ENUMERATE INSTANCES WHEN THE RPC MAY BE ENFORCED OUTSIDE PHILIPPINE JURISDICTION.

Article 2 of the RPC. Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only
within the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, against those
who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship;
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of
the Philippine Islands;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding
number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit and offense in the exercise of their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of the nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN DELITOS, DOLO AND CULPA.

Article 3 of the RPC. Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos). Felonies are committed not only by means of deceit (dolo) but also
by means of fault (culpa). There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent; and there is fault when the wrongful act results from
imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.

DEFINE CONSUMMATED, FRUSTRATED AND ATTEMPTED FELONIES.

Article 6 of the RPC. A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is
frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not
produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. There is attempt when the offender commences the commission of a
felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident
other than his own spontaneous desistance.

DIFFERENTITATE GRAVE, LESS GRAVE AND LIGHT FELONIES IN TERMS OF IMPOSABLE PENALTY.
Article 9 of the RPC. Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are
afflictive. Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum period are correctional. Light felonies are
those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, is provided.

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN JUSTIFYING, EXEMPTING, MITIGATING, AGGRAVATING AND ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES. GIVE ONE EXAMPLE FOR
EACH.
Justifying circumstances => those acts of a person said to be in accordance with law, such that a person is deemed not to have committed a crime
and is therefore free from both criminal and civil liability (self-defense, defense of relatives, defense of stranger, fulfillment of a duty or exercise of
right or office; and obedience to an order of a superior)
Exempting circumstances => when present, the act is unjustified and criminal but the actor is exempt from criminal liability which does not extend,
however, to the civil liability arising from the crime (minority, insanity, imbecility, accident, irresistible force, uncontrollable fear, and lawful and
insuperable cause)
Mitigating circumstances => those which if present in the commission of the crime, do not entirely free the actor from criminal liability but serve
only to reduce the penalty (incomplete justifying or exempting circumstance; offender is under 18 years old or over 70 years old; no intention to
commit so grave a wrong; sufficient threat or provocation; vindication of a grave offense; passion or obfuscation; voluntary surrender; physical
defect; illness of the offender; similar and analogous circumstances; and humanitarian reasons)
Aggravating circumstances => those which, if attendant in the commission of the crime, serve to have the penalty imposed in its maximum period
provided by law for the offense or changes the nature of the crime (advantage taken of public position; contempt or insult to public authorities;
disregard of age, sex, or dwelling of the offended party; abuse of confidence and obvious ungratefulness; Palace and place of commission of
offense; nighttime, uninhabited place or band; on occasion of calamity or misfortune; aid of armed men, or persons who insure or afford impunity;
recidivist; reiteracion; price, reward or promise; by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or intentional damage
thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving great waste or ruin; evident premeditation; craft, fraud or disguise;
superior strength or means to weaken the defense; treachery; ignominy; unlawful entry; breaking a wall; aid of minor or by means of motor vehicle
or other similar means; and cruelty)
Alternative circumstances => those which must be taken into consideration as aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and effects of the
crime (relationship, intoxication and degree of instruction and education of the offender)

WHO ARE CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR LIGHT FELONIES?

Article 16 of the RPC. Only the principals and their accomplices are made liable for the commission of light felonies. Accessories are not liable for
the commission of light felonies.

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN PRINCIPALS, ACCOMPLICES AND ACCESSORIES.

Article 17 of the RPC. The following are considered principals: (1) those who take a direct part in the execution of the act; (2) those who directly
force or induce others to commit it; and (3) those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another at without which it would not have
been accomplished.
Article 18 of the RPC. Accomplices are the persons who, not being included in Article 17, cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or
simultaneous acts.
Article 19 of the RPC. Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without having participated therein, either
as principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manners: (1) by profiting themselves or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the crime; (2) by concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or the instruments thereof, in
order to prevent its discovery; and (3) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principal of the crime, provided the accessory acts
with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the
Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.

(A) DURING THE TRIAL, THE COURT ORDERED THE CONFINEMENT OF X IN A MENTAL HOSPITAL DUE TO DIAGNOSIS OF PSYCHOSIS. X WAS
IN THE HOSPITAL FOR 6 MONTHS. AFTER DISCHARGE, X FILED A MOTION FOR RELEASE FROM DETENTION CONTENTDING THAT HE
HAD ALREADY SERVED THE MAXIMUM PENALTY IMPOSABLE. IS X CORRECT?
No. X’s confinement is not a penalty because it was not imposed as a result of a judicial proceeding but a mere preventive measure.

(B) WHAT ARE THE FIVE MEASURES OF PREVENTION OR SAFETY THAT MAY BE IMPOSED WHICH ARE NOT CONSIDERED PENALTIES UNDER
THE RPC?
1. The arrest and temporary detention of accused persons, as well as their detention by reason of insanity or imbecility, or illness requiring
their confinement in a hospital;
2. The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions mentioned in Art. 80 and for the purposes specified therein;
3. Suspension from the employment or public office during the trial or in order to institute proceedings;
4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in the exercise of their administrative or disciplinary powers, superior officials may impose
upon their subordinates; and
5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil law may establish in penal form.

(A) DIFFERENTIATE THE COMPUTATION OF PENALTIES WHEN THE OFFENDER IS IN PRISON AND WHEN NOT IN PRISON.
When the offender is in prison, the duration of temporary penalties is from the day on which the judgment of conviction becomes final. When the
offender is not in prison, the duration of the penalty consisting in deprivation of liberty is from the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of
the judicial authorities for the enforcement of the penalty.

(B) MAY THE PERIOD OF PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT BE DEDUCTED FROM THE TERM OF IMPRISONMENT?
Under Article 29 of the RPC, as amended by RA 10592, an accused who has undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited, either full of 4/5
of the term, in the service of their sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty, provided he is not disqualified. Credit is full if the detention
prisoner executed detainee’s manifestation, which is defines as a written declaration of a detained prisoner, with the assistance of a counsel,
stating his willingness to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon a convicted prisoner for the purpose of availing the full credit of the
period of his preventive imprisonment. Credit is 4/5 if the detention prisoner executed detainee’s waiver, which is defined as a written declaration
of a detained prisoner, with the assistance of a counsel, stating his refusal to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon a prisoner
convicted by a final judgment.

WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF CIVIL INTERDICTION AND PARDON?

Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender during the time of his sentence of the rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either as to the
person or property of any ward, or marital authority, of the right to manage his property and of the right to dispose of such property by any act or
any conveyance inter vivos.
A pardon shall not work the restoration of the right to hold public office, or the right of suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored by the
terms of the pardon. It shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence.

HOW IS DESTIERRO CLASSIFIED AS A PENALTY AND WHAT ARE ITS EFFECT/S WHEN IMPOSED BY THE COURT?
Destierro is a principal penalty. It is a punishment whereby a convict is banished to a certain place and is prohibited from entering or coming near
the place designated in the sentence, not less than 25 kms but not to extend beyond 250 kms.

MAY THE DEFENDANT SERVE THE PENALTY OF ARRESTO MENOR IN HIS HOUSE?
Under Article 88 of the RPC, service of arresto menor may be in the municipal jail or in the house of the offender but under the surveillance of an
officer of the law whenever the court provides in the decision due to the health of the offender or other reasons satisfactory to the court.

(A) ACCUSSED X DIED AFTER FINAL JUDGMENT AND WHILE HE IS SERVING HIS SENTENCE. WILL THE DEATH OF X EXTINGUISH BOTH
PECUNIARY AND PERSONAL PENALTIES?
When the death of the offender occurs after final judgment, only his criminal liability is extinguished. However, his civil liability is not affected by
his death and can be effected against the estate of the deceased.

(B) HOW IS CRIMINAL LIABILITY TOTALLY EXTINGUISHED?

Article 89 of the RPC. Criminal liability is totally extinguished:
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and as to pecuniary penalties, liability is therefore extinguished only when the
death of the offender occurs before final judgment;
2. By service of the sentence;
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects;
4. By absolute pardon;
5. By prescription of the crime;
6. By prescription of the penalty;
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of this Code.

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES AND PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTIES.

Prescription of crimes
Loss or forfeiture of the State to prosecute
Starts counting upon discovery of the commission of the
crime
Mere absence from the Philippines interrupts the running of
the prescription
Commission of another crime before the expiration of the
period does not interrupt prescription
Prescription of penalties
Loss of forfeiture of the State to enforce judgment
Starts counting upon the escape or evasion of service of
sentence
Absence from the Philippines interrupts the period only when
he goes to a foreign country without extradition treaty with us
Commission of another crime before the expiration of the
period interrupts the prescription

MAY THE COURT GRANT TIME ALLOWANCES? MAY IT BE REVOKED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS?
No. under Article 99 of the RPC as amended by RA 10592, whenever lawfully justified, the Director of the Bureau of Corrections, the Chief of the
Bureau of Jail Management and Penology and/or the Warden of a provincial, district, municipal or city jail shall grant allowances for good conduct.
Such allowances once granted shall not be revoked.

A REPEATEDLY STABBED X BELIEVING HIM TO BE Y KILLING THE FORMER INSTANTLY. A’S DEFENSE IS ERROR IN PERSONAE, INSISTING THAT HE
DID NOT INTEND TO KILL X. IS A CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR THE KILLING OF X?
Yes. In error in personae, a person is criminally responsible for committing an intentional felony although the actual victim is different from the
intended victim due to mistake of identity. The accused acted with dolo, hence, he shall incur criminal liability.

HOW IS TREASON COMMITTED? MAY THE PHILIPPINES CHARGE X, AN AUSTRIAN NATIONAL, WITH TREASON FOR ACTS COMMITTED AGAINST
THE PHILIPPINES DURING A WAR WITH CHINA, BY X WHILE IN FRANCE?
Treason is committed by any Filipino citizen or an alien residing in the Philippines, who shall levy war against the Philippines or adheres to her
enemies giving them aid or comfort within the Philippines or elsewhere. If an alien, while residing in a foreign country, does an act, which would
amount to treason if committed by a citizen of that country, he will be held liable for treason. Furthermore, Article 114 of the RPC punishes a
resident alien for committing treason

Y, A RESIDENT ALIEN, FAILED TO REPORT TREASON COMMITTED BY A AND B. MAY Y BE CHARGED FOR MISPRISION OF TREASON?
No. A resident alien cannot commit misprision of treason as it can only be committed by a Filipino citizen. Article 116 of the RPC expressly excludes
a foreigner.

DISTINGUISH QUALIFIED PIRACY UNDER THE RPC AND UNDER ANTI-PIRACY LAW (PD 532).
Under the RPC, qualified piracy is committed whenever the pirates have seized a vessel by boarding or firing upon the same; the pirates have
abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves; or it is accompanied by murder, homicide, rape or physical injuries. Under the Anti-
Piracy Law, qualified piracy is committed if as a result or on the occasion of piracy, rape, murder or homicide, physical injuries or other crimes are
committed, or when the offenders abandoned the victims without means of saving themselves, or when the seizure is accomplished by firing or
boarding a vessel.

DEFINE TERRORISM UNDER HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007. GIVE 5 EXAMPLES OF PREDICATE CRIMES FOR TERRORISM.
Under Section 3 of RA No. 9372, terrorism is perpetrated by a person who commits a predicate crime which creates a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among populace in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand. The predicate crimes of
terrorism are:
1. Piracy
2. Highway robbery
3. Hijacking
4. Rebellion
5. Coup d’ etat
6. Murder
7. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
8. Crimes involving destruction
9. Arson
10. Crimes involving unlicensed (loose) firearms and explosives

ENUMERATE 3 WAYS OF COMMITTING ARBITRARY DETENTION UNDER THE RPC.

1. By detaining a person without any legal cause or ground therefor purposely to restrain his liberty;
2. By delaying delivery to the proper judicial authority of a person lawfully arrested without a warrant;
3. By delaying release of a prisoner.

MAY PROHIBITED DRUG DEPENDENTS BE COMPELLED TO LEAVE QUEZON CITY AND LIVE IN CALAMBA CITY?
No. Such act constitutes the crime of expulsion wherein a pubic officer expels any person from the Philippines or compels him to change his
residence without being authorized by law.

WHAT IS THE TRUE TEST OF LACK OF JUST CAUSE IN SEARCH WARRANT MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED?
The true test of lack of just cause is whether the affidavit filed in support of the application for search warrant has been drawn in such a manner
that perjury could be charged thereon.
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN (A) INSURRECTION AND REBELLION; AND (B) COUP D’ ETAT AND SEDITION.
Rebellion or insurrection is committed by multitude of persons who rise publicly and take arms against the Government for the purpose of: (1)
removing the territory of the Philippines or part thereof, or its armed forces from the allegiance to said Government or its laws; or (2) depriving the
Chief Executive of the Legislature of any of their powers or prerogatives or part thereof. The object of rebellion is to completely overthrow and
supersede the existing government. In insurrection, it merely seeks to effect some change of minor importance, or to prevent the exercise of
governmental authority with respect to particular matters or subjects.
Coup d’ etat is committed by military, police or pubic officer with or without support or participation of civilians, who swiftly and singly or
simultaneously attacks by means of violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth, the duly constituted authorities of the Philippines, or facilities
needed for the exercise and continued possession of power such as military camp or installation, communications networks, or public utilities
anywhere in the Philippines for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state power. Sedition is committed by persons who rise publicly and
tumultuously, and by means of force, intimidation, or by other means outside of legal methods, in order: (1) to prevent the promulgation or
execution of any law, administrative order, or the holding of any popular election, or the free exercise of functions of any public officer or the
government; (2) to inflict any act of hate or revenge against private persons or any social class for any political or social end or upon the person or
property of any public officer; or (3) to despoil any person, or government of its property for any political or social end.

DEFINE LOOSE FIREARM UNDER RA 10591.

Under Sections 3 of RA No. 10591, it refers to an unregistered firearm, an obliterated or altered firearm, firearm which has been lost or stolen,
illegally manufactured firearms, registered firearms in the possession of an individual other than the licensee and those with revoked licenses in
accordance with the rules and regulations.

A FIRED HIS LICENSED FIREARM IN AN UNINHABITED MOUNTAIN IN BATANES PROVINCE. MAY A BE CHARGED WITH ALARM AND SCANDAL
UNDER THE RPC?
No. As a rule, the crime of alarm by discharging firearms must be committed in a public place. Thus, the discharge of firearm in an uninhabited
forest is not a crime.

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN COUNTERFEITING OF COINS AND MUTILATION OF COINS.

Forgery or counterfeiting of coins is committed by any person who makes or imports false coins; who utters such false coins with or without
connivance with counterfeiters or importers; or who possesses such false coin with intent to utter the same but without connivance with
counterfeiters or importers. Mutilation of coins is committed by any person who mutilates coins of the legal currency of the Philippines; or imports
such mutilated coins; or utters such coins with or without connivance with mutilators or importers; or possesses such coin with intent to utter but
without connivance with mutilators or importers.

DEFINE FALSE TESTIMONY AND DISTINGUISH IT FROM PERJURY.

False testimony is committed by a witness who gives false testimony under oath or solemn affirmation in a criminal case against or in favor of the
accused; or in a civil case, or in other case such as administrative case; or by a person who commits perjury in a sworn statement. Perjury is
committed by an affiant who knowingly makes untruthful statements upon any material matter in an affidavit or a solemnly affirmed statement
before a competent person authorized to administer an oath in cases in which the law so requires. False testimony includes perjury.

X USED A FICTITIOUS NAME TO EVADE A JUDGMENT OF PAYMENT OF P10M AS DAMAGES TO A RENDERED BY THE PASIG RTC. MAY X BE
PROSECUTED FOR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE?
Under Section 1 (d) of PD No. 1829, publicly using a fictitious name for the purpose of concealing a crime, evading prosecution or the execution of
judgment, or concealing his true name and other personal circumstances for the same purpose or purposes is obstruction of justice. Hence, X may
be prosecuted for such.

X, Y AND Z, ALL TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANIES AGREED IN WRITING TO SELL THEIR SERVICES AT PREDETERMINED PRICES. NO ONE CAN
RAISE THEIR PRICE WITHOUT PRIOR CONSENT OF THE OTHER PARTIES. MAY THEY BE PROSECUTED UNDER ARTICLE 186 OF THE RPC?
Yes. Under the RPC, any person who shall enter into any contract or agreement or shall take part in a conspiracy or combination in the form of a
trust or otherwise restraint of trade or commerce or prevent by artificial means free competition in the market is liable for monopolies and
combination in restraint to trade.

A WAS ARRESTED WHILE SNIFFING SHABU AND WHILE IN POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA. HE TESTED POSITIVE OF SHABU BY CONFIRMATORY
TESTING. IS HE LIABLE FOR POSSESSION OF SHABU? IS HE LIABLE FOR POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA?
Under Section 15 of RA 9165, where a person tested positive for dangerous drug is also found to have in his possession of any dangerous drug, he
shall be held liable for possession of dangerous drug under Section 11 thereof. The fact that the kind of dangerous drugs is different from that for
which A was found positive is of no moment. What is important is that he is in possession of any dangerous drugs to exempt him from being
prosecuted for use of dangerous drugs.

Z OFFERED THE SEXUAL SERVICES OF B, A MINOR, TO Y. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME Z HAD OFFERED THE SEXUAL SERVICES OF B TO CUSTOMERS. (A)
IS Z LIABLE FOR RAPE AS PRINCIPAL BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION? (B) IS Z LIABLE FOR QUALIFIED TRAFFICKING IN PERSON UNDER RA
9208?
Accompanying a child and offering her sexual services in exchange for money constitutes child prostitution under RA 7610. The accused who
offered the victim to the one who raped her is not liable for rape as principal by indispensable cooperation since bringing the victim to the rapist is
not indispensable to the commission of the crime of rape. If the accused is regularly offering the sexual service of the child in exchange for money,
the crime committed is not anymore child prostitution. Maintaining or hiring the child for the purpose of prostitution constitutes qualified
trafficking in person under RA 9208 because the former took advantage of vulnerability of the latter as a child and as one who need money.
Minority is a qualifying circumstance.

A, A WELL-KNOWN FEMALE RAMP MODEL, SWAM NAKED IN HER SWIMMING POOL INSIDE HER RESIDENCE IN A MAKATI SUBDIVISION. SHE
WAS PHOTOGRAPHED BY HER NEIGHBORS WHO CAN SEE HER SWIMMING NAKED FROM THEIR HOMES. MAY A BE LIABLE FOR GRAVE
SCANDAL?
A may be liable for grave scandal if it obvious to her that she could be seen by her neighbors as such scandalous conduct offends against decency or
good customs. Otherwise, she is not.

B, A PUBLIC OFFICIAL, WAS CONVICTED FOR CORRUPT PRACTICES UNDER RA 3019. LATER, B WAS PROSECUTED FOR THE SAME ACT UNDER THE
RPC. WILL THIS CONSTITUTE DOUBLE JEOPARDY?
Section 3 of RA 3019 provides: In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute
corrupt practices of any public officer. It is clear then that one may be charged with violation of RA 3019 in addition to a felony under the RPC for
the same act.

(A) WHAT IS THE ARIAS PRINCIPLE?

Heads of offices can rely to a reasonable extent n their subordinates on preparation of bids, purchase of supplies, or negotiations. Any executive
head agencies or commissions can attest to the volume of papers that must be signed. Thus, an executive head cannot be convicted on the sole
basis of signature or approval appearing on a voucher. To sustain a conspiracy charge and conviction, evidence must be presented other than her
signature on the voucher.

(B) GIVE AT LEAST TWO EXCEPTIONS TO THE ARIAS PRINCIPLE.

1. If other than the accused’s signature on the voucher, circumstances show evident bad faith, or manifest partiality;
2. If other than the accused’s signature on the voucher, circumstances show gross inexcusable negligence;
3. If the public officer acting in his capacity as head of office has not relied on his subordinates but on officers of equal rank;
4. If the documents involving the release of funds are not so voluminous so as to preclude him from studying each one carefully.

K, CHAIRMAN OF THE SEC, RECEIVED WITHOUT CONSIDERATION, A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SHARES OF STOCK FROM ALL COMPANIES REGISTERED
WITH THE SEC. MAY K BE PROSECUTED UNDER THE RPC AND RA 3019? WHAT SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS WERE COMMITTED?

(A) DEFINE MALVERSATION AND TECHNICAL MALVERSATION.

Malversation is committed by a public officer who, being accountable for public funds or property by reason of the duties of his office appropriates
the same, or takes or misappropriates, or consent to the taking thereof by other person or permits him to take it through abandonment or
negligence. Generally, the offender derives personal benefit.
Technical malversation is wherein illegal use of public funds or property is committed by a public officer who applies a public fund or property
under his administration to any public use other than that for which such fund or property were appropriated by law or ordinance. The offender
derives no personal gain or benefit.

(B) WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT MODES OF COMMITTING MALVERSATION?

1. Malversation through misappropriation which is similar to that of estafa
2. Misarppriation through taking which is similar to that of theft

(C) IF A NON-ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER MISAPPROPRIATES PUBLIC FUNDS, WHAT IS THE CRIME OR CRIMES COMMITTED, IF ANY? EXPLAIN.
If the public officer is not an accountable officer, as a rule, the crime committed is not malversation but qualified theft. But if the public officer
acquired the public fund through false pretense, the crime committed is estafa.

(D) WHEN MAY RESTITUTION BE CONSIDERED A VALID DEFENSE?

Under the law, the refund of the sum misappropriated, even before the commencement of the criminal prosecution, does not exempt the guilty
person from liability for the crime. This is because damage is not an element of malversation and the payment, after the consummation of the
crime of malversation, is not one of the modes of extinguishing criminal liability. However, restitution if coupled with other circumstance may be
considered as a defense either because it negates dolo or it rebuts the presumption of malversation. Good faith is a valid defense in a prosecution
for malversation of public funds as it would negate criminal intent on the part of the accused. Restitution of fund is a mitigating circumstance
analogous to voluntary surrender if it was immediately and voluntarily made before the case was instituted.

(E) IS RESIGNATION A DEFENSE IN MALVERSATION?

Resignation is not a defense in malversation since it is not listed in Article 89 of the RPC as a mode of extinguishing criminal liability. Under Section
2 of RA 3019, no public officer shall be allowed to resign or retire pending investigation, criminal or administrative, or pending a prosecution
against him, or for any offense under RA 3019 or under the provisions of the RPC on Bribery.

(F) MAY A PUBLIC OFFICER BE ALLOWED TO RESIGN OR RETIRE PENDING INVESTIGATION FOR ANY OFFENSE UNDER RA 3019?
Under Section 2 of RA 3019, no public officer shall be allowed to resign or retire pending investigation, criminal or administrative, or pending a
prosecution against him, or for any offense under RA 3019 or under the provisions of the RPC on Bribery. However, a public officer facing criminal
investigation or prosecution has the right to resign. Nevertheless, if at the time he retire or resigns, a public official is facing administrative or
criminal investigation or prosecution, such resignation or retirement will not cause the dismissal of the criminal or administrative proceedings
against him.

(A) DEFINE TORTURE UNDER THE TORTURE ACT OF 2009.

Section 4 of RA 9745 defines torture as an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person
for purposes of obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession; punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is
suspected of having committed; or intimidating or coercing him or a third person; or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such
pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of a person in authority.

(B) MAY TORTURE BE ABSORBED UNDER THE CRIME OF MURDER?

No. Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be absorbed by any other crime or felony committed as a consequence, or as a means in the
conduct or commission thereof. Torture shall be treated as a separate and independent criminal act whose penalties shall be imposable without
prejudice to any other criminal liability provided for by domestic and international laws.

(A) WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF PLUNDER?

1. That the offender is a public officer who acts by himself or in connivance with other persons acquires, accumulates, amasses ill-gotten
wealth;
2. That public officer amassed, accumulated or acquired ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of the overt or criminal acts (or
predicate crimes);
3. That the aggregate amount or total value of the ill-gotten wealth amassed, accumulated or acquired is at least P50M.

(B) WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONSPIRACY IN PLUNDER? EXPLAIN EACH.
1. Single conspiracy => the public officer conspired with a single individual or group in committing plunder. The principal plunder in this
case must be a public officer but the participants can be public officers or private individuals.
2. Wheel conspiracy => there is a single person or group (the hub) dealing individually with two or more other persons or groups (the
spokes). In plunder, the principal plunder is the hub while the participants or persons with whom the principal plunder connived in
acquiring ill-gotten wealth are the spokes.
3. Chain conspiracy => usually involves the distribution of narcotics or other contraband in which there is successive communication and
cooperation in such the same way as with legitimate business operations between manufacturer and wholesaler, then wholesaler and
retailer, then retailer and consumer.

(A) WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION?

1. That there is a pregnant woman;
2. That violence is used upon such pregnant woman without intending an abortion;
3. That the violence is intentionally exerted;
4. That as a result of the violence, the fetus dies, either in the womb or after having been expelled therefrom. If the fetus dies after having
been expelled from the maternal womb, it is important that the victim is not viable.

(B) MAY UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION BE COMMITTED USING ABORTIVE SUBSTANCES UPON A PREGNANT WOMAN?
No. Unintentional abortion or reckless imprudence resulting in unintentional abortion can only be committed by intentionally or recklessly using
violence upon the woman without intent to cause abortion. Thus, it cannot be committed by using an abortive substance upon the pregnant
woman.

(C) DISTINGUISH ABORTION FROM INFANTICIDE.

Abortion is committed by employing violence upon the pregnant woman, giving her abortive substances or by other means with intent to cause
abortion; and as a result thereof, the fetus dies, either in the womb or after having been expelled therefrom; or killing a non-viable fetus outside
the maternal womb. Abortion can be committed by the pregnant woman, her parents, physician, midwife or any other person.
Infanticide is committed by any person who shall kill a child less than three days old. It has the following requisites: (1) the victim did not die inside
the maternal womb; (2) the born-alive infant must be viable; and (3) the born-alive viable infant must be less than three days old.

(D) WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES FOR THE CRIME OF INFANTICIDE?

1. the victim did not die inside the maternal womb;
2. the born-alive infant must be viable;
3. the born-alive viable infant must be less than three days old.

DISTINGUISH PARRICIDE, HOMICIDE AND MURDER.

Parricide => committed by any person who shall kill his father, mother or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or his legitimate other
ascendants or descendants, or his legitimate spouse without the qualifying circumstances of infanticide.
Homicide => committed by any person who kills another without the qualifying circumstance in infanticide, parricide or murder.
Murder => committed by any person who shall kill another person without the qualifying circumstance in infanticide and parricide, and with any of
the qualifying circumstances:
1. in consideration of a price, reward or promise;
2. evident premeditation;
3. treachery;
4. taking advantage of superior strength;
 5. aid of armed men;
6. employing means to weaken the defense;
7. employing means or persons to insure or afford impunity;
8. cruelty;
9. outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse;
10. by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship;
11. by means of motor vehicles;
12. with the use of any other means involving great waste and ruin;
13. on occasion of calamity.

DISTINGUISH SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES FROM MALTREATMENT.

Physical injury => committed by any person who, without intent to kill or mutilate, shall wound, beat or assault another.
Maltreatment => offender ill-treats another by deed without causing any injury.

WHO IS THE VICTIM UNDER RA 9262 (ANTI-VAWC)?

The victim under RA 9262 is a woman with whom the offender has marital, sexual or dating relationship or the child of such woman.

MAY A CHILD BE ABOVE 18 YEARS OLD? EXPLAIN.

Yes. Under Section 3 of RA 7610, a child is a person below 18 years of age or a person over 18 years of age but is unable to fully take care of
themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition.

DEFINE CYBERSEX UNDER RA 10175.

Cybersex under RA 10175 is committed b any person who shall willfully engage, maintain, control or operate, directly or indirectly, any lascivious
exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid of a computer system, for favor or consideration.

(A) DEFINE KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION.

Kidnapping and serious illegal detention is committed by a private individual who shall kidnap or detain another, or in any other manner, deprive
him of his liberty provided that any of the following circumstances is present: (1) the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than three
days; (2) simulation of public authority; (3) serious physical injuries; (4) threats to kill; (5) the victim is a female, public officer, or minor except
when the accused is the parent of the minor; (6) the purpose of the kidnapping or detention is extorting ransom from the victim or any other
person; or when the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention, or is raped, or is subjected to torture of dehumanizing acts.

(B) WHAT ARE THE TWO INDISPENSABLE ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL DETENTION?

1. Deprivation of liberty;
2. Intent to deprive liberty.

WHAT IS UNLAWFUL ARREST?

Unlawful arrest is the commission by any person who shall arrest or detain another for the purpose of delivering him to the proper authorities (or
filing a case in court) without being authorized by law, or reasonable ground therefor.

MAY ABANDONMENT OF PERSONS IN DANGER BE COMMITTED INSIDE A UNIVERSITY CAMPUS?

If the failure to render assistance to anyone found wounded or in danger of dying in an uninhabited place within the university campus when he
can render such assistance without detriment to himself, such person can be liable for abandonment of persons in danger. If the place within the
university campus is not uninhabited, such person cannot be liable for such crime.

WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME OF WIRE-TAPPING?

1. That there is a private communication;
2. That offender taps any wire or cable, or uses device or arrangement for the purpose of secretly overhear, intercept or record such private
communication;
3. That offender overhears, intercepts, or records the private communication without authority from all the parties thereto and without
written authority from a competent court.

WHAT CONSTITUTE CYBERCRIME OFFENSES UNDER RA 10175?

1. Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems;
2. Computer-related offenses;
3. Content-related offenses (cyber libel, cybersex and cyber child pornography).

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN GRAVE THREAT AND GRAVE COERCION.

Grave threat is committed by any person who shall threaten another with the infliction upon the person, honor or property of the latter, or of his
family of a wrong amounting to a crime. Grave coercion is committed by any person who prevents another from doing something not prohibited by
law, or compels him to do something against his will, whether it is right or wrong, by means of violence, threats or intimidation, and without
authority of law.
If the act desired was not immediately consummated, it is grave threat. If the desired purpose was correspondingly achieved, it is grave coercion.
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION AND ASPORTATION IN UNLAWFUL TAKING.
Constructive possession in unlawful taking occurs when the offender unlawfully acquires possession of personal property even if for a short time or
if such property is under the dominion and control of the thief as actual manual possession of the thief over the property is enough. To take in theft
does not require asportation or its carrying away.

(A) DEFINE QUALIFIED THEFT.

Qualified theft is committed by any person who takes personal property of another without the latter’s consent with intent to gain and with any of
the following qualifying circumstance:
1. Domestic servant;
2. Grave abuse of confidence;
3. On the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any other calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance;
4. Coconuts taken from the premises of plantation, or fish taken from a fishpond or fishery:
5. The property stolen is a mail matter.

(B) WHAT ARE THE QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES?

1. Domestic servant;
2. Grave abuse of confidence;
3. On the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any other calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance;
4. Coconuts taken from the premises of plantation, or fish taken from a fishpond or fishery:
5. The property stolen is a mail matter.

WHEN DOES THEFT BECOME ROBBERY?

Upon the employment of means of violence against or intimidation of any person or using force upon thing.

DISTINGUISH ROBBERY FROM KIDNAPPING FOR RANSOM.

In robbery, the offender is using violence or intimidation as a mode of extortion. The intimidation in robbery must be actual or immediate. On the
other hand, in kidnapping for ransom, the offender is using the victim’s deprivation of liberty as a mode of extorting ransom from him or any other
person.

WHAT CONSUMMATE STHE CRIME OF BRIGANDAGE?

Mere formation of band of highway robbers consummates the crime of brigandage. Actual commission of robbery on the highway is not an
element of brigandage. It is committed by at least four armed men who forms a band of robbers for the purposes of committing robbery in the
highway, or kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom of for any other purpose to be attained by means of force and
violence.

X TOGETHER WITH TWO OF HIS FRIENDS STOLE A’S BULLDOZER AND FORKLIFT. CAN THEY BE PROSECUTED FOR CARNAPPING UNDER R A 10883?
No. Bulldozers and forklifts are expressly among those excluded from the coverage of motor vehicles under Section 2 of RA 10883.

A ACCOMPANIED BY B, C AND D ENTERED THE PROPERTY OF Y, AND USING FORCE AND INTIMIDATION AGAIST A, BUILT A SMALL HOUSE IN Y’S
LAND. ATTORNEY X, REPRESENTING Y, FILED AN EJECTMENT CASE AGAINST A, B, C AND D. IS ATTORNEY X CORRECT?
No. A, B, C and D committed the crime of occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights as they took possession of Y’ property or usurps
real rights in Y’s property by means of violence or intimidation to Y.

MAY ESTAFA BE COMMITTED THROUGH NEGLIGENCE? EXPLAIN.

No.

DISCUSS THE 3 REQUISITES TO AVAIL THE PRESUMPTION OF KNOWLEDGE OF INSUFFICIENT FUNDS IN BP BLG. 22.
1. The check was presented within 90 days from the issuance of the check;
2. The accused received a written notice of dishonor;
3. The accused fails to pay the holder thereof, or to make arrangements for payment in full by the drawee of such check within five banking
days after receiving notice of dishonor.

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN DESTRUCTIVE ARSON UNDER ARTICLE 320 OF THE RPC AND SIMPLE ARSON UNDER PD NO. 1613.
Destructive arson is characterized as a heinous crime while simple arson under PD 1613 is a crime manifesting a lesser degree of perversity. Simple
arson contemplates the malicious burning of property not included in Article 320 of the RPC. It is an important element of simple arson that the
burning does not constitute destructive arson under the RPC. Burning personal property not listed in Article 320 is simple arson.