CRIM II MIDTERM TRANSCRIPT Par 3

from Fiscal Carillo 1. Manufacturer;

2. Producer; or
ART 185 Machination in public auctions 3. Processor
Acts punished: -of any merchandise or object of
commerce; or
1. The offender solicits as a consideration
from refraining from taking part; 4. Importer of any merchandise or object
2. The offender attempts to cause of commerce from any foreign country
bidders to stay away from the auction
Either as:
Mere solicitation/attempt consummates the
crime a. Principal or agent;
b. Wholesaler;
Intention- reduction of the price and c. Retailer
auctioned. Who:
combine
This protects the integrity of the public conspire, or
auction that it is open to everybody. agree in any manner

ART 186 Monopolies and combinations with any person for the purpose of:
in restraint of trade. (walay pulos mani,
so himuon nto memoriza nlng ni para 1. Making transactions prejudicial to
sayon) lawful commerce, or
2. Increasing the market price of the
Acts punished: merchandise or any at the
manufacturer of which the said
Par 1
merchandise is used.
1. Enter into a contract
Qualifying circumstance for all 3 acts:
2. Enter into an agreement
3. Take part in any conspiracy Offense affects:
4. Take part in any combination
food substance;
-all acts must be:
motor fuel or lubricants;
In restraint of trade or commerce, or other article of prime necessity.
Prevent by artificial means free
If committed by corporation or
competition in market
association:
Par 2
president;
1. Monopolize any merchandise, or directors;
object of trade or commerce; managers
2. Combine with any person to
monopolize said merchandise or -who knowingly permitted or failed to
object; prevent the commission of the offense is/are
liable.
In order to alter the price thereof by;
a. Spreading false rumors
b. Making use of any artifice to
restrain free competition in the
market
 1. Validity of plaintiffs mark;
2. Plaintiffs ownership of the mark;
3. Use of the mark or its colourable
imitation by the offender likely to
cause confusion.
a. FOR COLOURABLE IMITATION
TO BE PRESENT IT MUST
PART 2 LIKELY TO CAUSE
CONFUSION.
ART 187 Importation and Disposition of
Falsely Marked Articles or Merchandise IF YOU CAN ESTABLISH THAT A MARK
Made of Gold, Silver and other precious HAS BEEN REGISTERED IN THE IPO,
metals or alloys THEN IT ESTABLISHES THE FOLLWING
DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS:
Elements:
Registration with the IPO
1. The offender imports, sells or dispose
of articles or merchandise made of Certificate of Registration prima facie
Gold, Silver or other precious metals evidence of:
or alloys.
2. The merchandise or articles fails to 1. Validity of registration;
2. Ownership of mark;
indicate actual fineness or quality.
3. Exclusive right to use mark.
3. The offender knows that the article or
merchandise fails to indicate such
fineness or quality. Cannot be registered.

What is punished here is that you do not 1. Generic,

indicate the true quality. So those who deals 2. Common descriptive names,
or sells these merchandise must indicate the 3. Genus of which a product is a species,
actual quality of the precious metal. EX. FLOWERS, BREAD, LECHON
4. Commonly used description of a kind
RA 8293 Intellectual Property Code of goods.

The three more common/relevant

criminal offenses under the IPC are: 3rd element: Colorable Imitation
o Infringement (Sec 155)
MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR.
o Unfair competition (Sec 168);
and This term has been defined as such a close
o False designation/description or or ingenious imitation as to be
Representation (Sec. 169). calculated to deceive ordinary
purchasers, or such resemblance of the
Infringement.
infringing mark to the original as to deceive
Mark may refer to trademark (goods) or an ordinary purchaser giving such
Service mark (services). attention as a purchaser usually gives,
and to cause him to purchase the one
Marks PURPOSE IS TO distinguish the goods supposing it to be the other. (EMERALD vs
or services of one person from that of CA)
another and to indicate the origin or
ownership. IN THE SAME CASE A QUESTION WAS ASKED
IF CAN AN ORDINARY PURCHASER BE
Elements of infringement DECIEVED INTO BUYING A PAIR OF
FANTASTIC MR. LEE JEANS SUPPOSING IT TO Here you pass of your goods so it is not
BE LEE JEANS? necessary you use the marks but anything to
pass off your goods as that of somebody who
SC SAID NO. FILIPINOS ARE DISCRIMINATING has greated goodwill of the same goods.
PURCHASERS. JEANS ARE NOT INEXPENSIVE.
BECAUSE OF THIS YOU GIVE IT A LOT OF You do not need to imitate or give it the
ATTENTION WHEN BUYING. FILIPINOS BUY appearance the goods but what you need is
THEIR JEANS BY THE BRAND. WHEN YOU to decieve the public that your goods are the
SPEAK OF AN ORDINARY PURCHASER same as the one who created the goodwill.
ESPECIALLY IN THE CASE OF JEANS YOU
DONT TALK OF A TOTALLY UNAWARE BUYER. False designation
YOU TALK OF A PERSON WHO IS WELL Any person who, in connection with any
INFORMED OF WHAT HE IS ABOUT TO BUY, goods or services or any container for
HOW MUCH IT COSTS AND ITS goods, uses in commerce, any word, term,
DISTINGUISHING FEATURES. THE WORDS name symbol, or device, or any false
FANTASTIC MR. LEE ARE TOO IMMINENT designation of origin, false or misleading
TO CONFUSE A PURCHASER OF SUCH description of fact, or false or misleading
JEANS. representation of fact.
Unfair competition likely to cause confusion, or deceive as to
Any person who has identified in the mind of the affiliation, connection or association of
the public the goods he manufactures or such person with another person as to the
deals in, his business or service from those of origin, sponsorship or approval of his or her
others, whether or not a registered mark goods, services or commercial activities or:
is employed, has property right in the in commercial advertising, or promotion,
goodwill of the said goods, business or misrepresents the nature, characteristics,
service so identified. (SEC 168.1, IPC) qualities, or geographic origin of his goods,
Elements of unfair competition services or commercial activities.

1. Confusing similarity in the general PART 3

appearance of the goods PD 1602 Gambling, acts punished:
2. Intent to deceive.
1. Taking part (directly or indirectly) in
The essence of unfair competition is the
any illegal or unauthorized
passing off of ones goods, business or
activities or games.
services for that of another who 2. Illegal gambling includes activities that
established goodwill of said goods, depend upon skill where betting is
business or services. conducted.
a. Any person who shall permit
- What is important here is that somebody
illegal gambling to be carried
has generated something through his
on.
goodwill. Unlike infringement that it needs to
b. Maintainer or conductor.
be registered, goodwill doesnt need to be. 3. Maintainer is the person who sets up
and furnishes the means with which to
So you need to prove to court that goodwill
carry on gambling game or scheme.
has been established by the plantiff of the
4. Conductor is the person who
particular product.
manages or carries on the gambling
Unfair competition has a broader coverage game or scheme.
because infirngement only refers to marks.
 a. Any person who knowingly, Seen walking together at the botanical
without any lawful purpose, gardens,
possess lottery lists, papers Looking for a house to rent they spent
containing letters, numbers or a few hours in the house and came
symbols pertaining to jueteng, out, and
jai-alai, etc. Talking at the sidewalk
b. A barangay official who, with
knowledge of the existence of a *only the cochero and one daughter saw the
gambling house or place in his accused Samniego at the lower level of the
jurisdiction fails to abate the house wearing only his drawers.
same or take action in
So are these enough to convict them of
connection therewith.
5. Security guard/officer, watchman, etc., grave scandal?
of hotels, villages, buildings, SC said no. of the 4 incidents there was
enclosures which have the reputation nothing scandalous. The element of publicity
of a gambling place or where is missing. Publicity requires the public to
gambling activities are being held. scandalized. Here only two seen the accused,
*RA 9287 increased the penalties for it is not enough.
numbers games, eg jueteng, jai-alai.

PD 449, Cock Fighting Law of 1974

Cockfighting allowed only in a licensed

cockpit during:
ART 201. Immoral Doctrines, Obscene
Sundays and legal holidays publications and exhibitions, and
Local fiestas (not more than 3 days) indecent shows.
Provincial, city, municipal, agricultural,
commercial or industrial fairs, carnival Elements:
or exposition upon resolution of local
a. The materials, publication, picture or
leg upon approval of Chief of
literature are obscene; and
Constabulary or rep.
b. The offender sold, exhibited, published
To entertain foreign dignitaries or
or gave away such materials.
tourists, balikbayans, fund-raising
campaigns for charitable purposes. What do we mean by obscene?
ART 200. Grave Scandal PP vs KOTTINGER, GR NO 20569, Oct.
29, 1923
Elements:
FACTS: accused was selling postcards
1. Ordinary performs an act;
2. Act is highly scandalous; with naked women on the post cards.
3. Act is not any other felony; Was it obscene?
4. Public/public knowledge
SC said no. these are pictures of naked
SAMANIEGO (16 Phil 663), Publicity women as they would appear in their
villages. They did not make any unsual
FACTS: a married woman was seen poses or exgerated sexually message in
the postcards. It is obscene because
Evidence:
what is obscene is
The word obscene and the term pimps who habitually associate with
obscenity may be defined as meaning prostitutes;
something offensive to chastity, d. One who loiters in inhabited or
decency, or delicacy. indecency is an act uninhabited places w/o any lawful or
against good behaviour and a just delicacy. justifiable purpose; and
e. Prostitutes.
deprave of corrupt those whose
minds are open to such immoral Vagrancy decriminalized.
influences and into whose hands a
RA NO 10158 (April 2012)
publication or other article charged as
decriminalized vagrancy.
being obscene may fall.
All pending cases dismissed, all serving
Another test of obscenity is that which
sentence released.
shocks the ordinary and common sense
of men as an indecency. Prostitutes

Elements:

FERNANDO vs CA, GR 159751, Dec 6, 1. Women

2006 (READ TO UNDERSTAND MORE 2. Engage in sexual intercourse or
WHAT IS DECENT or NOT) lascivious conduct,
3. Habitual kung panalagsa ra, pang
Test of Obscenity load, pang tuition - not prostitution
must be done habitually, and
Latest guidelines: 4. For money or profit.
a. Whether to the average person, *RA 9208
applying contemporary standards
would find the work, taken as a whole,
appeals to the prurient interest;
b. Whether the work depicts or
describes, in patently offensive way,
sexual conduct specifically defined by
the applicable state law; and ART 203 Public Officers
c. Whether the work, taken as a whole.
Lacks serious literary, artistic, political, every public servant from the highest to
or scientific value. the lowest. (MANIEGO vs PP, 88 Phil 494)

ART 202. Vagrants and prostitutes. (has Examples:

been decriminialized)
-swimming instructor at UP Los Banos PP vs
Offenders: LARIN, Oct 7, 1998

a. One who neglects to apply himself to Swimming instructor liable for malesting a
some lawful calling, if physically able student who said no, im just a private life
to (w/o visible means of support); guard at UP not public officer.
b. One who loiters around public or semi-
public bldgs. Or places tramping or SC said no. you are receiving something from
wandering around (w/o visible means UP it means you are a public officeras well as
of support); a pervert.
c. Idle or dissolute persons who lodges in
houses of ill-repute and ruffians or -fiscal analyst for the city of Zamboanga PP
vs KULAIS, July 16, 1998
Malfeasance and Misfeasance 1. Judge;
2. He: a) knowingly renders unjust
Misfeasance- improper performance of interlocutory order or decree or b)
some act which might lawfully be done. renders manifestly unjust interlocutory
order or decree through inexcusable
Malfeasance- performance of some act
negligence or ignorance.
which ought not to be done.
Interlocutory order
ART 204. Knowingly rendering unjust
judgement. Issued by the court between commencement
and the end of a suit or action and which
Elements:
decides some point or matter, but
1. Judge; which, however, is not a final decision of
2. Renders a judgement; the matter in issue.
3. Judgement is unjust;
4. Judge knows. does it leave something to be done in the
trial court with respect to the merits of the
Are we saying that a judge cannot make a case main issue?
mistake?
Yes interlocutory order.
- no, a judge may make a mistake as
long as he does not know that he is JUDGEMENT disposes an issue of a cases
making a mistake and despite knowing
INTERLOCUTORY ORDER an order that does
it is a wrong judgement he will insist in
not dispose of the main issue of the case, a
promulgating that judgement.
- Pero kung sayop lang jud sya, wa sya preliminary injuction, a writ attachment and
kabalo sa balaod, I dont know why he other else.
became a judge, he may be liable for
- can be done in between the beginning and
some administrative penalty but not
end of case.
this article. Because again, there must
be criminal intent. ART 207. Malicious delay in the
administration of justice.

Elements:

1. Judge;
ART 205. Judgement rendered through 2. There is a proceeding in his court;
negligence. 3. Delays the administration of justice;
4. Malice; inflict damage on either party
Elements: to the case.
1. Judge; ART 208. Negligence and tolerance in
2. Renders a judgement;
the prosecution of offenses.
3. Judgement is manifestly unjust;
4. Due to inexcusable negligence or
Acts punished:
ignorance.
1. Negligence- not lack of foresight or
204 intentional, unjust
skill, neglects to file a case that should
205 manifestly unjust, negligence be filed.
2. Tolerance- allowing an offense to be
ART 206. Unjust interlocutory order. committed without prosecuting the
same.
Elements: - usually prosecutor is charged in here.
ART 209. Betrayal of trust by an 1st paragraph ..in consideration of any
attorney or solicitor, revelation of offer promise, gift or present received
secrets. by such officer

Acts punished: It is not necessary that the offender recieves

a gift or present.
1. Causing damage to a client by
malicious breach of professional duty It is sufficient that the offender accepts an
or inexcusable negligence or offer of a gift or present.
ignorance.
2. Revealing secrets learned by him in If the public officer does not accept the
his professional capacity (damage is offer, only the person making the offer is
not necessary.) criminally liable (Art 212 Corruption of
3. Undertaking the defense of an Public Officer)
opposing party in the same case w/o
What if the public officer actually commits
consent of the first client, when the
the act that constitutes a crime? Lets say a
offender has undertaken the defense
court stenographer agrees to commit
of the first party or has received
falsification okay ra atty alisodon nko ang
confidential information from the said
yes og no. The mere act of agreeing to
first party.
commit the crime constitute direct bribery.
PART 3 So both falsification and direct bribery.

ART 210. Direct Bribery. 2nd paragraph ..in consideration of

the execution of an act which does not
1. Agree to perform an act constituting a constitute a crime,
crime, in connection with the
performance of his official duties, in The act does not constitute a crime
consideration of any offer, promise,
- a policeman accepting a gift in
gift or present.
2. Accepting a gift, in consideration of consideration for making an arrest.
the execution of an act which does
- a government employee processing
not constitute a crime.
documents in consideration of a gift.
3. Agreeing to refrain or refraining
from doing something which was his Gift must be accepted. If not all you end up
official duty to do in consideration of a with is a public officer doing his duty.
gift or promise of a gift.
if the gift was accepted.. if said act
Elements shall not have been accomplished,
1. Public officer (Art 203) The public officer must accept the gift.
2. Accepts an offer or a promise or
receives a gift or present The implication is that an acceptance of an
(himself/another); offer or promise is not sufficient.
3. Offer, promise, gift, present is
received/accepted: Mere agreement to execute the act is
a. Commit some crime; not sufficient. Either the offender
b. In consideration of some act not accomplishes the act or at least commences
a crime; the same by overt acts.
c. Refrain from doing his official
duty So mere saying na o ako bahala ana
4. Act is connected with his official duties without accepting the gift or commencing
the act by overt acts then there is no bribery. Elements:
Must ACCEPT.
1. Public officer;
What if you just accept the gift and not do 2. Accepts gifts;
any overt act yet? Yah gi dawat ang kwarta 3. Gifts were offered by reason of his
but does not do anything. Unsa man? office.

Estafa- if really no intention to do the act ..accepts gifts

Indirect Bribery no intent to decieve but The offender must accept a gift.
wala lang jud gi buhat. Nearest would be
In this case, they were planning to entrap anf
3rd
paragraph ..refrain from doing officer however the officer was not taking tha
something which it was his official duty bait.
to do,
there must be a clear intention on the part
If the failure to perform the official duty shall of the public officer to take the gift so offered
also constitute a crime, the offender shall be and consider the same as his own property
liable under paragraph 1. from then on, such as putting away the gift
for safekeeping or pocketing the same.
Example: (FORMILLEZA vs SANDIGANBAYAN, 159 SCRA
1)
A prosecutor who shall not prosecute a case
in consideration of a gift or promise of a gift. ART 211-A Qualified Bribery
(Art 208)
Elements:
So why was in TAD-Y vs PP, why was he
acquitted? 1. Public officer entrusted with law
enforcement;
You have the building official and city 2. Refrains from arresting/prosecuting an
engineer. They were acquiitted because offender who has committed a crime
apparently because the document to be punishable by reclusion perpetua
issued was not supposedly to be issued and/or death;
by another office and not their office. 3. In consideration of any promise, gift or
Naka lusot. reward.

Must relate to the official functions of ART 212 Corruption of public official
the public officer.
Elements:
however, where the act is entirely
1. Offer/ promise/ gives gifts to present
outside of the official functions of the
to a public officer;
officer to whom the money is offered, 2. Offer/promise is made or gift/present
the offense is not bribery. (TAD-Y vs PP, is given under circumstances that
GR NO 148862, August 11, 2005) would make the public officer liable for
direct/indirect bribery.

- if public officer does not accept the gift.

If accepted. Bribery on the public officer
and corruption on the part of the private
party.

ART 211 Indirect Bribery

ART 213 Frauds against the public 3. That he commits any of the frauds or
treasury and similar offenses. deceits enumerated in Articles 315 to
318.
A public officer who in his official capacity
with regard to furnishing supplies, the ART 215 Prohibited Transactions
making of contracts, or adjustment or
settlement of accounts relating to public The officer must be an appointive public
property or funds shall enter into an officer.
agreement with any interested party or The transaction involving exchange or
speculator or make use of any other scheme speculation must take place within the
to defraud the government. territory subject to the offenders jurisdiction.
-entering an agreement to defraud the The offender becomes interested therein
government. during his incumbency.
A public officer entrusted with the collection ART 216 Possession of prohibited
of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts, interest by a public officer.
shall:
The article does not distinguish between
-demand payment of sums different from or elective, appointive or whether the public
larger than those authorized by law; officer is such by provision of law.
-voluntarily fail to issue a receipt, as provided The felony consists in becoming interested in
by law, for any sum collected by him any contract or business in which it was his
officially; official duty to intervene.
-collecting or receiving by payment or The article also punishes private individuals
otherwise, things or objects of a nature like experts, arbitrators, private accountants,
different from that provided by law. guardians and executors as long as it was
Par 1. in his official capacity.. to their duty to intervene in the contract or
defraud the government; business that he takes interest in. even
though they are not public officers.
The offender must take advantage of his
public office and must act in his official What is punished here possible conflict of
capacity. interest. Public official ka then you intervene
because of your official duties and yet you
There must be intent to defraud the are interested, and tend to give the
government. interpretation most favorable to you.

ART 214 Other Frauds ART 217 Malversation.

Additional penalties in case a public officer The acts punished are:

who takes advantage of his official position
violates any of the felonies under ART 315 1. Appropriating;
2. Taking or misappropriating;
(Estafa), 316 (Other forms of swindling), 317
3. Consenting, or thru abandonment
(Swindling a minor), and 318 (Other Delicts).
or negligence, permitting other
Elements: persons totake public funds or
property;
1. That the offender is a public officer; 4. o/w guilty of misappropriation or
2. That he takes advantage of his official Malversation.
position.
Penalty for Malversation: The vital fact is not so much the manner in
which appellant could lawfully perform his
Penalty for Malversation is the same duties in relation to said funds as the fact
whether committed with malice or that he received money belonging to
through negligence. the Govt for which he was bound to
Elements: account (VELASQUEZ)

1. public officer; As long as money was handed to you and

2. custody or control of you had to account for it. And control comes
funds/property by reason of his hand in hand with account.
public office by reason of public
Private individuals are also liable
office;
3. offender is accountable for the ART 222 The provision of this chapter shall
funds/property; apply to private individuals who in any
4. offender commits any of the four
capacity whatsoever, have charge of
acts previously enumerated.
public funds, revenues, or property
Custody or control of funds
even if such property belongs to a
It is the nature of the duties and not the private individual.
title thereof that is controlling.
Examples:
if he is an employee of, or in some way
-property in custodia legis
connected with the govt and that, in the
course of his employment, he receives -property seized by law enforcement agents
money or prop belonging to the govt for
which he is bound to account. (US vs Presumption of personal use.
VELASQUEZ, 32 Phil 157)
The failure of a public officer to have duly
Qualified Charge forthcoming any public funds or property
with which he is chargeable, upon demand
He had no authority of his own volition to by any duly authorized officer, shall be
withdraw funds from the safe upon any prima facie evidence that he has put
pretext whatsoever. The funds were placed in such missing funds or property to
the safe and could only be taken from it by personal uses. (last paragraph, ART 217)
his superior officer or by his order.
Defendants possession of the key and the PP vs JOSE TING LAN UY, JR, Nov 17,
combination of the safe gave him control 2005, GR No 157399
over the contents (US vs F. WICKER SHAM,
Even on the putative assumption that
GR No 6781, 1911 Nov 6, 1911)
evidence against petitioner yielded a case of
Since he was not fully in control of the funds Malversation by negligence but the
that were taken from the safe he could not information was for intentional
be liable for malversation but may be liable Malversation, under the circumstances
for either theft or estafa but not of this case his conviction under the
malversation. first mode of misappropriation would
still be in order. Malversation is
When you do not have full control of the committed either intentionally or by
money and you took it then it may be theft. negligence. The dolo or the culpa present in
the offense is only a modality in the
Accountable officer
perpetration of the felony. Even if the mode
charged differs from mode proved, the same 4. offender applies the same to a public
offense of Malversation is involved and use other than for which it was
conviction thereof is proper. appropriated.

Naay caso na gi pangita-an sya ug sinsiyo, In malversation the officer uses the funds for
he was able to produce the change from his personal purposes. Here its not, its still for
pocket. Ingun SC that is not malversation public purpose but for a different purpose for
because he was able to account for it. which it was supposed to be used for.

But in another case where he had to go out Ex. Funds for a road were used instead to
of the room, borrow some money form some build a road. Intention does not matter.
friends turn It over to the person demanding Bahalag for a good cause.
to account, is considered to have failed to
account because he had to get out of the ART 221 Failure to make delivery of
office and borrow money from other people. public funds or property

PART 4 Acts punished:

ART 218 Failure to render accounts 1. Failure to make payment. Ex dka

musweldo sa employees kay laban ka
In this felony, the offender who is required sa suspended governor.
to render an account to the COA or 2. Refusing to make delivery.
auditor fails to do so.
INFIDELITY IN DEALING with THE
This felony may be committed by a public CUSTODY OF PRISONERS.
officer:
ART 223 Conniving with or consenting
-still in service; to evasion

-separated from service by resignation; Elements:

or
1. Public officer;
-separated from service for any other 2. Custody/charge of a prisoner;
3. Prisoner escapes;
cause
4. Connivance
ART 219 Failure of a responsible officer - must have custody or charge like
to render account before leaving the warden or jail guard for a specific
country prisoner when goes to court.
- Must be intentional
The felony is the act of unlawfully leaving
the country or an attempt thereof
without securing a certificate from COA. ART 224 Evasion thru negligence
ART 220 Illegal use of public funds or Elements:
property. (TECHNICAL MALVERSATION)
1. Public officer;
Elements: 2. Charged with conveyance or custody
of a prisoner;
1. public officer; 3. Escapes through negligence.
2. public funds/property under his - version of 223 but with negligence.
administration;
3. funds/property has been appropriated WERE A JAILGUARD ALLOWED A PRISONER
by law or ordinance; TO GO TO THE RESTROOM BUT INSPECTED
THE RESTROOM FIRST BEFORE THE 3. Documents/papers entrusted by
PRISONER WENT IN. THEN HE STAYED reason of office;
OUTSIDE WHILE THE PRISONER DID HIS 4. Damage to a 3rd party or public
BUSINESS BUT EVENTUALLY ESCAPED. interest.

SC SAID THAT IS NOT NEGLIGENCE. Removal, concealment or destruction.

COMPARED TO GUARD GUARDING AT THE
If the act is removing, there must be an
FRONT YARD TALKING TO SOMEBODY ELSE
illicit purpose, which, however, need not be
WHILE SMOKING. KANA KLARO NAJUD NA
accomplished.
NEGLIGENCE.
If the act is by concealing or destroying,
Negligence
the same does not require proof of an
it is only that positive carelessness that is illicit purpose. here presumption is
short of deliberate non-performance of his that you have intention and you need to
duties as guard that is the gravamen of the rebut this presumption.
crime of infidelity.
ART 227 Officer breaking seal. pag ka
Liability of escaping prisoner way hinumdan

Convict - evasion of service of sentence ART Elements:

157.
1. Public officer;
Detention prisoner no liability 2. Charged with custody of
papers/property;
WILL THE GUARD STILL BE LIABLE IF THE 3. Sealed with proper authority;
PRISONER IS A DETENTION PRISONER UNDER 4. Breaks the seals or permits them to be
224? broken.

YES. Breaking seal.

ART 225 Escape of prisoner under the The offender is charged with the sealed
custody of a person not a public officer. paper or property.

Elements: The envelope or parcel need not be

opened, what is required is that the seal
1. Private person; is broken by the offender or he permits
2. Conveyance of a prisoner is confided another to break the said seal.
to him;
3. Escape; No damage is required.
4. Consent/negligence

ART 226 Removal, Concealment or

Destruction of Documents.

Elements: ART 228 Opening of closed documents.

1. Public officer; Elements:

2. Abstracts, destroys, or conceals,
documents or papers; 1. Public officer;
 2. Closed papers, documents or objects The offender receives an order from his
are entrusted to his custody; superior for execution.
3. Opens/permits them to be opened;
4. No authority. The offender suspends its execution and

What if the document was not intrusted to the superior officer disapproves the
him. Yang gi kawat nyah iyang gi abri. suspension.
Masuod sya ani na article?
Nagbalik2x ni sya pero of course kinsa mu
YES daog ang superior jud.

ART 229 Revelation of secrets by an The felony consists in disobeying the

officer. superior despite the disapproval of the
suspension.
Acts punishable:
ART 233 Refusal of assistance.
1. Revealing any secrets known by public
officer by reason of official capacity; Offender is a public officer.
2. Delivering wrongful papers or copies
of papers of which he may have Competent authority demands that he lends
charge and which should not be his cooperation in the administration of
published. justice or other public service.

Offender maliciously fails to do so.

ART 230 Public officer revealing secrets
Serious damage to a third party or
of private individual.
public interest is qualifying.
Elements:

1. Public officer;
2. Secrets of a private individual by ART 234 Refusal to discharge elective
reason of his office office.
3. Reveals secrets without authority or
Offender is elected by popular election.
justifiable reason.
The felony is committed when the offender,
ART 231 Open disobedience
without legal motive, refuses to:
The offender is a judicial or executive officer.
a. Be sworn in; or
You will notice walay legislative. I dont know b. Discharge the duties of his office.
why. Probably because they made the law. ART 235 Maltreatment of prisoners
Nganu apil2x man nto ato kaugalingon na
kita man ga himo. Offender is a public officer who has under his
charge a prisoner.
The offender, without legal justification,
openly refuses to execute a judgement, Maltreatment consists in:
decision or order issued by a superior
authority. 1. Overdoing the correction or handling
of prisoners:
ART 232 Disobedience to a superior a. Punishments not authorized
officer, when said order was suspended b. Authorized punishments in a
by inferior officer. humiliating manner
2. Extort a confession or obtain
The offender is a public officer. information.
ART 236 Anticipation of duties of a No, because the consitution allows it.
public office.

Offender is entitled to hold public

office/employment by election or
appointment. ART 240 Usurpation of executive
The offender assumes the performance of functions
duties without taking his oath of office The offender is a judge who:
or give the bond required by law.
a. Assumes powers pertaining to the
ART 237 Prolonging performance of executive; or
duties and powers. b. Obstructs the executive in the lawful
exercise of their powers.
The public officers period to hold public
office has expired as provided by law, ART 241 Usurpation of judicial
regulation or special provision. functions.
The felony consists in the public officer The offender is a member of the executive
continuing to exercise his duties and powers branch who:
of such office despite the expiration of the
period. a. Assumes judicial powers; or
b. Obstructs the execution of any order
So how about this issue about our suspended or decision rendered by an judge w/in
governor, is she liable under this article? his jurisdiction.

No because her term has not expired. ART 242 Disobeying request for
disqualification
ART 238 Abandonment of office or
position. The offense is the disobedience of a public
officer who has been lawfully refrained,
The public officer formally resigns from his
due to questions of jurisdiction, from
position.
continuing with proceedings in his office.
Without his resignation being accepted, the
Ex. Quoaranto proceedings questioning
public officer abandon his office to the
qualification of a particular person.
detriment of public service.
ART 243 Orders or requests by
ART 239 Usurpation of legislative
executive officers to any judicial
powers.
authority
The offender is an executive or judicial
The offender is a member of the executive
officer.
branch.
The offender:
He issues an order or suggestion addressed
a. Makes general rules or regulations to any judicial authority which order or
beyond scope of his authority; or suggestion relates to any case or business
b. Attempts to repeal a law; or w/in the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of
c. Suspends the execution thereof. justice.

How about the SC in their rules of court, are - judicial independence

they liable under this article?
ART 244 Unlawful appointments.
The offender appoints or nominates another a. Other ascendants or
to a public office knowing that the appointee descendants, not the
or person nominated lacks the qualifications father/mother or child of the
at the time of the appointment or offender who must be
nomination. legitimate.
OR
Appointment of non-eligibles - must not b. Spouse, who must be
exceed three months (Rev Adm Code) legitimate of the offender
Di pwede nang live-in

Relationship by blood.

What distinguishes parricide from other

felonies involving destruction of life is the
element of relationship by blood. Even in the
ART 245 Abuses against chastity na
case of legal adoption, the killing of an
sa-ag na article
adopted child is not parricide as the
Offenders: relationship is not by blood.

1. Any public officer before whom Knowledge of such relationship by the

matters for decision are pending or offender is not required.
with respect to which he is required to
How about an adopted child?
submit a report to, or consult with a
superior officer. FMC says that adopted child for all intesive
2. A warden or public officer charged
purposes what? Adopted child angay daug-
with care and custody of prisoners or
daugon. Aw. Di diay legitimate diay.
persons under arrest.
Reyes book is not updated may not have
Abuses against chastity
considered the FMC.
The felony consists in soliciting or making
In keeping with the times, killing an adopted
immoral or indecent advances to a
child should be considered as parricide.
woman.
IN A CASE WHERE A WIFE AND A LOVER
It can also be done to the wife, daughter,
CONSPIRING TO KILL THE HUSBAND BY
sister or relative within the same degree of
PLACING A BOMB IN HIS CAR THE WIFE WAS
affinity of the person in custody. (Mother is
CONVICTED OF PARRICIDE while the LOVER
not included) nganu man wala sila
MURDER. Why? Because....
kadungog ug MILF?!! man diay?? Thats
the law. Art 62, par 3 RPC Book I.

LAST circumstances that arise from the private

relations with the offended party serve to
ART 246 Parricide
aggravate or mitigate the liability of those as
In this felony, the person killed must be: to whom such circumstances are attendant.

a. Father ]\ ART 247 Death or physical injuries

b. Mother ] > whether under exceptional circumstances.
legitimate or illegitimate
c. Child ]/ Preliminary requisites:
d. Or:
 a. Legally married person with respect to were seen sleeping on the same bed),
his/her spouse. GONZALES (Wife was rising up while a man
b. Parents with respect to daughters was buttoning his drawers) in these cases it
a. Legitimate or illegitimate. cannot be.
b. Under 18 years of age, and
c. Living with them It is not necessary that he see the carnal act.
It is enough that the circumstances
Common requisites.
reasonably show thet the carnal act is being
The married person or parent surprises the committed or has just been committed.
spouse/daughter in the act of sexual
It is therefore, necessary that sexual
intercourse;
intercourse is established.
The spouse/daughter and their paramour
Where sexual intercourse is not clearly
or seducer are killed or serious physical
established or if only preparatory acts are
injuries are inflicted upon them by the
committed, Art 247 is not applicable. Also in
married person or parent.
premeditated plans to avail of the
Why Not a felony, no penalty.? Bec circumstance it cannot be justified. So it
must be strictly construed. Only during the
The act is a justified burst of passion. act or immediately after.

In book 1, where a husband caught his wife Highly unlikely

and the lover in their house and then he
attacked the lover and the lover defended Farmer in the morning when he went
himself, the lover was able to kill the back to his house catches the wife and
husband and then interposed self defense. the lover and the lover ran away. So the
husband warned the wife not to do it
SC said no aggression was lawful. In fact if he again. In the afternoon husband found
would have killed you or the wife, it would them again in the toilet. Farmer found
have been a justified burst of passion. his wife rise from the ground and the
lover buttoning his drawers. It is then
- must be caught in the act or inflicts the
he attacked both of them.
injury or kills in the act or immediately there
after. As long as it can be established that SC did not believe him. said:
they had sexual intercourse right then and
there before they were caught. Neither ii it likely that a woman thirty years
of age, like Sixta Quilason, and twenty-five-
Destierro is a measure to protect the year old Isabelo EVangelio, both of sound
spouse/parent from possible retaliation from judgment as is to be supposed, had dared to
the relatives of the deceased or injured. have carnal intercourse near the toilet of the
offended partys house, a place which is
in the act or immediately
naturally frequented by some persons. (PP vs
thereafter,
GONZALES, 69 Phil 66)
The killing/serious physical injuries must be
- it may be that it was only an
committed while the wife/daughter is in the
afterthought of gonzales of not killing
act of sexual intercourse or immediately
them in the morning.
thereafter (right after the sexual intercourse)
PP vs abarca
Where there is no clear showing that
sexual intercourse has occurred, the article The husband just came home from taking the
is not applicable. BITUANAN (man and wife bar exam. Uli sya sa ila, want to go to
another town so went to the bus terminal girl was given a chocolate. The intent
early. Only to find out that all the buses were was not to kill but to sexually arouse the
full. So balik sya ilang bahay. So naa man ni girlfriend. Nyah ang girlfriend inhan kaayo ug
puli sa iyang place sa bed. So pag lili nya sa chocolate gi kaon ang whole box namatay.
vents around the room. True enough his wife not murder but homicide because it was not
and the lover was having sexual intercourse conciously adopted.
but he made a noise wherein nakakit nuon
ang lover sa iya. Ma pa nasuko gi tiunan sya -PP vs PUGNAY, GR No 74324, Nov 17, 1988.
ug pusil, dagan sya ngita sya sa iyang amigo By means of fire. Playing a simple
na sundalo huwam syag pusil when he went prank on a retarded child. Ang usa gi bubu-
to the place of the lover iyang gi rakrakan an ug gasolina. Another accused put fire on
naa na-apil lain. the soaked victim so victim burned.
SC said as far as shooting the lover no SC said its not murder because there was no
liabilty. But to the other people reckless evidence that it was intentionally done. All
imprudence. Why? The act was lawful it was the evidence will show that it was just a
a justified burst of passion. prank taken to extreme but still a prank. Fire
and gasoline were not intentionally adopted
here in the crime.
ART 248 Murder
In arson, where you burn a house not
The unlawful killing of another which is not knowing that there are persons inside that is
parricide or infanticide, with the presence of still arson not murder because there was no
any of the six circumstances enumerated: intention. But if you burned the house
knowing the victim is inside. Then that is
1. Treachery murder. Depends upon the intent when we
2. Price
talk about par. 2.
3. Inundation
4. Calamities
PP vs CAGOCO, GR No. 38511, October
5. Evident premeditation
6. Cruelty 6, 1933.

considering that there is no moral or legal

incompatibility between treachery and the
Par 3 vs Par 1,2, 4, 5 and 6 mitigating circumstance No. 3 of Art 9 of the
Penal Code, because the former depends
Par 3. by means of inundation, fire, upon the manner of execution of the crime
poison must be consciously adopted and the latter upon the tendency of the will
towards a definite purpose,
Pars 1, 5 and 6. with
here he punched the person because he
Par 2 in consideration
thought he was being cheated in cards.
Par 4 on the occasion.. Victim fell down and died as a reuslt of the
injuries. SC said. Yes you are liable for
By means of fire treachery because you hit him from behind
in a sudden and treatcherous manner.
The rule in these decisions is that: there is a
need to establish intent to kill, by means of Killing a child of tender years.
fire, on the part of the offender to qualify the
killing to murder. ..the killing of a child in tender age,
defenceless and unprotected, must always
-PP vs GALURA, 16 CA Rep 70
be classified as murder. Even though the There may still be treachery even if,
deceased children had been awake they before the assault, the assailant and the
could not have defended themselves or have victim had an altercation and a fisticuffs and,
fled or escaped from the attack of their after the lapse of some time from the
assailants. (US vs ANTOBIO, GR No 10562, said altercation, the assailant attacks
August 3, 1915) the unsuspecting victim without
affording the latter any real chance to
Intent to kill: so if you hit somebody with an defend himself. (PP vs LACADEN, GR No.
iron bar. That person does not die. Intent to 187682, Nov 25, 2009)
kill is important to distinguish or dertermine
the exact felony. What if all qualifying circumstance gi gamit
nimu? I want an express ticket to hell, unsa
When intent to kill is present so it may be man mahitabo sa imo? Only one as a
attempted or frustrated murder/homicide. qualifying and the rest as an aggravatign
If no intent it may be a case of physical circumastance.
injuries. Several qualifying circumstances.
But if the person dies, intent to kill is the trial court ruled that the crime
conclusively presumed di nata mag hisgot committed was murder after finding that the
kung naa bay intent or wa. Kung namantay killings were attended by treachery, evident
intent to kill is conclusively presumed wana premeditation, dwelling and price or reward.
malalis ana. Only one aggravating circumstance is
So like in cagoco, no intent to kill on his part enough to qualify the killing to murder,
but he died so no need to argue if there was the rest constitute generic aggravating
intent to kill because death of the victime is circumstances. (PANA vs JUDGE BUYSER,
a conclusive presumption of intent to kill. GR No 130144, May 24, 2001)
The most we can do is give the mitigating Taking advantage of superior strength.
circumstance of no intent to commit a grave
so wrong. To take advantage of superior strength is to
use force out of proportion to the means
So if the victim dies pili-on ra ana kay available to the person attacked to defend
murder, homicide or reckless imprudence himself. In order to be appreciated, it must
resulting to homicide. Mao ra na ang la-lison be clearly shown that there was
sa court dili na mahimo physical injuries deliberate intent on the part of the
kung namatay na. malefactors to take advantage thereof.
Treachery (PP vs REGALRIO, GR No. 174483, Mar 31,
2009)
The essence of treachery is a deliberate and
sudden attack that renders the victim unable To appreciate the attendant circumstance of
and unprepared to defend himself by reason abuse of superior strength, what should be
of the suddenness and severity of the attack. considered is whether the aggressors took
(PP vs LOPEZ, GR No. 177302, April 16, 2009) advantage of their combined strength in
order to consummate the offense. Mere
Must be consciously adopted so there would superiority in number is not enough to
not be any risk from the victim to defend constitute superior strength. There must be
himself. clear proof that the assailants purposely
used excessive force out of proportion to the
Killing was preceded by a fight. defense available to the person attacked. (PP
vs AMODIA, GR No. 177356 Nov 20, 2008)-
here the offenders took turns in punching the infanticide. (VILLAMOR vs PP, GR No.
victim. SC said so if u took turns then its 182156, Nov 25, 2009)
homicide because they did not use of their
numerical superiority. Intent to kill

Intent to kill specific intent which the

prosecution must prove by direct or
Qualifying circumstances must be circumstantial evidence,
proved.
General criminal intent presumed from the
It is an ancient but revered doctrine that commission of a felony by dolo.
qualifying and aggravating circumstances
before being taken into consideration, for the Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when
purpose of increasing the penalty to be the victim dies.
imposed, must be proved with equal What if victim does not die how
certainty as those which establish the Establishing intent to kill.
commission of the criminal offense. (PP
vs ABDULAH, GR No. 182518, Jan 20, 2009) ..the means used by the malefactors,
the nature, location and number of
- victim was found near garbage dumpster, wounds sustained by the victim, the
there was evidence that her hands were tied conduct of the malefactors before, the time,
behind her back. Murder ang gi kiha. There or immediately after the killing of the victim,
was evidence though that she was killed in the circumstances under which the crime
such a position. SC said then that is not was committed and the motives of the
enough to prove treachery in crime with just accused. (RIVERA vs PP, GR No. 166326, Jan
circumstancial evidence. 25, 2006)
Sec 8 and 9, Rule 110, RROC Inconsistent with negligence.
Sec. 8 Designation of the offense ..specify No such felony as Reckless imprudence
its qualifying and aggravating circumstances. resulting in attempted homicide. Only
Sec. 9 Cause of the accusation ..the reckless imprudence resulting in physical
qualifying and aggravating circumstances injuries.
must be stated in ordinary and concise If there is intent (dolo) it follows that there
language can be no culpa.
Must be specifically mentioned in the ART 250 Penalty for frustrated
information. parricide, murder, or homicide.
ART 249 Homicide. Courts may impose a penalty two
The elements of homicide are as follows: degrees lower in cases of frustrated
parricide, murder or homicide and a
1. A person was killed; penalty three degrees lower on cases of
2. The accused killed him without any an attempted felony.
justifying circumstance;
3. The accused had the intention to kill, 50:37
which is presumed; and
4. The killing was not attended by any of ART 251. Death caused in a tumultuous
the qualifying circumstances of affray.
murder, or by that of parricide or
Several individuals involved that do not and the suicide is not
constitute organized groups. consummated (one or two degrees
lower than reclusion temporal,)
They fight or quarrel in a confused and
tumultuous manner. ART 254 Discharge of firearms.

Someone is killed in the fight and the one Elements:

responsible cannot be ascertained.
1. The offender discharges a firearm
Offender against or at another person; must
aim at the victim but
1. One who inflicted serious physical 2. That the offender has no intention
injuries on the victim, or to kill that person. Intent is to
2. One who used violence on the intimidate.
victim.
- injuries must not have caused who shall shoot at another with any
the death because if it is then you firearm..
are liable instead for murder or
homicide. It is not necessary that the firearm was
pointed at the victim at the actual time of
The victim need not be a participant in discharge. It is sufficient that the firearm was
the fight. pointed at the victim prior to the actual
discharge.
ART 252 Physical injuries inflicted in a
tumultuous affray. There must be no intent to kill. The
purpose is to intimidate or frighten the
The victim must be a participant in the fight.
victim.
The offender is the one who used violence
You must discharge. Recent
upon the person of the victim.
jurisprudence states that before the
Slight physical injuries are not included. discharge it may not be pointed at a
person it is sufficient that the discharge
ART 253 Giving assistance to suicide. was for the purpose of intimidating or
frightening the victim.
The person commititng suicide is not
liable. No felony of suicide. ART 255. Infanticide

The scenarios are: Elements:

1. A person assists another to commit 1. A child is killed;

suicide and the suicide is 2. The child is less than 3 days
consummated (prision mayor); (72hours) of age;
2. A person assists another to commit 3. The offender killed the child.
suicide and the suicide is not
consummated (arresto mayor med- Infanticide
max); When the mother or grandparents of the
3. A person assist another to commit
victim commits the crime to conceal the
suicide by doing the killing himself
mothers dishonour Mitigating.
and the suicide is consummated
(reclusion temporal); If the child is born dead or could not sustain
4. A person assist another to commit independent life outside the womb,
suicide by doing the killing himself infanticide is not committed.
ART 256 Intentional Abortion ART 258 Abortion practiced by the
woman herself or by her parents.
Abortion is the killing of a fetus in the womb
or its expulsion from the womb causing its The woman who consents to the abortion is
death. liable under this article. The penalty is
mitigated if the purpose is to conceal her
2 ways of committing intentional abortion. dishonour.
1. Using violence upon the pregnant The parents of the pregnant woman with her
woman; consent for the purpose of concealing her
2. Without using violence
dishonour are also liable.
(drugs/beverages)
a. With consent of the pregnant ART 259 Abortion practiced by a
woman, physician or midwife and dispensing
b. Without consent of the
abortives.
pregnant woman.
Applicable only in intentional abortion.
Elements of intentional abortion
Physician or midwife who causes the
1. Pregnant woman;
abortion and takes advantage of scientific
2. Violence exerted or drugs or
knowledge or skill is imposed the maximum
beverages are administered, or
penalty.
offender acts upon such pregnant
woman; ART 260 Duel
3. The fetus dies as a result;
4. Intentional. It must refer to a formal or regular combat
previously concerted between two parties in
ART 257 Unintentional Abortion
the presence of 2 or more seconds of lawful
Elements: age on each side, who make selection of
arms and fix all the other conditions of the
1. Pregnant woman; fight.
2. Violence is used without intending an
abortion; Persons liable.
3. The violence is intentional;
4. Fetus dies as a result of the violence. 1. Person who killed his adversary
(Reclusion temporal)
Violence is intentional but the abortion 2. Person who inflicted physical injuries
is unintentional. on his adversary (According to the
nature of the injury)
Knowledge of pregnancy (BASAHA NING 3. Combatants where no physical injuries
DUHA KA CASO) are inflicted (Arresto Mayor)
JEFFREY - the offender need not know that ART 261 Challenging to a duel human
the woman was pregnant. jud oh. With plenty of time to spare.
Maayo jud ko na maestro oi.
CARNASO accused must have known of the
pregnancy. Acts punished:
Chocking the pregnant wife attempted 1. Challenging to a duel;
parricide with unintentional abortion (without 2. Inciting another to give or accept a
intention to abort the child) challenge to a duel;
3. Scoffing or decrying another publicly
for having to refused to accept a
challenge to fight a duel.