with insult t o the public authorities.
The circumstances affecting climinal liability are divided The alternative circumstances are those which mu8
jnto five .groups, namely: (1) justifying circumstances, ( 2 ) taken into consideration as aggravating o r mitigating ai:
''2 exempting circumstances and. other ahsolutory causes, ' (3) miti- ing to the nature and effects of the crime and the o
,,2 gating circumstances, (4) aggravating circumstances, and (6) ditions attending its commission. The examples of a1teW.a
: alternative circumstances. circumstances are intoxication and relationship.
~. Justifying circumstances are those where the act of a
person is said to be in accordance with law, so that such person'
.<,is deemed not to have transgressed the law and is free from / AUGUST, 1952
: both criminal and civil liability. The examples of justifying ./
circumstances are self defense, defense of relatives, defense I. From the definition given in the Revised Penal $2
5 <30f;strangers, and state of necessity.
,I:
(1932) that "acts and omissions punishable by law are f e
, . (Art. 3), the word VOLUNTARY of the previous code,
~ ...."; Exempting circumstances are those grounds for exemption
, " ~
777
CKIXINAL LW REVIEWER CRIMINA LAW REVIEWER
B a r Examinsti r in Criminal Law Bar Examin m e in Criminal Law
The elimination of the word and the phrase mentioned in the -public officer. With due respect, I respectfully submit that it^
question is justified, because the law premmes that acts or ishould have been attempted corruptiox of public officer.
omissions punishable by law are voluntary. The accused may
overcome the presumption by shon4ng that his act or omission 111. State the differences existing between the circumstance
.is not free, intelligent, and intentional, or thnt i t is not due t o %of"laving acted under the compulsion of an irresistible force",
his negligence, imprudence, lack of foresight or lack of skjll. and that of "having acted upon an impulse so powerful as
(b) Yes. Even in cases of felonies committed through n e e -naturally to have produced passion and obfuscation".
Iigence or reckless imprudence, there is voluntariness on the The differences existing between the circumstance of "hav-
part of the offender, because reckless imprudence, as defined 5ng acted under the compulsion of an irresistible force" arid
by the Revised Penal Code, consists in 'voluntarily, but without -that of "having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturalllly
malice, doing or failing to do an act 'from which material damage to have produced passion and obfuscation" are:
results, etc. (1) While passion or obfuscation is a mitigating circum-
, ,:;,.,
..
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW. RZVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
The accident having occurred on December 1, 1950, t h e VI. Pedro Ingles, a bill collector of the Metropolitan~AWater
Motor Vehicles Law was applicable when death or serious District, was prosecuted in the Municimpal Court of Manila in
bodily injury to any person resulted 'from negligence or reck- 11 separate cases for the light felony of unjust vexation eom-
less o r unreasonably fast driving by a motor vehicle driver. mitted against 11 distinct persons in 11 different dates of
Republic Act No. 687, amending such provision of the Motor t h e month of July, 1952. The Rev. Penal Code punishes the
light felony of unjust vexation with arresto menor or a ,fine
.Vehicles Law and making the Revised Penal Code applicable in
ranging from 5 to 200 pesos, or both. The guilt of the del
such cases, took effect. on Januam 11, 1951.
fendant in the 11 cases was.proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Since the single act of reckless driving produced a viola- (1) If you were the Judge, would you render a verdict of guilty
tion of the Revised Penal Code (damage to property through and sentence him to the corresponding penalty in each o f , the
reckless imprudence) and a violation of a special law, Art. 48 11 cases? (h) Assuming that the proper penalty that should.
of the Code is not applicable; because this. article speaks of be imposed in each case upon the defendant were 11 days of
h a v e o r less grave felonies resulting from a single act, and a 1 axresto menor, what would be the length of the ,period of
violation of a special law is not a felony. sentence that Pedro Ingles could be compelled to serve? Why?
(a) If I were the Judge, .I would render a verdict of guilty!- *
V. In a criminal case john^ Smith was sentenced by t h e and sentence Pedro lngles to the corresponding penalty
Municipal 'Court of Manila to suffer the penalty of 2 years,
four months and 1 day of destierm (banishment), and thus
I
fl of the 11 cases. The rule is that all the penalties corresponding,
to the different crimes of which the accused is found guilt
forbidden to enter any place within the radius of 100 kilometers should be imposed on him.
from the City of Manila. Subsequently and duringbthe period (b) Pedro Ingles could be compelled to serve'only 33 d
of service of his sentence, John Smith was caught in the
City of Manila and was therefore prosecuted before the Court
1 imprisonment. Under the threefold rule, the maximum duratio
of the convict's sentence shall not be more than threefold
of First Instance of this capital for evasion of service of .sen-'
teuce. I n his defense John Smith claimed t h a t ' h e was not
criminally liable because his case did not coine within the
1i
i
length of time corresponding to the most severe of the 'be
ties imposed upon him.
scope of the penal code, particularly of Art. 157 thereof which VU. A, E and C, employees of a rice dealer who..ha
5'. warehouse situated at Dagupan street, Manila, where hundr
punishes the evasion of sentence, for the reason that, accord-
ing t o him, this article refers only to persons who are im- of sacks. of rice were usually stored, surprised X,
prisoned in x penal institution. W h a t is your opinion? Why? '
when they were one morning inside the warehouse. Up0
a u g h t there the 3 intruders fired upon and killed all sa
My opinion is that John Smith was criminally liable f o r employees and ran away thereafter. The police subseque
evasion of the service of the sentence. Although, the English arrested Z who was charged in the Court of First Insta
text of Art. 157 refers only t o persons who are imprisoned i n Manila with the crime of robbery with triple homicid
a penal institution, the Spanish text of the same article uses the hearing the prosecution failed to prove any robbery,
the phrase "sufriendo priwacibn de libertad". Destierro is a because no explanation was given of the intruders' motives
deprivation of liberty, though partial, in the ,sense that as being in the warehouse, or because on 1.hat occasion t h e '
.,,,. ...
.,,in,,the present case, John Smith was deprivsd of the liberty house happened to be empty. If you were the Judge,
?:to enter the City of Manila. you convict %. If so, of what crime o r crimes? Why?
780 781
I
If I were the Judge, I would convict Z of three crimes- IX. ( a ) What are the elements of the crime of occupation ’
of homicide, the prosecutibn having failed to prove any robbery. of real property ox usurpation of real rights in property? (b) -:
“A” t@wner of a house and lot situated a t N,o. 100 Taft ‘.:
Considering the circumstances, I submit that there WBS
Avenue Extension, leased this property to “B” and family, ‘ q d ..?
. .: conspiracy among X, Y and Z in the killing of A, B and C. because the lessor and the lessee quarelled at the club on certain ,’,:
The fact that they were together in a place where they had no. Qersonal matters, “A” went to said property, forcibly entered ’,
right to be, and that they fired simultaneously -with their guns
at, the three employees who had surprised them, shows that
therein and by means of violence against and intimidation of ’
the occupants thereof .seized it back from “B”. Has “A” corn--
.,::.,. .they had a common purpose and. were united in its execution. ~
I
,’
P500,1‘’
VIII. a) What is the main feature t‘lat differentiates
the cri e oE estafa from that of theft? (b) “A” delivers two
bills to “B”, his employee, with instructions to go to
the Central Bank to.exchange them with bills of smaller deno-
minations, :md to bring back the change to him afterwards- [J
or usurpation of r e d rights in property are:
(1) The offender takes possession of any real property or
usurps an? real rights in property.
(2) That the real property or real rights belong to another.
(3) That violence against or intimidation of persons is
,i
’%’’ receives. the two 8500.00 bills from his employer, but ‘f used by the. o f h d e r in occupying real property o r usurping
instead of ,complying with the latter’s instructions, disappears real rights.
with the money which he appropriates for himself. “B” axil- (4) There is intent to gain.
rnitted qualified theft or estafa? What is your opini,nn and
the reasons therefor?
(a) In esta€a, the offender receives the thing from tho
i (Is) No. “A” did not commit the crime of occupation
of real property or usurpation of real rights in property, be-
’. cause “A” was the owner of the real property and he had
offended party. In theft, the offender takes the thing without no intent t o gain. Elements Nos. 2 and 4 of the crime are
the consent of the offended party. Even if the offe5der receives not present.
the thing from the offended party, but the former acqnires
only the physical or material possession of the thing, his X. “A” and ‘€3’’ were mortal enemies. They occasionally, .
misappropriation of the same would constitute the crime o f
theft. IIence, in estafa the offender has the juridical posses-
sion of the thing which he misappropriates or converts to the
J
met a t a arty that their common friend “C” gave in his:’
hous nowing that there would be a game of poker and
availing himself of the first opportunity, “A” picked up the
d
prejudic of another.
‘. ( My opinion is that “€3” committed qualified theft, not
est a. The reasons for my opinion are that although “B”
received the two PS00.00 bills from his employer, be had only
the physical or material possession of the same and the con-
wallet of C containing P1,OOO.OO and surreptitiously put it in
the pocket of “B’s” coat. When the guests were called for the
ganie “C” discovered the loss of his wallet and money and
“A” told “C” that he had seen “B” in the act of suspiciously
placing in his coat a wallet with a bulged sheaf of paper bills.
structive possession thereof remained with the employer untiE I‘
B,, is searched despite his protests of innocence and “C’s’”:,
the misappropriation of the two F600.00 hills. wallet and money is found in the coat of B who is brought to
::q
.I\
782
. .
I83
; L
I
... .
..
the police station for investigation and proper action. Is the There is proDosal when the person who has decided to'
trick or scheme of "A" punishable by law? If you think so. commit a felony propoees its execution to some other persoq"
" b y which law a n d what is the name of the criminal offense
,.A
or persons.
.;committed? State your reasons. (b) Conspiracy and proposal are considered as felonies'
..,
'? Yes, the trick or scheme of "A" is punishable by the Re- only in the cases in which the law specially provides. a penalty
~ vised Penal Code and the name of the criminal offense is therefor (Art. 8, par. 1, R.P.C.).
' incriminating innocent person, because he performed an act ( c ) The crimes o f conspiracy and proposal that can be
:"which directly incriminated o r imputed to "B", an innocent committed are: (1) conspiracy and proposal t o commit treason,
person, the commission of a crime (theft). (2) conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion, and (3) con-
.. .
'1
spiracy t o commit sedition. There is no proposal to commit
sedition.
AUGUST, 1953 (cl) Conspiracy does not constitute a crime and is only a , '
I. ( a ) Enumerate the characteristics of Criminal Law
means o r manner of incurring criminal liability, when the crime ::
which the conspirators agreed and decided to commit is not
, (b) Explain briefly what they are. treason, rebellion or sedition. Even if the crime involved in
(a) Criminal Law has &reo main characteristics, namely: the conspiracy is treason, rebellion, 01- sedition, but any
i (1) generality, ( 2 ) territoeiality, and (3) prospectivity. said crimes is actually committed, the conspiracy is only a'
2 , (b) Generality means that i t is binding on a11 persons who means or manner of incurring crimina1 liability. The reason
" reside o r sojourn in Philippine territory. for this rule is that in conspiracy as felony, the offenders must
Territoriality means that i t undertakes to pnnish crimes only agree and decide to commit treason, rebellion or sedition:
committed within the Philippine territory. As a rule, penal (e) Those who take part in conspiracy are equally liable fop
lawk are enforcible only within the territory of the Philippines. th ctually committed after the conspiracy. When there
Prospectivity means that a penal law cannot malie an act is. y, the act of one is the act of all.
punishable in a manner in which it was not punishable when'
committed. In other words, crimes are punished ,-rider the he Revised Penal Code considers a GENERIC .wT,
laws in force a t the time of their commission.
P GATING circumstance the fact that the offender is ,una
years of age (but over 15) a t the. time of the commissi
, 11. (a) Define conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony. the offense, but another article of the code provides that:
(b) When are conspiracy and proposal considered as felonies? a person oyer 15 and under 18 years of age, the penal
( e ) Enumerate the crimes of conspiracy and proposal that can lower than that. prescribed by law shall be imposed, but
be committed. (d) When does conspiracy not constitute a crime in the proper period". In view of these provisions, .c
and is oinly a means or manner of incurring criminal liability? generic mitigating circumstance ever be appreciated in
(e) In the latter case, what is the liability attached by law of a minor delinquent over 15 but under 18 years ,of a
to those who take part in the conspiracy? the time of the commission of the offense? Explain
answer.
( a ) A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come
': t o ' an ameement concerning the commission of a felony and Yes. The age over 15 but under 18 years i s . ~ . , a . g e
"ii decide to commit it. mitigating circumstance in two cases:
,";
't 784 785
. .,
,”: ,.% ,,
CRIMIINAL LAW ILEVIEWEK CRDIISAI. LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law ,/ Bar Examinolions in Criminal Law
. (1) When the offender is 1G years or over but under 18 tetieed in case their guilt is shown, could John Doe receive th
years, because the other article of the Code may not then be benefit of the special or privileged circumstance designed, fa
applicable, since that article should apply only when the offender juvenibweffenders under 18 years of a@ provided in Art?%
has been proceeded against under Art. 80 and while in the . e 6 Revised Penal Code? Why?
reformatory institution or in the custody of a responsible person This is ,not a settled question. In one case, the Supr
he becomes incorrigible. The offender is not entitled to a eus-
pended sentence under Art. 80 when he is 16 years o r over.
i Court held that Republic Act No. 47, reducing from 18 to 1
the age of juvenile delinquents, does not apply to A r k $
matter.
The question involved in the first case is not yet settled
b y ’ t h e Supreme Court. There are conflicting decisions on t h e
i
I
which provides for the special or privileged circumstance dt
signed for juvenile offenders under 18 years of age. Undi
the ruling in that case, John Doe could receive the benefit of %$
special or privileged mitigating circumstance even if h e wa
9/”
(2) When the offense committed is a light felony, because
Art. 80 Is applicable only when the offender who is under 16
of age is accused of a grave o r less grave felony.
IV. (a) What are the laws referred to as “special lavis”
1 17 years of age.
68 is not
.’
held that since
when the offen@
.,A
under Article 1 0 of the RevisJtd Penal Code? (b) When a special
law declares the commission of a certain act a criminal offense, 80 is applicable o
providing a penalty for its penpetration, could a violator there- when the offender is under 16 years of age, the offender
of be convicted ‘of a frustration or attempt to commit such years of age is not entitled to a penalty one degree.lower:
act? Explain your answer. ,
It is submitted that the ruling in the second case has le6
basis and, therefore, is the correct one,
(a) The laws referred to as “special laws” ‘under Art.. 10
-.ofthe Revised Penal Code are those penal law6 enacted by the
VI. (a) What are the elements of the crime of
,
.,~.
illem
.
.:,
legislative body (now Congress), which do not form part of
or a r e not amendments to, the Revised Penal Code. marriage? (h) Antonio was married legally to Josefa, an
( b ) ’ A violator of a special law cannot oe convicted of a during the existence of this marriage Antonio married .,Peh
frustration or attempt t o commit the act defined by that law
as a criminal offense, unless the special law provides a penalty
for the frustration or attempt t o commit the act. The reason
yor this ruling of the Supreme Court is that the provisions
of the Revised Penal Code on attempted and frustrated felonies
, , a r e not applicable to special laws. ~. against Antonio f o r said offense. Aft,
-?
V. John Doe committed the crime of theft of one Parker’s hearing all the foregoing facts were duly established. Z ’ y j
were the judge, would you convict Antonio of the crime,;.!
set of fountain pen and pencil valued at t40.00 when he was ‘J
bigamy? Explain your answer.
17 years of age. Considering the provisions of Rep. Act No. -.: I
47 amending Art. 80 of the Revised Penal Code, by reducing marriages under the Revised Penal Col
from 18 t o 16 the age of juvenile delinquents who may be sen- are: (1) b y y, (2) marriages contracted against provisioi
786
I
,, c?f I&,
/ CRIMrXAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal t a w
*
:,$
I
character of permanency. The fact that John Smith returned AUGUST, 1954
tlie truck after using it shows that he did not have the in-
tention to own it.
d '
%ate briefly what is the fundamental principle on which
the right of the State to punish or impose coercitive measures
The next question to determine is whether or not John upon ci;iminal offenders is based.
Smith could be held liable for robbery for consuming the 30
liters of gasoline contained in the lank of the truck. It is To secure justice. The State has an exislence of its own
submitted that there was no taking of the gasoline. It was t o maintain, a conscience of its own to assert, and moral prin.
ciples to be vindicated. Penal justice must therefore be exere
/d"
spent in e use of the truck. John Smith is only civilly liable
for i value. cised by the State in the service and satisfaction of a duty,
and rests primarily on the moral rightfulness of the punishment
IX. Jokn Doe, driver of an automobile coming from Santa inflicted.
Cruz, Lagung while passing through Calantba saw hundreds of
coconuts piled up along the side of the road in front of the
estate of Pete Poe, ready for transportation t o Manila. John P( ention 2 circumstances of each of the following classi-
ficat' n: a ) justifying; (b) exempting; (e) mitigating, (a).,
Doe stopped his car and without the knowledge or consent of
P
the owner took 24 of said coconuts, put them in t e automobile
.'
and continued his trip to Manila. Is the theft ommitted ,by
aggravating; and (e) nlternative.
(a) Two justifving circumstances. - The following do not
incur criminal liability: (1) Anyone who acts in defense of S i -
John Doe simple or qualified? Why? person or rights, provided that the following circumstance;
The theft committed by John Doe is simple, not qualified. concur: first, unlawful aggression; second, reasonable necessit&
Theft of coconuts is qualified theft, when the coconuts 'are taken of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and third, l a #
/"'
from t coconut plantation. The side of the road, where the of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defendink
eocon s were piled up, was not part of the plantation. himself. (2) Anyone who acts in defense of the person or
1
I rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimatg;
X. Can the TAKING of an automobile for a joyride, pun- !' natural, or adopted brothers or sisters, or of his relatives bJi
Ished by the Motor Vehfcle Act, ever constitute the crime of theft, affinity in the same degrees, and those by consanguinitr w i t b i
simple or qualified, of that automobile? Why? the fourth civil degree, provided that the first and second I$
In the case of People vs. Fernandez, decided by the ,Supreme quisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance ,+p
purt, and in the case of People VY. Martisano, decided by the present, and the further requisite, in case the provocation w d
Court of Appeals, i t was held that the takiiig of the motor given by the person attacked, that the one making the defe
, vehicle belonging to another for joy-ride or to use i t only
i; as a meanir of transportation is aqualified had no pa$ therein (Art. 11, pars. 1 and 2 ) .
vehicle.
theft of the motor
‘the offender is under eighteen years of age or over seventy give such bond, shall he be DETAINED for a period not‘
years (Art. 13, pars. 1 and 2). eeeditig 6 months in cases of grave or less grave felonies,:&4
(d) Two aggravating circumstances. -
(1) That advantage not exceeding 30 days if for a light felony, as provided i.:g
be taken by the offender of his public position. (2) That the 85 of the RPC, or shall he be SENTENCED to destierro (banish6
crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to the’ public ment), as provided in Art. 284 of the same Code? What ’@
.. .
authorities (Art. 14, pars. 1 and 2 ) . Ihe reason of your answer?
(e) Two alternative circzmstances. - (1) Relationship and (a) They are: .
.~
- (2) intoxication (Art. 16). (1) Grave threats; and
.,.,
.?, .
..
. ( 2 ) Light t h r k t s .
III. What are the exceptions to the allowance of one-half
L+~..\
:?.of
the period of preventive imprisonment undergone by criminal (b) B e should be sentenced to destierro, because Art. 284
’ ~ offenders? which is the one applicable specifically so provides and, morever,
’::
They are: Art. 35 which provides for “bond to keep the peace” applies,
‘. only to other crimes, it being a general provision intended to:
. (1) When the offenders are recidivists, or have’ been con-
cover other cases.
victed previously twice or more times of any crime;
(2) When upon being summoned for the executjMl of their VI. Sam was pl-osecuted and found guilty of the crime OR
sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily; malicious mischief under Art. 329, No. 3, of the RPC as amended:
(3) When they have been convicted of robbery, theft, estafa, by Act No. 3999 of the Legislature and sentenced to pay a fine
malversati ad of public funds, falsification, vagrancy, or pros- of P200, value of the damage caused, and to indemnify William,
/
titution
V. In what cases the execution of the death penalty must
be suspended?
. In the following cases, the execution of the death sentence
the offended party, in the sum of P200, o r to suffer the cor-
responding subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, plus
the costs. Sam has money to satisfy both amounts, but he is
stubbornly unwilling to pax them and prefers t o serve the sub-
sidiary imprisonment. (a) Has Sam the right to choose between
must be suspended: thl? payment of said am,ounts and the service of the subsidiary
(1) When the convict is a woman, within the three ygars imprisonment? ( b ) Does not such subsidiary im,prisonment
next following the date of the sentence. amount to impris,onmeiit for debt and is, therefore, unconsti;
.. (2) When the convict is a pregnant woman, until after tutional? Reason out both answers.
delivery. (a) It is submitted that Sam has no right to choose between
. (3) When the convict is a person over 70 years of age. ‘the payment of the fine, the damage, and indemnification, and
(4) When the convict becomes insane after final sentence the service of the subsidiary imprisonment, because the op
of death has been pronounced, until he recovers his reason. ing sentence of Art. 39 says: “If the convict has no prope
, V. What are the only crimes punished under the Revised with which to meet the pecuniary liabilities”, which means
.Penal Code for which the Court, in addition to the penalty if the offender has property with which to pay the pecu
;~:.aJ@ched by the code, may sentence or require the ,offender liabilities, he can be required t o , pay, which may be done
PtL-tn give r bond for good behavlor? (h) If the culprit fails to writ of execution.
$
Q
:
$
”“..’
3:. 792 793
\
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW, REVIEWER
Rar Examinations in Criminal L a y Rar Examinations in Criminal Law
(b) No, because the prohibition that no person shall be im- -of firearm without license is punished under a special law,
prisoned for non-payment of debt does not relate to cases seelc- while robbery is punished under the Revised Penal Code.
ing the enforcement of penal statutes that provide for the pay- Therefore, they should he prosecuted for two crimes, namely:
ment of money as a penalty for the commission of crime. (1) robbery with intimidation, and (2) ea,ch f o r illegal possen-
sion of firearm. .,*
VII. At the corner of Rim1 Avenue and Zurbuan street, ..
M a n h ’ P e t c r and Paul stopped Alex and a t the ,point of their VIII. ( a ) State the difference between the crime9 :b@fG-
respective rNevolvera the former ordered the lat.ter to $eliver ANDAGE and ROGBERY IN BAND. (b) What arms &$ve+-
to.them his wallet containing $500 iii the paper money. Alex pons the malefactors must cawy to be considered as armed n%n?
handed them the wallet and then the robbers went away in (a) If the agreement among more than three armed ‘men
the direction of two detectives who saw the misdeed from a w a t o commit only a particular robbery, the offense is-’
distance and arrested the pair and seized from them the wallet brigandage, but only robbery in band.
and the money as well as the two revolvers for the possession Both in robbery ir. hand and in brigandage, the offen
of which Peter and Paul had no license. The crime committed
m u s t be a.t least f o z o uwned persons who form a band of robbers. . ;
by these two malefactors is frustrated or consummated robbery? The intent to gain is likewise common to both. , .. .
9’
(b) Could they be accused and convicted of a co lex crime o f
robbery through unlawful possession of unlicense firearms in
accordance with the provisions of Art. 48 of the RPC as amend-.
In robbery in band, the purpose of the offender is only t0 f
commit robbery, not necessarily in the highway; whereas, in ,~
ed by Act No. 400 of the Philippine Legislature? State briefly brigandage, the purpose of the offenders is anyone of the fol-
the reasons of your answers to these two questions. lowing: (1) to commit robbery in the highway, (2) to kidnap ’,,
persons for extortion or to obtain ransom, or (3) to attain , ~
(a) The crime committed is consummated robbery, because %y means of force and violence any .other purpose.
the asportation or unlawful taking was complete the moment
they had poissession of the wallet and its contents, even if the In robhery in hand, the crime of robbery must be actuallyi
culprits had had no opportunity to dispose of the same. mmmitted; whereas, in brigandage the existence alone of the
pnrpose to commit robbery in the highway is sufficient, because
(b) It is submitted tha,t they could not be accused and
what the law punishes in brigandage is .the formation of a band
convicted of a complex crime of robbery through unlawful pos-
ef robbers for any of the purposes mentioned by the law.
session of unlicensed fireaims under Art. 48. n
(b) Neither Art. 306 nor Art. 296 of the Revised Pena
Reason: Art. 48, in defining the second form of complex
Code specifies the kind of arms or weapons the malefacto
crime, provides that “when an offense is a necessary means
I must carry to be considered as armed men. It merely: me
2 for committing the other, the penalty for the more serious
tiow “armed persons”. Hence, any arm or weapons like kni
crime shall be imposed.”
or boloes will be sufficient.
While this form of complex crime does not seem to require
that the crime intended to be committed and the crime coni- IX. John asked James to exchange him a check for
mitted as “necessary means for committing the other” must be sum of B1.,000, and upon receiving this amount from the lat
both felonies, nevertheless in the case of People v6. Araneta, John, with deliberate intent to defraud and for the purposet
48 Phil. 650, it was held that both crimes must be punished musing the Philippine National Bank, against which it ;.
under the same statute. In the problem given, the possession a w n , to dishonor the check, executed the same by Wri
794 ‘796
1
I
collection, but, a s i t was expected, the bank refpsed payment taneous acts. . ,,~_
..,, .
'_ because the signature of the drawer was not his registered sig- Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the corn.':
nature and John declined to issue another good check or to mission of the crime, and without having participated %herein;;
return the money he received from James. Has John committed either as principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to 'StS;
~. ,
~
the crime of "estafa"? State briefly your opinion and the cornmission in any of the following manners: (I) hj. p r e
.-' riasons-on which it is based. fiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by. t h e
P,,
.. -Yes, because by signing his name very differently from effects of the crime; (2) by concealing or destroying the bo&
that registered in the Bank for the purpose of causing the of the crime or the effects o r instruments thereof, in order
.Bank to dishonor the check which was exchanged for cash, to to prevent its discovery; and (3) by harboring, concealing,,,
,the prejudice of the payee, h e committed estafa bf means of pr assisting in the escape of the principal. of the crime, pro-
vided the accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or
B
~.deceit. It is like signing the check with a ficti ious name.
/
deri him guilty of perjury. For example: A induced B to fen e are differriitiated. as follows:
te ify falsely against C in a preliminary investigation. B, a f t e r Any one of these aggravating circumstances may facilitate
eing duly sworn, knowingly and wilfully testified falsely against the commission of the crime. In treachery, means, .methods or
C that the latter raped D. forms o f attack are employed by the offender to make it im-
(e) Misprision of treason is a crime against. national secur- possible or difficult for the offended party to put up any sort
ity committed by a person owing allegiance to the Government e. In craft, the offender resorts to intellectual trickery
,' of the Philippines, without being a foreigner, and having knowl- In use of means to weaken the defense, the of-
' ' edge of any conspiracy against it, who conceals or does not . treachery, eniploys means but the means employed
disclose and make known the same, as soon as possible, to the weakens the resisting power of the offended party.
governor o r fiscal of the province or the mayor o r fiscal of t h e Examp!es: Treachery - A waited until B fell asleep in
city in which he resides, as the case may be. For example: the latter's house and then and there stabbed him to death.
During a war in which the Philippines is involved, A, a Filipina Craft - A, with intention t o commit robbery, hailed a taxi
citizen and knowing that several persons are in conspiracy against pretending t o be a bona fide passenger so as not to arouse the
the Gover fhent of the Philippines, keeps silent about it. suspicion of the driver, and when he was taken as passenger,
the driver if the latter would not give
Tomas Cruz, a cargador riding on
o/ milkasbelonging
;4 truck hauling cases 4
?
in his possession. A succeeded in getting the
Use of means to wenken the defease -
. 850.00 the truckto passed
Sikat Co., threw street.
a certain out /twoA cases valuedwit-
policeman at
E, threw a handful of sand t o the eyes
nessing the act immediately places Cruz under arrest. Disc- of B and, when the latter could not see, A boxed him on the
face and different parts of the body.
whafl offense has been coniuiitted, and whether it is consum- d
mated, frustrated or attempted, giving reasons in full:
Tomas Cruz committed theft. It is consummated. T h e
'
fact that he was all the time'on the truck and that he merely
threw o u t the two cases of milk as the truck passed wecertain
1
.*(
'(h) Band, aid of aimed men, and brigandage are dif-
ferentiated, as follows:
Rand and aid of armed men are aggravating circumstances,
while brigandage is a felony. Band is composed of at least
street, is immaterial. In a juridical sense, the consummation four (4) armed persons who act together in the commission
of the crime of theft takes place upon the voluntary and'mali- of a crime. In aid of armed men, i t is not necessary that there
cious taking of the property belonging to another which is be at least Sour armed men. Two o r three armed men would
:' realized by the material occupation of the thing whereby t h e
'a thief places it under his control and in such a. situation as h e
could dispose of it at once.
(4) armed persons form a band of robhers for the purpose
IV. D'Areutiate the following circumstances, giving t h e of committing robbery in the highway, or kidnapping persona,
/
necesar illustrative examples: (a) Treachery (alevosia) , craft
(astu a ) and use of means to weaken the defense. (b) Band
@J.drilla), aid
. of armed men, and brigandage. (c) Recidivism
for the purpose o f extortion or to obtain ransom or for any
other uurpose t o he attained by means of force and violence.
Examples: Band, - A, B, C and D, all armed, held up k;
(reineidenein), repetition (reiteracion) and habitual delinquency- , , and Y, depriving them of their personal belongings. AX of
. .
I
z%ndage- A, B, C, D and E, all armed with guns, went upon he shall be sentenced to the penalty corresponding to the cnme
'::the highway and roamed upon the country for the purpose of of serious physical injuries, in the maximum period, and %o':iln'--
kidnapping rich persons to obtain ransom or robbing them. additional penalty for being a habitual deiinquent.
., . (c) Recidivism, repetition and habitual delinquency are dif-
ferentiated, as follows: V. A, knowing that his master €3 used to carry a very Val: '
. . Recidivism and repetition are generic aggravating circum- uahle watch, waylays him one night, wearing a mask t o %void
stances, w'bile habitual delinquency is an extraordinary ag- recognition, and demands surrender of the watch, threatening '~
'.: gravating circumstance. B with a revolver. When searched, B is found to carry only a :
Repetition or reiteraeion is distinguished from recidivism, pocketbook with B50 that, A does not take. When B tells."A ,
in that- that the watch was left a t home, B is albowed to g o withoyt';
further molestation. What offense is c'ommitted by A and IS
(1) I n reiteracion, it is necessary t.hat the offender shall. his responsibility aggravated? Why? Reason out your answer..,.
.have served his sentence; whereas, in recidivism it is enough
that a final judowent has been rendered in the first offense. A commits the crime of attempted robbery with intimid&;
',. 1
(2) Ln reiteracion, the previous and subsequent offenses tion, attended by the aggravating circumstance of disguise (wear- I,
ing a mask to avoid recognition). When A waylays B and de:'
' . ~ must not be embraced in the same title of the Code; whereas, ' mands surrender of the watch, with intent t o gain, threatening.:
recidivism requires that the offenses be included 'in the same
the latter with a revolver, he thereby commences the mmmis;':;
y title of the Code.
sion of robbery with intimidation directly by overt acts and does
( 3 ) Reiteracion is not always an aggravating circumstance; not perforrii all the acts of execution which should produce the
whereas, recidivism is always t o be taken into consideration in felony by reason of a cause or accident, that is, that B left the
iixing the penalty to be imposed upon the accused. watch at home.
There is habitual delinquency when 5 person within a period It is not an impossible crime, because the crime of robbery
of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of is possible of accomplishment, B having a pocketbook with P50
the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery,
in it. ..
theft, estafa or falsification, is found guilty of any of said crimes
a third time or oftener. In habitual delinqxency, the offender
'1 is either a recidivist or one who has been previously punished
/ VI. If a person is convicted of a crime penalized with pfi$
sion mayor maximum t o reclusion perpetua, and there are no
. . f o r two or more offenses (reiteracion). He siiall suffer an addi-
aggravating circumstances, is the accused entitled to the bene-
'.i tional penalty for being a habitual delinquent. fits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law? Reasons.
Examples: Recidivism - A was on trial for theft. He was
/
,'
Yes. The enalty provided for the cnme being a compleq
.,. then already convicted by final judgment of estafa. Convicted penalty, con ' ting in three different penalties each forming .a
of theft. Repetition- A was on trial for homicide. Ne pre- period, a there being no aggravating circ.umstances, the penal:
viously served sentence for rape. Convicted of homicide. Habit- i y imposable is reclusion temporal, the medium period., ,Th$,
-
. . ,, ual delinquency In 1950, A was convicted of estafa and served penalty imposable not being death or life imprisonment and'"it
,.'. sentence therefor. In 1954, A was convicted of theft and served not appearing that the crime committed is one of those men:
9, ,
, :
800 801
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINBL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law'
.tioned 1
. . . in th exceptions to the application of .the Indeterminate
'-Sentence Law, he is entitled'to the benefits of that Law.
the duplicate receipt is merely a priva
no such complex crime of estafa throdg
_...
... ,. ' i
: I t is the penalty imposed, not the penalty provided by law, document. In fahification of a private
which determines whether or not the Indeterminpte Sentence Law crime unless another fact, independent'
'is-applicable. I' of that of falsifying the document, is proved: Le., damage'<or
intent to cause damage. If the fdsification of a Brivate docu-
VI Yielding to Maria's insistence upon marriage, Pedro ment was committed in connection with the crime of estafk, the
''&
:'~:./ er to his friend Juan, who upon previous arrangement falsification is not another crime to be coinplexed with: estafa, ,
,.$thPedro poses a s a duly authorized minister of the Gospel. because there was no damage or intent to cause damage in the, '.
Juan performs an alleged marriage ceremony that Maria believes act of falsifying the document. The intended damage t,h,a t.
good faith to be real, and Pedro and Maria sign a marriage resulted was caused by the commission of estafa.
certificate, with Juan signing as "Minister". The couple live hi the second place, the falsification of the duplicate, re:
,'together as husband and wife for some time, but later Maria ceipt was not a necessary means for committing the estafa; 'be-
discovers the scheme and complains to the fiscal. For what cause X had the money in his possession and it would not hb'
crime may Pedro and Juan be held liable, if Maria is only 16, necessary for him to falsify it to misappropriate part of thk'"
and it 'turns out that Pedro was already married t o another money. The falsification and the estafa were not produced b..y
woman? Explain Jlour answer, giving reasons.
Pedro and Juan may be held liable or the complex crime of
s@ple: seduction through usurpation of official \f
. . functions. . Since met and pursued his enemy U, who took cover h ewn
they were in conspiracy, that act of one was the act df both. . time that B showed his head, A fired at him
bullets bit and killed Pedro, who was seated
'Without legal authority, Juan performed an act properly
a t a nearby store, and one bullet hit Y in the left thumb, caus-
pertaining to a person in authority by. assuming the official ing injuries that required two weeks to heal. Three informa-
character of a minister of a religious sect in order t o malte the
tions are filed against A: one for frustrated murder with respect
girl believe that she was legally mavried t o Pedro who had the
intention to seduce her. The girl .would not have been seduced to B; one for homicide by reckless imprudence a s to Pedro and
by Pedro were it not for the act of Juan. The crime of ususpa-
one for illegal discharge of firearms as to Y. Convicted in all
tion of official functions' was a necessary means f o r commit- three cases, A appeals. Are the convictions correct? Reasons.
ting the crime of simple seduction. The convidions are not correct. The conviction of A for
.'d/
VI1 X, a duly authorized collector of "ATC Inc.," receives
P5,OO from Q in payment of an account, and entered the said
sum in ihe original recei.pt; but in the duplicate receipt delivered
t o the Company, X makes it appear that he received F4,OOO only,,
frustrated murder is not correct,, because B was not wounded at
all, A h a v h g missed, and there is nothing mentioned in t h e
problem that will indicate any qualifying circumstance
der. T$re being int.ent t o kill on the part of A, as s
of weapon he used and the persistence in hls a
and pockets .the difference. The Court convicts X of the com- B, A committed as regards B only attempted ho
plex crime of estafa through falsification of private document. A was not properly and legally convicted of homicid
Is.-cthe
,;._
~.,..
,. .sentence correct?
,I.. Reason out. the answer. reckless imprudence as to Pedro, because A acted with 'm
,I :;..,:,-No. The sentence is not correct, for two reasons. He is liable for all the consequences of his malicious a d , altho
-..
,v
, I I
. . ._ i .
802
I , .
803
.,.
t h e wrongful act done be different from that which he intended (a) The effects of civil interdiction as accessory penaltg
(Art. 4, pa;. 1, R.P.C.). are:
A was not properly and legally convicted of illegal discharge ( I ) 'Deprivation of the rights of parental authority o s guard-
the offender must not ian9hip of any ward.
(2) Deprivation of marital authority.
(3) Deprivation of the right to manage his property and
of the right to dispose of such property by any act or any
conveyance inlev vivos (Art. 34).
(b) The penalties which include civil interdiction as an acces-
sory penalty are: (1) death, when not executed by reason of
commutation or pardon ; ( 2 ) ,reekisio?~pe?Petzba: and (3) ~ e c l u s i m
mitted by them? And considering that M and N are married, te~~pold.
but P is single, to what civil liability should the court sentence
. "; 11. (a) What crimes are geualized by death a s maximum:
each of the accused? Reason out your answer. 4
M, N and P committed robbery with rape. The robbery
was accompanied by rape.
&J/
penalty? (b) If a man or woman becomes insane after he OS
sentenced to death, what does the law provide regarding
t h execution of the death penalty? (e) Give your opinion i s...
P who is single should be to whether or not the death penalty should be abolished. Give
woman and to support the reasons.
gave birth to an offspring (a) The crimes which are penalized by death as maximum!
. .
penalty are: (1) treason, (2) certain acts of espionage under
All the three must support the offspring, because a n d u e Commonwealth Act No. GI.6, ( 3 ) correspondence with hostile
each and every one of them country when it contains notice os information and the intention'
contributed to, and cooperated in, the giving birth of the child. of the offender is to aid the enemy, (4) qualified piracy, ( 5 ) cer-
Not one of the three may be required to recognize the off- tain violations of thc Anti-Subversion Act, (6) parricide, (7))
spring of the offended woman, it being impossible to determine
' murder, (3) kidnapping and serious illegal detention, (9) robbery;,
the paternity thereof, and as regards M and N who >re married with homicide, and (10) rape with homicide.
."the
.& ,.
law prevents them from so doing. (b) If d a n or woman becomes insane after be or she '
,~
'j
I .. ,They should return the jewelry to the owner thereof, if pos-
sible; otherwise, to indemnify him in the amount of P1,000.
/
s e n h d to death, the law provides that the execution of t
penalt,y shall be suspended only with regard t o the perso
penalty. If at any time the convict shall recover his reason,:
his sentence' shall be executed, unless the penalty shall have; .,'
AUGUST, 1956
prescribed. , ,*
the effects of civil interdiction as accessory .Art. '79, being a general provision on the suspension of
penallies include civil interdiction as an ac. execution and service of the penalties in case of insanity,,
ory penalty? there being no^ specific. provision as r e s r d s the suspensio
;
804 805
. , ,;.>.,* .
CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIiilINAL LAW REYIEWBR
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Rnr Examinations in Criminal Low
the execution of death penalty in case of insanity of the convict, merely privileged from civil a w e s t during their attendance ‘at
said article is applicable. the scssion of Congress, and in going to and returning from t)ie’.
(e) My opinion is t h a t the. death penalty shpuld not be same. ..
.,i
abolished. Social defense and exemplarity justify the penalty of
death.: Thi penalty has deterred many a dangerous’.enemy of
society f m committing serious offenses.
A (a) “A”, while visiting his friend Juan in the latteis ’
house, surreptitiously ,placed in the drawer of Juan’s table;some.,
I . , subversive papers of communist wigin. At midnight “B?, .a
. ...
.I. (a) What do you understand by parliamentary immun- fake NBI agent, searched the house, by meam of a faysified
‘ ,A7; ity?
i
(h) Under what c&umstances can a senator or represerl- search warrant and found the subversive papers in Juan’s table.;
a,,, ’I
B9, threatened and intimidated Juan, telling him t h a t unless he:
tative of the Philippine Congress be arrested and convicted?
(c) :-Does parliamentary immunity mean exemption from criminal gives him P500.00, he will arrest him and charge him for.,being
. ~. liability? Enplain fully these three points. a conimunist. Juan to avoid being arrestsd and taken to jail,
. -’ . (a) Parliamentary immunity, under the Revised Penal Code,
”
gave P500.00 to the fake agent. Outside of the house “B” gave
ns that no public officer or employee shall, while Congress is
“A” part of the money he got from Juan. ‘What crime have :A’
lar or special session, arrest or search ‘any member there- and “B” committed? Give reasons. (b) Distinguish blaekmN
pt in case such member has committed a crime punishable from threats as penalized by the Revised Penal Code. .’, ,
’’
‘uiider the Code by a penalty higher than prisiun mayor. Under (a) ”A” and “B” commi.tted robhery with intimidation. The
the:ConstituRion, i t means that the members of Gongress shall in placing of subversive papers of communist .origin in the drawer
~,.,
. .ai cases, except treason, felony and breach ?f the peace, be of Juan’s table by “A”, the search made by “E?’,knowingly and
.,
.>. .
pnvileged from arrest during their attendance ‘ at tKe session falsely pretending to be NBI agent, the use of a falsified search
.; : ’Bf;.Congress, and in going. to and returning frvm the same. warrant, and the threat made by “E’ are not separate offenses
’ . of incriminating innocent person, of violation of domicile, of usur-
(b) A senatw or representative of the Phijigpine Congress
cin he arrested and searched under the following circumstances: pation of official functions, of using falsified document with in-
ient to cause damage, and of grave threats. They are acts con-
’ . (1) When Congress is in regular or special session, gut the stituting the element of intimidation in robbery. “A” and “B”
crime committed is punishable under the Revised Penal Code by were in conspiracy. They are equally liable for the same crime.
a penalty hi,gher than prision mayor; ‘and
.. . (b) Blackmail is the unlawful extortion of money by air
‘ ( 2 ) When Congress is not in session, regardless o f ’ the appeal to the fear of the victim, or by threats of accusation or
penalty provided for the crime committed. exposure. I t is mid that light threats may amount of blacli-
It is submitted that a member of Congress can bc convicted mailing.
by the court for any crime regardless of the penalty provided
:‘- by lavr for the crime and whether Congress is in session or not. V. (a) 1%’ f penalties ale classifed a s afflictive? (b) Give
What the law prohibits is arresting or searchCng a member of the p A e s c r i p t i n n o ~ crilnes
i punished with correctional
Congress under the circumstances mentioned by the law. penalties.
, (e) No. Parliamentary immunity does not mean exemption (a) The penalties which are classified a s afflictive are:
from criminal liability, because the law merely provides for the (1) reclusion perpetua, ( 2 ) reclusion temporal, ( 3 ) perpetual or
exemption from ayrest or search of memberr of Congress under temporary absolute disqualification, (4) ’ pelTetual or temporary
. .
..c e ~ a i ncircumstances. The Constitution prmides that they are special disqualification, and (5) v i s i o n mayor.
806 807
‘3
CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER , . CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal L a w Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
(b) The period of prescription of crimes punished with cor- robbery with homicide. The word "homicide", as used in de-
rectional penalties is ten (10) years; with the exception vf those fining such s ecial complex crime, is to be understood .. in,its
.
maw?, which shall prescribe in five ( 5 )
'What facts constitute indirect bribery? (b) When While it is true that they entered into a partnership, they,+
is committed by reason or on the occasion not the paytnership, owned their respective shares which were
different and se- d e t e r m v - ,
(a) The facts which constitute indirect bribery are: (1) that IX., (a) Explain fully why is it that the ,penalties provided
.the offender is a public officer, (2) that he accepts gifts, and in the Revised Penal Code are divided into arreslo menor, a-,;
(3)..that said gifts were offered to him by reason of his office. resto mayor, prision correecional, prision mayor, etc.? (b). Dis!;
. ~.
. (.b) No: When murder is committed by reason or on occa- cuss whether or not this nomenclature or division of 'pen,@tie$i
, , ;,....i
&n.b.f the robbery, it is a special, indivisible complex crime of should be abrogated? ,,
I
..L
i~'XZ1
,j..
."
808 809
,I
(a) The penalties provided in the Revised Penal Code are is affected by mitigating circumstances, and. ( 2 ) two i
divided into urresto menor, arrest0 mayor, pision correccional, when degree is affec
Pr;rion magor, etc., for many reasons, namely: (1) one of the ( c ) F the rules
juridical conditions of penalty, according to the classical school Se ence Law: (1) If the offense is punishable under.the:'
on'which the Code is mainly based, is that it must be commen- vised Penal Code or its amendments; and ( 2 ) if the offense
surate with the offense-differenl crimes must be punished with punishable under any other law.
'different penalties; ( 2 ) the Fravity of a felony is determined (a) By degree is meant one entire
,ky the penalty attached to i t ; (3) the respective severity of the % or onp unit of the penalties enumerated in t
penalties is considered in the successive service of sentences; (4) ~ provided for in Art. 71. Each of the pe
the penalties are classified in the graduated scales for the perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision mayor,
,.purpose of determining a penalty lower or higher by one or in the graduated scales o f Art. 71, is a degree. By period- is
more degrees than another given penalty. meant one of the three equal portions, called minimum, medium
(b) The nomenclature or division of penalties in the Revised and maximum, of a. divisible penalty.
Penal Code should not be abrogated, because t h e penalties that (b) A degree is affected by mitiga
may be imposed under the Code are subject 'to many rules there are two or more mitigating circumstan
be eliminated if the division of penalties ing circnnmtances are present. In such case, the court
the nomenclature or division of impose the penalty next lower t o that prescribed by law
Code is to change completely 64, par. 6. R.P.C.).
A degree is affected by a privileged mi
.. , ~ .. . that he was attacked by (1) when .the offend
the,day before. fhd- years of age and he
denly, he got up, took his bolo and killed 'his wife, qounded his and (2) wpeii the majority of the requis
father and several other persons. Finally he stabbed. himself tify th act or to exempt from criminal liability is present.
' but did not die. Motives of the crime are not shown., Being ) If the offense is punished by th
I.prosecuted for parricide, bis counsel alleges as defense the fact th JJcourt shall sentence the accused to an indetermi
@at the nian committed the crime under the influence of an the maximum teim of which shall be that which, in
.:??@Uucination
, as an after-effect of his dream.' If you were the attending circumstances, could be properly imposed
.,I' ,judge,
- would you acquit or convict the defendant? Give reasons. rules of the Revised Peual Code, and the minimum of
I i
If I were the judge, I would acquit the defendant.' The act he within the range of the penalty next lower to that pmsc
e o f the defendant was not voluntary, there being no intelligenffe by the Code for the offense.
' ;and intent on his part. A person is not criminally liable if his In determining the minimum term, i t is left entirely w i
act is not voluntary (Art. 3, R.P.C.). the discretion of the court to fix i t anywhere within the
of the penalty next lower without reference t o the periods
AUGUST, 1957 which it may be subdivided (People vs. Uucosin, 59 Phil.
reference to penalties for offenses punishable The mitigating and aggravating circumstances are req
Penal Code, what is meant by degrm and to be considered only in fixing the maximum term of 'th
(h) Give (1) an instance when degree determinate sentence. The court may disregard them in f
810 811
I c:
I
&
. , , :starting point for determining the minimum term of the in-
..~
',,* determinate penalty is the penalty next lower from that pre-
i. :.cribed b y the Code for the offense (People vs. Gonzales, 73
.'' Phil. 549).
/
by said law nd the minimum term shall not be less than the the ruIes of the Code shouid be imposed upon the offender.
minimum rescribed by the same.
si2 813
I
in its full extent, within what penalty should (n) 'l'Be court should sentence C of homicide, the crime
sentence to be imposed on him be? Ex- alleged in the information. Evideut premeditation proved dur-
(b) Charged with and convicted of theft ing the trial by the fiscal cannot qualify the crime to murder,
because i t is not alleged in the information.
in the Municipal Court following his plea
to the Court of First Instance nf this (b) 'The penalty for homicide should be imposed in the
'
city. Upon arraignment in the latter court, he pleads guilty ium period. because of the aggravating circumstance of
as,charged. Is he entitled to the mitigating circumstance of emeditation which is not offset by any mitigating
votuntary plea of guilty? Reason out your answer.
, . *'.(a) The maximum of the sentence to be imposed on L should Distinguish instigation from entrapment. (b) ., H
be,within prisidn mayor, because he is entitled to a penalty one is the owner and operator of a drag store. Suspecting that she
de&ee lower to that prescribed for homicide. Art. 64, par. 5, @lis her medicines at prices above the ceiling prices fixed
- . of,"the Revised Penal Code provides that when there are two by the government, government agents buy medicines from her
o r 'more mitigating circumstances, without aggravating . cir- a t her drug store and pay with marked paper money. The
cumstances, .the offender shall be sentenced to. the penalty prices a t which she sells the medicines t o the agents are higher
next lower in degree to that prescribed by the 'Code. than the ceiling prices and the agents apprehend her for viola-
(b) No, because the plea of guilty should be made a t t h e
first opportunity and he had that opportunity when he was
arfaigiied 'in the Municipal Court. Plea of guilty in the Court
i tion of the Price Control Law. Accused of profiteering by the
fiscal, she moves to quash the information on the ground that
she was induced by the agents to oommit the act for which she'
of"First Instance in a case appealed from the Municipal Court is being prosecuted. Assuming that the Price Control Law is
is not a mitigating circumstance, becaiise the Code requires still in force, how should the court resolve.her motion to quash?
that it should be made by the accused prior t o the pcescnta- Explain your answer.
tion of the evidence of the prosecution. In the Municipal Court, (a) Instigation is distinguished. from entrapment, a s fol-
the prosecution presented its evidence. lows:
under the. following informa- There is a wide difference between entrapment and insti-
day of March, 1957, in the gation, for while in t,he latter case the instigator practically
Province of Bulacan, and within the induces the would-be accused into the commission of the.,of-
a4sault M by stabbing
the above named accused, ?with intent
the
wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously
latter on the chest with a dagger,
7"7 If'become a coprincipal, in entrapment ways and . ,':
means a resorted to for the purpose of trapping and captur-..
ing Lhe lawbreaker in the execution of his criminal plan. en-^,
::
:
trapment is no bar to the prosecution and conviction of the
thus inflicting upon him physical injmies which were the direct lawbreaker. But when there is instigation, the accused must ',
and immediate cause of his death.'' At the trial, the fiscal
be acquitted (People vs. Galicia, 40 O.G. 4476).
proved, 4vith0,ot objection of the defense, that the killing was
attended by evident premeditation. (a) Of what offense should In instigation a public officer or a private detective induces, . ,
. .the court sentence C? (b) In what period (minimum, medium
.-' an innocent person to commit a crime and would arrest him,: ,i
or 'maximum) of the penalty for that nIfense should the court upon or after the commission of t h e crime by the latter:: it:.,^;
. ....., <
. i
(b) The court should deny the motion to quash the informa- Re accepts the condition and is forthwith released from jail.
tion, because B: was not induced by the agents to commit the Five years after his release, he assaults another and is con-
act for which he was being prosecuted. When the agents yicted & sI&ht physical injuries by the proper court after
trial. w h e be convicted of a violation of Article 159 of the
bought medicines from her a t her drug store and paid the
prices at. which H sold them, they merely resorted to ways I Revised Penal Code? Reason out your answer.
and means for the purpose of trapping and capturing her in the (a) The court should convict A of evasion of the service
exe&ition of h e r criminal plan. There is entrapment, which is of the sentence. Although, the English’ test of Art. 157 speaks
ing the term of his imprisonment,” the Spanish
de, which uses tne phrase “sufriendo privacion
and the English texts of Article 157 uld prevail, because the Revised Penal Code was
Code are in part respectively worded as
!”
approved by the Philippine Legislature in its Spanish text. The
con prision correccional e.1 sus grados phrase mentioned covers the penalty of destierro. The convict.
medio y maximo el sentenciado que quebrantare sn condena, i sentenced to the penalty of destierro is suffering from depriva-
fgandose mientras estuviere sufriendo privadan de libertad tion of liberty, though partial, because he is not free to enter
por:sentencia firme x x x.” “The penalty of ‘prision correcciorial the prohibited area.
,‘In. its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon (b) No. When F was granted a conditional pardon by the
any, ixnvict who shall evade service of his senter.ce by escaping Presiden.t$of the Philippines, he had only four years of im-
d+g the term of his imprisonment by reason 0: a final j n d e prisonment to serve. Since the remitted portion of his sen-
ment x x x.” A is the accused in a criminal case in the Munie- tence is only four years, and he committed slight physical
ipal.Court of Manila. After trial he is sentenced ;.o the penalty inj,uries five years later, the condition was no longer operative
of destierro and is ordered for the duration of his sentence not at that time. I submit that the condition “that he shall not
to enter any pNlace within a radius of 100 kilometers from.said again violate any penal law of the Philippines” does not in-
city. He disobeys the order and comes back to live in Manila dicate an intention on the part of the President to require F
before his sentence expires. Prosecuted for a violation of p art.
t o observe that condition for a longer period of time.
157 of the Revised Penal Code, be contends that he should, be
acquitted because the sentence which he evaded is not impri- VIII. (a),Distinguish violation of domicile from trespass to
sonment but destierro. How should the court decide the case? 3 When may a. public officer or etnployee commit
‘Explain your answer. (b) Art. 159 of the Revised Penal Code although that public officer or employee
provides: “The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum is provided with a search warrant?
per,iod shall be imposed upon t,he convict who, having been (a) Violation of domicile and trespass t o dwelling are com-
granted eonditionaI pardon by the Chief Executive, shall violate mitted in the same manner, that is, the oilendcr enters a
any of the conditions of such pardon. However, if the penaltr dwelling against the will of its owner or occupant. They differ
remitted by t.he granting of such pardon be higher than six in that, while in violation of domicile the o€fender is a public
.’ years, the convict shall then suffer the unenpired portion of his officer o r employee, in trespass t o dwelling the offender is a
., original sentence.” F is convicted of homicide and sentenced private individual
. t o 12 years and one day of reclnsion temporal as maximum.
After serving eight of the twelve years in prison, he is par- (b) A public officer Gr employee may commit violation of
doned by the President of the Philippines, on condition that domic’le although he is provided with a search warrant in, the
..’’. he.shal1 not again violate any penal law of the Pl1ilippines. following instances: (1) when the public officer o r employee
.~
, . ~ .
817 . .
816
i
CllI~lINAL LAW REVIEWER i CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law 2 Ear Exarninalions in Criminal Law
procured the search warrant withollt just cause: (2) when he tion, because there is nc such complex crime as estafa t l p u g l i :
exceeded his authority or used unnecessary severity in execut- falsification of a private document, the reason being that the
ing t h e searcli warrant legally obtained: and (3) when ha $ Praudulent gain obtained through'deceit in estafa, in the corn..'
searched the domicile, papers or other belongings of any per-
f $,
mission of which a private document is falsified, is nothing^ :,
,
son, without the presence of the owner, or any member of his more nor less than the very damage caused by the falsifica-
family, or two witnesses residing in the same locality. 1i tion of such document.
(b) The fact that B is his brother is not available t o A
M. (a) Wow is parricide committed? (b) P and G are 1 >as a defense, because the exemption from criminal IiabiIity
hmhand and wife. They have had a stormy marital life, be- estahliahed by law (Art. 332, R.P.C.) for relatives (among them,
=use P has had one concubine after another and often beats brothers who are living together), does not extend to-crimes
G. Unable to stand her husband longer, G hires B to kill other than theft, swindling, or malicious mischief. The cri
&&,promising to pay B the sum of P1,OOO as reward for the
committed by 4 against his brother- B is falsification. . ,.I,*
to the proposal and receives part of the reward
~
* , .
G . So B enters P's house one night and shoots
Of what offense or offenses are -G and AUGUST, 1958
tively. G is guilty of parricide, because d i e is the spouse (a) Crime is defined as an act committed or omitted in vi@. '
of the person killed. B is guilty of murder, because he killed lation of a public law forbidding or commanding it (Bouvier's
P in Consideration of price, reward or promise. A stranger Law Dictionary, Itawle's Third Revision, Vol. 1, p. 729).
cannot be held liable for parricide even if he is in conspiracy. Criminal law! is tbat branch or division of 1
with the spouse of the deceased, because the private relation fines crimes, treats o r their nature, and provides f o
of the spo se with the deceased is not attendant to him (Art.
punishment (12 Cyc. 129).
62, par. , R.F'.C.).
(b) The constitutional rights of the amused are: ,~
(a) A falsifies a private document for the purpose of 1. No person shall be held to answer for a
defrauding B, his brother with whom he is living, in the sum fense without due process of law.
of 81,000. A succeeds in obtaining the P1,000, to the prejudice 2. All persons shaI! before conviction be bailable
of B,by m e m j of the falsified document. What crime or crimes ficient sureties, except those charged with capital of
has A committed? Reason out your answer. (b) I n ' c a s e of when evidence of guilt is strong. Excessive bail shall n
prosecution, would the fact that B is his brother be available required.
.to. A as a defense? Why? 3. In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall
' I . ,. (a) A committed falsification of a private document. He sumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved, an
~':,, did^ not commit a complex crime of estafa through falsifica- enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel,, to\.:
,, > i i i , ,
';,'..;
.; 818 819
. .
, ,..
I ! ' I
,_. . 1
i
'5
,. CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
l CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criniinal Law
I is that those rights which may be waived are personal, svhile'
f the nature and cause of the accusation against him,
a speedy and public trial, to meet the witnesses face those rights which may not be waived involved public interest':
and to have r,ompulsory process to secure .the attend- which may be affected (Rules of Court by Moran, Vol.:2, p;:
1,..
in his behalf. 748, 1952 Edition). ,.
, .
,,.
. . 4 . No person shall be compelled to be a witness against U N ' T o what wffenses committed outsid
liimself. ,
limitdof the Philippines do the provisions of the Rev
fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel and Code apply? Name them. (b) A jilted suitor forcibly
:
a
-
a girl aged 20 to another town where, he kept her agai
put in jeopardy of punishment will for several days, and through intimidation, tried, ~ , ,
. . for the same offense. success, t o make her marry him. He had no thought
.""7.Free access t o the courts shall not be denied t o any jug her chastity and did not touch her person beyond
son by reason of poverty (Article 3, Bill of Rights, Philip- was necessary to accomplish his purpose to marry the,^
pine Constitution). . . What, if any, crime did the suitor commif? Slate your re
.. .I
The statutory rights of the accused are:, (a) The provisions of the Revised Penal Code appl
' ' "'
1. To be presumed innocent until'the contrary is prove+ the fcllowing offenses committed outside the territorial:,l
'2. To be present and defend in person and by attorney of the Philippines :
at every stage of the proceedings, that is, 'from the arraiui-
promulgation of the judgment.
e informed of the nature and cause of the accusa-
To testify as witness in his own behalf. His neglect 3 . Acts connected with the introduction into the Phil'
1. or refusal t o be a witness shall not in any manner prejudice OP the obligations and securities mentioned in the pre
..dr'be used a,gainst him. number;
5. To be exempt from being a witness against himself.
', ' " ' ? 6 . To be confronted a t the trial by, and cross-examine,
1'-+,he witness against him. 5 . Crimes against the national security and , the
3,'. .7. To have compulsory process issued to 'secure the at- nations (Art. 2, R.P.C.).
tendance of witnesses in his behatf. '
(b) It is submitted that the answer to this
1. 8. To have a speedy and public trial. be qualified, because there is no lewd intention on
9. TO have the right of appeal in all cases authorized by of the suitcr and there is no clear indication that the
Sec. 1, new Rules of Court).
which may be waived is the right of the
and cross-examination. A right which
may not be waived is the right of the accused to be informed
the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
The reason or principle underlying the difference between
".;.rights
, . which may be waived and rights which may not be waived being a woman and a minor), if there is deprivation of iibe
820 621
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
I Oar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
Abduction, being one of the ways in which illegal detention can I ' evident premeditation, Night time and with the aid of .armed
b e committed, the kidnapping of a woman without unchaste men to insure or afford impunity should not be taken into con-
designs must, according to Viads and t n our Penal Code, he sideration as separate aggravating circumstances, because they
considered as illegal detention. However, since there is no are inher Tn or ahsorbed by the qualifying circumstance o f ,
clear dcprivation of liberty but the offended woman is compelled treacpfF
to do something against her will, such as to make her marry 1 A l t h o u ~ h ,evident premeditation is a qualifying circumstance
the offender through intimidation. the crime committed is grave of murder. when it concurs with another qualilying +cumstance,
coercion (People vs. Dauatan, et al., C.A., 3 6 . 0 . G . 450). like tmaciiery, whicli is already considered as qualifying, evident
In case of doubt as to whethey or not there is deprivation
of liberty, the purpose of the offender must be taken into con-
sideration to determine the' crime actually committed. In this
base, since the purpose 6f the of€ender is t o compel the girl
by means of intimid ion to marry him, the crime committed .
-.
i premeditation is to be regarded as aggravating circumstance only.
822 823
I i
I.
824 s25
I 1
:i .:
., .:;
i /
mour. S' e his wife and the man were on their feet, they
,could n t have been in the act of committing sexual intercourse
when the accused surprised them. Under Art. 247 of the R e
vised Penal Code, i t is an indispensable requisite that a legally
married person should surprise his spouse i n , the act of com-
.mitting sexual intercourse with another person (People vs: Gon-
zales, 69 Phil. G6.
IX. (a) A was aroused from sleep by a noise 'in his room, ':
a) It is submitted that A was guilty of theft, although
had been previously stolen .. which was unlighted, and saw in the room the outline of a.
One of the elements of the \ i i r m h A s k e d who he was, the man did not identify hi,mseE.
crime of theft is that the property belongs to another. This Believing that nian to be a burglar, A shot and killed him 'with
element has ' beon interpreted by the Supreme Court to mean .his (A's) pistol, which he kept under his pillow. The man
that it is sufficient that the offender is not the owner of the w h k A thought was a dangerous thief, it turned out, was,
From whom the personal .property A's son. Is A crirninally liable for the killing? State your.
Possession of the property by reason. (b) A waited in ambush for 13 to kill him. He saw C
is taken is sufficieht @S. a few meters away and, believing C to be B, he fired upon and ;. I ,
826
-
_-
',
.
A
'.'
si
CRIMIN t L A W REVIEWER CRlMlNAL LAW BEVIEWER
/
Bar Ex inations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal ~ a w
part of the aceus t o act immediately, because when the door 3 . By means of inundation, fire, poison, esplosion, shigi''
\vas forcibly (;p ed by the deceased who was then outside and wreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment of, or assault upon, 6:;
a chair fell o him (Ah Chong) he thought that he was being street car or iocomotive, fall of an airship, by means of motor..,
attacked. I the problem given, there was no such pressing neces- vehicles, or with the use of m y other means involving g r e a t ,
waste and ruin; ..
., ,
' . sity on t part of A to shoot and kill the person whom he be-
lieved was a dangerous thief. Under Art. 4, par. 1, of the Re- 4 . On occasior~of any of the calamities enumerated in the
vised Penal Code, criminal liability is incurred by anY person preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano,
committing a felony although the wrongful act done he different destructive cyclone, epidemic, o r any other public calamity; '
from that which be intended. Since the act of A was not justified, 5 . With evident premeditation;
he was committing a felony when he shot the deceased.' A is 6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmentiug
criminally liable for the killing, although the wrongful act done the suffering of the victim, o r outraging o r scoffing at his
was different from that which he intended. w s o n or corpse.
(b) A is liable for killing C, even though he did not have (Art. 243, R. P. C.)
(b) It is submitted that A did not commit any penal uffense.~
When a person issued a check in payment of a pre-existing
obligation, even if a t the time he knew that he had no funds
in the bank to cover the check and even if he did not inform
the payee of that fact, there is only civil liability. The reason,.
for this answer is that in the crime of estafa by postdating or.
issuing a check, it is required that the said check must be"'
issued and delivered in payment of some obligation contrac$edi '
a t the time of the issuance 01' delivery of the check (People
vs. Lilius, 69 Phil. 339).
X. (a) Name all the circumstances any one of whicb makes ( e ) The foliowing crimes must be prosecuted upon complain$^: ,'
the taking of human life murder. (b) A i s s u d a check without by the Fffended party: ., -.,
funds in payment of an outstanding debt knowing the check 1. Adultery;
1 would not be honored. Did A, or did he not, commit any penal
2 . Concubinage;
offense? If your answer i s yes, what was the offense? If
your answer is no, why nut? (c) Name the crimes which must 3 . Seduction ;
be prosecuted upon complaint o€ the offended evty, ana- state 4. Abduction ;
5 . Rape;
the taking 6. Acts of lasciviousness; and
of huma:i li.fe murder, are: 7. When the defamation imputes the commission of a
which cannot be prosecuted de oficio.
(Arts. 344 & 306, R
It is patent that the provision requiring that the
ings must be initiated upon the complaint filed. by the
. , .i
828 829
I 1
;on f o r
ed party o r her relatives, was enacted out of considerat& rate crimes of serious illegal detention and rape. The crime of
the offended party and her family who might prefer to Suffer seridus illegal detention was conlmitted outside the base. It is.
e question that the two American soldiers of the
the outrage in silence rather than go tnrough with the scandaL took the two Filipino hostesses from Angeles,
of a public trial (Samilin vs. Court of First Instance, 57 Phil- :
. ,'
, Pampanga, which is outside the Base. The forcible taking of the
298). .' d
two Filipino hostesses constitutes the crime of serious illegal de-
tention, there being no lewd designs on the part of the two Amer-
ican soldiers at the time of the taking of the hostesses, as shown
by the fact that they took them to a dance once inside the base.
&a) .Ex(;ept as provided in treaties and laws of prefer- The Base Agreement does not apply with respect to the crime
,, ., of serious illegal detention which was committed outside the base.
ential applicatlon, enumerate five cases wherein the Revised , When the crime is committed outside the base by a member of
Penal Code is applicable outside the territorial jurisdiction of
the Philippines. (b) One night, two American soldiers of t h e the armed forces of the United States and the offended party is,
U.S. Army forcibly take two Filipino hostesses from Angeles, not a member of the armed forces of the United States, the Philip-.
Pdpanga, and bring them inside Clark Air Base. Once inside pine Court shall have jurisdiction over the offense.
the base they are taken to a dance, but fbding the ball to0 Even if it is supposed that the American soldiers committed
crowded they immediately .proceed to the soldiers' quarters a complex crime of forcible abduction with rape, it being a con-
where the girls are raped. (1) May the two soldiers be pro- tinuing crime which began outside the base, the Philippine Court,
secuted ' befor,e a Philippine Court? Reasons. ( 2 ) For what' bas concurrent jurisdiction with the military court o€ the United,
offense or of.fenses are they criminally, liable? Reasons. .,
States Armed Forces.
( a ) p i o n s of the Revised Penal Code'shall be en- ( 2 ) The two American soldiers are criminally liable for two.,
forced o ide the jurisdiction of the Philippines again&t those illegal-detention and rape.
detention, because the forcible
z Nho:/ P detention and the victims were
1. Should commit an offenSe while on a Philippine ship or
women. The crime committed may not be forcible abduction,
airship ; ha. because there seems to be no lewd designs on the part of the
2. Should forge or counter.%.%tany coin 01' currency note
two American soldiers a t thc time of the forcible taking of.the
of the Philippines or obligations and securities issued by t h e
Government of the Philippines; hostesses. Lewd designs cannot be inferred from the commission
' ' 3 . Should be liable for acts connected with the introductiora of rape when the circumstances of the case show that the of-
fenders had no intention to commit rape a t the time of the forcible'.
h t o the Philippines of the forged obligations and securities men- taking of the women.
tioned in the preceding number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit The two American soldiers are also guilty of rape as a sepa-
rate offense, because the intention to have carnal knowledge with
an offense in the exercise of their functions; or the two Filipino hostesses came to the mind of the American
5 . Should commit any of the crimes against national security soldiers on-hey were already inside the base and they
(Art. 2, R.P.C.) could not dance with them a,s they found the hall too crowded.
soldiers may be prosecuted be- But since from the circumstances of the case it is apparent'.
that the intention of the two American soldiers in forcibly taking 9
committed two distinct and sepa-
830 831
I 1
' i
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Ba,r Examinations in Criminal Lav
the two hostesses from Angeles, Pampanga, was to take them ,(a) The penalty to be imposed for complex crimes is the;',
to a dance, and not to rape them, they have different criminal penalty for the most serious crime, the same to be applied in its..
,
..
.., .,,
intents and, therefore, two different crimes wer? committed by maximum period.
t them. In cases in which the crimes committed a r e different from .
' 3 . I
tliose which the offenders intended to commit, the following rulm'' ;
.,... ,
II. (a) '[s mere membership in the Coamunist Party of
8 shall be observed :
t h e Philippines punishable? Cite authoritative provisions. (b) 1. If the pena.lty prescribed for the felony committed be.;,,
A was taken to a farm by outlaw members R and C. B gave higher than that corresponding to the offensg which the accused' ~
'A a bolo and told the latter that the chief outlaw wanted to intended to commit, the penalty corresponding to the latter. shall,...,
kill the farmer who tvas sleeping inside the hut. A refused, be imposed in its maximum period.
but after B told A "you have t,o com,ply with that order of 2 . If the 'penalty prescribed for the felony committed be,'
. the chief outlaw, otherwise you will have to come along With
lower than that corresponding to the one which the accused in-
us," A killed the farmer. Is A criminally liable? Reason out
tended t o commit, the penalty for the former shall be imposed
your answer.
in its maximum period.
(a) Yes. The Anti-Subversion Act punishes any person who
3 . The rule established by the next preceding paragraph
knowingly, wilfully and by overt act affiliates, becomes, or re- shall not be applicable if the acts committed by the guilty person '.
mains a member of the Communist Party.
shail also constitute an attempt or frustration o f another crime, ;
(b) Yes, because A is not exempt from criminal liability. if the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter
A was not acting under the impulse of uncontrollable fear of an offenses, in which case the penalty provided for the attempted
equal or gre,ater injury. The statement of B, "You have to com- or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in its maximum period.
ply with tha.t order of the chief outlaw, otherwise YOU will have (b) If I were the prosecutor, I would charge A with the
t o come along with us,"$s not a threat sufficient to cause a fear
of a n evil or injury ggeater than that which A was, required complex crime of homicide with serious physical injuries through
to commit. Such a statement did not promise. ah evil of such reckless imprudence. When A held his revolver in hand while
gravity and imminence that a n ordinary person would have Suc- looking for another seat in the theater, he did not take the neces-
cumbed to it. The fear of A was fanciful, remote and speculative, s a r y precaution to avoid injury to persons. Since the single act
not rcal, imminent o r reasonable. of reckless imprudence resulted in homicide and serious physical
injuries, A committed the complex crime of homicide with serious
111. (a) What penalties are to be imposed for cwmplex physical injuries throngh reckless imprudence.
,crimes?; for crimes committed which are different from those The proper penalty t o he imposed on A would be the penalty
. . intended? (b) A was sea.ted at the rear side of the orchestra for homicide through reckless imprudence, it being the graver
:in a theater. He left his seat with his revolver in hand t o offense, to be appiied in the maximum period.
' ', :
',
'look for another seat behind. On his way, his revolver sud- ,, .
denly was discharged and the bullet hit E, causing his death, IV. (a) Distingnish hot11 by their nature and their effect&
: , and C, causing injuries that required more than 30 days to between justifying and exempting circumstances. (b) M, a public:
'' . !heal. If you were the prosecutor, for what offense or offenses school teacher, scolded B, one of her pupils. The next day;:
d you charge A? Reasons. If convicted, what would be while M was condncting her class, R's father boxed M on dif-2
proper penalty? ferent parts of her body. The injuries of M healed moretfi++
. ..
832 833
. .
CRIMINAL LAW REYJEWER CRIXINAL LAW REVIEWER ,.
Bar .Examinations in Criminal Law ' Bar Examinations in. Criminal Law.
than thirty days. For what offense of .grave threats before the JP court. He was arrested'and
ather be charged? Give reasons for your tained in the municipal jail
Chief of Police that X performed
rson who acts by virtue of a absence, X was able t n draw his s
ansgress the law, that is, he his confinement. The mayor approved the payroll
nit any crime in the eyes of the law, because there treasurer paid the salary. What offense or offenses h
awful in the act or conduct of the actor. The act commithed? Reasons. Who are the parties liakle:
ed and lawful. On the otiier Reasons.
the grounds for exemption (a). One specific offense where
anting in the agent of the gardless of whether the offense is
conditions which make the act voluntary or tent or through criminal negligence is malversation','
(b) Either there is a complex crime of estafa t
s by virtue of a fieation of an official document, i€ Patrolman X and
Police were in conspiracy, in whic
therefor; or there are two different offenses of
of official document through reckless imprudence fo
ere is. a crime, Chief of. Police is liable and estafa by means of dece
Patrolman X is liable.
The 'Chief of Police e
document when he certifie
when the latter was detained in the municipal jail
period of time. The act of falsificatiou committed.'
of Police is making untruthful statements in 'the,
oxing M resulted ' facts. If the Chief of P
the falsity of the facts narrated
irect assault. Under the law; a fieation committed by a public of
erson in authority. M, a public school positih. If Patrolman X was in conspiracy with
Police, then both he and the Chief of. Police: wo
of estafa through falsification
there is conspiracy the act of
eopplex crime of estafa throu
single act, they constitute a complex crime. ment, because the falaificati
necessary means for commit
ifthe
, Chihef o f Police was
cation and Patrolman X mer
fication made by the Chief
be liable for the crime of e
thereby employed deceit
. .
CRIMINAL LAW KEVIEWEIL CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW1;S
Bar Examinationn in Criminal Law
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
lic o€ficials concerned to pay him the salary. The injured party or to the heirs of the injnr
R.P.C.) .
Persons guilty of rape, seduction o r abduction, sh
sentenced :
1. To indemnify the offended
- 2 the offspri
veut from doing so.
3 . In every case to support the offspring.
The adulterer and the concubine may
indemnify for .damages caused to the offended spouge
R.P.C.). .
- :>
Give the two exceptions to the rule that penal laws (b) The two exceptions to the rule that penal^,
a retiroactive effect io so f a r a s they favor the persons have retroactive effect in so f a r as they f
(1) when the new penal laws specifically provide,
arrested during the regular or special session ,of not apply.to pending action o r causes of actioh,
the offender is R habitual delinquent.
e civil liability incurred by a person who committed (e) A member of Congress may be a
includes: (1) restitution; (2) reparation of the d&- ular or special session of Congress for offenses pun
d.; and (3) indemnification for conseque:btial da&ges a penalty .higher than prkion mayor.
. ,
restoring the thing itself,
th allowance for any deterioration or diminu-
.t?on':of value, as determined by the court. The thing itself shall
,b&,.restoredemn though it may be found in the possession of a
house 9
-11. (a) and B, armed with carbi
attempting
shouted or help which caused A
There is no evidence to show who
twrd party who had acquired i t by lawful means, saving to the fatal shot. May A and B be prose
latter. his action against the proper person who may be liable answer. (b) A police raiding team a
"tO-'Gm(Art. 106, R.P.C.). a wornan in the act 6f cohabitation
admitted by the couple that the woman received five .bo
paration- is made or satisfied by determining the amount perfume in consideration of the inter
age, taking into consideration the price of the tliing, when- fense committed, if there was any
possible, and its special sentimental value to the injured J answer.
.~ The Court shall order the payment of the amount deter-
(a) -Yes, A and B may b e prosecuted even if there is.
mked,
, . based on those considerations (Art. 106, R.P.C.).
evidence to show who among A and B fired the fatal shot.
emnification shall include not only those caused to the reason for this answer is, since A and B were in consp
party but also those suffered by his family or by a third to commit robbery in the house of
by reason of the crime. The Court shall fix the amount that the death of X was an incident and a consequenc
consequential damages that the offender shall pay to the agreement t o commit robbery, coupled with the Pact th
,.
836 837
I I
838 839
. .._
.'~. , I
'1
,..
. , CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Exnminationa in Criminal Law
fl CRlBlTNAL LAW REVIEWER
:,,
,
, ~
Bar Examinations in Criminal IAW 8
the terms of conditional pardon granted truthful statements, shall testify under oath or make an affidavit :,
Chief Executive. upon any material matter before a competent person authorized' .'
maximum term of imprisonment does not to administer an oath in cases in which the law so
a c e d one year. (Art. 183, R.P.C.).
Those who, upon the approval of the iaw, had been sen- Defamation is a public and malicious imputation o
by final judgment. or a vice or defect, real o r imaginary, or any act, omissi0
. .;,' .,,lo.
.*
Those sentenced to desfiewo or suspension. lion, status,, or circumstance tending to cause the dis
.- ,'Jb). The offlanse committed by D was acts of lasciviousness,
.,."<, of a natural or jlrridical person, or t
.committed with intimidation, because by compelling his maid who is dead (Art. 353, R.P.C.).
off her clothes and dance before him, there was lascivious- that the former offense of false
the motive (U.S. vs. Bailoses, 2 Phil. 49). innocent person (Art. 363, R.P.C.),
(ic) F and 1; a r e liable for estafa. The offense committed only when there is planting of
ot.malversation, because the funds of the Manila Rai1roa.d
6,omVany are not public funds and the cashier of that company that no offense was committed b y
k3,:not.a public officer. The crime committed is estafa with on the part of S f o r failure to co
ab@,e,--of,confidence, even if the Railroad Company i s of a ply with his obliga.tion t o execute a deed of conv
quasi-public character (U.S. vs. Sevilla, 43 Phil. 190). Although the lot in favor of R. S did not commit the crime of es
L, a businessman, did not have any fiduciary relation- with the because there was neither deceit nor abuse of confidence. ,+'
Masfla -Railroad Company, he is neverthelkss liable for. estafa, lot was existing. It does not appear that S had the inten
becaqse when the law clearly defines a crime, a s the Revised the beginning to defraud R and that the former proinuse
qeyl Code defines the crime of estafa, those who in any way e latter to execute a deed of conveyance only to induce;:him
participated therein must be principals, accomplices or abettors to part .with his money. The amount of P15,@00'was'rece
thereof (U.S. vsr Ponte, 20 Phil. 379, citing Groizard & Viada). by S not in trust, or on commission, or for administration
under any other obligation involving the duty to mak
X. (a) State the provisions in the Revised Penal Code or to return, the same. The transaction was one of Pum
which ,succeeded the former offense of false prosecution. (b) sale and when the amount of Q15,@00was delivered by'
ideration of P15,OOO which R gave ~ L Y S, the 'latter the latter acquired ownership over the money, not 'mer
execut'e the next day a deed of conveyance over 1,000 dical possession of the same. S was still the o
in favor of R. On the following day, S did not he sold it, because there was no
the ag,reemeut, instead he evaded R.. When pressed having been executed.
Later on, S sold the same lot
was the offense committed, if there AUGUST', 1960
: :.. any? Reason out your answer.
:
"
(a) The former offense of false prosecution is now punished frustrated felolly, and give a n exantplp:'
,by the Revised I'enal Code as perjury, if the false accusation io required for self-
uriaer oath: or defamation, if not under oath, and the purpose an example.
,k%&iscredit
,I
,<,erwrjr .
., . or to injure the reputation of the offended party.
i s committed by any person^ who, knowingly mak'ing un-
(a) A felony is frustrated when the offende
.;,"*py+.r.
~
341
I
,.,-
842 843
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWISR
Bar :Examinations in Criminal Law
@
+
.
,cording to the conditions attending the commission of the,,~';.rime^ :,'!#I
,!-it
(Art. 15, R.V.C.). '~ ~ ,&A
/ I
the means employed to pre- V. (3) Mention two ways in which criminal liability 6:
totally extinguished. .Yb) Distinguish between prescription
. .~of ' ,
a crime and prescription of a penalty. ,; , , ~ n
of a cri
circumstances; :
,
,~i .
L
.
:,:.:"*\#~* , , (1)
.,,
That advantage"be taken by the offender of his public
" nosition: /
e committed in contempt of or with
rities (Art. 14, pars. 1 and 2, R.P.C.). VI. Define (a) parricide, (b) murder. (
stance.-That a person killed another
reward ai. promise (Art. 248, par. 2*
846. 841
..
,-
. ,
,, ,
I
are two or more mitigatiag circumstances ,.. ,An example of a complex crime is when a person fired his.
circumstances are present., the court shall gun once and the same bullet killed t w o individuals; o r when, ,',"
ext lower to that prescribed by law, in the a person falsified a dezd of mortgage to induce another to p,a.&, , ,
may deem applicable, according to the number with his money, thereby defrauding the latter. The latter,is:.an: ,!~;
such circumstances. exainple of a complex crime of estafa through falsific+tio~z&~:@$
public document. .. ,.. . . , .yT,:
,_ > i
atever may be the number and nature of the aggravab x:,:,?
ances, the courts shall not impose a greater penalty ' i
, , y<,
escribed by law, in its maximum period. /' AUGUST, 1961 I .
, a.
, ,
imits of each period; the courts shall deter- ' /
' . '. &ne the extent of the penalty according to the .number and
.aggravating and mitigating circumstances and the
$(a) Define "crime" and give an example of an
sible' crime,'' as defined in the Revised Penal Code. .&b
'
e r extent of the evil produced by the crime. charged with the forcible abduction with lewd desi2
a.,girl, 16 years old and Y, a 20-year old female f e e n d , p f
) State one difference between arbit&ry detention The evidence shows that the abduction was with their conge
detention. (b) A is accused of robbery and is ar- Decide 'the case with reasons.
constabulary sergeant, by virtue .of a warrant
, .(a) Crime is defined as an act comnitted or
st. A put up bail and was ordered released by the court.
violation of a public law forbidding or commanding it.
sergeant B'sees A a t the cockpit and im-
him and takes him +A the constabular guard- An example of impossible crime is, aa f o l l o m A b
.
yl
p t there till the next morning when B took that' B was only sleeping, with intent to kill, shot at the la,@
him to the court. All along A was telling ? , t h a t he was out body then lying on bed. It turned out that B had be
"
on bail, but B would not believe him; neither did he, B, make an hour before A fired at his body.
,. , ' 'Sng effort to verify if A had really been released on bail. .What (b) A should be sentenced to suffer the penalty f o r $
.offense if any has B committed, acd why? sented abduction in which X is the offended party,
.' (a) Arbitrary detention is committed by public officer, while being with her consent, she being 16 years old
illegal detention is committed by private person. In both of- io be a virgin, it not appearing that she is married.
,: femes;. the offendy s, a person of his liberty without A should be acquitted of the charge of forcible abdu
,::legal ground or auth insofar as Y is the offended party, becau:;e the element of
tention through negligence, be- the abduction is against her will" is absent; and he c o d
malice he did not take the neces- be convicted of consented abduction, because Y is over 18 y
'ving A of his liberty without legal of age.
.. ,
..';is
-11. (a) If an insane person ,commits a crime, wh
ine complex crime and give an example. first be civilly liable, his legal guardian, or t h e insane$
.:. .:
, ..
./'
. . 848 849
.:,.:*.,:'
?*:
I 1
win his p r o k r t y ? Why?' (b) Specify two (2) offenses which '' 4 committed a complex crime of estafa t h r o u g h ' . f a l s i f i c o ~ ,
/
prescribe i one (1) Year. of a commercial document. When he imitated the signature:
,',(a) he civil liability for acts committed by a n insane shall. the bank depositor on the check for FlOO and issu
i'
A committed. the crime of falsification of a comm
devolve pan. his legal guardian, unless it appears that there
ment. By cashing the check, A committed estafa by
was'no fault o r riegligence on the part of the latter,+ If the legal deceit. And since the crime of falsification was
g'uayd' n was not a t fault or negligent or be insolvent, the in- means for committing the crime of estafa, A committed.
&de person who committed the crime shall respond With his .complex crime of estafa through falsification of commercial d
OWn'property not exempt from execution, in accordance $th ment.
. .the civil law (Art. 101, R.P.C.).
' .* .Hence, iAe legal guardian should first be civilly liable. . N. Specify two (2) modifying circumstances in the.
e for damages caused by the incapacitated sition of the ,penalty which ' can be considered ' aggravathg at
their authority and live i n their com- times, and miti-ting at other times. Give illnstrative examples,>.
of the guardian shal! cease .when they
all the diligence of E. good father of a
damage (Art. 2180, N.C.C.). A and 13 were convicted of slight physical'injuries infliC~84
punished only by a .fine or by imprisonment on C. A was the son of C and B was the.father of C. In!thi.k
one month, or both, prescrise after one year. case, 'relationship is a mitigating circumtance i n tlie iinp!.isition
e following offenses.prescrihe after one year: of the penalty .on B and a n aggravating circumstance in theri
ailure t o brand or register cattle.-Any. person who imposition of the penalty on A. Relationship is a mitigating:
se to brand or. regiiter his large cattle circumstance in crimes against persons, ,when the offender &.a-
h animal not branded or registered by relative o f - a higher degree than the offended party.. It is .an
an two nor more than five pesos, or by im- .aggravating circumstance when the offender is a relative of.-;a.:
ment for not less than five days nor more than thirty days, lower degree than the offended party. ,., .
both such fine and imprisonment, in 'the discretion of the A killed B when the former was i n the state of intolticdtion.
vised Adm. Code). If the intoxication OS A was accidental, it is a mitigating cir-
'. . ( 2 ) Unlicensed signs, signboards, or billboar&.-Any per- cumstance. If it is habitual o r subsequent to the plan to corn-?
. , mit tbe crjme, his intoxication is a n aggravating circumstance.. i f :
'son .who shall erect, construct, m a i r b i n , display, o r , expose a
, ,~
bign, signboard, Cr billboard without first paying the lawful tax . .,,.:.'r:1
,
m c m h i u g said check, what crime or crimes, if any, have been (a) The following are criminal acts constituting violationi'
r committed? Why? of the Election h i w : . . .. ,..., . ~
1
i a50 861
. CRIMINAL LAW REVlEWER CRIIIIIXAL LAW REVlEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminnl Law
driver recklessly drove at nig is mashr‘s felonies and they were the results of one single ct of reckless
driving (Art. 48, R.P.C.).
There is such crime as unintentional a.bortion through reck-
less imprudence when, as in this case, the violence was not inten-
injury on a child passenger &at was tionally-exerted and the foetus died ax a consequence.
expelling out of a foetus from the body If the foetus survived in spite of the violence, the offender
passenger; and damage to the “innocent” is liable f o r at least less serious physical injuries, because the
were committed? Why? mother necessarily suffered internal injuries due to the expulsion
three separate and district crimes, of the foetus.
(2) homicide with abortion (if the .The offense of slight physical injuries through reckless im-
physical injuries (if the a light felony, cannot form a complex crime.’ ,-j
‘thtough reckless im- treated and punished as a separate offense. .):
through reckless im- I . .”
IX. Distinguish dander by deed from libel. ,‘. ,. , i
the essential elemeots In slander by deed, the offender per€orms:any act not in-
a taking of the c a r ; cluded.in the crima of libel or slander; in libel, the offender
personal property avails himself of written o r printed words, or words published, .y
belongs to another, his master; (4) ,that the taking was with- by means of radio, phonograph, painting or threatridal o r cine-: .‘iJ
O l i t the,consent of the owner of the car: and (5) that there was matographic exhibition in besmirching the reputation. of another
&nt t o gain. It is qualified theft, because the property taken person. ’
_
~I
is a motor vehicle.
The element‘of intent to gain is present, because the use o r
property is sufficient to establish’ that
r
The two offens ’ are similar i n the sense that in both of-
fenses (1) there m st be publicity and (2) that the acb, per- :!
formed or the wo$ds published cast dishonor, discredit. o r .con-
tempt upon the offended party.
/
dement.
“taking”, the Supreme Court held that X. Distin isla “trespas to dwelling” from c‘tres&w to
qualified theft of an automobile when propert* (0 er forms of trespass). , ,
a joy ride without the consent of its In “tr .pass to dwelling”, the offender is a private person: ”
in “trespa s to property” (other forms of trespass), the off&dev I:
that if at the time is any person. In the first, the offender enters a dwelling%ouse~@~
have the intention of withhold- of another; in the second, the offender enters the closed premises
the element of or the fenced estate of another. In the first, the place entered
‘:taking”
%
in the crime of theft is lacking and, hence, the crime by the offender i s inhabited; in the second, the place entered.@
is. not committed. uninhabited. I n the first, the act constituting the crime is by
He also committed the complex crime of homicide with abor- entering the dwelling against the wiII of the owner: in the second,
.tin’ or . a t least less serious physical injuries, and damage to it is by entering the closed premises or the fenced estate with-
’property, assuming that the damage is not less than PlOO,through’ out securing the permission of the owner or caretaker .thereof. .
reckless imprudence, because the three offenses a r e a~?.Iqas,grave I n the first, the prohibition to enter the dwelling of another i$
854 855
, ,,,*:,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Emminations in Criminal Law ...a1r
*.
’ ’
in the second, the prohibitior’ to, enter the the corresponding VISA authorizing “B” ‘ t o ’en* Philip-
- ’ ’,
fenced estate of another must‘be mknifest. pine soil to which “B” WEIS not entitled:
->., .. * ,’
(a) Has “A” committed any crime defined and .p&hed ,:
.’ .’AUGUST, 1962 ,. in the Revised Penal Code? If so, name it;, if not,
esplain your answer. .‘.,l’i
(b) Can “A” be prosecuted in the Philippines for said
crime? Why? , . . . ,.
k.”
outside o ,its jurisdiction, against those who, while’being
” ’ public ficers or employees, should commit ‘an offense
in the ]?hilippines are: in t$ exercise of their functions (Art. 2, R.P.C.).
~, 1. The Spanish Penal Code, and ~
,./
been adopted by Congress. (a) The aggravating circumstance that the crime was
Consul of the Philippines stationed in X-pl&, committed by a hd is present when more than three armed
of his official functions as such, while in malefactors ted together in the commission of the of-
his place of assignment and for the consideration oE F10,oOO f se. least four of the persons who committed the
prepared various documents in favor of “E” wherein he riHe must be armed. It is not necessary: that the mem-
’ .. ,
~ . knowingly made untruthful statements ’ .in - the,- .na+ra : . bers of the band be armed with firearms.
’ Boloskid clubs
. .,. I / .
tion of facts and ih connection therewith ‘ h e ‘i&u&‘‘B’’ ’ ~ . - snd other deadly weapons a r e sufficient arms.^‘.'."?':
856 857
. >.,’
,I CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
/
court held that its former decision did not declare an ab- But if the commission of other common crimes .in the
. ~ .,solute and general rule which would exclude the possibility course of the rebellion is done for private purposes or pro-
of their being considered separately when their elements
I fit, without political motivation, those other common crimes.
a r e distinctly perceived and can subsist independently, re- would he punished as separate and distinct offenses.
vealing a greater degree of perversity (People vs. Santos, (b) Yes. The threefold-iength-of-time rule shduld’ be
et al., G.R. No. L-4189, May 12,.1952)’. followed irrespective of the fact that the different’offenses
are charged in several informations, or a r e included in. a
wi (a)
Can the crime of rebellion be complexed with, ocher single prosecution, or that the several cases are tried be-
common crimes? Why? fore. the same court o r in different courts (People vs.
(h) In 1960, Juliet committed 6 crimes. of estafa to’ the Garalde, 50 Phil. 823).
damage of the respective offended parties in the sum The rule applies although the penalties were &posed
of P1,OOO in each case. She was in the m e year for different crimes, at different times, and under separate
prosecuted for all the 6 cases: 2 in the Court of First informations (Torres vs. Superintendent, 58 Phil. 847).
htitance of Bizanila, 2 in Quezon city, 1 in Pasay city .~ ,
am$ the last one in Cdoocan City. She was convicted The rule shall be applied to her in the service of the
after hearing in all the 6 cases. In the imposition penalties. The maximum duration of the’ convict’s sen-
of the corresponding penalties: (a) would she be tence shall not be more than threefold the length of time
entitled to the benefits of the threefold-length-of- corresponding to the most severe of the penalties &posed:
time rule provided in Rule 70, last paragraph. of the upon her.
. . Revised Penal Code a s amended by Commonwealth V. One morning, Hilarion went to the house of Dionisio and
Act No. 217, Section 2? In the affirmative case, .: there had an altercation v i t h him over certain. deliver@
~
how could that rule be applied to her? of tobacco leaves which the latter did not want to yieId.1
(a,) No, because the other common crimes committed Enraged, Hilarion left saying that he was to come back,
SA:.’in the course of the rebellion are either absorbed in the
rebellion or treated and punished as separate and distinct
at-noon, which he did, armed with ‘a galtik and a
.
- . . and at a distance of 30 feet from t h e house, .called .DIP!-. ~
!
858 869
I 1
?:" nisi0 to ''come down". As the latter refused, Hilarion, ,,,' Even if F .had participated in the conspiracy, he was
',.
I .
t~ compel Dionisio to come down, set fire to Dionisio's not one of the malefactors, because he desisted before the
, . " ,.
2. house. Naturally, Dionisio fled before the house was de- commission of the crime. Conspiracy alone without the
~'
. stroyed. Is Hilarion liable for the crime of arson pro- execution of its pui'pose is not a crime, except in treason;
'":-' vided in Art. 321, No. 1, of the Revised Pen& Code for
'
rebellion, or sedition. This ruling applies to F. And even
". .. 'having
. set fire to a dwelling house knowing it to be OC- if F was one of the malefactors, but he and C were shot
..~ .,."'cupied by one or more persons at the time of, the fire? and killad by their companions on the occasion of the rob-
t '
, ).,*
'
'Explain your answer. bery, the latter would still be liable for robbery with homi-
,
No. That the great perversity on the part of the of- \ cide. . ..
' ,.,.. , . fender implied from the burning of a building knowing It is immaterial that the person killed was one of the
"
that persons were in it, and for which a quite severe penalty .robbers, "provided that the homicide be produced by reason
r,ir-.
" is attached by law, was not the moving spirit in the case o r on occasion of the robbery, inasmuch as it is only the
at bar. With all probability the crime of arson would not result ,obtained, without reference or distinction as t o the
have been committed if Dionisio had heedcd the call, of circumstances, causes, modes or persons intervening in the
,q .,:;r
Hilarion for Dionisio to come down (People vs. Manhit,
~
.,
.,. . '
If F and C were killed by the government forces, the
'.>VI.A;& C:, D, E and F conspired to comm:t the crime of Ic. 8
malefactors did not commit the crime of robbery with homi-
:.'.*'*-.robbery with homicide in the h&se of the sp.oUWSY and cide, but only qualified theft, being already "in the act of
r: 5 2,'residing in San Juan, Riial. F, sm.aht of d d
carrying the spouses' automobile away from the garage,"
-4 ' spouses became a f r d d upon learning that tlte? canspirators ' , .
wben "they were halted by the government forces."
::'. intended also to kill his masters and informed- them. Of.
' ., , It is qualified theft only, because there was no violence
, I
: forces whereupon a gun battle ensued With the result that the material possession of the hutomobile. The taking of
:, , F, the spouses' servant, and C, one of the. mdefacbrs, the automobile may be considered already complete when
were killed. Did the surviving malefactors .commit tiie the gun battle ensued.
- '
composite or special crime of robbery with homicide not- i : ' ' The'NBI agents and the constabulary soldiers, were
withstanding the fact that one of the ,persons killed had j_, ,
not liable, if they killed F and C, one of the malefactors,
participated in the conspiracy and the other was one Of .- because they were acting in the justifying circumstance of
the malefactors killed by the government forces? EX- '
fulfil1,ment of duty when they killed them.
- plain your answer.
The surviving malcfaetors committed the special crime -Vn. (8) What do you know about the so-called impossible
.; ,.
.. ,
of robbery with homicide if F was killed by anyone of them. !, ;:,/, criimes? Do the perpetrators thereof incur an$ crim-
I
860 861
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEIVER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law . Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
. .
imposed to Romeo, for the crimes committed before his
inal liability under the provisions of the Revised
Penal Code? Why? esedw from Muntinglupa, affect the imposition and .%N-
ice of the penalties for which he wils sentenced f o r the
(b) In the affirmative case, give an example of a' fe- second group of crimes under the threcfold-length&,f-time
lon,ious act punished by the Penal Code that turns out rule prescribed in Article 70, last paragraph, of the Re-
to be a n impossible crime. In the negative case, e.?
vised Penal Code, as amended by Commonwealth Act 217,
plain briefly why the perpetrator of a so-called h- section 21
possible crime does not incur an>- criminal liability.
Yes, the penalties imposed upon Romeo, f o r the crimes
(a) There is a n inlpossible crime, when the offender he committed before his escape from Muntinglupa, can af-
performs a n act which would be an offense against ?fr-
., . fect the imposition and service of the penalties for which
:,, sons o? property were it not for the inherent impossiblllty ' .
, . of its accomplishment or on account of the employment Of he was sentenced for the second group of crimes. Upon
his conviction o f the 10 crimes of estafa, he could be de-
I. inadequate or ineffectual means (Art. 4, par. 2, R.P.C.). clared a recidivist, having been convicted of theft by final
Yes, because the Revised Penal Code provides the pen- judgment a t the time of his trial for estafa and both crimes
alty of awesto mayor or a fine ranging from 8200 t o being embraced in the same title of the Revised Penal Code.
B500 for the commission of an impossible crime (A@. 69, It is assumed that a t the time Romeo escaped in 1960,
R.P.C.), According to the positivist theory, on which the he was serving one of the penalties f o r the three crimes
punishment of an impossible *crime is based, society must of theft.
be protected from the anti-social activities, whether actual
...or aotential. of the morbid type of men, called "swially All the penalties f o r the ten crimes of estafa should
'.
.
8 :
dangerous persons."
/
be imposed on Romeo notwithstanding the penalties for
theft. But in the service of the penalties f o r estafa, the
(b) A, with inteni to kill B, looked for 'the latter penalty f o r theft not yet served out should be considered
. and, finding him lying on a bamboo bed, stabbed him.with
,
862 863
I
'4. Aquino, 53 O.G. 8844, citing State vs. Hoskins, 60 Minn. - ( b ) Yes, the Indeterminate Sentence Law may be a p
,.. 168). It is submitted that this ruling applies, even if the plied in this case. Although the penalty for murder is
., ,. three offended parties 1:eside in different cities and prov-
.I. 1
,. reclwion temporul in its maximum period to death, the
.i!,y82.ince. The criminal action for libel must be filed with penalty that should be, considered is that which the court
:s the Court of First Instance of the province or city where i imposed after trial. The Indeterminate Sentence Law is
' ~ ' . < , the accnsed or any of the offended parties resides a t the
I .
not applicable to, among others, persons convicted of of:
time of the commission of the offense (Art, 360, R.P.C.). fenses punished with death or life imprisonment. Since
the court did not impose the penalty of death o r life im-
Hence, only one criminal action can be filed.
,. prisonment, 'the particular exception t o the applicati& of
.'Xr'ta)!A, B, C and D, without any right whatsoever squat- 1 the Indeterminate Sentence Law can not be considered in
j! ,: , ,
6
, this case.
p;:! '
ted on a piece of land in the Ctiy of Manila, the . -.
, .pra,perty of E. Inasmuch as ejectment proceedings i : ,
~
.35 : 9 . ~.
would take quite a very long time to produce results, AUGUST, ~-1.963
."if .ever successful, can the Fiscal of Manila, upon < -.
, complaint of E, charge A, B, C and D with the crime :;
,of coercion or unjust vexation which, though. Ught i - .I ~, ,
I , . !'
.,, ..: '(a) When did Act No. 3815, .knqwn as the Revised Pen& i
.?,'.
.felonies, covered by Article 287, last paragraph,'of the Code, take effect?
/,: ,:.,, .
,... . Revised Penal Code, wonld, upon conviction'. ..of the
culprits, bring about their immediate ejec%n from (b) Is the Revised Penal Code of the! Philippines east .in+1
-,, ".th8epremises? Express your opinion giving your rea- the moulds cf the Classical School, the Positive School or i n y,, 1'', ~ ,
,.I . . (a) No, because although they may he convicted of (b) John had a motor boat'which he used to lake to t h e
the crime of coercion or unjust vexation, the restitution middle o f . the Manila Bay t o sleep there, alone. At about mid-
*:a . . ..of,the piece of land to its owner has no legal basis. The ' night of August 5, 196.7, Peter, 'Paul and Mike;'acting in eon-
.crime committed not being against prollerty, no restitution s p h y and eanfederation with .wch other, drove in a . b a a to
of ,the thing .can be done (Teresa de las Piiias vs. Royal and boarded -the motor boat where John was sleeping and right
Bus, Co., Inc., 56 O.G. 4052). then and there assaulted him and causcd,,his.death byb by st ran^.
' .?.7 :'
864 865
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER . ....
I' , CRIMINAL LAW REVSEWER'
~ a maminations
r in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal La<
.lation. Peter, pad and Mike were prosecuted 'ii, the Court. Of
First Instance of Manila for murder qualified by treachery
mpntioned facts were proved at the hearing. May the
'. 'defendants ~R this case be convicted of murder attended by
.the aggravating circumstauces of nighttime, uninhabited Place What do you hnow'.about
./
,.and'bya band? Why? single common crimes, complea
crimes or eo@e . .~
or special crimes? Give an exampIe-:oi
","'(i)There is treachery when the offender Commits any of each. /
' . ' < i G!
the crimes against the person, employing means, methods or for? crime is one committed by a single act, prb:
in '&e execution thereof which tend directly and specially to 111- ,..,.
. ,,
1
sure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the de- EzampZe: A shot B, causing the latter's death. .,, .I <
fense which the offended party might make (Art. 14, Par. 16, -.
There is a complex crime when a single act constitutes: Go
R.P.C.) . / '
',.
or more grave or less grave feloxues, or when an offense is a
The word "nighttime" should be understood, ' according to
Via&, to mean that period of darkness beginning a t end of dusk necessary means f o r committin&the other (Art. 48, R.P.C.). ,
Ezample: A shot at B .to kill the latter;
and ending a t dawn, Nights are from sunset to Sunrise.. The same slug h i t md killed B, also hjf
act of firing a shot
frustrated homicide.'
1 C~
kcted' together offense, Tn the problem, although 8 cows pertaked to one owner and the ,other, 5 &&..:
part in the 'killing Of the .,* * ...
;:$here are {lnly to another ownes (People vs. Tumlos, 67 'Phil. 32Oj.z . ' ,'i-.i.ii
1 866
867
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminnl Law Bar Examinations in Crjminal Law
' . n e r e is only one crime of qualified theft of 13 COW, because 1 .cAUCION or bond t o keep the peace a s additional penalty be
&-the taking of them the offender had only one criminal resolu- 4 *
imposed upon a person found guilty of having committed any
other crime defined and punished in thla Revised Penal, Code?
tion or t h a t he acted under one criminal impulse. He had only State the reasons fui/y& answer.
one criminal intent. No. No,&y shall be punishable by any penalty not.pre-
. ., V. scribed b A a w prior t o i t s commission (Art. 21, R.P.C.).
Does the act of contecting the services of 286 laborers, Since the Revised Penal Code does not expressly' prescribe
paid; the act of paying their partial the additional penalty of bond t o keep the peace for any other
pay or non-payment of the ' @ariees crime defined and punished therein, it cannot be imposed if'the
ngle act or several independent 'acts crime committed is neither grave threats (Art. 282) nor .light
the laborers unpaid file independent threats (Art. 28.1).
for the respective amount each ,hss
. ,
Reason out your answer. '
WI.
d prior to the effectivity of Repubkc A, an accessory after the fact in a crime of mnrder,for
assisting in the escape of B, the principal, was prosec,uw,
known as the Minimum Wage Law, which wa?.
April 6, 1961, the answer is in .the affirmative. '. the Court of First Instance of Manila together with said priii. ~
of appellant in contracting the services of' the '286': cipal, the information charging them with the commission of
riaid offense in their respective participation. Before hearing, ':
of whom .were not fully paid, the act of pa Yk k,died and the case as to him was dismissed. Under these etr;. '.
wages and the act of non-payment of the salaries cumstances, can A-nvicted alter the hearing' of the m e & '
Ute independent acts of decep+&n.
ontract with appellant and if one crime for having assisted in the escape' of the :,
State the reasons for your answer.
laborer was not paid the amount due him on the date agteed If the prosecution proved beyond doubt the commission of
upon, then such laborer could file the. corresponding actio? .to the crime of murder by B, A can be convicted as accessom b - )
right the wrong done to him. I n fact, there are 'as many .estafas the 'conimission of the crime, for having assisted in t h
& ' t h e r e a r e offended parties (People vs. Nagampo, 52 O.G. of the principai.
6625).
But if the act was committed after the effectivity of Re-
It is not necessary to convict a person, charged as
' that the principal be tried and..convicted first. While
iish text of Art. 19 of the Revised Penal Code seems to req
it, the Spanish text of that article does not require that
principal be found guilty before the accessory could be held i'
. r
In case of confIict between the Engiish text and Spanish
the latter must prevail.
VIII.
Withuut any previous request or understanding
owner of a large tract of land in Quezon City where th
had a. little shack, and without any right whatsoever,"
868 869,
I 1 . :,,..,. ~,.
,.
/
CHIM1NP.L LAW REVIEWER
Bar E m u h t i o n s iii Criminal Law 0'
871
810
i
.~
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW .,.
I’ CRIMINAL ‘ U W REVIEWER
Bar ExExarninatians in Crilninal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Lnw
.of reclusion temporal is the maximum of the three periods of SEF’TEMBER 20, 1964
,.
the penalty prescribed. I. (a) hi what cases may the Provisions of the Revised P&
,
ae,imposition of the additional penalty, I submit that that ruling .- (b) Distinguhkmotive from intent, and give an example
-should not apply when a special aggravating circumstance, like of each.
of the crime. per se” from ‘‘Mala prohibita”, $&
( e ) Distinguish “D’&
penalty, because he is
, ’ ! give an example of each. ...
i (a) Except as provided-in the treaties and laws of preferen-
., ,
tial application, the provisions of the Revised P e n d Code
be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, inclu$ng
. i l
..,..
1 ‘ ,
.. its.atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but &o
outside of its jurisdiction, against those who: ,. ., ,
j’
<r’
. Ii ~
.. .
.A * ,
, .. by the Government of the Philippine Islands. .* ,.,
,. 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introd&,,. ; .
I , I
. .. . . -
I .
_ .
~
.,
Gon into these Islands of the obligations and securiti&, men- 1
. , ., . , ,
: ,
-,
. ..
I
,. ,
. ~
. .
.. *, ”
,,
.this Code.
..
. ?,.!. , . means to effeek such result.
I ...
tremp. moral perversion may lead a man to’,co
without a real motive but just f o r t h e tiirke . o f i
372 873
I
/
Example of intent:-A shot B tq kill the latter. A had , , . 8. Those wh se m a m u m term of impriso
~ t h e ' i n t e n tto kill. exceed one year
,,
' , (e) There is a, distinction between acts which are hakt ;' 9. Those ho, upon the approval of the
8 ~ , o wrongful r from their nature, and those that we mukt 9ro- . . !sentenced. by inal judgment.
hi@ita,or wrong merely because they are prohibited by statute; :' 10. Those sentenced to the penalty of destierro 0
Crimes w ~ a hin SE are those so serious in their effects o n " ' sion.
society = ' t o call for the almost unanimous condemnation of itd ',' .' (b) The purpose of the Indeterminate S
mchbers; while crimes makt prohibita are -violations of mere, to uplift and redeem valuable human niateri
@ea of convenience designed to secure a more orderly regols- unnecessary and excessive deprivation of pers
tion of the affairs of society. economic usefulness.
(1) I n acts mla'in se, the intent governs; but in those A b The 1ndet.erminate Seiitence Law aims to individualke: t h e
p@ibita, .. the only inquiry is, has the law been violated. administration of our .criminal law.
,'
, d , , ' . ( 2 ) The term naah in se refers generally to felonies defined
% ,
he term mala p6ohi- IJL (a) 6 n e invoke lack of edwation w, ..a. '
.. .&d pemlized by the s h c e in ,his favor if h e dow.not'know
b. i.b, .refers~ generally write but a p p w s t o be exeeption'dy, $
'". Example of idtelligent to the extent t h a t he 'coul
, I full Consequence of his' acts?
(b) An engineer for and in behalf of the
': where h e is officially assignel& signs
II. (a) Tb what crimes is the Indeterminate Sentence Law provincial officials, a contract with a
not applicable? truction company for the construction of a propin- '
(b) What is the purpose of the Indeterminate'Sentence cial road. He also approved part of the, co&C'
Law? tion work €or payment. Within a period of
year after the termination of the eontract. ahd
(a) The Indeterminate Sentence Law is not applfceable t o work, he recommended his 8on and he was accept@ .i
the. following: as a ,foreman in the construction company., Fs'
1. Persons convicted of offenses punished with death pen- there an offense committed by the engineer? 'Why?..
alty .or. life imprisonment.
875
874
/’ i
, ,
CRIMINAL LAW REVEWER . ,., <.
Bar Emuhadom in CSdnnl Law ..
”,
>
.. ., ,
of sufficieu8 in.. “X” is liable ?or other forms of swindling, under Ar&
the alternative 316, paragraph 2, of the Revised Penal Coqe, .whi~jpqali+$&$i
any person who, knowing that real property is encumbered, ,&tlJ&
so densely ig-’ dispose of the same, although such encumbrance be not record&
. ~norant
~ ~ and
* . of such low intelligence that he does- not realize the It is assumed that the encumbrance is L: real estate’mortgage;:.
full consequences of a criminal act, may still be entitled to this because the property encumbered was a house. Having c1aimed.G”
%tigating circumstance. On the other hand, another unable t0 the deed that the house was free from all liens and encumbranceip.
write because of lack of educational facilities or opportunities, although he knew that the house had been previously encumbered,.
h y ,yet be highly or exceptionally intelligent and mentally alert “X” violated the provision of the Penal Code referred to. T h e -
that he easily realizes the full significance of his acts, in which term “shall dispose” includes the act of encumbering.
ease he may not invoke this mitigating circumstance in his favor. Y. (a) What are the crimes against personal liberty and
Under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Law;. security?
any public officer to accept or have any memher cashier in a governmen( office received a sum
employment in a private enterprise whicb.has. of depositing same, he mLmppro-
with him during the pendency’ there& priated it and later falsified the bank’s reconciliation
its termination. The’engineer is &.- statements. Is there a complex crime of estata thru
where he is officially assigned: .,’
falsification? In the negative, what crimes, if any,
are committed?
of a defendant in a criminal (a) The crimes against personal liberty a r e : (1) Kidnapping
action to make indemnification. devolve u p ? his and serious illegal detention; (2) Slight illegal detention; (3) Un-
heirs? Explain. Iatvful arrest; ( 4 ) Kidnapping and failure to return a minor;
(b) A8 security for a P10,OOO.OO loan which “X* re- ( 5 ) Inducing a minor to abandon his home; (6) Slavery; (7)
ceived from “Y”, “X” executed a deed of chattel Exploitation of child labor; (8) Services rendered under compul-
mortgage on his house in favor. of. “Y”, in which sion in payment of debts.
deed “X” claimed that t h e house w& free from The crimes against security are: (1) Abandonment of per-
all liens and encumbrances. The r e g i s t m , how- sons in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim; (2) Aban-
ever, refused to register the deed because the house ’
doning a minor; ( 3 ) Abandonment of minor by person entrusted,
with his, custody; indifference of parents; (4) Exploitation’ of ,,
minors; ( 5 ) ther forms of trespass; , ’
(.7)Grave threats; (8) Light threats; ( 9 ) Other light threats; ,~
.., . (10) Grave coercions; (11) Light coercions; (12) Other similar-,^
coercions - (Compulsory purchase, of merchandise and payment,,.1:
. of wages by means of tokens) ; (13) Formation, maintenance and , ”
prohibition of combination of capital or labor through violenceior:?
hhreats; (14) Discovering secrets through seizure of correspon$-;$
ence; (15) Revealing secrets with abuse of office; and .(16) R,&
vealing of industrial secrets. 1 .,::,.;,.&
.,‘_,I
877
I
crime of estafa thru ’ fa1dfiCa- VII. “A” the accused, a driver in an army motor pool, among
I’.(b) There his duties, was assigned to drive home the employees, one
document. However,, i n : of whom is “B”, the complainant woman. On t h e way
by “A” is not a Complex
through falsification, because the fabificatfon about 1O:OO p.m. he stopped the weapon 'carrier. informing
,a& of the woman that it was out of gas. She got off ~ t h e , h u c k
bank’s reconciliation statements was not a necessary means and he followd. Immediately, h e held and hugged her
it the est& or malversation. Those documents Were
to c:oneeal the other crime. “A” committed two Crimes, to h‘ breast. A struggle ensued. From his efforts,.to
(1) malversation of public funds, because a8 a cashier. &h her breast, her dress from the collar to the waist
. line on the front p a r t was tom. A t any rate, she
vernment office A was an accountable. public. Officer
received by him in his officlal CapaditY,WaS ’ , to get free and moved away. The accused desist
) falsification of commercial documents, the, foUowing her. Nay the defense of frustrated act,.,of
tatements being commercial documents. ’ ’ -
viohmess prosper? Why?
No. There is no frustrated crime of acts of lasciviousness; ’’
es the crime of arbitrary detention Cox’- because if the participation of the accused amounts t o
..
m y classes of arbitrary detention are all the acts of execution, the felony is necessarily pr
. . consequence thereof. There ic only consummated cri
man, through fraud and while h i s y’; lascivionsness.
sisting, contracted a ,second marrmge.
the marriage “L” learned about the vm. Smtos was indebted to Perez f o r Pi0,OOO.O
forthwith left, “A’. She refus& secure the necessaw cash, Santos drew up’a.’ch&k!
&&A,,. U.L f s7 9
arges of bigamy w i n s t ’ , ~p10,~00.00in fa-pera against the P.N.B.’%t
, .
n r d g h b q however, fjed a complaint against “A’’ for t i m e w ~ 3 u pthe check, Santos knew that h e ~ h a d
bigamy. the Fiscal prosecute “A” on the bF% . ..Of. ’funds deposited it the P.N.B. and that he would
t h e complaint filed by “L’s’’ ‘neighbors? .. .
any time be able to deposit any money to
’” (a) Arbitrary detention is a crime commitkd by public’.offi- value of the check. When the check got di
eem or employees, which consists in detaining ‘a person..+thout sued Santos for estafa. Decide the case.
legal grounds,, or delaying the delivery of the person detained for
5ome ,legal ground to the proper judicial authorities with1.n the Santos is not liable for estafa. Postdating or
,be,spwifi&by law, or unduly delaying the release Of a PrlsOner without fcnds in the bank is estafa only when the
D r detentio11 prisoner.
in payment of an obligation contracted at the tim
. and delivery thereof. If the check is issued a n d . deli
payment of pre-existing ,obligation, there is only civil,
criminal, liability.
..lll(r
$E
,~~ ;
M. (a) What offenses constitute “impossible crimes”?. ’ ,d@
,:,w4 ,
679
1 1
. ,
1MPQR.TANT PROVISIONS 'OF THE
GRAFT &XD CORRUPT PRACTICES:?;
'\
(Approved, August 17, 1960)'' " ::
The Anti-Grdt and Corrupt Pmctkes Law' does. not
provisions ;of the Code on bribery.
Unless the act performed by the offender would The corrupt practices of any public
0.
See.' 3 of the Anti-Graft Law a r e in &iti
of public officers already penaIized by existin
Rep. Act No. 3019).
63 O.G. 6232).
employment in .a private enterprise which has pending:,offfcia!?
i81
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIE\VER
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Law Anti-Graft and Compt PraSOic~ Law
P
Government, or giving any private party an$' unwarranted bene- lified or entitled.
fits, advantage or preference in the disch ge of his official ad- (k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential character,
ministrative
, , .".,kJ. ./+; ' or judicial functions thro gh manifest partiality,. acquired by his office or by him on account of his official position
' +dent bad faith or gross inexcusable egligence. This provision to unauthorized pexcoq,or- releasing such information i n advance
,' &all~,applyt o officers and employe of offices or government of its yt-ase date.
CSrporations charged with the gra t of licenses or permits or T G person giving the gift, present, share, percentage,~or
. ~ d&er concess,ions. ,;
benefit referred to in subparagraphs (b) . a n d ( c ) ; or ,offering>,
:or. giving to the public officer the employment mentioned in
subparagraph (d) ; or urging the divulging or untimely'release ,.;%
, of the confidential information referred to in suhparagraph. (k):,.of.;l..
~
! this section shall, together with the offending public officer>b2.'2 "
punish under Section nine of this Act and shall be permanently.of'~.
temporarily disqualified in the: discretion of t h e Court, from.:.
,, , '?
transacting business in any form with the Government. ,
~
Entering, on
';,ortransaction
. .,.'.
(a) It shall be unlauful for any person having family or.
personal relation with any pu8lic official to capitalize o r exploi
take advantage of such family or close personal relation b
, ,, , '?,~,. 88
i ~,,.
I
Prohibition on relatives of the President, Vice-President, Pres- approval of such law or resolution authored or recommended by
~ , ,,,
, ident, of the Senate or the Speaker. him, continues for thirty days after such approval to retain :su,d
1 be unlawful for the spouse o r for any,?elative, by interest.
ty or affinity, within the third civil degree, of the
f ' the Philippines, the Vice-president of the Philip-
:esident of the Senate, or the Speaker of the House Penalties for violations.
reseniatives, to intervene, directly or indirectly; in any
Any public officer or private person co
s, transaction, contract o r application' with the Govern-
... , . unlawful a.cts or omissions enumerated in S
Sec. 5 , Rep. Act No. 3019). , . fihis Act shall be punished with impris
one year nor more. than ten years,
. . public office, and confiscation or forfe
his section shall not apply to - . ,
erninent of any prohibited interest a n
person who, prior to the assumption bf office of any nifestly out 'of proportion to his sala
officials' to whom he is related, has'been already (Sec. 9, Rep. Act No. 3019).
with the Government along the same line of. business, nor
transaction, contract or application already. existing or Comt. of First Instance h8s jurisdictims.
e time 0.f such assumption of public office;
n,y.appIication filed by him the apprbval o$ which is
. Until otherwise provided by 1
onary on the part of the official 06 officials concerned Act shall be within !he original jurisdictiotl of the proper'
First Instance (See. 10, Rep. Act No. 3049). . , .
s upon compliance with requisites provided by law, or
'.
gulations issued pursuant to law;
Prescription of offenses.
..,
et lawfully performed i n an 'official oapacm or ....,.- ~ ,
of a profession. , . All 'bffenses punishable under this Act shall prescr1Fe.- in'
,
, ~, .:
' .ten years (Sec. 11, Rep. Act No. 3019). . . ,
. ,.
ition on Members of Congress: ' . ,
Exception to the applkation of the Anti-Graft and Oormpt
unlawful hereafter f o r any Member of the Conga% Flractices Law.
, ,
ing the i;erm f o r which he bas been elected, to acquire or re-
nal pecuniary interest in any specific husineM en-
," .
Unsolicited gifts or presents of s m a ~o r insignificant $due'
:;,
:~",. t b p r i s e which will be directly and particularly fa-qored or,benefited offered or given as a mere a r d i m q taken of gratitude or friendship
aocording to local customs or usage, shall be excepted from the
1 by any law or resolution authore'd by him previoilsly approved or
provisions of .this -Act (Sec. 14, Rep. Act No. 3019).
adopted by.the Congress during the same term.
The ,provision of this section shall apply to any other public
officer who recommended the initiation i n Congress of the en-
actment or adoption of a n y law or resolution, and acquires or re-
'ceives any such interest during his incumbency.
:.i. It shall likewise be unlawful for such member of Congress
. '
'I ,:w other public officer, who, having such intefest prior to the
.~ 884
,. 885
CKIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
CRIM<NAL LAW REVIEWER. Bar Examinations in CrirninaJ Law
"Bar !Eiaidi&tions. in^ Crimina1 Law
,ning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same. He orfended party is a relitive 'of
or .when the offender and the
shall be punished by the maximum I period, of. pen(llty at?; same 1.evel;as killing a brother, a half
cribeh by law for the n e v felony. (Art. 160, -R.P.G:) ,,
ther.
r s o n shall be deemed to be. habitual delinquent,,,if ;with-. (b) Thk following ' are' the four ' d
: ' in i~ period of ten (10) years from the date of his reiease nesty and pardon :
i... or-last conviction. of the crimes of. serious or less ,serious
(1j Pardon includes any crime and ia exercised ind
injuries, robo, hwrto, estafa, or falsification, .Ee. is
by the President; amnesty is a blarket pardon gr
.guilty of any of said 6rimes a , t h i r d , t i m e w o f t e n e r .
classes of persnns o r communities, who may be
,last par., as.amended. by Republic - A c t "No. 12).
political offenses ;
ex penalty is one composed of three distinct penalties,.
(2) Pardon is exercised when the person'is already, c
foxming a period; the lighfestdf them',shall:be,kh&
the next the medium, and the rrost severe the
4 victed; amnesty may be exercised even before triakrdr
vestigation is had;
~
r'
CRIMlNAL LAW REYIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVTEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
!i
be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon." On the 0,'while delivering a speech dnring a p ~ b & c , , @ ~ Y,?$I
~,~
":I band, amnesty looks backward and abolishes and puts amplifier, uttered defamatory ' w o r d $ ; ; i n s l
oblivion the orfenses itself; it so ,overlooks and obliterates upon the laiter the commisslon'of 1
the orwnse wlth which the ofrender is charged that he stands &ve offiinse.
betore the law precisely as though he committed no offense. What crime o r crimes, if any, may 0 be h e d l i a b l e '
b (4) Pardon, being a private act of the President, must Why?
i , , b e pleaaed and proved by the person pardoned; amnesty, (a) It is respecUully submitted that A's contention is with.
being by proclamation of the Ghier bxwutive with the coil- out merit. The law which A violated is a special law and the f a d
. . currence of Gongress, is a public act of wnich the courts
%,, that his act was without any criminal intent is immaterial. It ma3
, , Could take judicial notice.
be conceded that A did not intend to intimidate any elector or ti
. . . (e) Even if I) failed to pay the amount of indemnity, he will violate the law in any other way, but when he entered the poll
be cominea in jail t o r six (ti) years and one (I) clay oiiry. 'Yher? , gun tucked at his waist, he committed..it wfl
&,no suusiaiary Imprisonment. buosmary lmprisorunmt is p ~ o '- law does not reqnire f o r its violation tlht t$
per only waen tne penalty imposea is eltner (1) prksron oorrec-' , ' offender has the intention to intimidate the voters, or td 'inter
c i p d , (2) arresm nwgor, (3) arresco menor, or (4) tine only,<.,, .. '* 1 fei-e otherwise with the election. In acts mala proMbitu, the onl:
'* "__ gence, LS the penalty imposea by the court is not one or'them, . . ij inailiry is. has the law been violated? In this case, A violated tk
suusictlary peirar-cy cannor; be imposed. Wnen a convict'is sen-, Election Code.
I
tenced to serve an imprisonment of SIX ( 6 ) years and one' ('ij
day, the penalty imposed is prkszon mayor. .
I, (b) The word "radio", as used hi Art. 355, should be con
sidered in relation t o the terms With which it i s associated -
..
I rvriting, painting, engraving, phonograph, etc. - all of Wlikl
/
111. have a common characteristics, namely, their permanent nat?
' 1
(a) A, mho was duly licensed to possess and a m y a fire-arm, j as a means o€ publication, and this explains the graver penal@ fa
in his hurry to cast h.s vote, forgot tnat when. he ,en- ! libel than that prescribed for oral defamation. In ' short,' th
tered hls pouing piace he had nls g& turned ,at nis w&& present case constitutes the crime of oral defamation punish,@
Prosecuted for tne violat.on of tne provmon of tlip Ke-' in Art. 358 of the Revlsed Penal Code (People vs. Santiago; G)?
vised &:leetion Code prohibiting. the carrying of fqearm: NO. L-17663, May 30, 1962).
inside pollAngplaces A eontends'that his act was without ,
-1 .,
' .i
1 ',
'
any criminal intent, that he did not use his gun .to inti..' IV .
midate any one, or violate .any provision of 'the election' (a) W, an unmarried woman, killed her infant child wh0-w
code, and, therefore, he should be absolved of the charge , only two (2) weeks old far the purpose of concealing, he
'. f.iled against him. dishonor. For what crime or crimes may W be held liable
/ Xb)
Is A's contention meritorious? Give reasons for your
answer.
. , Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code penalizes libel com-
' ' mitted by 'means of writing, printing, lithography, en-
Why?
Supposing, in the foregoing problem, W was wistd
the'commission of the act directly by her broth
~ ~ h e d i a b i l i oft yX, if any? Why? ,. '.
,
. .. .graving, radio, phonogiraph, painting, theatrical exhibition, (b) F, who was then living in the same house With;
' ' " ' 'cxematographic exhibition, or any similar .means. G, with intent of gain and without the h,oNI@,
888 889
LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
gar Examinations in Criminal Law
was able to run away and hide in a room. After shooting
B, A ran away. I3 suffered a wound that was treated and
healed in 15 days.
What crime was committed by A? Reason out your
#
’
answer.
#refi
sum a t stapes.
,,!?h&&pted, 6;
d L r a t e d , and
-
d e l o n y is consummated when all the elements necessary f o r
its execution and accomplishment are present. i,
I 891
890
..
,~.,
,v..::;,, I {,
a e subjective phase of said acts. This doubt must be resolved ( c ) yes, when no two of the ci-imes cornmitted a r e embm&''s;;
id the same title of the Revised Penal Code. ,. ..!
, ~ ..I' '
' . &:favor of .A.
Therefore, A is not guilty of frustrated murder, 6ut only of
~
Ihtl.atiO%: -x ;L:;.,.
was convicted of falsification in 1920&(f
.,,. 3..
<.. ,~.., .::, .
served sentence in the mme year. Then, he committed:&&f& .,*.. '..~. ,
attempted murder, because he did not perform all the acts of Was convicted thereof, and served sentence therefor in 1925.~::"His ,'
execution, a@tual,and subjective, in order that the purpose 2nd kist crime was physical injuries wmmitted in 1930. Falsifica-'
he had to kill his victim might be carried out tion is a crime against public interest; esblfa, against phperty;, ii
Pio, G.R. No. L-5848, April 30, 1954). , '
and physical injuries, against persons. While X is a habitual ~
VI1 .
,. /.
'$
o r more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is B to guard him. The day following the robbery'the China-
&essai.y, , means for committing the other. (Art. 48, R.P.C., as man kept on sh~utingand, fearing Lhat his. shouts would
"%en,ded
:i by Act NO. 4000) attract attention that would lead to .&he!r detectiofq A &id
In complex crimes, although two or more crimes are actually B lulled the Chinaman.
committed, they constitute only one crime in the eyes Of the la%' Based on the foregoing facts A, 5 C and D , were ,~
all
BS'Well as jn the conscience of the offender. The offender has pnb charged with having committed the crime of robbery with
one criminal intent. Even in the case where a n offense 1s a homicide.
necessary means for committing the other, the evil intent of the C and D set up the defense that they should only be
offender is only one (People vs. Hernandez, et al., 62 0.G: 5506). charged with the simple crime of [robbery because: ,(1)
Hence, there is only one penalty imposed for the commission of 9 they had not conspired to kiu the'chinaman; (2) they had
mmolex
.-.
.I crime, and that penalty is that for the most serious crime not participated in killing him since they were not present
to be applied in its maximum period. in the place where, and during the time when, he wa8
-
Example: Guillen, by a single act of throwing a hi(3hly ex- killed; (3) the IdU'ng of the victim was only an incfdent
plosive hand grenade at President Roxas in a public meeting re- to silence him; arid (4) the killing did not take place by
sulting in the death of Simeon Varela, comgitted several grave reason or on tbe occasion o f t h e -rohhnrv.
----,-
felonies, namely: (1) murder, of which Simeon Varela was the Decide the case, declaring the criminal liability, if my,
victim; (2) multiple attempted murder, of which President R o s s of each of the accused. Exnlain.
and four others were the injured parties, but having been produced least two (2) distinctions between robbery &
'
bv a single act, they for1n.a complex crime (People VS. Guillen,
& Phil. 907). , (a) It is submitted that A, B, C, and D are liable,for
(b) Conspiracy in the commission of a crime exists when
, hvo or ,mote persons come to an agreement concerning the com-
ICfdnaPPing with a demand for ransom and homicide, the latter
mission of a felony and decide to commit it (Art. 8, R.P.C.). a s a separate offense. The robbery and the kidnapping, although
892 893
CRIMlNAt LAW REVIEWm CRIMINAL .LAW RCVIENER:
Bar Examinations in Crimjnal L a w . Bar Exaninations in. Criminal. ~ a o i
' ., -/'What crime, or crimes, if any, did A commit? , Reason
from one criminal resolution. The
to commit the two criminal acts on the .' .out y o w answer. .
.- .~ ., ~.. ,.
,., .
___
. I
. ..*
'
, I
same occasion, the robbery may be considered absorbed i n the (b) M, a son of N; committed the crime o f murder in-'tK⪯ ~.
crime of kidnapping. The homicide was committed with a dif- .. , sence of the latter.. N, 1~110i s the Chief of Police anqabus-
ferent criminal intent. '-.' ing his .office a s such, allowed his son M to escape to an-
did not commit any crime, there is nothing that would ib) No, N is not an accessory to M, because although he2
,'
' , have required the public officer to exercise his duty 01' . .
knew that M committed.the crime of murder, he did not assist t h e
function. On the other hand, if the victim 'committed a latter in his escape with abuse of his public function. ;He. only
crime and the public officer accepted bribe: the latter allowed him to escape, which is different from assisting t h e culprit ,
..'
. thereby agreed to refrain from doing somethmg which it to escape. ,,
, .
,~ ...
'.. . was his official duty to do. N is an accessory under Ai%. 19, he is exempt.from :.
2 ) 111 robbery, the victim is deprived of his money or Pro- liability, he being the ascendant of M, the principal,, and,,
, .~': , -
perty by foree or intimidation; in bribery, he park3 with
his money or property in a sense voluntarily (U.S. VS.
F'lores, 19 Phil. 178).
'
by the effects of the crime or assist the off&de<i,??
' t q p r o f i t by them. 'This exemption is expressly provided fo$l;=,"
Art: 20 'of the Revised Penal Code.
~
; ,,..,-. , *, *: I
. . :
VI11 .
. . ..,,
individual, arrested a person while the latter Ix.,. ..
as actually committing the crime of murder, with the .. .
ne of simple seduction.
. intention of bringing him to the police authorities. While '
of 'Marnda who is single and; 17 :y
,!
., _,
I.,
. . 'on the way, in consideration of the sum of W o , A allowed carnal knowledge of .the.1
.:. -is., his, prisoner to escape.
*3ir.**.- in order to assuage .her
.894 %95
. .
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWEX
Bar Bxsuainations in Criminal Law
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law
OCTOBER 2, 1966
,..:-.in@, X - m a d e repeated promises to m u r y her. Far f&hre
' in
I. What are the three stages in the cornmisston of an offense?
to keep his promise, E was charged with the crime of sim- . ,
irees at his backyard. To scare the b y the Iarmer fired 11. ,(a) A was ther diriver of a passenger truck which was in
I . his gun in the air, The shot scaftered and a' stray pellet good condition. While passing a curve at moderate
injured the boy who was gathering fruits. speed on t h e national highway, one of t h e front%ea
What crime, if any, was committed by the farmer? exploded, as a result of which the'truck took'a sharp
*.: " .. ,, (a) l i g h t felonies are punishable only when they have been
.i')
tuarn to the right, and fell off an embankment,'riot-
consummated, with the exception of those committed against per- withstanding A's efforts to apply the b&esmid~,Yo.,
.'~soimor property ( ~ r t7, . R.P.c.). veer the vehicle to the left. As a consequence, 'one:
, '.., .. of the p m n g e r s @f the truck was pinned 'to,.d&-th!,I
Only principals and accomplices, excluding, accessories, are
criminally liable for light felonies (Art. 16, R.P.C..). Is A criminally liable for the death of.the7parr
< s e w e r ? If not, why not? If so, of what crime is h e
( E ) ) The farmer committed the crime cf physical injuries
Wru simple imprudence. He did not take the necessary pre- guilty? Explain you? answer,
caution t.o .avoid injury t o person. It is only thru Simple hum- (b) A was indebted to B. When the latter tried to col-
dence, because the danger was not clearly manifest, and the in- lect the indebtedness, A insulted him, strurk'hhwith '
jury imgending t o he caused was not immediate. The farmer had his fiet, and then pu'rsued him. When B w a s cur-
, no intention to kill the boy, because he did not fire a t the boy. nered by a high pYe of logs, he drew.his bolo' &d-
His purpose was only to scare him. delivered a blow on the shoubder of A. A tried to
896 897
B struck two more blows, causing
far homicide, B pleaded self:
tenable? Reasons for yoW
answer.
,,.,: , , ..
,. (a) A is not criminally liable,'for the redson that the death '
.,!
(a) An accomplice does not enter, into ,a...,$onspi&y '&&:':"
,(
";io,?, I ,
=of the passenger was caused without fault or malice on the p,art the principa1 by direct participation, ' f o r :lie,.merely concurs in, F,:
'.6YAA:
.. Since the truck was in good conditior, that A was driv-, the criminal design of the latter. A pGincipa1 ,.by: cooperation..: I
:,ing at moderate speed, that one of the front tires exploded,
I .Y,,." is usually in conspiracy with the prillcixlii lj$ 'dif&t '$&icipa- ''
'i something which could not have been foresezn, and A exerted
,
tion. The cooperation of the accomplice is',onlyineCessary. The. ,
~, gfforts t o apply the brakes and to Veer the vehicle to the left
cooperation of the principal is 'indinpensable t o ' t h i ,accomplish- ' '
%'avoid
.11. , any injury, he was performing a lawful act with due
care, and he caused an injury by mere accident without fault ment (b)
of the commisaion
Ill the of the
latest case offense.
decided by~., t,he'
~
, Court
. ,
,of"!A.ppeals..
. ,.:i . ,
898 899
CRlMIN.4L LAW REVIEWER
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER Bar Eraminatiom in Crimini~l Law
Bar Exminations in Criminal t a w
l,
i 901
900
I
E. (a) A, neighbor of B, in conspk'acy with the latter's of the thing delivered. The facts of this case before us are.not
servant C, who allowed A to enter his master's house, four-square with the above-quoted provision of law. ' Here, A "
deceitfully pointed to B one parcel of land, offering it f o r sale, "
took therefront B's TV set, without the knowledge
, on the shength of which deceit B parted with his money. The ;
.d<,
and consent of B. What are the respective criminal
deceit practised by A preceded the alienation by B of his money. 'V.
liabilities of A and C? Reasons for ydw answers. It i s therefore clear that there was no alteration o f substance, ::
,(b) A pointed to B a parcel of h d for +e. y'llabg quantity or quality in the sense intended by paragraph l(a)
,., ,
the land suitable f o r his purposes, B bought, it. I(. of article 315 in A's execution of the deed of sale. .. . .,
turned out that in the deed of sale entered inro by Since the facts of, this case are not covered by any o! the
them, A had switched parcels of land, with the re- provisions of articles 315, 316 and 317, the offense comqit$e+d ~
sult thtit what B bought was another Pame1 wh:'eh by A must perforce come within the meaning and intendp&:
was worthless for his purposes. A was t h m a f t m of the blanket provisions of paragraph l ( a ) of article 318. ''
,. 0CTY)BER 1, 1967
(a) The two classes of privileged communications are: (1)
absolutely privileged; and (2) conditionally or qdalifiedly privi- X. ,(a) Define Criminal or Penal Law.
leged. (b) ENUMERATE and DEFINE the diffkent, clwifiea-
',?;~ . Example
. of absolutely privileged communicatioion:
. , .. tions or the circumstances affeefing criminal liabi-
1. The absolute immunity granted by the Constitution to ty. Give two @xamplesof each.
'
Senators and members of the House of Representatives who are
( a ) Criminal Law is that branch or division of law which
not to be questioned in any other place for any speech or debate
therein. (Art. VI, See. 15, Constitution); or defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides
for their pnnishment. (12 Cyc. 129)
2 . .Testimony or statements made by parties and witnesses
in the course of judicial proceedings provided that such Btate: ( b ) The circumstances affecting criminal liability are:
ments are pertinent or relevant t o the case. I. Justifying circumstances (Art. 11)
Example of a qualifiedly privileged conimunication: 11. Exem2ting circumstances (Art. 12), and other ab-
1. A private communication made by any person to ac- solutory causes (Arts. 20; 124, last par.; 280, last
other in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty. par.; 332; 344; etc.)
(Art. 354, par. 1, R.P.C.); os 111. Mitigating circumstances (Art. 13)
2 . A fair and true report, made in good faith, vithout any IV. Aggravating circumstances (Art. 14)
comments 01- remapks, of any judicial, legislative or other offi- V. Alternative circumstances (Art. 15)
cial proceedings which are not of confidential nature! or:of any
Justifying circnmstances a r e those where the act
statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings or of
of a persoil is said to be in zccordance with law,, so
any other act performed by public officers in the exercise Of
their functions. (Ibid, par. 2, R.P.C.) that such pe:son is deemed not to have transgressed
the law and is free from both Criminal and civil lia-
( 6 ) The motion of B is tenable. Clearly the municipal court bility.
of Casiguran, Quezon, has no jurisdiction over the case, because
only the Court of First Instance of the province or city where Examples :
the libelous article is printed and first published or where any 1. Anyone mho acts in defense of his person or
of the offended parties actually resides or, in case one of the rights, provided that the following circumstances eon-
offended parties is a public officer, where he holds office, a t the cnr :
"'
.time of the commission of the offense, has jurisdiction over First. Unlawful aggression;
.. the case.
Second. Reasonable necessity of the means'employed
Even f o r purposes of preliminary investigation, only the to ,prevent or'repel it;
fiscal of the province or city, the municipal court of the city
'or capital of the province can conduct the same. (Art. 360, .as Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the p a r t
amended by Rep. Act No. 4363) 4
ti
of the person defending himself.
2 . Anyone who acts in defense of the person O I - . ~
rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legiti-,:
mate, nataral, wr adopted brothers or sisters or of his:!
I
906
. 907
I
i
CRIMlNAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinations in Criminal Law Bar Examinations in Criminal t a w
relatives by affinity in the same degrees, ‘xiid those 2 . That the crime be committed i n contempt of
by consanguinity within the fourth civil depee, pro- or with insult to the public authorities.
vided that the first and second requisites prescribed Altercative circumstances are those which must be
in the next preceding circumstance are present, and takeii into consideration as aggravating o r mitigating
the further requisite, in case the provocation was given according to the nature and effects of the crime and
by the person attacked, that the one making defense the other conditions attending its commission.
had no part therein. Examples :
Exempting circumstances (non-imputability) are 1. Relationship.
those grounds for exemption from punishment because 2 . Intoxication.
there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the 11. (a) ENUMERATE a n d DEFINE the different stages,:of
Examples :
-
conditions which make the act voluntaq, o r negligent.
the execution of a crime.
,(b) “A” 1~1acedrugs and jute sacks, soaked in kerosene
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the oil near the partition of an i,nhahited house and set
latter has acted during a lucid interval. them o n fire, but no part of the house was burnkd
Y ’ ’ .
2 . A person. under nine years of age. because t h e fire was extinguished on time. What
crime did “A” coxmit. Give your reason.
Mitigating circumstances are those which, if pres- *
ent in the commission of the crime, do not entirely free (a) They are:
the actor from criminal liability, bUt serve only to re-
(1) consummated,
duce the penalty.
(2) frustrated, and
Examples : (3) attempted.
1, Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when Consummated felony, defined.
all the requisites necessary to justifsr the act or t o A felony is consummated when
exempt from criminal liability in the respective cases necessary for its execution and accomplishment ar
a r e not attendant. present.
2. That the offender j, under eighteen years of Frustrated felony, defined.
age or over seventy years.
It is frustrated when the offender
Aggravating circumstances are those which, if at- the acts of execution which would
tendant in the commission of the crime, serve to in- felony as a consequence but which,
crease the penalty without, however, exceeding the do not produce it by reason of causes
maximum of, the penalty provided by law for the of- of the will of the perpetrator.
fense.
Attempted felony, defined.
Examples : There is an attempt when t h
1. That advantage be taken by the offender of mences the commission of a felony
his public position. acts, and does not perform all the’acts 0
908 909
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
nir Examinations in Criminal Law Bar haminations in Criminal Law
which would produce the felony by reason of some former i s riot qualified theft, for the offended party
cause or accident other than his own spontaneous was the ovylier of thz store, and not “B”.
desistance. IV. (a) What a r e the offenses not subject to the provisions
(b) The fact of having set fire to some rags and jute sacks, of the Revised Penal Code? Give an example.
soaked in kerosene oil, aiid placing them near the wooden (b) Under the Administrative Code, councilors a r e prohi-
partition of the house, should not be qualifikd as eon- bited to have an interest in any c o n t i z t with the
summated arson, inasmuch as no p a r t of the house be- municipality. ‘A,” an incnmbe1bt municipaI council-
gan to burn. It is only frustrated arson. (U.S. VS. or, made a n offe!r to the municipality of which he is
Valdcs, 39 Phil. 240) councilor, to pave one o f its streets’ for a very rea-
sonable price, which offer %vas not however accepl.
111. ( a ) Who are the principals in the commission of an of- ed. Did the councilor commit a n y mime? Give your
I fense? reason.
(b) “A,” servant of “B,” went to a store, where “B” OOUld
(a) Offenses which are o r in the future may be punishable
purchase on credit, and falsely represented to the under special laws a r e not subject to the provisions
owner of the store that he was sent t h a e by “B” to of this Code. (Art. 10, R.P.C.)
buy certain goods worth P50.00 to be chargeed to t b e
Example :
,
account of ‘‘13.” As “A” was known t o ’ t h e owner of
t h e store a s the servant of “B,” the goods were de- The offense of ille@d possemion of firearm which
livered by t h e owner of t h e store to “A” who abscond-
Is punished by a special law.
ed with them. What crime was committed by“‘A”2 (b) No, because there was only a n attempt to violate the’
Give your reason. provision of the Administrative Code, a special law.
11: was held that the attempted or the ‘frustrated stage
( a ) The following a r e considered principals. of the execution of a n offense’genalized by a special
> .
1. Those who take a direct part i n the execution law is not punishable, unless the special law provides ’!
of the act. a penalty therefor (US. vs. Lopez Basa, 8 Phil. 89). (
I 2 . Those who directly force or induce others t3 V. (a) Jose committed robbery in t h e house of Pedro. The i
commit it. h t t e r with a shotgun puirsued Jose. While running,
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the JOW dropped tlie money h e had stolen and thus Pe.
offense by another act without whicb it would not dro wa3 able to recover the m,oney.
have been accomplished. (Art. 17, R.P.C.) Jk Jose guilty of robbery, and, if so, is it consummat-,6%
(b) The crimc of estafa was committed by “A”, because ed, frustrated or attempted? Give pour reason. ~h
j‘
he defrauded the owner of the store by means of deceit .-,Cb)Distinguished grave thrent demanding money from .:
consisting in falsely representing to the latter that ? robbery with intimidation of person.’
he was sent by “B” t o buy the goods and thereby caused ’j ’ .,
damage t o the said owner of tbe store. Although, “A” f a ) Yes, Jose is guilty of robbery’ Ghich is consummated.
was the servant of “El”, the crime committed by the he having carried out of the house the property taken
<1
910 511
I
1
CRIMINAL LAW XEVIEWW CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Bar Examinatiom in Criminal Law Bar Eminatious in Criminal Law
and, therefore, the taking of the same was already (a) In illegal assembly i t is necessary that there is
complete. This is on the assumpti011 that robbery with an actual meeting or assembly of armed persons
force upon things was committed. It was not robbery for the purpose of committing any of the crimes
with intimidation, because the intimidation (pursuing punishable under the Revised Penal Code, or of
with a shotgun) was employed by the offended party, individuals who, although not armed, are incited
not by the offender. to the commission of treason, rebellion, sedition,
or assault upon a person in authority or his agent;
(b) In both crimes, there is intimidation by the offender. in illegal association, i t is not necessary that there
The purpose, when threat is made to extort money, is be am actual meeting.
identical- t o obtain gain.
( b ) In illegal assembly, it is the meeting and attend-
5
The differences are: ance at such meeting that are punished; in illegal
(1) In robbery, the intimidation is actual and, imme- association, it is the act of forming or organizing
diatc; whereas, in threats, the intimidation ,is Con- and membership in the association that are pun-
ditional or future, that is, not immediate; ished.
(2) I n robbery, the intimidation is personal, while in ( e ) In illegal assembly, the person liable are: (1) the
threats i t may be through an intermediary; orga.nizers or leaders of the meeting and (2) the
(3) In threats the intimidation may refer to the per- persons present a t the meeting. In illegal associa-
son, honor or property of the offedned party Or lion, the persoas liable a r e : (1) the founders,
that of his family; while in robbery the intimida- directors and president, and (2) the members.
tion is directed only to the person of the victim; ( b ) Theft. Perez’ possession of the coutents of the safe
( 4 ) In robbery, t h e gain of the culprit is immediate: was not such as to render its abstraction by him mal-
whereas, in threats the gain of the cidprit is not versation ( U S . vs. Webster, 6 Phil. 394). Perez had
immediate (People vs. Moreno, C.A., G.R. No. only the physical or material possession of the cash
43636, April 30, 1936). and checks he abstracted. #,
’
,VI. (a) Is there any difference batween ILLEGAL ASSOCIA- VII. ,(a) Who commits the crime of ABUSE AGAINST CHAS-
TION and ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY? Give the differ- TITY?
ences. (b) “A” a provincial guard, incharge of the provin
(b) Perez was a clerk of the Bureau of Post. entrusted made love and unchaste proposal to a woman
with t h e combination and k@y of a safe, but he is confhed in the jail but failed t o seduce her.
not Incharge of the cash book nor he has any author- be liable for the crime of ABUSE AGAINS
itr to open the safe and withdiraw money therefrom. TITY? Give your reason.
,During the absence of his superior, he opened the (a) The publie officer who commits any of the f
safe and abstracted therefrom cash and checks. What f acts:
crime did he commit? 1 1. By soliciting or making immoral or inde
4
. (a) Yes. The differences are: yances to D. woman interested in matters pending se-.,:bi
‘i
8 .
yI :~3
...
912 913
lis
-;I fore the offending officer for decision, o r with respect 2 . Tittering seditious words or speeches which tend
‘ai t o which he is required to submit a report to O r con- to disturb the public peace.
’, sult with a superior officer. 3 . Writing, pubiishiny, or circulating scui“ri1ous libels
,’! 2. Ey soliciting or making immoral or indecent ad- against the Government or any of the duly consti-
!, , vances to a ivonian under the offender’s custody. tu@d authorities thereof, which tend to disturb the :
,(b) Enumerate the acts constituting INCITING’ TO SI% ,’6) AlthougkL, only the provincial treasurer was a n account-
DITION. able public officer, and the two guards were not, all
of them committed malversation, for even public of-
( a ) They are: ficers wlio are not accountable f o r public fund6 may
1. Causing’any serious disturbance in a public place, be held liable for malversation if they participated as
, ,
office or establishment ; eo-peqetmtors in the offense of malversation. (U.S.
2 . Interrupting or disturbing public performances, vs. Polite, et.al., 20 Phil. 379) Even if they were not
functions or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if able to g?.t the money, the crime was consummated,
the act is not included in Ark. 131 and 132; because the law uses the phrases “shall take” and
“permit any other person to take such public funds
3 . Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or
sedition in any meeting, association or public place; or property”. I t is submitted that there was taking
4. Displaying placards o r emblems which provoke a
disturbance of public, order in such place :
in bringing the safe outside of the building.
X. (a ’ “A” is serving sentence for violation of
4
a law whiehd
5 . Burying with pomp, ,the body of B person who has was subsequently totally repealed. I”
been legally executed. May “A” be refieved of the penalty imposed upon him’
.* ’
, ,
(b) They are:
accomplishment of ‘any of the
sedition by means of speeches,
emblems, ete.
1)
L
und,er the repealed law? Give your reason.
( b ) Pedro, a relative of Juan who was executed for the
crime of multiple murder, claimed the corpse of
’ Jnan and gave it a pompous burial.
915
t
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWEK
nar Examinations in Criminal Law
916