1

CRIMINAL LAW 11

CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY:

1. Treason (Art. 114)
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (Art. 115)
3. Misprision of treason (Art. 116)
4. Espionage (Art. 117)
Treason- is defined as a breach of allegiance to a government, committed by a person who owes allegiance to it. The
offender in treason is either a Filipino citizen or a resident alien. It is a war and continuous crime.

Treason, elements:
1. That the offender owes allegiance to the Government of the Philippines;
2. That there is war in which the Philippines is involved;
3. That the offender either-
a) Levies war against the government, or
b) Adheres to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort.
The offender in treason may either be Filipino citizen or resident alien who owes allegiance to the Philippines. This
crime is committed in time of war in which the Philippines is involved.
Allegiance - means the obligation of fidelity and obedience which the individuals owe to the government under which
they live or to their sovereign, in return for the protection they receive.

Two ways or modes of committing treason:

1. By levying war against the Government; and
2. By adhering to the enemies of the Philippines, giving them aid or comfort.

Levies war - means that there is an actual assembling of men for the purpose of executing a treasonable design by
force. The levying of war must be in collaboration with a foreign enemy. It is necessary that the purpose of levying war is
to deliver the country in whole or in part to the enemy and the levying of war must be in collaboration with a foreign
enemy.
Adherence to enemy – means a citizen or alien temporarily residing in the country, with intent to betray, intellectually
or emotionally favors the enemy and harbors sympathies or conviction disloyal to the country’s policy or intent. To
constitute adherence it is essential that there concurs giving aid or comfort to the enemy.
Aid or comfort - is defined as an act which strengthens or tends to strengthen the enemy in the conduct of war against
the traitor’s country and an act which weakens or tends to weaken the power of the traitor’s country to resist or to attack
the enemy. Example: Giving information to enemy, commandeering foodstuffs for the enemy.

Ways of proving treason:

1. Testimony of two witnesses, at least, to the same overt act; or
2. Confession of the accused in open court.

Conspiracy to commit treason is committed when in time of war two or more persons come to an agreement to levy
war against the Government or to adhere to the enemies and to give them aid or comfort, and decide to commit it.
Proposal to commit treason is committed when in time of war a person who has decided to levy war against the
Government or to adhere to the enemies and to give them aid or comfort, proposes its execution to some other person or
persons.

Misprision of treason, elements:

1. That the offender must be owing allegiance to the Government, and not a foreigner.
2. That he has knowledge of any conspiracy to commit treason against the Government.
3. That he conceals or does not disclose and make known the same as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of the
province or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which he resides.
Espionage- is defined as the offense of gathering, transmitting, or losing information respecting the national defense
with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the Republic of the Philippines or to the
advantage of any foreign nation. It may be committed in time of peace or in war.

Two ways of committing espionage:

1. By entering, without authority therefor, a warship, fort, or naval or military establishments or reservation to obtain
any information, plans, photographs or other data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippines.
2. By disclosing to the representative of a foreign nation the contents of the articles, data or information referred to
above, which he had in his possession by reason of the public office he holds.
To be liable under the first way of committing espionage it is not necessary that information, etc is obtained. What is
important is that the offender must have the intention to obtain information relative to the defense of the Philippines.
Under the second way of committing espionage, the offender is a public officer in official custody of data or
information relative to the defense of the Philippines.

Distinction between treason and espionage:

1. Treason is committed only in time of war, while espionage may be committed both in time of peace and in time of war.
 2
2. Treason is limited in two ways of committing the crime: levying war and adhering to the enemy giving him aid or
comfort; while espionage may be committed in many ways.

CRIMES AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS:

1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals (Art. 118).
2. Violation of neutrality (Art. 119).
3. Correspondence with hostile country (Art. 120).
4. Flight to enemy’s country (Art. 121).
5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas (Art. 122).

Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals, elements:

1. That the offender performs any unlawful or unauthorized acts;
2. That such acts provoke or give occasion for a war involving or liable to involve the government or expose Filipino
citizens to reprisals on their persons or property.
The offender is criminally liable under this article regardless of his intention for as long as he performs unlawful or
unauthorized acts. The offense is committed in time of peace. Example: The raising, without sufficient authorization, of
troops within the Philippines for the service of a foreign nation against another nation.
Piracy - is defined as robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas or in Philippine waters, without lawful
authority, with the intention of universal hostility
Mutiny - is the (1) unlawful resistance to a superior officer, or (2) the raising of commotion and disturbance on board
a ship against the authority of its commander, while the ship is on the high seas or in Philippine waters.

Piracy, elements:
1. That a vessel is on the high seas or in Philippine waters.
2. That the offender is not a member of its complement or a passenger of the vessel.
3. That the offender (a) attacks or seizes the vessel or (b) seizes the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its
equipment, or personal belongings of its complement or passengers

High seas - refers to any waters on the sea coast which are without the boundaries of law water mark, although such
waters may be in the jurisdictional limits of a foreign government. It does not mean that it be beyond the three-mile limit
of any state.
Philippine waters - refer to all bodies of water, such as but not limited to seas, gulfs, bays around, between and
connecting each of the Islands of the Philippine Archipelago, irrespective of its depts., breadth, length or dimension, and
all other waters belonging to the Philippines by historic or legal title, including territorial sea-bed, the insular shelves, and
other submarine areas over which the Philippines as sovereignty or jurisdiction.
Vessel - is any vessel or watercraft which is used for transport of passengers and cargo from one place to another
through Philippine waters. It shall include all kinds and types of vessels or boats used in fishing.

Two modes/ways of committing piracy:

1. By attacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas or in Philippine waters.
2. By seizing the whole or part of its cargo, its equipment or personal belongings of its complement or passengers.

Distinctions between piracy and mutiny:

1. In piracy, the persons who attack a vessel or seize its cargo are strangers to said vessels; while in mutiny, they are
members of the crew or passengers.
2. In piracy, intent to gain is essential; while in mutiny, the offenders may only intend to ignore the ship’s officers or
they may be prompted by a desire to commit plunder.
See: PD 532 otherwise known as Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of 1974-

Qualified piracy (The penalty shall be death), instances:

1. Whenever the offenders have seized the vessel by boarding or firing upon the same;
2. Whenever the offenders have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape.

Qualified mutiny (the penalty shall be death), instances:

1. Whenever the offenders have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves; or
2. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape.

The said crimes (murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape) that accompany the commission of piracy or mutiny
become an element of qualified piracy or mutiny. Consequently, they cannot make the crime complex.
Aiding or abetting piracy - is committed when any person who knowingly and in any manner aids or protects pirates.
Examples: Giving them information about the movement of police or other peace officers of the government, or acquires
or receives property taken by such pirates deriving any benefit therefrom. Any person who directly or indirectly abets the
commission of piracy shall be considered as an accomplice of the principal offenders (sec. 4, PD 532).

CRIMES AGAINST FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE:

1. Arbitrary detention (Art. 124);
 3
2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities (Art. 125);
3. Delaying release (Art. 126);
4. Expulsion (Art. 127);
5. Violation of domicile (Art. 128);
6. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the service of those legally obtained (Art. 129);
7. Searching domicile without witnesses (Art. 130);
8. Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of peaceful meetings (Art. 131);
9. Interruption of religious worship (Art. 132);
10. Offending the religious feelings (Art. 133).

Arbitrary detention, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That the offender detains a person.
3. That the detention is without legal grounds.

Public officers/employee- include all persons who, by direct provision of law, popular election or appointment by
competent authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the Philippine Government, or shall perform
in said government or any of its branches, public duties as an employee, agent, or subordinate official, of any rank or
class.

The legal grounds for detention are:

1. The commission of a crime;
2. Violent insanity or any other ailment requiring the compulsory confinement of the patient in a hospital.

Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities, elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he has detained, without warrant of arrest, a person for some legal grounds.
3. That he fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within the period of:
a) 12 hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by light penalties, or their equivalent;
b) 18 hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by correctional penalties, or their equivalent; and
c) 36 hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by afflictive or capital penalties, or their equivalent.

The continued detention of persons legally arrested without warrant of arrest becomes illegal upon the expiration of
the period specified in Art. 125 without their having been delivered to the corresponding judicial authorities within the
period prescribed by law.
The delivery of arrested persons without warrant to judicial authorities does not necessarily mean actual delivery of
their persons but the filing of appropriate complaint or information in court.

Instances when a peace officer or private person may arrest a person even without warrant of arrest
(warrantless arrest):
1 When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit
an offense.
2. When an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of
facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it.
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is
serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from
one confinement to another.

Distinction between Arbitrary Detention and Delay in the Delivery of Detained Person to Proper Judicial
Authorities:
1. In arbitrary detention, the detention was without legal ground;
2. In delay in the delivery of detained person to proper judicial authorities, the detention was with legal ground but
the filing of complaint against the arrested person in court is delayed.

See: RA 7438 (An Act defining certain rights of persons arrested, detained or under custodial investigation, which
was approved on April 27, 1992) which provides rights of persons arrested, detained, or under custodial investigation and
duties of public officers.

Delaying release, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That there is a judicial or executive order for the release of a prisoner or detention prisoner, or there is a proceedings
upon any petition for the liberation of such person.
3. That the offender, without justifiable reason, delays (a) the service of the notice of such order to the prisoner, or (b) the
performance of such judicial or executive order for the release of the prisoner, or (c) the proceedings upon a petition
for the release of such person.
 4
The judicial or executive order mentioned above refers to the order issued either by the court, fiscal or other agencies
of the government authorized to so issue.

Acts constituting delaying release:

1. By delaying the performance of a judicial or executive order for the release of a prisoner.
2. By unduly delaying the service of the notice of such order to said prisoner.
3. By unduly delaying the proceedings upon any petition for the liberation of such person.

Violation of domicile, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he is not authorized by judicial order to enter any dwelling.
3. That he enters the dwelling of another against the latter’s will, or searches papers and effects therein without the
previous consent of such owner, or that having surreptitiously entered said dwelling and being required to leave,
refuses to leave the same.

Not being authorized by law – means the public officer or employee is not authorized by the court to enter any
dwelling. Only the court can issue such order or search warrant and no other.

Acts constituting violation of domicile:

1. By entering any dwelling against the will of the owner thereof.
2. By searching papers or other effects found therein without the previous consent of such owner.
3. By refusing to leave the premises, after having surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after having been required to
leave the same.
Against the will of the owner – presupposes opposition or prohibition by the owner of the dwelling, whether express
or implied. If the owner consented the search, the crime is not committed by the public officer or employee.
An officer has the right to break into the building or enclosure in order to make an arrest by virtue of a warrant, or
authorized to make such arrest for an offense without a warrant, as provided in Sec. 5, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court.

Search warrants maliciously obtained, and abuse in the service thereof, acts punished:
1. By procuring a search warrant without just cause.
2. By exceeding his authority or by using unnecessary severity in executing a search warrant legally procured.

Without just cause- means the requisites for the issuance of search warrant such as (a) the determination of probable
cause by the judge, (b) examination under oath or affirmation the applicant and his witnesses, (c) the specification of the
place to be searched and the thing to be seized, has not been complied with.

Elements of exceeding authority or using unnecessary severity in executing search warrant legally procured:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he legally procured a search warrant.
3. That he exceeds his authority or uses unnecessary severity in executing the same.

The search warrant here was legally procured, that is, the requisites for the issuance thereof have been complied with
but the officer executing it had performed an act not necessary anymore in the execution of such search warrant.
Examples of exceeding authority: When the search warrant was served during nighttime, the serving officer
exceeded his authority because search warrant will be served only in the day time UNLESS a direction is inserted in said
warrant that it be served at any time of the day or night; The officer used unnecessary severity in executing the search
warrant when he broke the outer door of a house without any justifiable cause; In executing a search warrant for shabbu,
he seized books, personal letters, and other property having no connection or very remote to shabbu.

Searching domicile without witnesses, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer or employee and armed with a search warrant legally procured.

2. That he searches the domicile, papers or other belongings of any person.

3. That the search was made in the absence of (a) the owner, or (b) any member of his family, or (c) two witnesses
residing in the same locality.

It is not required that the two witnesses must be officials of the barangay. It is sufficient if they are of sufficient age
and discretion residing in the same locality.

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER:

1. Rebellion or insurrection (Art. 134);
2. Coup d’etat (Art. 134-A);
3. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat, rebellion or insurrection (Art. 136);
4. Disloyalty of public officers or employees (Art. 137);
5. Inciting to rebellion or insurrection (Art. 138);
6. Sedition (Art. 139);
 5
7. Conspiracy to commit sedition (Art. 141);
8. Inciting to sedition (Art. 142);
9. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of the Assembly and similar bodies (Art. 143);
10. Disturbance of proceedings (Art. 144);
11. Violation of parliamentary immunity (Art. 145);
12. Illegal assemblies (Art. 146);
13. Illegal associations (Art. 147);
14. Direct assaults (Art. 148);
15. Indirect assaults (Art. 149);
16. Disobedience to summons issued by the National Assembly, its committees or subcommittees, by the
Constitutional Commissions, its committees, subcommittees or divisions (Art. 150);
17. Resistance and disobedience to a person in authority or the agents of such person (Art. 151);
18. Tumults and other disturbances of public orders (Art. 153)
19. Unlawful use of means of publication and unlawful utterances (Art. 154);
20. Alarms and scandals (Art. 155);
21. Delivery of prisoners from jail (Art. 156);
22. Evasion of service of sentence (Art. 157);

23. Evasion of service of sentence on the occasion of disorders, conflagrations, earthquakes, or other calamities (Art. 158);
24. Other cases of evasion of service of sentence (Art. 159);
25. Commission of another crime during service of penalty imposed for another previous offense (Art. 160).

Rebellion or insurrection, elements:

1. That there be (a) public uprising, and (b) taking up arms against the Government.
2. That the purpose of the uprising or movement is either:
a) To remove from the allegiance to said Government or its laws the territory of the Philippines or any part
thereof, or any body of land, naval or other armed forces or
b) To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives.
Public uprising and taking up arms against the government do not absolutely mean actual clash of arms with the
forces of the government. Thus, the mere fact that the accused knowingly identified him with the Huk organization that
was openly fighting to overthrow the government was enough to make him guilty of the crime of rebellion.
The purpose or motive of the offender in rebellion or insurrection as its requisites is political and is essentially a crime
of masses or multitudes involving crowd action which involves armed uprising against the government as the gravamen of
the crime. Thus, political motive should be established.
There is no complex crime of rebellion with murder or homicide. Murder or homicide is absorbed in rebellion except
when the offender has personal motive on the person killed in which case separate crime of murder or homicide should be
filed against him.

Distinctions between rebellion and treason:

1. If the levying of war was in collaboration with a foreign enemy, it is treason; if the levying of war is merely a civil
uprising, without any intention of helping a foreign enemy, it is rebellion.
2. Rebellion involves taking up arms against the Government; treason may be committed by mere adherence to a
foreign enemy giving him aid or comfort.

Coup d’etat, elements:

1. A swift attack accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth.
2. Directed against duly constituted authorities of the Republic, military camps or installation, communication networks,
public utilities, other facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of power.
3. Committed by any person or persons belonging to the military, or police or holding any public office or employment,
with or without civilian support or participation.
4. The purpose is to seize or diminish state power.

Distinctions between coup d’etat and rebellion:

1. In coup d’etat, the essence of the crime is a swift attack upon the facilities of the Philippine Government, military
camps and installations, communication networks, public utilities and facilities essential to the continued possession
of government powers; in rebellion the essence of the crime is public uprising with the taking up or arms.
2. In the first, the crime may be committed singly or collectively and does not require a multitude of people; in the
second, the crime requires a multitude of people.
3. In the first, the objective may not be to overthrow the government but only to destabilize or paralyze the government
through the seizure of facilities and utilities essential to the continued possession and exercise of governmental
powers; in the second, the objective is to overthrow the duly constituted government.
4. In the first, the crime requires as principal offender a member of the AFP or of the PNP organization or a public
officer with or without civilian support; in the second, the crime does not require the participation of any member of the
military or PNP organization, or public officer and generally carried out by civilians.
5. In the first, the crime may be carried out not only by force or violence but also through stealth, threat or strategy; in
the second, the crime can only be committed through force and violence.
 6
Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat, rebellion or insurrection- is committed when two or more persons come to an
agreement to commit coup d’etat, rebellion or insurrection and decide to commit it.

Proposal to commit coup d’etat, rebellion or insurrection- is committed when the person who has decided to commit
the said crime/s proposes its execution to some other person.

Inciting to rebellion or insurrection, elements:

1. That the offender does not take arms or is not in open hostility against the government.
2. That he incites others to rise publicly and take arms against the government for any of the purposes of rebellion.
3. That the inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamation, writings, emblems, banners or other representations
tending to the same end.

Distinction between inciting to rebellion and proposal to commit rebellion:

1. In both crimes, the offender induces another to commit rebellion.
2. In proposal, the person who proposes has decided to commit rebellion; in inciting to rebellion, it is not required that the
offender has decided to commit rebellion.
3. In proposal, the person who proposes the execution of the crime uses secret means; in inciting to rebellion, the act of
inciting is done publicly.
In both proposal and inciting to rebellion, the crime of rebellion should not be actually committed by the person to
whom it is proposed or who are incited.

Sedition- in its general sense, is the raising of commotion or disturbances in the State. It is a revolt against legitimate
authority. Though the ultimate object of sedition is a violation of the public peace or at least such a course of measures as
evidently engenders it, yet it does not aim at direct and open violence against the laws, or the subversion of the
Constitution.

Sedition, elements:
1. That the offenders rise (1) publicly and (2) tumultuously.
2. That the offenders employ any of those means to attain any of the following objects:
a) To prevent the promulgation or execution of any law or the holding of any popular election.
b) To prevent the National Government, or any provincial or municipal government, or any public officer thereof
from freely exercising its or his functions, or prevent the execution of any administrative order.
c) To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the person or property of any public officer or employee.
d) To commit, for any political or social end, any act of hate or revenge against private persons or any social class.
e) To despoil, for any political or social end, any person, municipality or province, or the National Government of all
its property or any part thereof.
The disturbance shall be deemed to be tumultuous if caused by more than three persons who are armed or provided
with means of violence.

Distinctions between sedition and rebellion:

1. In both crimes, there must be a public uprising.
2. In sedition, it is sufficient that the public uprising is tumultuous; in rebellion, there must be taking up arms against the
government.
3. In the first, the purpose of the offender may be political or social; in the second, the purpose of the offender is always political.

Distinction between sedition and treason: Sedition is the raising of commotion or disturbances in the state; treason
is the violation by a subject of his allegiance to his sovereign.
Conspiracy to commit sedition- is committed when two or more persons come into an agreement to commit any of
the objects of sedition and decide to commit it.
Only conspiracy to commit sedition is punishable, and not proposal to commit sedition.

Inciting to sedition, elements:

1. That the offender does not take direct part in the crime of sedition.
2. The he incites others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition.
3. That the inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other
representations tending to the same end.

Acts punished as inciting to sedition:

1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts of sedition, by means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, etc.
2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the public peace.
3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels against the Government or any of the duly constituted authorities
thereof, which tend to disturb the public peace.

Actual disturbances or disorder is not necessary in inciting to sedition. What is punished in inciting to sedition is the
inciting of the people to rise publicly and tumultuously in order to attain any of the acts which constitute sedition and not
the performance of act of sedition.
 7

Rules relative to seditious words:

1. The clear and present danger rule. It is required here that the words uttered must be of such nature that uttering them
there is a danger of a public uprising and that such danger should be both clear and imminent.
2. The dangerous tendency rule. It is required here that the words uttered or published have a seditious tendency such
that the words uttered or published could easily produce disaffection among the people and a state of feeling in them
incompatible with a disposition to remain loyal to the government and obedient to the laws, or the words used tend to
create a danger of public uprising.

Illegal assemblies, kinds:

First kind of illegal assemblies: Any meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under the Revised Penal Code.

Elements of the first kind of illegal assemblies:

1. That there be a meeting, a gathering of group of persons, whether in fixed place or moving.
2. That the meeting is attended by armed persons.
3. That the purpose of the meeting is to commit any of the crimes punishable under the Revised Penal Code

Second kind of illegal assemblies: Any meeting in which the audience, whether armed or not, is incited to the
commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection, sedition or assault upon a person in authority or his agent.

Elements of the second kind of illegal assemblies:

1. That there is a meeting, a gathering of group of persons, whether in a fixed place or moving.
2. That the audience, whether armed or not, is incited to the commission of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, treason,
sedition or direct assault.

Illegal Association, kinds:

1. Associations totally or partially organized for the purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable under the
Revised Penal Code.
2. Associations totally or partially organized for some purpose contrary to public morals.

Direct assaults, modes:

First mode of direct assault: Without public uprising, by employing force or intimidation for the attainment of any of the
purposes enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and sedition.
Second mode of direct assault, elements:
1. There must be an attack, use of force, or serious intimidation or resistance upon a person in authority or his agent.
2. The assault was made when the said person was performing his duties or on the occasion of such performance.
3. The offenders knew that the victim is a person in authority or his agent, that is, he had the intention to defy the
authorities.

The word attack means any offensive or antagonistic movement or action of any kind, the intimidation must produce
its effect immediately, and the resistance must be active and grave.
If the offended party is a person in authority the force employed need not be serious. The mere fact of having slapped
the face of an official engaged in the performance of his duties constitutes the crime of assault with the hand, committed
upon person in authority.
If the offended party is an agent of person in authority the force employed must be of serious character as to indicate
determination to defy the law or its representative.
The phrase “on the occasion of such performance” signifies “by reason of past performance of official duty” so that
even if at the very time of the assault no official duty was being discharged and for as long as the impelling motive of the
attack is the performance of a duty or connected therewith the crime of direct assault is committed.
Where in the commission of direct assault, homicide or murder or serious or less serious physical injuries are also
inflicted, the offender is guilty of the complex crime of direct assault with homicide or murder or serious or less serious
physical injuries in view of the provision of Article 48 of the RPC. Slight physical injuries are absorbed in direct assault.
Person in authority- is one who is directly vested with jurisdiction, whenever as an individual or as a member of
some court or government corporation, board or commission, like: the governor, mayor, barangay captain, division
superintendent or school, public and private schools, provincial and city fiscals (prosecutors), judges of the courts,
municipal, city and provincial kagawads, professors and instructors of public and private colleges and universities.
Person agent in authority- is one who, by direct provision of law or by election or by appointment by competent
authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order and the protection of life and property, such as: policemen,
military men, barangay kagawads, barangay leaders, and any person who comes to the aid of a person in authority.

Indirect assault, elements:

1. That a person in authority or his agent is the victim of any of the forms of direct assault defined in Art. 148.
2. That a person comes to the aid of such authority or his agent.
3. That the offender makes use of force or intimidation upon such person coming to the aid of the authority or his agent.
Indirect assault can be committed only when a direct assault is also committed, that is, the person in authority or his
agent has been assaulted already.
 8
The offended party is any person (may be a private person) who comes to the aid of a person in authority or his agent,
who was a victim of direct assault, and was himself also assaulted. Example: The mayor who was trying to separate two
persons boxing each other, was also attacked. B comes to aid the mayor but was also attacked by one of the two persons.
The person who attacked the person who tried to aid the mayor is therefore guilty of Indirect Assault.

Resistance and serious disobedience, elements:

1. That a person in authority or his agent is engaged in the performance of official duty or gives lawful order to the
offender.
2. That the offender resists or seriously disobeys such person in authority or his agent.
3. That the act of the offender is not included in the provisions of Articles 148, 149, and 150.

What is punished in this article is the resistance or seriously disobedience to the orders directly issued by the
authorities in the exercise of their official duties. The disobedience referred to here must be serious otherwise the act
would be considered as simple disobedience. Example: A person who at the moment when a policeman comes to arrest
him refuses to obey the command of the latter and strikes him with the fist may be adjudged guilty of simple resistance
and serious disobedience.

Simple disobedience, elements:

1. That an agent of a person in authority is engaged in the performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to the offender.
2. That the offender disobeys such agent of a person in authority.
3. That such disobedience is not of a serious nature.

Example: A drunk person lied at the middle of the road. When ordered by the police to stay away from the middle of the
road, said person ignored it. Later, said police officers dragged said person out of middle of the road.

Distinctions between direct assault and resistance:

1. In direct assault, the person in authority or his agent must be engaged in the performance of official duties or that he is
assaulted by reason of such performance; while in resistance, the person in authority or his agent is only engaged in
the actual performance of duty.
2. In direct assault, the offender employed force; in resistance, the use of force is not so serious, as there is no manifest
intention to defy the law and the officers enforcing it.

Alarms and scandals, acts punished:

1. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other explosive within any town or public place, calculated to cause
alarm or danger.
2. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive to another or prejudicial to
public tranquility.
3. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at night or while engaged in any other nocturnal amusement.
4. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places while intoxicated or otherwise, provided Art. 153 is not applicable.

The discharge of firearm should not be aimed at a person, otherwise the crime committed would be illegal discharge
of firearm under Art. 254.

A “charivari” is a mock serenade of discordant noises, made with kettles, tin horns, etc., designed to annoy and insult.

Instigation or taking an active part in any charivari and other disorderly meeting are punished to prevent more
seriously disorders.
If the disturbance is of a serious nature, the crime committed is tumults and other disturbances of public order under
Art. 153.

Delivering prisoners from jail, elements:

1. That there is a person detained or confined in a jail or penal establishment.
2. That the offender removes such person, or helps the escape of such person.

The words “person confined therein” refer to both detention and convicted prisoners. Hospital or asylum is
considered an extension or jail or prison.
If the offender is a public officer who has in his custody or charge of the prisoner, he is liable for the crime of
infidelity in the custody of a prisoner under Art. 223. The offender is usually an outsider, a jail guard who is off duty.
If a prisoner removed is already convicted by final judgment, such prisoner may also be held liable for evasion of
service of sentence.

Evasion of service of sentence, elements:

1. That the offender is a convict by final judgment.
2. That he is serving his sentence, which consists in deprivation of liberty.
3. That he evades the service of his sentence by escaping during the term of his imprisonment by reason of final judgment.
 9
The crime of evasion of service of sentence does not apply to detention prisoners and minor delinquents who escape
from confinement because detention prisoners are not convicts by final judgment, and minor delinquents confined in the
reformatory institution are not convicts, because sentence is suspended.
There is no evasion of service of sentence if the accused prisoner escapes while sentence of conviction was under
appeal because the judgment is not yet final.
Quasi-recidivism- is a special aggravating circumstance to the effect that the offender commits a new felony while he
is serving his sentence for a previous offense and shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by
law for the new felony.

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST:

1. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, forging the signature or stamp of the Chief
Executive (Art. 161);
2. Using forged signature or counterfeit seal or stamp (Art. 162);
3. Making and importing and uttering false coins (Art. 163);
4. Mutilation of coins (Art. 164);
5. Selling of false or mutilated coin, without connivance (Art. 165);
6. Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents payable to bearer; importing, and uttering such false or forged notes
and documents (Art. 166);
7. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments payable to bearer (Art. 167);
8. Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit (Art. 168);
9. Falsification of legislative documents (Art. 170);
10. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or ecclesiastic minister (Art. 171);
11. Falsification by private individuals and use of falsified documents (Art. 172);
12. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone messages, and use of said falsified messages (Art. 173);
13. False medical certificates, false certificates of merit or service, etc. (Art. 174);
14. Using false certificates (Art. 175);
15. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for falsification (Art. 176);
16. Usurpation of authority or official functions (Art. 177);
17. Using fictitious and concealing true name (Art. 178);
18. Illegal use of uniform or insignia (Art. 179);
19. False testimony against a defendant (Art. 180);
20. False testimony favorable to the defendant (Art. 181);
21. False testimony in civil cases (Art. 182);
22. False testimony in other cases and perjury in solemn affirmation (Art. 183);
23. Offering false testimony in evidence (Art. 184);
24. Machinations in public auctions (Art. 185);
25. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Art. 186);
26. Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or merchandise made of gold, silver, or other precious metals or
their alloys (Art. 187) ;
27. Substituting and altering trademark, tradenames, or service marks (Art. 188);
28. Unfair competition, fraudulent registration of trademark, tradename or service mark, fraudulent designation of origin,
and false description (Art. 189).

Making and importing and uttering false coins, elements:

1. That there be false or counterfeited coins.
2. That the offender either made, imported or uttered such coins.
3. That in case of uttering such false or counterfeited coins, the offender connived with the counterfeiters or importers.

A coin is false or counterfeited, if it is forged or if it is not authorized by the Government as legal tender, regardless of
its intrinsic value. There must be an imitation of the peculiar design of a genuine coin.
To utter is to pass counterfeited coins and it includes delivery or the act of giving them away.
Making, importing and uttering false coins does not require that the coins falsified should be a legal tender. It is
committed even if the coin, be it of the Philippine or foreign currency, is withdrawn from circulation in the country of
origin.
The words uttering false or forged obligations or notes- mean offering obligations or notes knowing them to be false
or forged, whether such offer is accepted or not, with a representation, by words or actions, that they are genuine and with
intent to defraud. There must be connivance with the authors of the forgery
For this crime to be committed there must be imitation of genuine money with the use of spurious or clipped coins.
Mutilation - means to take off part of the metal either by filing it or substituting it for another metal of inferior
quality.

Mutilation of coins, acts punished:

1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency (foreign currency not included), with the further requirement that there be
intent to damage or to defraud another.
2. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with the further requirement that there must be connivance with the
mutilator or importer in case of uttering.
 10
One who mutilates coins does not do so for the mere desire of mutilating, but in order to appropriate the metal taken.
Consequently, the intrinsic value of the mutilated coin is diminished.
The coin mutilated must be genuine, a legal currency or current coin of the Philippines (foreign currency not
included), and has not been withdrawn from circulation.

Selling of false or mutilated coin, without connivance, acts punished

1. Possession of coin counterfeited or mutilated by another, with intent to utter the same, knowing that it is false or
mutilated.
2. Actually uttering the said false or mutilated coin, knowing the same to be false or mutilated.

Unlike in mutilation of coins, selling of false or mutilated coin does not require that the false coin be legal tender.

Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit, elements:
1. That any treasury or bank note or certificate or other obligation and security payable to bearer or any instrument
payable to the order or other document of credit not payable to bearer is forged or falsified by another person.
2. That the offender knows that any of those instruments is forged or falsified.
3. That he performs any of these acts: (a) using any of such forged or falsified instruments or (b) possession with intent
to use of any of such forged or falsified instruments.

Possession of false treasury or bank notes alone is not a criminal offense. For it to constitute illegal possession and
use of false treasuryy, the possession must be with intent to use said false treasury or bank notes such as when he handed
to any person a bogus P100-bill in payment of debt but which was not accepted.

Acts constituting forgery:

1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order mentioned therein, the appearance
of a true and genuine document.
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means the figures, letters, words, or signs contained therein.

Forgery includes falsification and counterfeiting.

Falsification- is committed by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means the figures, letters,
words, or signs contained therein as when the accused erased and changed the last digit 9 of serial no. F-79692619 of a
genuine treasury note so as to read.
Document - is defined as any written statement by which a right is established or an obligation extinguished. A
document is a writing or instrument by which a fact may be proven or affirmed.

Classification of documents:

1. Public document - is any document created, executed or issued by a public official in response to exigencies of the
public serviced, or executed with the intervention of a public official, or instrument authorized by a notary public or a
competent public official with the solemnities required by law. Examples: Receipt issued by the Department of
Assessments and collections of the City of Manila for taxes collected; Burial permit issued by the Board of Public Health
of the City of Manila.
2. Official document - is any document issued by a public official in the exercise of the functions of his office. This
is also a public document. Example: A petition for habeas corpus duly subscribed and sworn to before a clerk of court
and filed with the court which forms a part of the court records in said proceedings; All pleadings filed with the courts.
3. Commercial document - is any document defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or any other
commercial laws. Examples: Letter of exchange, letter of credit, drafts, trade acceptance, checks, notes or pagares
issued in the course of a business transaction, quedans, bonds, books of accounts, and in general, any negotiable
instrument;
4. Private document - is any deed or instrument executed by a private person without the intervention of a notary
public or other person legally authorized, by which document some disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set
forth. Example: theater ticket.
A private document may be considered as a public document when it becomes part of an official record and is
certified by a public officer duly authorized by law. Examples: Deed of Sale duly notarized by a notary public; Marriage
contracted accomplished by priest and filed with the Local Civil Registrar.
In falsification of private documents, criminal liability will not arise unless there is damage caused to third person. While in
falsification of public or commercial documents, criminal liability can arise even if there is no damage caused to third person.

Falsification by public officer, employee, or notary or ecclesiastical minister, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer, employee or notary public.
2. That he takes advantage of his official position.
3. That he falsifies a public document.
The offender takes advantage of his official position when (a) he has the duty to make or to prepare or otherwise
intervene in the preparation of the document; or (b) he has the official custody of the document which he falsifies.

Ways or acts of committing falsification:

 11
1. Counterfeiting or imitating (feigning) any handwriting, signature, or rubric.
2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so participate.
Examples: Making it appear that the payee of a money order signed or indorsed the same; Making it appear that a
person was the purchaser at an execution sale when he did not in fact participate.
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than those in fact made by them.
Example: Increasing the grades in certain subjects of a bar flunker and placed the altered grades below the initials of
the correctors, attributing to the correctors such statements other than those in fact made by the latter.
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts. Example: Falsely stating in the certificate of candidacy his date
of birth that he is 21 years old in order to qualify for election when he is only 19.
5. Altering true dates, which dates are essential to the document that without it, the document cannot produce any legal
effect. Example: Writing 6/28/28 to show that the accused was committed to prison on June 28, 1928, when the truth
was the accused was committed to prison on January 2, 1930.
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning. Example: -Erasing or
obliterating in the Traffic Violation Report the originally written figure “III” and the word “three” after the words
“pending cases” and by writing and superimposing thereon number “I” and the word “one” in order to hide his
previously pending traffic violation cases and thereby avoid immediate arrest should he be caught committing a
fourth traffic violation.
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document when no such original
exists, or including in such copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original. This can be
committed only by a public officer or notary public. Example: A notary public made a copy of a deed of sale which
was never executed, or a civil registrar who issued a certified copy of a certificate of live birth that the person named
therein is legitimate when there is no such statement in the original copy file in his office.

Counterfeiting or imitating- is an act of making the signature or handwriting so similar to another that they can only
be distinguished with difficulty.
In feigning, the offender does not imitate a signature, handwriting or rubric. There is no original signature,
handwriting or rubric, it is forgery of a signature, handwriting or rubric that does not exist. Example of feigning is
drawing up an open will purporting to have been executed in March, 1901, by one Petra Mariano and signed by Norberto
Cajucom at her request and by attesting witnesses, when as a matter of fact she died on July 28, 1900.
A document- is a deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by which something is proved, evidenced or set
forth. It is any written statement by which a right is established or an obligation extinguished. It must be complete or it
must be of apparent legal efficacy, that is, it must have the appearance of a true and genuine document.

Falsification by private individuals & use of falsified documents, acts punished:

1. Falsification of public or official or letter of exchange or any other kind of commercial document by a private
individual.
2. Falsification of private document by any person.
3. Use of falsified document.

Falsification of public, official, or commercial document by a private individual, elements:

1. That the offender is a private individual or a public officer or employee, who did not take advantage of his official
position,
2. That he commits any of the acts of falsification in Art. 171, namely: paragraphs 1 to 6.
3. That the falsification was committed in a public or official or commercial document.

In falsification of private documents, criminal liability will not arise unless there is damage caused to third person.
While in falsification of public or commercial documents, criminal liability can arise even if there is no damage caused to
third person.
Falsification of private document by any person, elements:

1. That the offender is any person who commits any acts of falsification mentioned in paragraph 1 to 6 of Art. 171.
2. That the falsification is committed in a private document.
3. That the falsification caused damage to a third person or the falsification was committed with the intent to cause
damage to a third person.
It is not necessary that the offender profited by the falsification. What the law requires is intent to prejudice another
person.
The essential difference between falsification of public or official document and private document is that in the
former, the principal thing punished is the violation of public faith and the perversion of truth which the document
solemnly proclaims, and for this reason it is immaterial whether or not, some prejudice has been caused to third persons;
while in the latter, the prejudice to a third party is primarily taken into account so that if such damage is not apparent, or
if no intentions to cause it, the falsification of private document is not punishable.
If the public officer by means of falsification embezzled public funds for which he is accountable, the crime
committed is malversation through falsification. If said officer by means of falsification embezzled public funds for
which he is not accountable, his crime is estafa through falsification.
There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of private document, because the immediate effect of
falsification of private document is the same as that of estafa and hence, the crime committed should be classified only as
that of falsification of private document.
 12

Use of false document in a judicial proceeding, acts punished:

1. By knowingly introducing in evidence in a judicial proceeding a false document, elements:
a) That the document is falsified by another.
b) That the false document is embraced in Art. 171 or in any of subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 of Art. 172.
c) That the offender has knowledge of its falsity.
d) That the offender introduced said document in evidence in any judicial proceeding.
Examples: Introducing in court a forged will; Damage to another is not necessary.
2. By using a falsified document, not in a judicial proceeding, to the damage of a third person or with intent to cause
such damage, elements:
a) That the document is falsified by another person.
b) That the false document is embraced in Art. 171 or in any of subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 of Art. 172.
c) That the offender has knowledge of its falsity.
d) That the offender used the false document in any other transaction.
e) That the use of the false document caused damage to another or at least it was with intent to cause such
damage.
The person who used the false document in a judicial proceeding or in any other transaction should not be the one
who falsified the document, otherwise, the crime committed is falsification.
In the absence of satisfactory explanation, the user of a falsified document is deemed the author of the falsification, if
(a) the uttering of the falsified document was so closely connected in time with the falsification, and (2) the user had the
capacity of falsifying the document
Usurpation of authority- is committed by knowingly and falsely representing oneself to be an officer, agent, or
representative of any department or agency of the Philippine Government or any foreign government.
In usurpation of authority there must be a positive, express and explicit representation on the part of the offender.
The performance of an act pertaining to a public officer is not necessary. Example: A person who represented himself to
the owner of the house as fire inspector and as such he had the authority to demand payment of inspection fee when in fact
he was not a member of any fire department.
Usurpation of official functions- is committed by performing any act pertaining to any person in authority or public
officer of the Philippine Government or of a foreign government or any agency thereof, under pretense of official
position, and without being lawfully entitled to do so.
In usurpation of official function it is necessary that the offender should have performed an act pertaining to a person
in authority or public officer under pretense of official position, and without being lawfully entitled to do so. Example: A
person who, without representing himself as police officer, blew his whistle, stopped the buses and ordered the drivers to
step down their vehicles and produce their driver’s license.

Usurpation of authority and official functions may be violated by a public officer.

Using fictitious name, elements:

1. That the offender uses a name other than his real name.
2. That he uses that fictitious name publicly.
3. That the purpose of the offender is: (a) to conceal a crime; (b) to evade the execution of a judgment; or (c) to cause
damage to public interest.

Fictitious name – is any other name which a person publicly applies to himself without authority of law. Example:
Signing a fictitious name instead of his real name in an application for passport is publicly using a fictitious name.

If there is damage to a private interest, the crime would be estafa under art. 315, subdivision 2, par. (a).

Concealing true name, elements:

1. That the offender conceals his true name and all other personal circumstance.
2. That his purpose is only to conceal his identity.

Distinction between use of fictitious name and concealing true name:

1. In use of fictitious name, the element of publicity must be present; in concealing true name and other personal
circumstances, that element is not necessary;
2. The purpose in use of fictitious name is any of those three enumerated (to conceal a crime, to evade execution of
judgment, or to cause damage to public interest); in concealing true name. it is merely to conceal identity.

Illegal use of uniform or insignia, elements:

1. That the offender makes use of insignia, uniform or dress.
2. That the insignia, uniform or dress pertains to an office not held by the offender or to a class of persons of which he is
not a member.
3. That said insignia, uniform or dress is used publicly and improperly.
Examples: A layman who wears publicly the ecclesiastical habit of a catholic priest is liable for illegal use of uniform
or insignia is punishable under Art. 179; Unauthorized wearing of any naval, military, police, or other official uniform,
decoration or regalia of a foreign State, or one nearly resembling the same, with intent to deceive or mislead, is punishable
 13
under RA 75; Using or wearing insignia, badge or emblem of rank of the members of the AFP, or any colorable imitation
thereof, is punishable under RA 493.
An exact imitation of a uniform or dress is not necessary. A colorable resemblance calculated to deceive those who
are not thoroughly familiar with every detail or accessory thereof is sufficient.
Using or wearing of such insignia, etc. in playhouse or theater or in moving picture films is not punishable.
Using the uniform or insignia of an imaginary office (which does not originally exist) is not within the coverage of
this article.
False testimony – is committed by a person who, being under oath and required to testify as to the truth of a certain
matter at a hearing before a competent authority, shall deny the truth or say something contrary to it.

Three forms of false testimony:

1. False testimony in criminal cases;
2. False testimony in civil cases;
3. False testimony in other cases and perjury.

False testimony against a defendant, elements:

1. That there be a criminal proceeding.
2. That the offender testifies falsely under oath against the defendant in said proceeding.
3. That the offender who gives false testimony knows that it is false.
4. That the defendant against whom the false testimony is given is either acquitted or convicted in a final judgment.

The witness who gave false testimony is liable even if his testimony was not considered by the court, the reason being
that the law punishes the false testimony even if the defendant in the principal case is acquitted, the law intends to punish
the mere giving of false testimony.
False testimony favorable to the defendant (criminal cases)- is punished not because of the effect it actually
produces, but because of its tendency to favor or to prejudice the defendant. It need not directly influence the decision of
acquittal nor benefit the defendant. It is sufficient that the false testimony was given with intent to favor the defendant

The defendant who falsely testified in his own behalf in a criminal case is guilty of false testimony favorable to the
defendant.

False testimony in civil cases, elements:

1. That the testimony must be given in a civil case.
2. That the testimony must relate to the issues presented in said case.
3. That the testimony must be false.
4. That the false testimony must be given by the defendant knowing the same to be false.
5. That the testimony must be malicious and given with an intent to affect the issues presented in said case.

This article applies only to ordinary civil cases and does not apply to special proceedings.

Two ways of committing perjury:

1. By falsely testifying under oath (not in a judicial proceeding).
2. By making a false affidavit.

Perjury, elements:
1. That the offender made a statement under oath or executed an affidavit upon a material matter.
2. That the statement or affidavit was made before a competent officer, authorized to receive and administer oath.
3. That in said statement or affidavit, the offender made a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood.
4. That the sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required by law.

Oath – any form of attestation by which a person signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform an act faithfully
and truthfully. It involves the idea of calling to God to witness what is averred as truth, and it is supposed to be
accompanied with an invocation of His vengeance, or a renunciation of His favor, in he event of falsehood.
Affidavit – is a sworn statement in writing; especially, a declaration in writing, made upon oath before an authorized
magistrate or officer.
Material matter – it is the main fact which is the subject of the inquiry or any circumstance which tends to prove that
fact, or any fact or circumstance which tends to corroborate or strengthen the testimony relative to the subject of inquiry,
or which legitimately affects the credit of any witness who testifies.
Examples: Falsely making statement in a preliminary investigation that somebody owed some amount when in truth
and in fact the latter never borrowed such amount. The allegation that somebody owed some amount is a material matter
because that would determine whether or not estafa case would prosper; Falsely filling up in the application form for civil
service examination that one had never been accused of any crime when in truth and in fact he had been charged with
several crimes.

Crimes classified as frauds:

1. Machinations in public auctions;
2. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade;
 14
3. Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or merchandise made of gold, silver or other precious
metals;
4. Substituting and altering trademarks and tradenames or service marks;
5. Unfair competition, fraudulent registration of tradename, trademark, or service mark; fraudulent designation of
origin and false description.

Acts punished by Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (RA 9165):

1. Importation of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals;
2. Sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution, transportation of dangerous drugs, and/or controlled
precursors and essential chemicals;
3. Maintenance of a den, dive or resort where dangerous drugs is used or sold in any form;
4. Being employees and visitors of prohibited drug den, dive or resort;
5. Manufacture of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals.
6. Illegal chemical diversion of controlled precursors and essential chemicals;
7. Manufacture or delivery of equipment, instrument, apparatus, and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs and/or
controlled precursors and essential chemicals;
8. Possession of dangerous drugs;
9. Possession of equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs;
10. Possession of dangerous drugs during parties, social gatherings or meetings;
11. Possession of equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs during parties, social
gatherings or meetings;
12. Use of dangerous drugs;
13. Cultivation or culture of….
14. Maintenance and keeping of original records of transactions on dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and
essential chemicals;
15. Unnecessary prescription of dangerous drugs;
16. Unlawful prescription of dangerous drugs;
17. Attempt or conspiracy……..;
18. Misappropriation or failure to account for the confiscated, seized and/or surrendered dangerous drugs, plant sources of
dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, instruments/paraphernalia/equipments by public
officer or employee;
19. Planting of evidence

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS:

1. Gambling and betting (see PD 1602, as amended);

2. Importation, sale and possession of lottery tickets or advertisements;
3. Betting in sport contests;
4. Illegal betting on horse races;
5. Illegal cockfighting;
6. Grave scandal (Art. 200);
7. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions (Art. 201);
8. Vagrancy and prostitution (Art. 202).

Gambling – is a game or scheme the result of which depends wholly or chiefly upon chance or hazard. Hence, those
games, the result of which depends wholly or chiefly upon skills, are not gambling.
Gambling is punished because it has the effect of causing poverty, dishonesty, fraud and deceit. Many a man has
neglected his business and mortgaged his integrity to follow the fickle Goddess of the cards. Many a woman has wasted
her hours and squandered her substance at the gambling board while some children were forgotten.
Lottery – is a scheme for the distribution of prizes by chance among persons who have paid, or agreed to pay, a
valuable consideration for the chance to obtain a prize.

Acts punished in gambling:

1. Taking part directly or indirectly in –
a) Any game of monte, jueting, or any other form of lottery, policy, banking, or percentage game, dog races, or any
other game or scheme the result of which depends wholly or chiefly upon chance or hazard; or wherein wagers
consisting of money, articles of value, or representative of value are made; or
b) The exploitation or use of any other mechanical invention or contrivance to determine by chance the loser or
winner of money or any object or representative of value.
2. Knowingly permitting any form of gambling to be carried on in any place owned or controlled by the offender;
3. Being maintainer, conductor, or banker in a game of jueteng or similar game;
4. Knowingly and without lawful purpose possessing lottery list, paper, or other matter containing letters, figures, signs
or symbol which pertain to or are in any manner used in the game of jueting or any similar game.

Grave scandal, elements:

1. That the offender performs an act or acts.
2. That such act or acts be highly scandalous as offending against decency or good customs.
 15
3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not expressly falling within any other article of this Code.
4. That the act or acts complained of be committed in a public place or within the public knowledge or view.

Grave scandal- is defined as consists of acts which are offensive to decency and good customs which, having been
committed publicly, have given rise to public scandal to persons who have accidentally witnessed the same.
Examples: A man and a woman enter a movie house which is a public place and then goes to the darkest part of the
balcony and while there the man started kissing and touching private parts of the woman; A man and a woman went to
Luneta and slept there. They covered themselves their blanket and made the grass their conjugal bed.
When the act complained of was committed at night, in a private house, and at a time when no one was present except
the accused, the mistress of the house, and one servant, these circumstances do not constitute that degree of publicity
which is an essential element of the crime.

Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions, and indecent shows-The word “obscene” and the terms
“obscenity” may be defined as something offensive to chastity, decency, or delicacy. Indecency is an act against good
behavior and a just delicacy.
The test of obscenity is whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscene, is to deprave or corrupt those whose
minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication or other article charged as being obscene
may fall.

Basic guidelines in determining whether or not the article is obscene:

1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary standards would find the work, taken as whole, appeals to the
prurient interest.
2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the
applicable state law;
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literacy, artistic, political, or scientific value.

If pictures, sculptures and paintings are shown in art exhibits and art galleries for the cause of art, to be viewed and
appreciated by people interested in art, there would be no offense committed.
But if the pictures in question were used not exactly for art’s sake but rather for commercial purposes so that the cause
of art was of secondary or minor importance, the crime is committed.
A sexy dancing performed for a 90-year old is not obscene anymore even if the dancer is strip naked but if performed
for a 15 year old kid, then it will corrupt the kid’s mind.

The following are vagrants and prostitutes:

1. Any person having no apparent means of subsistence, who has the physical ability to work and who neglects to apply
himself or herself to some lawful calling;
2. Any person found loitering about public or semipublic or places, or tramping or wandering about the country or the
streets without visible means of support;
3. Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill-fame; ruffians (persons who are brutal, violent, lawless).or
pimps (persons who provide gratification for the lust of others).and those who habitually associate with prostitutes;
4. Any person who, not being included in the provisions of other articles of this Code, shall be found loitering in any
inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to another without any lawful or justifiable purpose;
5. Prostitutes. It is defined in this article as a woman who habitually indulges in sexual intercourse, or lascivious conduct
for money or profit.

Absence of visible- means of support is an essential element of the offense of vagrancy only under the first and second
paragraph of this article.
Example: A person, able-bodied man of 33 years of age, who habitually neglected to apply himself to any lawful
calling, spent his time in loitering about the streets and frequenting cockpits and places were games of various kinds of
gambling was indulged, and no apparent means of existence other than the charity of his mother whose means are so
limited that she would appear to need assistance rather than to be in position to render it, is vagrant.

CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS:

1. Knowingly rendering unjust judgment (Art. 204);
2. Rendering judgment through negligence (Art. 205);
3. Rendering unjust interlocutory order (Art. 206);
4. Malicious delay in the administration of justice (Art. 207);
5. Dereliction of duty in prosecution of offenses (Art. 208);
6. Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor-revelation of secrets (Art. 209);
7. Direct bribery (Art. 210);
8. Indirect bribery (Art. 211);
9. Qualified bribery (Art. 211-A);
10. Corruption of public officials (Art. 212);
11. Frauds against the public treasury and similar offenses (Art. 213);
12. Other frauds (Art. 214);
13. Prohibited transactions (Art. 215);
 16
14. Possession of prohibited interest (Art. 216):
15. Malversation by appropriating, misappropriating or permitting any other person to public funds or property (Art. 217);
16. Failure of accountable officer to render accounts (Art. 218);
17. Failure of a responsible public officer to render accounts before leaving the country (Art. 219);
18. Illegal use of public funds or property (technical malversation) (Art. 220);
19. Failure to make delivery of public funds or property (Art. 221);
20. Infidelity in the custody of prisoners thru connivance (Art. 223);
21. Infidelity in the custody of prisoners thru negligence (Art. 224);
22. Infidelity in the custody of documents (Art. 226);
23. Revelation of secrets (Art. 229);
24. Open disobedience (Art. 231);
25. Disobedience to order of superior officer when said order was suspended by inferior officer (Art. 232);
26. Refusal of assistance (Art. 233);
27. Refusal of discharge elective office (Art. 234);
28. Maltreatment of prisoners (Art. 235);
29. Anticipation of duties of a public officer (Art. 236);
30. Prolonging performance of duties and powers (Art. 237);
31. Abandonment of office or position (Art. 238);
32. Usurpation of legislative powers (Art. 239);
33. Usurpation of executive functions (Art. 240);
34. Usurpation of judicial functions (Art. 241);
35. Disobeying request for disqualification (242);
36. Orders or requests by executive officers to any judicial authority (Art. 243);
37. Unlawful appointments (Art. 244);
38. Abuses against chastity (Art. 245).

Public officers- include all persons who, by direct provision of law, popular election or appointment by competent
authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the Philippine Government, or shall perform in said
government or any of its branches, public duties as an employee, agent, or subordinate official, of any rank or class. ( See:
RA 6713 known as Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees).

Malicious delay in the administration of justice, elements:

1. That the offender is a judge.
2. That there is a proceeding in his court.
3. That he delays the administration of justice; and
4. That the delay is malicious, that is, the delay is caused by the judge with deliberate intent to inflict damage on either
party in the case.

This is designed to prevent delay in the administration of justice, for obviously justice delayed is justice denied, and
delay in the disposition of cases erodes the faith and confidence of our people in the judiciary, lowers its standards and
brings it into disrepute.
To bring the judge within the operation of this law, the delay in the administration of justice must be malicious, that
is, the delay is caused by the judge with deliberate intent to inflict damage on either party in the case.

Refraining from prosecuting offenses or tolerance in the commission thereof, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer or officer of the law who has a duty to cause the prosecution of, or to prosecute,
the offense;
2. That there is dereliction of the duties of his office, that is, knowing the commission of the crime, he does not cause the
prosecution of the criminal or knowing that a crime is about to be committed he tolerates its commission;
3. That the offender acts with malice and deliberate intent to favor the violator of the law.

Acts punished as failure to prosecute or tolerance in the commission of offense:

1. By maliciously refraining from instituting prosecution against violators of the law. Example: City or Provincial
Fiscal who, knowing that the evidence against the accused is more than sufficient to secure his conviction in court,
drops the case.
2. By maliciously tolerating the commission of offenses. Example: A chief of police who instructed his men not to raid
the house of his friend where gambling games were being played.
The offender must act with malice and deliberate evil intent, not caused by poor judgment or honest mistake.

Acts constituting and punished as obstruction of justice (See PD 1829):

1. Preventing witnesses from testifying in any criminal proceeding or from reporting the commission of any offense or
the identity of any offender/s by means of bribery, misrepresentation, deceit, intimidation, force or threats;
2. Altering, destroying, suppressing or concealing any paper, record, document, or object with intent to impair its verity,
authenticity, legibility, availability, or admissibility as evidence in any investigation of or official proceedings in
 17
criminal cases, or to be used in the investigation of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases;

3. Harboring or concealing, or facilitating the escape of, any person he knows, or has reasonable ground to believe or
suspect, has committed any offense under existing penal laws in order to prevent his arrest, prosecution and
conviction;
4. Publicly using a fictitious name for the purpose of concealing a crime, evading prosecution or the execution of a
judgment, or concealing his true name and other personal circumstances for the same purpose or purposes;
5. Delaying the prosecution of criminal cases by obstructing the service of process or court orders or disturbing
proceedings in the fiscal’s offices, in Tanodbayan, or in the courts;
6. Making, presenting or using any record, document, paper or object with knowledge of its falsity and with intent to
affect the course or outcome of the investigation of, or official proceedings in criminal cases;
7. Soliciting, accepting, or agreeing to accept any benefit in consideration of abstaining from, discontinuing, or
impending the prosecution of a criminal offender;
8. Threatening directly or indirectly another with the infliction of any wrong upon his person, honor or property or that of
any immediate member of his family in order to prevent a person from appearing in the investigation or, or official
proceedings in, criminal cases, or imposing a condition, whether lawful or unlawful, in order to prevent a person from
appearing in the investigation of, or in official proceedings in criminal cases;
9. Giving of false or fabricated information to mislead or prevent the law enforcement agencies from apprehending the
offender or from protecting the life or property of the victim; or fabricating information from the data gathered in
confidence by investigating authorities for purposes of background information and not for publication and publishing
or disseminating the same to mislead the investigator or the court.

Direct bribery, elements:

1. That the accused is a public officer within the scope of Art. 203, RPC (Who are public officers).
2. That the accused received by himself or thru another, gift or present, offer or promise.
3. That such gift, present or promise has been given in consideration of his commission of some crime or any act not
constituting a crime; and
4. That the crime or act relates to the exercise of the functions of the public officer

Acts punished as direct bribery:

1. By agreeing to perform, or by performing, in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present, an act constituting a
crime, in connection with the performance of his official duties. Examples: A stenographer, who had accepted a
promise of P5,000.00 from an individual, altered the notes in accordance with the agreement. The act of stenographer
constitutes falsification of public documents; A warden who released the prisoner in consideration of P1,000,000.00.
Releasing prisoner by the warden constitutes infidelity in the custody of prisoners.
2. By accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of an act which does not constitute a crime, in connection with the
performance of his official duty. Example: A treasurer of the municipality who, in consideration of money or
present, awarded certain stalls in the public market to a Chinaman, in spite of the fact that there are Filipinos who
have better rights. The act of the treasurer is not a crime but it is unjust.
3. By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing something which it is his official duty to do, in consideration of
gift or promise. Examples: A sanitary inspector who accepts a gift from the tenant of an unsanitary building and in
consideration thereof refrains from performing his duty to report its condition to his superior; A public officer who
instead of reporting on the derogatory information he has gathered against a suspect whom he had been spying on for
communistic leanings, agrees to refrain from doing his official duty in consideration of a sum of money.

Indirect bribery, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That he accepts gifts.
3. That the said gifts are offered to him by reason of his office.

The consideration received may not be given to prevent public officer from doing an act or to induce him to do
something pertaining to his office. It may suffice if the consideration was offered to him by reason of his office.
Example: A money given to a public officer after the latter had performed a lawful duty in the service of the giver
constitutes indirect bribery.
There is no attempted or frustrated indirect bribery, because it is committed by accepting gifts offered to the public officer
by reason of his office. If he does not accept the gifts, he does not commit the crime. If he accepts the gifts, it is
committed.

Distinctions between direct bribery and indirect bribery:

1. In both crimes, the public officers receives gift.
2. While in direct bribery there is an agreement between the public officer and the giver of the gift or present, in indirect
bribery usually no such agreement exists.
3. In direct briber, the offender agrees to perform or performs an act or refraining from doing something, because of the
gift or promise; in indirect bribery, it is not necessary that the officer should do any particular act or even promise to
do an act, as it is enough that he accepts gifts offered to him by reason of his office.

See: PD 46, known as Act Punishing the Receiving and Giving of Gifts of Public Official and Employees.
 18

Qualified bribery is committed when the offender who is a public officer and entrusted with law enforcement refrains
from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present; or he asks or demands such gift or present.

Corruption of public officials, elements:

1. That the offender makes or promise or gives gifts or presents to a public officer.
2. That the offers or promises are made or the gifts or presents given to a public officer, under circumstances that will
make the public officer liable for direct bribery or indirect bribery.

The offender is any person who made the offer or promise or gave the gift, even if the offer or promise or gift was
demanded by the public officer and the offer was not made voluntarily prior to the said demand by the latter.
Giving bribe money to a public officer for the purpose of entrapping him does not constitute corruption of public
officials.
See: RA 3019 otherwise as known as Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
See: PD 749, known as Immunity from Prosecution of Bribe-giver. Before the bribe giver may be dropped from the
information, he has to be charged first with the receiver. Before trial, prosecutor may move for dropping bribe giver from
information and be granted immunity.

5 conditions before a bribe giver may be exempt from prosecution:

1. Information must refer to consummated bribery.

2. Information is necessary for the proper conviction of the public officer involved.
3. That the information or testimony to be given is not yet in the possession of the government or known to the
government.
4. That the information can be corroborated in its material points.
5. That the informant has not been convicted previously for any crime involving moral turpitude.

The immunity granted to the bribe giver is limited only to the illegal transaction where the informant gave voluntarily
the testimony. If there were other transaction where the informant also participated, he is not immune from prosecution.
The immunity in one transaction does not extend to other transaction.

See: RA 7080, known as PLUNDER

Plunder - is a crime defined and penalized under RA 7080 which became effective in 1991. This crime somehow
modified certain crimes in the RPC insofar as the overt acts by which a public officer amasses, acquires, or accumulates
ill-gotten wealth like bribery (210, 211, 211-A), fraud against the public treasury (213), other frauds (214), malversation
(217), when the ill-gotten wealth amounts to a total value of P50 million. The amount was reduced from P75 million by
7659, and the penalty was changed from life imprisonment to Reclusion Perpetua to Death.
Short the amount, plunder does not arise. Any amount less than P50 million is a violation of the RPC or the AGPA.
Under the law on plunder, the prescriptive period is 20 years commencing from the time of the last overt act.

Plunder is committed through a combination or series of overt acts to wit:

1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury.
2. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary
benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project by reason of the office or
position of the public officer.
3. By illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of asset belonging to the national government or any of its
subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or GOCCs and their subsidiaries.
4. By obtaining, receiving, or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or
participation including the promise of future employment in any business or undertaking.
5. By establishing agricultural, industrial, or commercial monopolies or other combinations and/or implementations of
decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests.
6. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich
himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people, and the Republic of the
Philippines.
While the crime appears to be malum prohibitum, RA 7080 provides that “in the imposition of penalties, the
degree of participation and the attendance of mitigating and aggravating circumstances shall be considered by the court”.

Malversation of public funds or property, acts punished:

1. By appropriating public funds or property.
2. By taking or misappropriating the same.
3. By consenting or through abandonment or negligence, by permitting any other person to take such public funds or
property.
4. By being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such funds or property.

Elements common to all acts of malversation:

1. That the offender is a public officer.
 19
2. That he had custody or control of the funds or property by reason of the duties of his office.
3. That these funds or property were public funds or property for which he was accountable; and
4. That he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented, or through abandonment or negligence permitted another
person to take them.
An accountable officer- is one who has custody or control of public funds or property by reason of the duties of his
office. Funds must be received in official capacity. Example: The abstraction of funds from a safe by a clerk without
the consent of the person charged with their custody, with the intent to convert them to his own use, is held to be theft and
not estafa (embezzlement) or one of its kindred offenses, in a case wherein it appeared that while the clerk was intrusted
with the combination and the key of the safe he had no control over its contents and was not authorized to open the safe or
withdraw the contents or any part thereof except by the express direction of the person charged with the custody of the
contents and responsible therefor.

Malversation may be committed by private individuals in the following cases:

1. Those in conspiracy with public officers guilty of malversation.
2. Those who are accessory or accomplice to a public officer.
3. Custodian of public funds or property in whatever capacity.
4. Depository or administrator of public funds or property.

The return of the funds malversed is only mitigating, not exempting, circumstance. But if at the very moment when
the shortage is discovered, the accountable officer is notified thereof and he at once present the money, no prima facie
evidence of the crime of malversation can be established
Previous demand is not necessary in malversation in spite of the last paragraph of Article 217 for it only provides for
a rule of procedural law.
Demand merely raises a prima facie presumption that missing funds have been put to personal use. But the demand
itself is not an element of, and not indspensalbe to constitute, malversation.

Illegal use of public funds or property (Techinical Malversation), elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That there is a public fund or property under his administration.
3. That such public fund or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance; and
4. That he applies the same to a public use other than that for which such fund or property has been appropriated by law or
ordinance.

This offense is sometimes called “technical malversation” because the fund or property is already earmarked or
appropriated for a certain public purpose. Example: Applying the salaries of school teachers and other municipal
employees to construct barangay road.

Distinction between malversation and illegal use of public fund or property (technical malversation):
1. In both crimes, the offenders are accountable public officers.
2. In malversation, the offenders in certain cases profit from the proceeds of the crime, while in illegal use of public funds
or property, the offenders do not derive personal gain or profit.

Infidelity in the custody of prisoner thru connivance, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That he had in his custody or charge a prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment.
3. That such prisoner escaped from his custody; and
4. That he was in connivance with the prisoner in the latter’s escape.

Tolerance by the custodian of prisoner in permitting the latter to go out of the jail, thus affording him to get away, is
deemed connivance.

Infidelity in the custody prisoner thru negligence, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That he is charged with the conveyance or custody of a prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final
judgment.
3. That such prisoner escapes through his negligence.

The word “negligence” used in this article is definite laxity amounting to deliberate non-performance of duty.

Escape of prisoner under the custody of a person not a public officer, elements:
1. That the offender is a private person.
2. That the conveyance or custody of a prisoner or person under arrest is confided to him;
3. That the prisoner or person under arrest escapes.
4. That the offender consents to the escape of the prisoner or person under arrest, or that the escape takes place through
his negligence.
 20
This article is not applicable if a private person was the one who made the arrest and he consented to the escape of the
person he arrested.

Infidelity in the custody of documents, elements:

1. That the offender be a public officer.
2. That he removes, destroys or conceals documents.
3. That the documents which he removes, destroys or conceals be entrusted to him by reason of his office.
4. That injury to a third party or to the public follow from the abstraction, destruction or concealment.
Example: Simple act of retaining the mail without forwarding the letters to their destination, even though without
opening them, already constitutes the crime of infidelity on the part of the post-office official, because he, seriously
neglected his duties, stole and concealed several letters and separated them from the ordinary and legal course which they
should follow in order to reach destination without delay.

Maltreatment of prisoners, elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he maltreats the prisoner or detention prisoner under his charge in either of the following manners- (a) by
imposing punishments not authorized by the regulations, or by inflicting such punishments in a cruel and humiliating
manner; or (b) by maltreating such prisoner to extort a confession or to obtain some information from the said
prisoner.

It is necessary that the maltreated prisoner or detention prisoner be under the control of the officer maltreating him.
Thus, the mayor who maltreated the prisoner is not liable for maltreatment of prisoner, the prisoner being maltreated was
not under his custody but of the police.
The maltreatment must relate to the correction or handling of the prisoner, or for the purpose of extorting a confession
or of obtaining some information from the prisoner. Thus, if the maltreatment was due to personal grudge against the
prisoner, the crime is not committed. There is no complex crime of maltreatment with physical injuries.

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS:

1. Parricide (Art. 246)
2. Death or physical injuries under exceptional circumstances (Art. 247)
3. Murder (Art. 248)
4. Homicide (Art. 249)
5. Death caused in a tumultuous affray (Art. 251)
6. Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray (Art. 252)
7. Giving assistance to suicide (Art. 253)
8. Discharge of firearms (Art. 254)
9. Infanticide (Art. 255)
10. Intentional abortion (Art. 256)
11. Unintentional abortion (Art. 257)
12. Abortion practiced by the woman herself or by her parents (258)
13. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife& dispensing of abortives (Art. 259)
14. Duel (Art. 260)
15. Challenging to a duel (Art. 261)
16. Mutilation (Art. 262)
17. Serious physical injuries (Art. 263)
18. Administering injurious substances or beverages (Art. 264)
19. Less serious physical injuries (Art. 265)
20. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment (Art. 266)

Parricide, elements:
1. That a person is killed.
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused.
3. That the deceased is the father, mother, or child (not less than 3 days old), whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a
legitimate other ascendant or legitimate other descendant, or the legitimate spouse, of the accused.

Only relatives by blood and in direct line, except spouse, are considered in parricide. If the child killed is less than
three (3) days old the crime committed is infanticide.
The other ascendant (grandfather or grandmother) or descendant (grandson or granddaughter), or spouse must be
legitimate.

Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances, elements:

1. That a legally married person (or a parent) surprises his spouse (or his daughter, under 18 years of age, single, and
living with him), in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person.
2. That he or she kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any or both of them any serious physical injury in the act or
immediately thereafter.
3. That he has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his wife (or daughter), or that he or she has not consented to
the infidelity of the other spouse.
 21

Preparatory acts are not included in the phrase “sexual intercourse”.

The phrase “immediately thereafter” connotes the discovery of the sexual act, the escape, the pursuit and the killing.
There must be interruption between the discovery and the act of killing.

Murder, elements:
1. That a person is killed.
2. That the accused killed him.
3. That the killing was attended by any of the following circumstances:

`a) With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing means to
weaken the defense, or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity.
b) In consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
c) By means of trickle, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon street
car or locomotive, fall of an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other means involving great waste
and ruin.
d) On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of
volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic, or any other public calamity.
e) With evident premeditation.
f) With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging or scoffing at
his person or corpse.

There is treachery (alevosia) when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means,
methods, or forms to insure its execution without risk to him arising from the defense which the offended party might make.

Requisites of treachery:
1. The employment of the means of execution that gives the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate;
and
2. The deliberate and conscious adoption of the means of execution.

The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by an aggressor on an unsuspecting victim, depriving
the latter of any real chance to defend himself, thereby, ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor, without the
slightest provocation on the part of the victim.
Treachery must be present at the commencement of the attack and not at the latter stage of the attack.
To take advantage of superior strength is to use excessive force out of proportion to the means available to the
person attacked to defend himself, and in order to be appreciated it must be clearly shown that there was deliberate intent
on the part of the malefactors to take advantage thereof. Example: An attack made by a man with a deadly weapon upon
an unarmed and defenseless woman, constitutes the circumstance of abuse of superior strength.

With the aid of armed men, to be appreciated, the armed men must directly or indirectly take part in the commission
of the offense and that the accused avails himself of their aid or rely upon them when he commits the crime.

Taking advantage of superior strength and with the aid or armed men may be absorbed in treachery.
Employing means to weaken the defense is attendant when for instance a person who suddenly casts sand or dirt
upon the eyes of his opponent and thereafter kills him.
The circumstance of price, reward or promise may be appreciated when a person who received the price or reward or
accepted a promise, price or reward would not have killed the deceased were it not for that price, reward or promise
Treachery and premeditation are inherent in murder by means of poison, hence, they cannot be considered as
aggravating.
Throwing a hand grenade inside the house of the victim which exploded, killing the occupant therein, constitutes
murder by means of explosion.
There is evident premeditation when it affirmatively shows from the overt act of the defendant that he has definitely
resolved to commit the offense; that he has from then coolly and dispassionately reflected both on the means of carrying
his resolution into execution and on the consequences of his criminal design; and that such an appreciable length of time
has elapsed as to expect an aroused conscience to otherwise relent and desist from the accomplishment of the proposed
crime.

Requisites of evident premeditation:

1. The time when the accused determined to commit the crime.
2. An act manifestly indicating that the accused has clung to his determination; and
3. Sufficient lapse of time between such determination and execution to allow him to reflect upon the circumstances of his act.

There is cruelty when the offender deliberately inflicts other would or wounds which are not necessary for the killing
of the victim, and this were done while the deceased was still alive. The culprit enjoys and delights in making his victim
suffer slowly and gradually, causing moral and physical pain which is unnecessary for the consummation of the criminal
act.
 22

Rules on murder and kidnapping:

1. Where the main purpose of the offender in bringing the victim to another place and then and there killed the latter, the
crime committed is murder, kidnapping is absorbed.
2. Where the deceased was kidnapped for ransom and brought to another place where he was later killed, the crime was
held to be kidnapping only. The kidnapping absorbed the murder.
3. Where the victim was kidnapped and never seen again, the crime committed is kidnapping only even in all likelihood
the victim was killed.

Homicide, elements:
1. That a person was killed.
2. That the accused killed him without any justifying circumstance.
3. That the accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed.
4. That the killing was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances or murder, or by that of parricide or
infanticide.

Even if there is no intent to kill, the crime committed is still homicide because our penal law looks on the material
results following the unlawful act and holds the aggressor responsible for all the consequences thereof. Intent to kill is
necessary only in frustrated or attempted homicide.

The killing is considered homicide only in the following cases:

1. Where the killing was committed on the spur of the moment.
2. Where an altercation preceded the killing.
3. Where the proof does not show the antecedents of the killing and the exact manner it was committed.
4. Where both the defendants, acting independently of each other, shot the victim and the wounds inflicted by them were
mortal, both are liable and each one of them is guilty of homicide.

Discharge of firearms, elements:

1. That the offender discharges a firearm against or at another person.
2. That the offender has no intention to kill that person.

There must be no intent to kill and the purpose is only to intimidate or frighten the offender party. Thus, firing a gun
at a distance of 200 yards between the offender and the victim indicates no intent to kill.
If there is intent to kill in the discharge of firearm, the crime would be attempted or frustrated parricide, murder, or
homicide.
If there is no intent to kill and injuries were inflicted by means of the discharge of firearm, the crime would be
complex one of serious or less serious physical injuries with discharge of firearm.

Infanticide- is the act of killing a child less than 3 days of age, whether the killer is the parent or grandparent, any
other relative of the child, or a stranger, is infanticide.
Abortion- is the willful killing of the fetus in the uterus, or the violent expulsion of the fetus from the maternal womb
which results in the death of the fetus.

3 ways of committing intentional abortion:

1. By using any violence upon the person of a pregnant woman.
2. By acting, without violence, without the consent of the pregnant woman, that is, by administering drugs or beverages
upon her without her consent.
3. By acting, with the consent of the pregnant woman, that is, by administering drugs or beverages upon her with her
consent.

Intentional abortion, elements:

1. That there is a pregnant woman.
2. That violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages administered, or that the accused otherwise acts upon such pregnant
woman.
3. That as a result of the use of violence or drugs or beverages upon her, or any other act of the accused, the fetus dies,
either in the womb or after having been expelled therefrom.
4. That the abortion is intended.

If the fetus expelled from the womb could sustain an independent life and is killed, the crime is infanticide, otherwise,
it is abortion.
Unintentional abortion- is committed when violence is intentionally exerted upon a pregnant woman without
intending an abortion, and as a result of which the fetus dies, either in the womb or after having been expelled there from.
The accused is liable for unintentional abortion even if he did not know that the woman is pregnant.
The crime committed is complex crime of homicide with unintentional abortion or parricide with abortion if the
primary intent is to kill the victim with violence but which occasioned the death of the foetus.

Mutilation, kinds:
 23
1. Castration- mutilating another by depriving him, either totally or partially, of some essential organs for reproduction.
2. Mayhem- intentionally making other mutilation, that is, by lopping or clipping off any part of the body other than the
essential organ for reproduction, to deprive the offended party of that part of his body.

Mutilation, elements:
1. That there be a castration, that is, mutilation of organs necessary for generation, such as penis or ovarium.
2. That the mutilation is caused purposely and deliberately, that is, to deprive the offended party of some essential organ
for reproduction.

Serious physical injuries, forms:

1. When the injured person becomes insane, imbecile, impotent, or blind, in consequence of the physical injuries
inflicted.
2. When the person injured (a) loses the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or loses an eye, a hand, a foot, an
arm, or a leg, or (b) loses the use of any such member, or (c) becomes incapacitated for work in which he was
theretofore habitually engaged.
3. When the person injured (a) becomes deformed, or (b) loses any other member of his body, or (c) loses the use thereof,
or (d) becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in which he was habitually engaged for more than
90 days.
4. When the person injured becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days but not more than 90 days. The
incapacity is for any kind of labor. Examples: Where in consequence of the injuries the offended party was ill for
more than 30 days but less than 90 days and it did not require medical attendance, said injuries fall under par. 4;
Where the offended party recovered from the injuries in 40 days and was incapacitated for labor for 28 days, the
defendant is convicted under par. 4.

Insanity- refers to mental illness or disturbance caused by the injury which may be a nervous breakdown caused by
emotional stress or fright due to the wounding, beating or assaulting.

The term impotent means the inability to copulate.

Blindness must be of two eyes.

The loss of hand or incapacity for usual work must be permanent. Examples: Where the victim became deaf because
the defendant cut his both ears; Where the victim lost an arm and suffered paralysis of his hip; Where the victim was
injured in the arm and lost the use thereof.
Deformity - is any permanent disfigurement of the appearance of a person and produces ugliness. Deformity must be
conspicuous, noticeable or visible on the outside and it cannot be repaired by the action of nature and the accused is not
relieved of his responsibility because the offended party might, if he had the means, lessen the disfigurement by some
artificial contrivance.
Less serious physical injuries is committed when the offended party is incapacitated for labor for 10 days or more but
not more than 30 days, or needs medical attendance for the same period, and the physical injuries must not be those
described in the preceding articles. There must be proof as to the period of medical attendance given to the offended
party.

Slight physical injuries, kinds:

1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the victim for labor from 1 to 9 days, or requires medical attendance for the same
period.
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the victim from engaging in his habitual work or which did not require medical
attendance.
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing any injury. Example: Slapping the face of the offended party by the
offender, without causing dishonor.

Rape, forms:
1. Rape is committed BY ANY MAN who has carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances
a) Through force, threat or intimidation.
b) When the offended party (woman) is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority.
d) When the offended party is under 12 years of age OR is demented even though none of the circumstances
mentioned above be present.
2. Rape is committed BY ANY PERSON (meaning either Man or Woman) who, under any of the circumstances mentioned
in paragraph 1, shall commit an act of SEXUAL ASSAULT by inserting his penis (by a man) into another’s mouth or
anal orifice (victim may be another man or a woman), OR any instrument or object (like stick, blunt object, etc.) into
the genital or anal orifice of another person (may be another man or a woman).

The force employed by the offender need not be so great or of such a character as could not be resisted. The forced
used by the offender must be sufficient to consummate his purpose.
The resistance of the offended woman may also be overcome by threat or intimidation. It is the fear cause by
threatening the offended woman with a deadly weapon, such as a knife or firearm.
 24
Carnal knowledge as used in the RPC, unlike its ordinary connotation of sexual intercourse, does not necessarily
require that the vagina be penetrated or that the hymen be ruptured.
The phrase “deprived of reason” has been construed to include those feeble-minded by coherent; or even those
suffering from mental abnormality or deficiency of reason.
Rape may be committed when the woman is unconscious due to any cause such as when she is asleep, in a lethargy
produced by sickness or narcotics administered to her.
It is still rape although the girl below 12 years old consented to the sexual act or she is a prostitute. The consent is not
voluntary because she has no will of her own.
Rape is either attempted or consummated and no frustrated rape.
Absent any showing of the slightest penetration of the female organ, i.e., touching of either labia of the pudendum by
the penis, there can be no consummated rape, at most, it can only attempted rape, if not acts of lasciviousness.

Rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ because not all acts of execution were performed. The
offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts.
Instrument or object as used in this article includes fingers. So if the offender inserts his finger inside the vagina of
the offended woman against the latter’s will, it is rape by sexual assault.
Effect of pardon by the victim of the offender- The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended
party shall extinguish the criminal action or remit the penalty already imposed. Provided, that the crime shall not be
extinguished or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio. In case it is the legal husband who is the
offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty:

See: Law punishing acts of violence against women and children.

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND SECURITY:

Against liberty-
1. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention (Art. 267).
2. Slight illegal detention (Art. 268).
3. Unlawful arrest (Art. 269).
4. Kidnapping and failure to return a minor (Art. 270).
5. Inducing a minor to abandon his home (Art. 271).
6. Slavery (Art. 272).
7. Exploitation of child labor (Art. 273).
8. Service rendered under compulsion in payment of debts (Art. 274).

Against security-
1. Abandonment of persons in danger & abandonment of victim (Art. 275).
2. Abandoning a minor (Art. 276).
3. Abandonment of minor by person entrusted with his custody, in difference of parents (Art. 277).
4. Exploitation of minor (Art. 278).
5. Qualified trespass to dwelling (Art. 280) .
6. Other forms of trespass (Art. 281).
7. Grave threats (Art. 282).
8. Light threats (Art. 283).
9. Other light threats (Art. 285).
10. Grave coercions (Art. 286).
11. Light coercions (Art. 287).
12. Other similar coercions (Compulsory purchase of merchandise and payment of wages by means of token) (Art.
288).
13. Formation, maintenance and prohibition of combination of capital or labor through violence or threats (Art. 289).
14. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence (Art. 290).
15. Revealing secrets with abuse of office (Art. 291).
16. Revealing of industrial secrets (Art. 292).

Kidnapping and serious illegal detention, elements:

1. That the offender is a private individual.
2. That he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives the latter of his liberty.
3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal.
4. That in the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is present:
a) that the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than 3 days; or
b) that it is committed simulating public authority; or
c) that any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill are made; or
d) that the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer.
The essence of kidnapping under Art. 267 is the actual deprivation of the victim’s liberty coupled with the intent of
the accused to effect it.
The fact that the victim initially agreed to go with the accused does not remove the element of deprivation of liberty
where the victim went with the former on false inducement, without which the victim would not have done so.
 25
However, where the victim had freedom to leave the place where she was confined, or where there is no evidence to
show that the defendant instilled fear into the mind of the victim in order to compel and force her to remain in the agency,
there is no illegal detention.
The purpose of the kidnapping is immaterial when any of the circumstances in par. 1 of this article is present. Thus, it
was held that even if the victim, a female, was kidnapped for the purpose of compelling her to withdraw her previous
charges against the defendant and she was later raped, the crime committed is till kidnapping. The rape was incidental
and used to break the spirit of the victim and induce her to withdraw the said criminal charges.
It is not necessary that any of the circumstances in par. 1 be present when the kidnapping or detention was committed
for purposes of extorting money.
Ransom- means money, price, or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person/s that would
release them from captivity. No specific form of ransom is required to consummate the felony of kidnapping for ransom
so long as it was intended as a bargaining chip in exchange for the victim’s freedom. Demand for the payment of
indebtedness of the victim from the offender for the former’s freedom is considered ransom.
There is complex crime of kidnapping with murder when the kidnapped victim was brought to a secluded place in
order to secure his consent to pay ransom and he was later killed because he refused to pay the ransom. The kidnapping is
a necessary means to commit the murder.
However, if the victim was taken from one place to another, solely for the purpose of killing him and not for detaining
him or for the purpose of obtaining ransom for his release, the crime committed is murder and not the complex crime of
kidnapping with murder.

Distinctions between illegal detention and arbitrary detention:

1. Illegal detention is committed by a private individual who unlawfully kidnaps, detains or otherwise deprives a person
of his liberty; while arbitrary detention is committed by a public officer or employee who detains a person without
legal ground.
2. Illegal detention is a crime against personal liberty and security; while arbitrary detention is a crime against the
fundamental law of the State.

Slight illegal detention, elements:

1. That the offender is a private individual.
2. That he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives him of his liberty.
3. That the act of kidnapping or detention is illegal.
4. That the crime is committed without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in Art. 267.

If the offender voluntarily releases the person so kidnapped within 3 days from the commencement of the detention,
without having attained the purpose intended, and before the institution of the criminal proceedings against him, his
liability is mitigated.

Unlawful arrest, elements:

1. That the offender arrests or detains another person.
2. That the purpose of the offender is to deliver him to the proper authorities.
3. That the arrest or detention is not authorized by law or there is no reasonable ground therefor.

The offender is any person, whether a public officer or a private individual. The purpose of arresting another is to
deliver him to the proper authorities, and that the arrest or detention is not authorized by law or there is no reasonable
ground therefor. No period of detention is fixed and what is controlling is the motive of the offender.

Slavery, elements:
1. That the offender purchases, sells, kidnaps or detains a human being; and
2. That the purpose of the offender is to enslave such human being. Example: Obliging the victim to render services in
another’s house as a servant without pay until her debt shall have been paid.

Exploitation of child labor, elements:

1. That the offender retains a minor in his service;
2. That it is against the will of the minor; and
3. That it is under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person entrusted
with the custody of such minor.

Exploitation of minors- is exploitation of a minor by requiring him to perform an act which endangers his life and safety.

The circumstances that will qualify the offense is the delivery of the child to a person following the callings of
acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker, diver, wild animal tamer or circus manager or to a habitual vagrant or beggar in
consideration of any price, compensation or promise.

Qualified trespass to dwelling forms:

1. Entering the dwelling of another against the latter’s will; and
2. Entering the dwelling of another with violence or intimidation.
Qualified trespass to dwelling, elements:
 26
1. The offender is a private person.
2. He enters the dwelling of another.
3. Such entrance is against the latter’s will.

Dwelling place- means any building or structure exclusively devoted for rest and comfort. Thus, it was held that a
store used as a dwelling place of the owner thereof is considered a dwelling place. A room occupied by another is also a
dwelling place.
To commit trespass, the entrance by the offender should be against the presumed or express prohibition of the
occupant. The prohibition to enter is presumed when the entry was effected surreptitiously at night for illicit purpose and
the inmates have retired, or through an opening not intended for ingress.
In forcible entry with violence, it is presumed that such entry was effected against the owner’s will. There is violence
or intimidation when the intruder cut the string fastening the door and quarreled with the occupants.
There is no trespassing if one enters the dwelling of another to prevent some serious harm to himself, the occupants of
the dwelling or a third person, or to render some service to humanity or justice.
There is also no trespassing in entering cafes, taverns, inns and other public houses, while the same are open. These
are called absolutory clauses.

Grave coercions, elements:

1. That any person prevented another from doing something not prohibited by law, or compelled to do something against
his or her will, be it right or wrong.
2. That the prevention or compulsion is effected by violence, either by material force or such display of force as would
produce intimidation and, consequently, control the will of the offended party.
3. That the person who restrains the will and liberty of another has no right to do so or, in other words, that the restraint is
not made under authority of a law or in the exercise of any lawful right.

The prevention or compulsion should be effected by violence, either by material force or such a display of force as
would produce intimidation and control the will of the offended party.
The violence, threat or intimidation should be made at the very moment that the offended party was doing or about to
do the act to be prevented. If the act was already done when violence or intimidation was employed, the crime is unjust
vexation such as when the defendant told the offended party not to go to work the next day and the latter went to work the
next day without the former having done anything to prevent him but the defendant only employed violence upon the
offended party after the latter had gone to work.

Light coercion, elements:

1. That the offender is a creditor who seizes anything belonging to his debtor.
2. That the seizure of the thing be accomplished by means of violence or a display of material force producing
intimidation.
3. That the purpose of the offender is to apply the same to the payment of the debt.

If there is no violence employed, the crime is unjust vexation.

Unjust vexation- includes any human conduct which, although not productive of some physical or material harm,
would unjustly annoy or irritate an innocent person. In other words, the offender’s act causes annoyance, irritation,
vexation, torment, distress or disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is directed. Example: Act of kissing a
woman under the impulse of anger and not to satisfy a lusts was held to unjust vexation, not acts of lasciviousness.

CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY

1. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons (Art. 294)
2. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an inhabited place and by a band, or with the use of firearm on a
street, road or alley (Art. 295)
3. Execution of deeds by means of violence or intimidation (Art. 298)
4. Robbery by the use of force upon things in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to worship
(Art. 299)
5. Robbery by the use of force upon things in an uninhabited place and by a band (Art. 300)
6. Robbery by the use of force upon things in an uninhabited place or in a private building (Art. 302)
7. Robbery of cereals, fruits or firewood in an uninhabited place or private building (Art. 303)
8. Possession of picklocks or similar tools (Art. 304)
9. Brigandage (Art. 306)
10. Aiding or abetting a band of brigands (Art. 307)
11. Theft (Art. 308)
12. Qualified theft (Art. 310)
13. Theft of the property of the National Library (Art. 311)
14. Occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in property (Art. 312)
15. Altering boundaries or landmarks (Art. 313)
16. Fraudulent insolvency (Art. 314)
17. Swindling (Estafa) (Art. 315)
18. Other forms of swindling (Art. 316)
 27
19. Swindling a minor (Art. 317)
20. Other deceits (Art. 318)
21. Removal, sale or pledge of mortgaged property (Art. 319)
22. Destructive arson (Art. 320)
23. Malicious mischief (Art. 327)
24. Special cases of malicious mischief (Art. 328)
25. Other mischief (Art. 329)
26. Damage and obstruction to means of communication (Art. 330)
27. Destroying or damaging statues, public monuments or paintings (Art. 331)

Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons, elements:

1. Unlawful taking of personal property belonging to another;
2. That the taking must be with intent to gain; and
3. That there is violence against or intimidation of any person, or force upon anything.

It was held that even property that is not within the commerce of man, such as opium, may be the object of robbery.
The property taken must belong to another, that is, the taker must not be the owner thereof. It is not necessary that the
personal property was taken from the owner thereof because ownership is not necessary. Possession of the property is
sufficient. Robbery may be committed from a person who himself has stolen it.
Taking means depriving the offended party of ownership or possession of the thing taken with the character of
permanency.
In robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons, the unlawful taking is complete the moment the offender
gains possession of the thing even if he has had no opportunity to dispose of the same, or in his flight he threw the
property stolen or fell without his knowledge.
Intent to gain (animo lucrandi) is presumed from the unlawful taking of personal property.
The violence must be against the person of the offended party and not upon the property taken. Intimidation is not
only threat of bodily harm. Violence or intimidation must be employed at anytime before the taking of the property is
complete.

Kinds of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons:

1. Robbery with homicide (Art. 294)
2. Robbery with rape (Art. 294)
3. Robbery with intentional mutilation (Art. 294)
4. Robbery with arson (Art. 294)
5. Robbery with serious physical injuries (Art. 294)
6. Frustrated robbery with homicide (Art. 297)
7. Attempted robbery with homicide (Art. 297)

The foregoing enumerated kinds of robbery refer to a special complex crime because it prescribes only one penalty for
two crimes committed. Hence, Art. 48, defining a complex crime, does not apply to the crimes covered by Art. 294. Art.
48 will only apply in a complex crime where there is no specific penalty imposed by law.

Robbery with homicide, elements:

1. The taking of personal property with the use of violence or intimidation against a person.
2. The property thus taken belongs to another.
3. The taking is characterized by intent to gain or animus lucrandi.
4. On the occasion of the robbery or by reason thereof, the crime of homicide, which is therein used in a generic
sense, was committed.

The phrase “on the occasion” and “by reason” of the robbery mean that the homicide, rape, mutilation, or serious
physical injuries defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 263 must be committed in the course or because of the robbery.
“Homicide” is used under this article in a generic sense as to include parricide and murder. Robbery with homicide is
primarily a crime against property and not against person. Homicide is a mere incident of the robbery. Robbery is the
main purpose and object of the criminal.
In robbery with homicide, it is essential that there should be a direct relation or an intimate connection between
robbery and the killing whether the latter be prior to or subsequent to the former or whether or not both crimes are
committed at the same time.
However, where the taking of the personal property was merely an afterthought and was done after the culprit has
successfully carried out his primary criminal intent to kill the victim, and hence, the use of violence or force is no longer
necessary, the criminal acts should be viewed as constitutive of two distinct offenses and not as single complex offense.
Robbery with homicide is committed even if the victim of the robbery is different from the victim of homicide, as
long as the homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, or even if the homicide is committed
before, during or after the commission of the robbery, or the homicide is committed by the actor at the spur of the moment
or by mere accident.
The complex crime of robbery with homicide is not to be multiplied with the number of persons killed. All the
homicides are merged in the composite integrated whole that is robbery with homicide so long as the killing were
perpetrated by reason or on the occasion of the robbery.
 28
Even if two or more persons are killed and a woman is raped and physical injuries are inflicted on another, on the
occasion or by reason of robbery, there is only one special complex crime of robbery with homicide.
All those who took part as principals in the robbery will also be held guilty as principals or robbery with homicide
although they did not take part in the homicide, unless it appears that they endeavored to prevent the homicide.

Robbery with rape, elements:

1. The taking of personal property is committed with violence or intimidation against persons.
2. The property taken belongs to another.
3. The taking is done with animo lucrandi.
4. The robbery is accompanied by rape.

The rape may be committed before, during or after the robbery. What is necessary is that the robbery is accompanied
by rape. In other words, the malefactor must have the intent to take the personal property belonging to another against the
latter’s will with intent to gain, and such intent must precede the rape.
In the case where the victim was raped twice on the occasion of the robbery, it was held that there is no law providing
that the additional rapes or homicides should be considered as aggravating circumstance.
Robbery by a band – is committed when at least four armed malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery.
Arms do not only mean firearms. It may include clubs for as long as it may be dangerous to the life of one who would
resist the depredations of the band as are revolvers or bolos.

Robbery by the use of force upon things in inhabited house, public building, or edifice devoted to worship, forms:
First form - the force was used before the offender gains entrance, elements:
1. The offender must enter an inhabited house, public building, or edifice devoted to religious worship
2. The entrance must be effected by any of the following means:
a) Through and opening not intended for entrance or egress. Example: through the window. Window is an
opening not intended for entrance of exit.
b) By breaking any wall, roof, or floor breaking by door or window. Example: The offender in entering the
house or building must actually break its outside wall, roof, or floor or the main or back door or window.
c) By using false keys, picklocks, or similar tools. Example: The false keys may be genuine keys stolen from
the owner and other keys other than those intended by the owner (Art. 305); Picklocks, or similar tools are
those specially adopted to the commission of the crime of robbery (Art. 304). The false keys, picklocks, or
similar tools must be used to enter the house or building. It is only theft if it is used to open the trunk in the
house or a wardrobe from which the offender took personal property.
d) By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority. Example: The offenders
represented themselves as detectives by displaying metal badges similar to those worn by regular police
officers to the occupants of the store and once inside took the proceeds of the sales of that day.
3. Once inside, with intent to gain, took personal property belonging to another.

The use of force upon things alone will not constitute the taking of personal property robbery. The malefactor should
have entered the house or building in which the robbery is committed by any of the means enumerated in Art. 299 and
302.
It was held that the defendant who broke the glass of the show-window of a bazaar and got watches of various makes
is not guilty of robbery because he did not enter the building. He merely introduced his hand through the broken glass and
got the watches from the show-window.

Second form – the force was used after the offender has gained entrance, elements:
1. The offender has gained entrance upon an inhabited house, public building, or edifice devoted to religious worship.
2. While inside, with intent to gain, he takes personal property belonging to another by:
a) Breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle. The doors
here refer to doors, lids or opening sheets of furniture.
b) Taking such furniture or objects away to be broken or forced open outside the place of the robbery.
Brigandage- is committed when at least four armed persons formed a band of robbers and the purpose is either (1)
To commit robbery in the highway; (2) To kidnap persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom; (3) To
attain by means of force and violence any other purpose.
The term “armed” as used in the first paragraph of this article covers arms and weapon in general including but not
limited to clubs, not necessarily firearm.

Distinctions between brigandage and robbery:

1. In brigandage, the purpose of the offenders is: (a) to commit robbery in the highway; or (b) kidnap persons for the
purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom; or (c) for any other purpose to be attained by means of force and violence; while
robbery in band, the purpose of the offenders is merely to commit robbery.
2. In brigandage, the formation of a band for any of the purposes enumerated above is sufficient; while in band, it is
necessary to establish that the band actually committed robbery.

See: PD NO. 532 (Anti-piracy and Anti-highway robbery Law of 1974.

Theft, kinds:
 29
1. Theft in general
2. Theft of lost property
3. Theft of fish, fruits, cereals or other forest or farm products inside an enclosed estate, elements:
4. Qualified theft

Theft in general, elements:

1. That there be taking of personal property (tangible and intangible).
2. That the said property belongs to another.
3. That the taking be done with intent to gain.
4. That the taking be done without the consent of the owner.
5. That the taking be accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things.

There must be intent to steal (animus furandi). Intent to steal is lacking if the defendant takes personalty which he
claims to be his own.
Intent to gain is the usual motive to be presumed from all furtive taking of useful property appertaining to another,
unless special circumstances reveal a different intent on the part of the perpetrator.
Intent to gain (animus lucrandi) is present even if the offender had the intention of returning the property taken.
By gain is meant not only the acquisition of a thing useful to the purposes of life but also the benefit which in any
other sense may be derived or expected form the act which is performed.
The term “consent” refers to consent freely given and not to one which may only be inferred from lack of opposition
of the owner of the property taken. Even if the owner knew the taking of his property, but did not give his consent, the
person taking the same is still liable for theft. Example: B picked the pocket of A while the latter is attending a mass in a
church. Noticing it, the latter did not do anything to prevent the taking of his money.

Theft of lost property, elements:

1. The finding of lost property.

2. The failure of the finder to deliver the same to the local authorities or to its owner.

The word “lost” is generic in nature, and embraces loss by stealing or by any act of a person other than the owner, as
well as by the act of the owner himself or through some casual occurrence.
When a person who finds a thing that has been lost or mislaid by a known owner takes the thing into his hands, he
acquires physical custody only and does not become vested with the legal possession; and in assuming such custody he is
charged with the obligation of restoring it to its owner. Appropriation of the thing thus found constitutes theft on the part
of the finder, if the act of appropriation be done with intent to gain.
Where the finder of lost or mislaid property entrusts it to another for delivery to a designated owner, the person to
whom it is thus confided assumes by voluntary substitution, as to both the property and its owner, the same relation as was
occupied by the finder. In such case appropriation of the thing by the person to whom it is thus confided constitutes theft
under the same conditions and upon the same principle as if the appropriation were effected by the actual finder (Ibid).
A defendant who shot a carabao which he found near his camote patch and distributed the meat to himself and his
neighbors is guilty of theft of damaged property.

Theft of fish, fruits, cereals or other forest or farm products inside an enclosed estate, elements:
1. The offender enters an enclosed estate or a field where trespass is forbidden without the consent of the owner; and
2. That the offender hunts or fishes upon the same or gathers fruits, cereals or other forest or farm products.

The fishing should not be in the fishpond or fishery, otherwise the crime committed is qualified theft.
The possession of stolen property is prima facie evidence that the possessor is the thief and throws on him the burden
of accounting for his possession.

Qualified theft, cases/instances:

1. If the theft is committed by a domestic servant.
2. If the theft is committed with grave abuse of confidence. Example: He who takes away personal properties belonging
to the person who has given him shelter and daily bread, out of charity, acts with grave abuse of confidence and there
commits the crime of qualified theft.
Breach of trust is not enough. It is only simple theft when the relationship between the defendant and the
offended party did not involve strict confidence. There should be a relation of dependence, guardianship or vigilance,
between the defendant and the offended party, that might create a higher degree of confidence between them, which
the accused could abuse.
3. If the property taken is a motor vehicle, mail matter, or large cattle. See RA 6539 (Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972) and
PD 533 (Anti-Cattle Rustling Law of 1974).
4. If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken from the premises of plantation.

The theft of coconuts is qualified when are still in the tree or on the ground within the plantation. The
purpose of the heavier penalty of theft of coconuts, is to promote the development of coconut industry.
5. If the property stolen is fish (includes crabs) taken from a fishpond or fishery.
 30
6. If the property is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any other calamity, vehicular
accident or civil disturbance.

Swindling (estafa), 3 ways of committing it:

1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence.
2. By means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts.
3. Through fraudulent means.

Estafa in general, elements:

1. That the accused defrauded another (a) by abuse of confidence, or (b) by means of deceit; and
2. That damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third person.

The person prejudiced need not be the owner of the goods for the law uses the word “another” instead of the word
“owner”. This means that as an element of the offense, loss should have fallen upon someone other than the perpetrator of
the crime.

Estafa with unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence, elements:

1. That the offender has an onerous obligation to deliver something of value, even though such obligation is based on an
immoral or illegal consideration. Example: In a contract of sale whereby the seller offered to sell to the buyer a
shabu, and the buyer agreed to buy. The seller then handed to the buyer which he claimed to be shabu contained in a
sachet and the latter paid the corresponding price. When the buyer opened the sachet the contents turned out to tawas.
2. That he alters its substance, quantity, or quality.
3. That damage or prejudice is caused to another.

Estafa through conversion or misappropriation, elements:

1. That money, goods, or other personal property be received by the offender in trust, or on commission, or for
administration, or under any other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of, or to return, the same, even
though the obligation is guaranteed by a bond.
2. That there be misappropriation or conversion of such money or property by the person who received it, or a denial on
his part that he receives it.
3. That such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of another.
4. That there be demand for the return of the property. The 4 th element is not necessary where there is evidence of
misappropriation of the goods by the offender.

Misappropriation- means to own, to take something for one’s own benefit.

Converting- is the act of using or disposing of another’s property as if it were one’s own.
The words convert and misappropriate- connote an act of using or disposing of another’s property as if it were one’s
own or devoting it to a purpose or use different from that agreed upon.
Criminal intent is not a necessary ingredient of embezzlement under Art. 315, 1(b). It is the breach of confidence or
infidelity in the conversion or diversion of trust funds that takes the place of the usual element of fraud or deceit in other
forms of estafa.

Juridical possession- means a possession which gives the transferee a right over the thing which he may set up even
against the owner. Example: The defendant rented a bicycle, and failed and refused thereafter to return the same to its
owner. In this case the owner delivered not only the physical but also the juridical possession of the bicycle to the
defendant. The defendant is guilty of estafa with abuse of confidence under subsection 1(b) of Art. 315.
It was held that the defendant received a ring from the offended party for the purpose of pledging it as security for a
loan for the benefit of the said offended party. Instead of pledging the ring, the defendant immediately carried it to one of
her neighbors to whom she sold it and appropriated the money to her own use. Held: That the juridical possession of the
ring did not pass to the defendant but remained in the original owner; that the said defendant was only the agent of the
owner and not a bailee of the property; and that therefore the crime committed was theft and not estafa.

See: PD 115 (Trust Receipt Law)

Estafa by means of deceit, elements:

1. That there must be a false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means.
2. That such false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior to or simultaneous with
the commission of the fraud.
3. That the offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means, that is, he was
induced to part with his money or property because of the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means.
4. That as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.

There is deceit when one is misled, either by guile or trickery or by other means, to believe to be true what is really
false (People vs. Romero, 306 SCRA 90).
Estafa through false pretense is committed by false pretense or fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously
with the commission of the fraud:
 31
1. By using fictitious name. Example: When a person found a pawnshop ticket in the name of another and, using the
name of that other person, redeemed the jewelry mentioned therein, he committed estafa by using a fictitious name.
2. By falsely pretending to possess: (a) business, (b) influence, (c) qualification, (d) property, (e) credit, (f) agency, (g)
business or imaginary transactions. Example: Pretending to be a magician endowed with power to discover hidden
treasures, the accused led the offended party to believe that under his house there was a jar containing articles of great
value, but that to obtain that jar it was necessary for the offended party to give him P150,000.00 for the purchase of a
certain substance and old gold coins to be used in extracting the hidden treasure. After receiving the money, the
accused left and never returned.
3. By means of other similar deceits. Example: Presentation of a deed of donation mortis causa, known to be
vitiated by consent, to the Office of the Register of Deeds to register the same and to secure new transfer certificate of
title in her name, the accused in effect falsely represented that the deed was validly executed and the lots described
therein actually donated to her.

See: BP 22 (An Act penalizing the making or drawing and issuance of a check without sufficient funds or credit and
for other purposes), in relation to Subdivision 2(d) of Art. 315.

Destructive Arson- is defined as the malicious destruction of property by fire.

In the crime of arson, the enormity of the offense is not measured by the value of the property that may be destroyed
but rather by the human lives exposed to destruction.

Arson, classification:
1. Destructive arson
2. Other cases of arson (see PD 1613-amending the law on arson).

The classification is based on the kind, character and location of the property burned, regardless of the value of the
damage caused.

Destructive arson, elements:

1. That there is intentional burning.
2. That what is intentionally burned is any of the following properties:

a) Any ammunition factory and other establishment where explosives, inflammable or combustible materials are
stored.
b) Any archive, museum, whether public or private, or any edifice devoted to culture, education or social services.
c) Any church or place of worship or other building where people usually assemble.
d)Any train, airplane or any aircraft, vessel or watercraft, or conveyance for transportation of persons or property.
e) Any building where evidence is kept for use in any legislative, judicial, administrative or other official
proceedings.
f) Any hospital, hotel, dormitory, lodging house, tenement, shopping center, public or private market, theater or
movie house or any similar place or building.
g) Any building, whether used as a dwelling or not situated in a populated or congested area.

Other cases of arson, elements:

1. That there is intentional burning.
2. That what is intentionally burned is any of the following properties:
a) Any building used as offices of the government or any of its agencies.
b) Any inhabited house or dwelling.
c) Any industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well or mine shaft, platform or tunnel.
d) Any plantation, farm, pastureland, growing crop, grain field, orchard, bamboo grove or forest.
e) Any rice mill, sugar mill, cane mill or mill central.
f) Any railway or bus station, airport, wharf or warehouse.

When fire is used with the intent to kill a particular person who may be in a house and that objective is attained by
burning the house, the crime is murder only, the fire being merely adopted as a means of committing the murder.
But if the main objective is the burning of the building and in burning the building a person who may be in the
building died due to fire, the resulting homicide may be absorbed by the crime of arson.
If the objective is to kill –and in fact the offender has already done so- and arson is resorted to as a means to cover up
the killing, the offender may be convicted of two separate crimes of either homicide or murder, and arson.
Example of attempted, frustrated or consummated arson: A person socked rags in gasoline and placed them
beside a structure and was about to set the rags when he was prevented for doing so by another, it is attempted arson.
When said person was able to set fire to the rags but the fire was put out before any part of the structure was burned, the
crime is frustrated arson. But, if the fire was put off and a part of the structure is burned, it is consummated arson. It was
held that setting fire to the contents of a building constitutes the consummated crime of arson even if no part of the
building was burned.
Malicious mischief, elements:
1. That another’s property was damaged.
 32
2. That the damage was deliberately caused.
3. That the damage does not constitute arson.

The crime of malicious mischief is not determined solely by the mere act of inflicting injury upon the property of a
third person, but it must be shown that the act had for its object the injury of the property for the sake merely of damaging
or due to hate, revenge or other evil motive; without this circumstance the essential element of the crime is lacking and the
criminal intention of the culprit can not be established.

Special cases of malicious mischief:

1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance of public functions.
2. Using any poisonous or corrosive substance.
3. Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle.
4. Causing damage to the property of the National Museum or National Library.
5. Causing damage to any archive or registry, waterworks, roads, promenade or to any other thing used in common by the
public.

Persons who committed theft, estafa and malicious mischief but are exempt from criminal liability:.
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property which belonged to the deceased spouse before the same shall have
passed into the possession of another.
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if living together.

Concubine and paramour are included in the term “spouses”.

Stepfather and stepmother are considered as ascendants, and stepson, stepdaughter, adopted or natural children are
considered as relatives included in the term “descendants”.

The exemption does not apply to a stranger who participates in the commission of the crime.

CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY

1. Adultery (Art. 333)
2. Concubinage (Art. 334)
3. Acts of lasciviousness (Art. 336)
4. Qualified seduction (Art. 337)
5. Simple seduction (Art. 338)
6. Consented acts of lasciviousness (Art. 339)
7. Corruption of minors (Art. 340)
8. White slave trade (Art. 341)
9. Forcible abduction (Art. 342)
10. Consented abduction (Art. 343)

Adultery, elements:
1. That the woman is married.
2. That she has sexual intercourse with a man not her husband.
3. That as regards the man with whom she has sexual intercourse, he must know her to be married.

Adultery- is a crime of result and not of tendency. It is an instantaneous crime which is consummated and exhausted
or completed at the moment of the carnal union. Hence, adultery is not a continuous offense. Each sexual intercourse
constitutes a crime of adultery.
The fact that the husband abandoned his wife and left her in poverty without means of obtaining a livelihood does not
justify her nor free her from the criminal responsibility she incurred by her breach of the fidelity she owed to her husband,
for she has means within the law to compel him to fulfill the duties imposed upon him by marriage.
Abandonment without justification by the husband will mitigate the criminal responsibility of the wife.
In order that the adulterous wife may be absolved from criminal liability, both the defendants must be pardoned by the
offended party and the same must come before the institution of the criminal action. The act of having sexual intercourse
with the offending wife subsequent to the adulterous act is an implied pardon of said adulterous conduct.
Acquittal of one of the defendants does not operate as a cause for the acquittal of the other defendant.

Concubinage, 3 ways of committing it:

1. By keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling.
2. By having sexual intercourse under scandalous circumstance with a woman who is not his wife.
3. By cohabiting with a woman who is not his wife in any other place.

Conjugal dwelling- is the home of the husband and his wife. A married man who keeps a mistress in the conjugal
dwelling is guilty of the crime of concubinage.
 33
Sexual intercourse under scandalous circumstances is present when the defendant’s conduct produced scandal and
bad example among their neighbors. These circumstances exist not only when the defendants live together in the same
house but also when they appear and perform act in public which give rise to criticism among their neighbors.
To “cohabit”, according to the sense in which the word is used in a penal statute, means dwelling together as husband
and wife, or to have sexual intercourse for a continued period of time. Hence the offense is not the single act of adultery.
It is cohabiting in a state of adultery. It may be week, a month, a year, or longer, but still it is one offense only. The
mistress must know that the man is married

Acts of lasciviousness, elements:

1. That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness upon a person of either sex.
2. That it is done (b) by using force or intimidation; (b) when the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious; or (c) when the offended party is under 12 years old.

There can be no attempted or frustrated acts of lasciviousness because from the moment the offender performs all
elements necessary for the existence of the felony, he actually attains his purpose.
“Lewd”- is defined as obscene, lustful, indecent, lecherous. It signifies that form of immorality which has relation to
moral impurity; or that which is carried on a wanton manner.
What constitutes lewd or lascivious conduct must be determined from the circumstances of each case. If the accused,
motivated by revenge, touched the breast of a woman in public in order to cast dishonor to her, acts of lasciviousness is
not committed but slander by deed. But, if the accused did the said act by stealth, the crime of acts of lasciviousness is
committed even thought the dominating motive was revenge.
If the acts of lasciviousness is with intent to have sexual intercourse with a woman, then it is attempted rape.

Qualified seduction, 2 classes:

1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 years and under 18 years of age by a person in public authority, priest, house-servant,
domestic, guardian, teacher, or any person who, in any capacity is entrusted with the education or custody of the
seduced girl, elements:
a) The offended party is a virgin.
b) She is over 12 years and under 18 years of age.
c) That the offender has sexual intercourse with her.
d) That there is abuse of authority, confidence or relationship on the part of the offender.

A girl is presumed to be a virgin if she is unmarried and of good reputation. The girl must be chaste and pure.
Although she had prior intercourse with the defendant, the girl is still considered a virgin. The girl need not be
physically virgin. However, if the girl had carnal knowledge with other men, her chaste character is questionable.
She is no longer a virgin.
The term “domestic” as used in this article is not restricted to household servants. It includes all those persons
residing with a family and who are members of the same household, regardless of the fact that their residence may be
only temporary or that they may be paying for their accommodations.
The word “teacher” includes those who teach in trade schools.
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother or descendant by her ascendant (known as incest).
There must be sexual intercourse but virginity is not required. The sister or descendant may be over 18 years of
age, and the relationship which is by consanguinity need not be legitimate
Deceit is not an essential element of qualified seduction but essential in ordinary or simple seduction. It is
replaced by abuse of confidence.

Simple seduction, elements:

1. That the woman is over 12 and under 18 years of age.
2. That the woman is single or a widow of good reputation.
3. That the offender has sexual intercourse with her.
4. That the sexual intercourse was induced by deceit.

The law requires that in order to convict the defendant of simple seduction, sexual intercourse between the parties and
deceit on the part of the accused be proven.
To constitute simple seduction there must in all cases be some sufficient promise or inducement, and the woman must
yield because of the promise or other inducement. If she consents merely from carnal lust, and the intercourse is from
mutual desire, there is no seduction.
So that, where the deceit alleged is a promise of marriage, it must appear that the woman was induced to yield her
body to the seducer by means of such promise, and that she surrendered her virtue in reliance upon its fulfillment.
Corruption of minors- is the act of a pimp who facilitates the corruption of the minor to satisfy the lust of another.
The minor is of either sex, of good reputation, and not a prostitute or corrupted person. The crime of corruption of minors
is consummated by a mere proposal upon the minor to satisfy the lust of another.

White slave trade, acts punished:

1. Engaging in the business of prostitution.

 34
2. Profiting by prostitution.
3. Enlisting the services of women for the purpose of prostitution.

Forcible abduction- is the forcible taking away of a woman from her house or the place where she may be for the
purpose of carrying her to another place with intent to marry or to corrupt her.

Forcible abduction, elements:

1. That the person abducted is any woman, regardless of her age, civil status, or reputation.
2. That the abduction is against her will.
3. That the abduction is with lewd design.

There may be a complex crime of forcible abduction with rape.

Consented abduction, elements:

1. That the offended party must be a virgin.
2. That she must be over 12 and under 18 years of age.
3. That the taking away of the offended party must be with her consent, after solicitation or cajolery from the
offender.
4. That the taking away of the offended party must be with lewd designs.

No matter how short is the taking away the crime of consented abduction exists, provided that the taking away of the
offended party is with lewd designs.
In abductions of this nature, the law presumes that there is seduction which may very well be present under the cloak
of the intention to marry. But this is not true where the female, as well as the male, is of competent age to marry, neither
of them laboring under any disability to contract marriage.

Cases/instances of crimes against chastity where the age and reputation of the offended party are immaterial:
1. Acts of lasciviousness against the will of the offended party; or against a sister or descendant.
2. Qualified seduction of sister or descendant.
3. Forcible abduction.

Simulation of births, substitution of one child for another, and concealment or abandonment of a legitimate child,
acts punished:
1. Simulation of birth
2. Substitution of one child for another
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child with intent to cause such child lose civil status.

Simulation of birth- is committed as when a woman pretends to be pregnant when in fact she is not, and on the day of
supposed delivery takes the child of another.

Usurpation of civil status, examples: A impersonates himself to be C, the son of another and assumes the rights of
C – the purpose is to usurp the civil status of another; A impersonates himself to be C, and was able to get the inheritance
of C – the purpose is to defraud the offended party or his heirs
Bigamy- is an act of contracting a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriage has been legally
dissolved or before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead by means of judgment rendered in the proper
proceedings. The first marriage must have been valid.
In contracting the second or subsequent marriage there must be fraudulent intent.

CRIMES AGAINST HONOR

1. Libel (Art. 353)
2. Threatening to publish and offer to prevent such publication for a compensation (Art. 356)
3. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in the course of official proceedings (Art. 357)
4. Slander (Art. 358)
5. Slander by deed (Art. 359)
6. Incriminating innocent person (Art. 363)
7. Intriguing against honor (Art. 364)

Libel- is defined as public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act,
omission, condition, status or circumstance tending to cause dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical
person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.

Defamation is the proper term but libel is used under art. 353.

The defamatory imputations are:

1. Crime allegedly committed by the offended party.
2. Vice or defect, real or imaginary, of the offended party.
3. Act, omission, condition, status of, or circumstances relating to the offended party
 35
Meaning of publication, is the communication of defamatory words or matter to some person or persons. Sending to
the wife a letter defamatory of her husband is sufficient publication.

The malice or ill will either must be proved, malice in fact

The imputation will be sufficient if it tends to cause:

1. Dishonor- disgrace, shame or ignominy
2. Discredit- loss of credit or reputation; disesteem
3. Contempt- state of being despised

Malice in law is presumed from every defamatory imputation.

Malice is not presumed in the following:

1. A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty.
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative or other
official proceeding which are not of confidential nature, or of any statement, report or speech delivered in said
proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of their functions.

Slander- is oral defamation which may either be SIMPLE SLANDER or GRAVE SLANDER, when it is of a serious
and insulting nature.
Examples of Simple Slander: Calling a person a gangster; Uttering defamatory words in the heat of anger, with
some provocation on the part of the offended party; An accusation that the offended party has been living successively
with several men uttered before several persons, when intended to correct an improper conduct of the offended party, a
kin of the accused, is only a simple slander.
Example of Grave Slander: Hurling at the complainant, a respectable married lady with young daughters, offensive
and scurrilous epithets, including words imputing unchastity to the mother and tending to injure the character of the
daughters.
Slander by deed- is committed not by word but by action. Example: Slapping
Incriminating Innocent Person- The common example of incriminating an innocent person is planting evidence to
show that a person committed a crime.
Intriguing Against Honor- is an act which has for its principal purpose to blemish the honor or reputation of a
person. It is any scheme or plot designed to blemish the reputation of a person.
Gossiping is a defamation and not intriguing against honor. BUT if the defamatory words cannot be determined, it is
intriguing against honor. Example: Spreading gossips to alienate one’s friendship with another.
Imprudence and Negligence- is not a crime in itself; it is simply a way of committing crime. It determines lower
degree of liability.
Imprudence and negligence are punishable only when it resulted in a crime.
Distinction between imprudence and negligence: Imprudence indicates a deficiency in action; negligence indicates
deficiency of perception, hence, a failure in precaution is termed imprudence; failure in advertence is known as negligence