2021 Golden Notes - Criminal Law (Readable)
2021 Golden Notes - Criminal Law (Readable)
2021 Golden Notes - Criminal Law (Readable)
0
L
D
E
N
NOTES
2021
CRIMINAL LAW
CRIMINAL LAW
Academics Committee
Faculty of Civil Law
University of Santo Tomas
Espana, Manila 1008
All rights reserved by the Academics Committee of the Faculty of Civil Law of the
Pontifical and Royal University of Santo Tomas, the Catholic University of the
Philippines.
2021 Edition.
A copy of this material without the corresponding code either proceeds from an illegal
source or is in possession of one who has no authority to dispose the same.
UST BAR-OPS
KRIZA NINA B. MALALUAN CHAIRPERSON
ELISHA ELAINE D. BAYOT VICE-CHAIRPERSON INTERNAL
JOSEPHINE GRACE W. ANG VICE CHAIRPERSON EXTERNAL
MARINETTE M. SOBREVILLA SECRETARY
SARAH ANGELA D. EVA HEAD, PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICER
REBECCA JOY M. MALITAO HEAD, FINANCE COMMITTEE
JEDIDIAH R. PADUA HEAD, HOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS COMMITIEE
SABINA MARIA H. MABUTAS ASST. HEAD, HOTEL ACCOMODATIONS
COMMITTEE
JOEMARI MATHEW R. AGARIN HEAD, LOGISTICS COMMITTEE
JOHN FREDERICK A. NOJARA LOGISTICS COMMITTEE
KIER JOHN V. UY LOGISTICS COMMITTEE
CHRISTINE JOYCE P. ANDRES SENIOR MEMBER
ELOUISA ANN D.C. CARREON SENIOR MEMBER
NICOLE MARIE A. CORTES SENIOR MEMBER
PATRICIA MAE D. GUILLERMO SENIOR MEMBER
GLENN MATTHEW C. MANLAPID SENIOR MEMBER
CIARI T. MENDOZA SENIOR MEMBER
MARYLOU RENZI M. OLOTEO SENIOR MEMBER
LOUELLE JUDE B. QUE SENIOR MEMBER
JAMES ROSS L. TAN SENIOR MEMBER
MEMBERS
RON-SOPHIA NICOLE C. ANTONIO MA. JERMAINE A. MARTINEZ
DANIELLE B. BARANDA SOPHIA MAE P. PIMENTAL
EARL NICOLE B. BARRIETA REEM D. PRUDENCIO
LYNDON C. BENIDO VINCE RAPHAEL P. ROMANA
GERMAINE VIDA L. CARREON KURT RANJEL E. RONQUILLO
PRECIOUS DIANNE A. CONCEPCION MARY ANGELIQUE M. SAGUJD
LANA MEDEYA L. DE GUZMAN JOHN DON CARLO P. TURQUEZA
NUVJ MAECY H. DELA CRUZ DIANNE MICAH ANGELA YUMANG
SABINA MARIA H. MABUTAS
MEMBERS
MARIE ANGELIQUE AQUINO GERIE ROSE MANZANO
KIMBERLY BALIGOD ELLAINE MARALLAG
LVZETH CHONG COLEEN PALISOC
APRIL ANNE FLORES SARAH MAE DY SIM
MA. ALLYANA LAGUNILLA JOSHUA MARTIN VILLARICA
JUSTINE ISCAH MADRILEJOS ANGELICA FAITH YANCHA
ACADEMIC OFFICIALS
For being our guideposts in understanding the intricate sphere of Criminal Law.
-Academics Committee 2021
DISCLAIMER
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE LAW OF NATIONS ..................................................... 123
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE ................................................................... 132
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER ...................................................................................................................... 142
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST ................................................................................................................ 167
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS ................................................................................................................... 186
CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS .................................................................................................... 189
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS ................................................................................................................................. 211
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND SECURITY ............................................................................... 240
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY----------------------258
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY ............................................................................................................................... 284
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS ....................................................................................... 295
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR ....................................................................................................................................299
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE ...........................................••.....••........................................................••.....••................... 309
Limjtations o n the power of Cong·ress to enact uncontrollable fear to do an att against his
oenal laws CArride Ill Sec 22 1967 will, in which that act produces a crime or
Coostiturionl offense, such person is exempted in any
criminal liability arising from said act.
1. Ex post facto law - The Congress cannot
make an ex post facto law. (Article Ill, Sec 22, Poctrine of Pro Ben in relation to ActicJe 4·6
1987 Constitution) This limitation prohibits reeaallv Farcomutcx crimes) of theRPC c201o
the passage of retroactive laws which are l!aBl
prejudicial to the accused.
Following the Doctrine of Pro Reo, crimes under
2. Bill of attainder - The Congress cannot Art. 48 of the RPC are complexed and punished
make a bill of attainder. (Article Ill, Sec 22, with a single penalty (that prescribed for the
1987 Constitution) This limitation requires most serious crime and to be imposed in its
that criminal laws must be of general maximum period). The rationale being that the
application and must clearly define the acts accused who commits two crimes with a single
and omissions punished as crimes. criminal impulse demonstrates lesser perversity
than when the crimes are committed by different
3. Equal Protection Clause - The Congress acts and several criminal resolutions. (People v.
must legislate laws that equally treat Comadre, C.R. No.1S3559,June 8, 2004)
persons or properties similarly situated
with respect to the conferment of rights or lJ:i.wJ:.
imposition of obligations. (Article Ill, Sec 22,
1987 Constitution; Campanil/a, 2020) The generic term used to refer to a wrongdoing
punished either under the RPC or under a special
law. It is an act committed or omitted in violation
4. Due Process Clause - The Congress must
of a public law forbidding or commanding it
legislate laws that do not deprive a person
(Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 2012, as cited in Reyes,
his life, liberty, or property and must be
2017)
given the opportunity to be heard and
afforded all rights to which he is entitled.
(Article Ill, Sec 22, 1987 Constitution; Classifirarinns ofcrime
Campanil/a, 2020)
1. As to the manner or mode of execution
Basic maxims in criminal law (Art 3, RPC)
a. Dalo or felonies committed with
1. Nullum crimen, nu/la poena sine /eg e deliberate intent
(There is no crime when there is no law b. Culpa or those committed by means of
punishing the same) - No matter how fault
wrongful, evil, or bad the act is, if there is no
law defining the act, the same is not 2. As to the stage ofexecution (Art 6, RPC)
considered a crime. a. Consummated
b. Frustrated
2. Actus non facitreum, nisi mens sitrea (The c. Attempted
act cannot be criminal where the mind is not
criminal) - This is true to a felony 3. As to gravity (Art 9, RPC)
characterized by do/o (deceit), but not to a a. Light felonies
felony resulting from cu/po (fault). b. Less grave felonies
c. Grave felonies
3. Doctrine of Pro Reo - Whenever a penal law
to be construed or applied admits of two 4. As to nature
interpretations, one lenient to the offender a. Mala ln se
and one strict to the offender, the b. Mala prohibita
interpretation which is lenient or favorable
to the offender will be adopted. S. As to count
a. Compound
4. Actus me invito factus non est meus actus b. Composite or special complex
(An act done by me against my will is not my c. Complex, under Art. 48 of the RPC
act) - Whenever a person is under a d. Continued
compulsion of irresistible force or e. Continuing
6. As to division and,
a. Formal felonies - those which are always therefore,
consummated (e.g. physical injuries). good faith
b. Material felonies - those which have and lack of
various stages of execution. criminal
c . Those which do not admit of the intent are
frustrated stage (e.g. rape and theft). valid
defenses
Soerial Jaw unless they
are the
A penal law which punishes at'tS not defined and products of
penalized by the RPC. They are statutes enacted criminal
by the legislative branch which are penal in negligence or
character, but are not amendments to the RPC. culoa
Mitigating Such
MALA IN SE AND MALA PROHIBITA and circumstance
aggravatin s are not
Maw in se vis-A-vis mow acohihito CJ999 g appreciated
2001 2003 2005 2010 2017 RAB) Asto circumsta unless the
attendinn nces are special law
MALA IN MALA circumstanc appreciate has adopted
BASIS
SE PROHIBITA es d in the scheme or
There It is sufficient imposing scale of
must be a that the the penalties
criminal prohibited penalties under the
intent act was done RPC
(a) Good (a) Good
Wrong Wrong faith; faith; or
from its merely (b) lack (b) lack of
very because it is of criminal
nature prohibited by criminal intent are not
statute intent; or valid
Asto legal
Criminal Criminal (c) defenses.
implication
intent intent is not negligence It is enough
governs necessary are valid that the
defenses. prohibition
Generally, Generally, it was
it is is punishable voluntarily
punishabl under special violated.
Asto their e under laws Criminal Criminal
concepts the RPC liability is liability is
NOTE: Not all incurred generally
violations of Asto even incurred only
special laws criminal when the when the
are ma/a liability crime is crime is
prohibita. attempted consummate
Even if the or d
crime is frustrated
punished The The penalty
under a penalty is of the
special law, if computed offender is
the act on the the same as
Asto denree basis
punished is of they are all
one which is
of
whether deemed
inherently
participation
he is a principals.
wrong. the principal
same is offender,
ma/um ;n se, accomnlic
Consuls, vice-consuls, and other GR: Acts or omissions classified as crimes will be
commercial representatives of foreign scrutinized in accordance with relevant penal
nation are NOT diplomatic officers. laws if committed after the effectivity of those
Consuls are subject to the penal laws of penal laws.
the country where they are assigned.
(Minucher v. CA, G.R. No. 142396, The law enforced at the time of the commission
February 11, 2003) of a certain crime should be applied. Article 366
of the RPC provides that crimes are punished in
2. Territoriality accordance with the law in force at the time of
their commission. (Gapit, 2013)
GR: The penal laws of the country have
force and effect only within its territory. NOTE: The maxim Lex Prospicit Non Respicit
(1994BAR) means the law looks fonvard, never backward.
XPNs: Art. 2 of the RPC (2000 BAR) XPN: Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect
insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a
1. Should commit an offense while on a felony, although at the time of the publication of
Philippine ship or airship (fact of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced
registration is in the Philippines); and the convict is serving the same. (Art. 22, RPC)
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or
currency note of the Philippine Islands XPNs to the XPN: The new law cannot be
or obligations and securities issued by given retroactive effect even if favorable to
the accused:
a. When the new law is expressly made Intentional Celnnx viS-A-vis Culnahle Celnnx
inapplicable to pending actions or U999 2001 2003 2005 2010 RAB)
existing causes of actions. (Tavera v.
Valdez, G.R. No. 922, November 8, 1902) BASIS DOW CULPA
b. When the offender is a habitual
Asto Act is malicious Act is not
delinquent as defined in Rule 5 in Art. 62
Malice malicious
ofRPC. (Art 22, par. 5, RPC)
With deliberate Injury caused is
FELONIES intent unintentional,
it being an
Asto incident of
CRIMINAL LIABILITIES AND FELONIES intent another act
performed
Felonies without malice
Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the
RPC. Has intention Wrongful act
Asta the to cause a results from
NOTE: If it is not under the RPC, it is called an source of wrong imprudence,
offense. the wrong negligence, lack
committed of foresight, or
Act a s contemplated in criminal law lack of skill
GR: Motive is not an element of a crime and 6. The proper penalty for quasi-offenses (Art
becomes immaterial in the determination of 365, par. 1, RPC).
criminal liability.
Classifications of felonies according to their
XPNs: Motive is material when: eravitv
1. The acts bring about variant crimes; 1. Grave - those to which the law attaches the
E.g. there is a need to determine whether capital punishment or penalties which in any
direct assault is present, as in offenses of their periods are afflictive. in accordance
against persons in authority when the with Art. 25 of the RPC. (Art 9, par. 1, RPC)
assault is committed while not being in
the performance of his duties; 2. Less grave - those which the law punishes
with penalties which in their maximum
2. The identity of the accused is doubtful; period are correctional, in accordance with
3. The evidence on the commission of the Art. 25 of the RPC. (Art 9, par. 2, RPC)
crime is purely circumstantial;
4. In ascertaining the truth between two NOTE: The criminal can still be rehabilitated
antagonistic theories or versions of the and hence can be the subject of probation
killing; and and Alternative Dispute Resolution insofar as
5. Where there are no eyewitnesses to the the civil aspect is concerned.
crime and where suspicion is likely to fall
upon a number of persons. 3. Light - those infractions of law for the
commission of which the penalty of arresto
NOTE: Good faith is not a defense to the menor or a fine not exceeding 40,000 pesos,
prosecution of a ma/um prohlbitum. or both, is provided. (Art 9, par. 3, RPC as
amended by R.A. No. 10951, August 29, 2017)
Motive vis-ti-visIntent
Eacrncs ro he considered in imoosine a
MOTIVE INTENT penalty for felonies punished under RPC
XPN: Light felonies are punishable in all stages BemlisUes fnr the anoliration of the
when committed against persons or property. Proximate cm,se Poarine CArt4 oar 1 BPCJ
(Art 7, RPC)
1. That an intentional felony has been
NOTE: However. this provision is not committed; and
always applicable. 2. That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be
the direct. natural, and logical consequence of
Example: If the offender is only an the felony committed by the offender. (U.S. v.
accomplice and there are two or more Brobs� C.R. Na. 4935, Oct<>ber 25, 1909)
mitigating circumstances without any
compensating aggravating circumstance, When considered as the "direct. natural. and
the appropriate penalty will be two loeical conseouence" ofthe felonious act
degrees lower. It must be noted that the
penalty lower than arresta menor is public 1. Blow was efficient cause of death;
censure. There is no two degrees lower 2. Blow accelerated death; or
than arrest.o menor. 3. Blow was the proximate cause of death.
(Reyes, 2017)
Persons Hablein lieht felonies
Q: In an act to disdpline his child, the father
Only the principals and their accomplices are claims that the death of his child was not
made liable for the commission of light felonies. intended by him. Is his contention correct?
Accessories are not liable for the commission of
light felonies. (Art 19, RPC) A: NO. He is liable under Art. 4 (1) of the RPC. In
order that a person may be criminally liable for a
Examoles of crimes considered as Hehr felony different from that which he intended to
felonies commit, it is indispensable that: (a) a felony was
committed; and (b) the wrong done to the
1. Slight physical injuries (Art 266); aggrieved person be the direct consequence of
2. Theft (Art 309, pars. 7 and BJ; the crime committed by the perpetrator.
3. Alteration of boundary marks (Art 313);
4. Malicious mischief (Art. 328, par. 3; Art. 329, In beating his son and inflicting upon him
par.3); physical injuries, he committed a felony. As a
5. Intriguing against honor (Art 364); and direct consequence of the beating suffered by the
6. Alarms and Scandals. (Art 155) child, the latter expired. His criminal liability for
the death of his son is, thus, clear. (People v. Sales,
NOTE: If one assists in the escape of another who C.R. Na.177218, October 3, 2011)
committed Alarms and Scandals, he is not liable
under RPC but may be liable under P.D. 1829 Causes which may produce a result different
penalizing Obstruction of Apprehension of from that which the offender intended
Prosecution of Criminal Offenders.
1. Mistake in identity (error in personae) - The
ELEMENTS OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY offender intends the injury on one person but
ART.4, RPC the harm fell on another. In this situation, the
intended victim was not at the scene of the
Criminal liability (1997.1999. 2001. 2004. crime.
2009 RAB)
Example: A. wanting to kill B, killed C
Criminal liability is incurred by any person: instead. (2003, 2015 BAR)
1. Committing a felony although the wrongful act NOTE: There are only two (2) persons
done be different from that which he intended involved: (1) the actual but unintended
(Art 4, par. 1, RPC); and vit1:im; and (2) the offender.
2. Performing an act which would be an offense
against persons or property, were it not for EFFECT: Art. 49 of RPC. It depends when the
the inherent impossibility of its intended crime and the crime actually
accomplishment or on account of the committed are punished with different
employment of inadequate or ineffectual penalties. (Reyes, 2017)
means. (Art 4, par. 2, RPC)
with criminaJ intent. It is necessary that had the 1. The direct, natural, and logical cause;
facts been true as the accused believed them to 2. Produces the injury or damage;
be, the act is justified. Moreover, the offender 3. Unbroken by any efficient intervening cause;
must believe that he is performing a lawful act. and
4. Without which the result would not have
An honest mistake of fact destroys the occurred.
presumption of criminal intent which arises upon
the commission of a felonious act. Difference between immediate cause and
oroximate ra11se
NOTE: Mistake of fact is a defense only in
intentional felonies. Immediate cause may be a cause which is far
and remote from the consequence which sets
Bem,isites ofmistake nffacr into motion other causes that resulted in the
felony.
1. That the act done would have been lawful had
the facts been as the accused believed them to Proximate cause does not require that the
be; offender needs to actually touch the body of the
2. That the intention of the accused in offended party. It is enough that the offender
performing the act is lawful; and generated in the mind of the offended party the
3. That the mistake must be without fault or belief that made him risk himself.
carelessness on the part of the accused.
If a man creates in another person's mind an
Q: Ah Chong was afraid of bad elements. One immediate sense of danger, which causes such
evening. before going to bed, he locked person to try to escape, and, in doing so, the
himself i n bis room and placed a chair against latter injures himself, the man who creates such a
the door. After going to bed, he was awakened state of mind is responsible for the resulting
by someone who was trying to open the door. injuries. (People v. Toling, G.R. L-27097, January
He called out, ''Who is there?" twice but 17,1975)
received no answer. He then said, "If you
enter the room, I will kill you." At that Example:
moment, he was struck by the chair. Believing
he was being attacked, he took a kitchen knife X andY are crew members of a cargo vessel. They
and stabbed the intruder who turned out to had a heated argument. X, with a big knife in
be his roommate. Is he criminally liable? hand, threatened to kill Y. The vit1:im Y, believing
himself to be in immediate peril, threw himself
A: NO. There was mistake of fact in the instant into the water. Y died of drowning. In this case, X
case. Had the facts been as Ah Chong believed is liable for homicide for the death ofY.
them to be, he would have been justified in killing
the intruder under Article 11, paragraph 1 on Even if other causes cooperated in producing the
self-defense. (U.S. v. Ah Chong, G.R. No. L-5272, fatal result, as long as the wound inflicted is
March 19, 1910) dangerous, that is, calculated to destroy or
endanger life, the actor is liable. It is important
Proximate cause that there be no efficient intervening cause.
That cause, which, in natural and continuous Instances when the felony committed is not
sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening the orox•imare cause nfthe resnltineininrx
cause, produces the injury, and without which
the result would not have occurred. (Vdo. De 1. When there is an efficient intervening cause
Botoc/on v. Medino, G.R. No. L-10126, October 22, between the felony committed and the
1957, 102 Phil.181) resulting injury; or
2. When the resulting injury or damage is due to
As a rule, the offender is criminally liable for all the intentional act of the victim.
the consequences of his felonious act, although
not intended, if the felonious act is the proximate Efficient intervenjng cause
cause of the felony.
It is an intervening active force which is a distinct
Requisites of proximate cause act or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious
act of the accused.
Q: Cruz and Villacorta were regular customers presented that tetanus bacteria is goad only for
at Mendeja's store. At around two o'clock in two weeks. That if, indeed, the victim had
the morning of January 23, 2002, while Cruz incurred tetanus infection out of the wound
was buying bread at Mendeja's store, inflicted by A, he would not have lasted two
Villacorta suddenly appeared and, without months. What brought about tetanus to infect the
uttering a word, stabbed Cruz on the left side body of B was his working in his farm using his
of Cruz's body using a sharpened bamboo bare hands. Because of this, the SC ruled that the
stick. When Villacorta Oed, Mendeja chased act of B of working in his farm where the soil is
Villacorta but failed to catch him. filthy, using his awn hands, is an efficient
supervening cause which relieves A of any
When Mendeja returned to her store, she saw liability for the death ofB. A, if at all, is only liable
Aron removing the broken bamboo stick from for physical injuries inflitted upon B. (Urbano v.
Cruz's body. Mendeja and Aron then brought /AC, C.R. Na. 72964, January 7, 1988)
Cruz to Tondo Medical Center and was treated
as an outpatient. Cruz was later brought to Cira,msrances which ace not considered as
the San Lazaro Hospital on February 14, 2002, efficient intervening causes
where he died the following day of tetanus
infection secondary to stab wound. What is 1. The weak physical condition of the victim;
the proximate cause for the death of Cruz? 2. The nervousness or temperament of the
victim;
A: The proximate cause of Cruz's death is the 3. Causes which are inherent in the victim, such
tetanus infection, and not the stab wound. There as the victim's inability to swim;
had been an interval of 22 days between the date 4. Refusal of the injured party to be subjected to
of the stabbing and the date when Cruz was medical attendance;
rushed to San Lazaro Hospital, exhibiting 5. Erroneous or unskillful medical treatment; or
symptoms of severe tetanus infection. If Cruz 6. Delay in the medical treatment. (Reyes, 2017)
acquired severe tetanus infection from the
stabbing, then the symptoms would have NOTE: Although the above·mentioned
appeared a lot sooner than 22 days later. Cruz's circumstances may have intervened in the
stab wound was merely the remote cause, and its commission of the crime, the offender is still
subsequent infection with tetanus might have liable for the resulting crime as it is the
been the proximate cause of Cruz's death. The proximate cause. Because of such proximate
infection of Cruz's stab wound by tetanus was an cause, his act remains and these circumstances
efficient intervening cause later or between the are inefficient.
time Cruz was stabbed to the time of his death.
(People v. Villacorta, C.R. Na. 186412, September 7, Wh"'n ""':uh i,.;: oresumed ro he the natural
2011) consea,ience ofohvsiral iniuries inOicred
Q: A and B had a quarrel and started hacking The following facts must be established:
each other. B was wounded at the back.
Cooler heads intervened and they were 1. That the victim at the time the physical
separated. Somehow, their differences were injuries were inflicted was in normaJ health;
patched up. A agreed to shoulder all the 2. That death may be expected from the physical
expenses for the treatment of the wound of B injuries inflicted;
and to pay him his lost income. B, on the 3. That death ensued within a reasonable time.
other hand, signed a forgiveness letter in
favor of A and on that condition, he withdrew IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
the complaint that he filed against A. After so ART. 11, RPC
many weeks of treatment in a clinic, the
doctor pronounced the wound already
Beouisites of an imnossible crime C2003
healed. Thereafter, B went back to his farm. 2004 2009 2014 2015 RABl
Two months later, B came home chilling.
Before midnight, he died out of tetanus 1. Act performed would be an offense against
poisoning. The heirs of B filed a case of persons or property (see list of crimes under
homicide against A. Is A liable? Title 8 and Title 10, Book 2, RPCJ;
2. Act was done with evil intent;
A: NO. Taking into account the incubation period
of tetanus bacteria. medical evidence were
The essence of an impossible crime is the Q: Four culprits, all armed with firearms and
inherent impossibility of accomplishing the crime with intent to kill, went to the intended
or the inherent impossibility of the means victim's house and after having pinpointed
employed to bring about the crime. the latter's bedroom, all four fired at and
riddled said room with bullets, thinking that
Inherent imuossihilitv the intended victim was already there as it
was about 10:00 i n the evening, It so
That under any and aJI circumstances, the crime happened that the intended victim did not
could not have materialized. come home that evening and so was not in her
bedroom at that time. Was it an impossible
Kinds ofinhecentimaossihilitx crime or attempted murder?
1. Legal impossibility - occurs where the A: Impossible crime. The factual situation in this
intended acts, even if completed would not case presents a physical impossibility which
amount to a crime. (e.g. killing a dead rendered the intended crime impossible of
person.) accomplishment. Under Art. 4 of the RPC, such is
sufficient to make the act an impossible crime.
2. Physical impossibility - occurs where (lntod v. CA, G.R. No.103119, October 21, 1992) In
extraneous circumstances unknown to the the instant case, however, their acts constitute
accused prevented the consummation of the malicious mischief.
intended crime. (e.g. pick pocketing an empty
wallet.) Q: A, a collector of Mega Foam failed to remit
to the company a check which was given to
Emalnxment ofinademiate means her as payment for a merchandise. She tried
to deposit the check, but he found out that the
It is the use of means whose quality or quantity is check bounced. What crime was committed?
insufficient to produce the intended felony.
A: Impossible crime of theft. The evil intent
NOTE: The difference between cannot be denied, as the mere act of unlawfully
attempted/frustrated crime and impossible taking the check meant for Mega Foam showed
crime is that in attempted/frustrated crime the her intent to gain or be unjustly enriched. Were
means are sufficient and adequate but the it not for the fact that the check bounced, she
intended crime was not produced. would have received the face value thereof,
which was not rightfully hers. Therefore, it was
Employment of ineffectual means only due to the extraneous circumstance of the
check being unfunded, a fact unknown to the
The means employed cannot in any way produce accused at the time, that prevented the crime
the intended crime (e.g. poisoning a person with from being produced. The thing unlawfully taken
sugar). by the accused turned out to be absolutely
worthless, because the check was eventually
Penalty imposed on impossible crimes dishonored, and Mega Foam had received the
cash to replace the value of said dishonored
NOTE: If it reaches the point where he has no of heart and washed out the stomach of B. A
more control over his ac.ts, the subjec.tive also gave B an antidote. Is A liable for
phase has passed. frustrated parridde?
2. Objective phase - the offender has performed A: NO. The cause which prevented the
until the last act and is no longer in control of consummation of the crime was not independent
its natural course. of the will of the perpetrator. It cannot be
considered attempted parricide because A
Cons11mmated felonv already performed all acts of execution. A can
only be liable for physical injuries.
A felony is consummated when all the acts
necessary for its accomplishment and execution Q: Jessiriel Leyble was waylaid and shot with
are present. (Art. 6, RPC) a firearm by the group of Eden Etino, et al.
Etino only fired a single shot at close range,
En1strared felonv but did not hit any vital part of the victim's
body. The victim's wounds, based on his
A felony is frustrated when the offender Medical Certificate, were located at the right
performs all the acts of execution which would deltoid through and through, and the left
produce the felony as a result, but which shoulder, and he immediately 0ed the scene
nevertheless do not produce it by reason of right after the shooting. It appears that he did
causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. not sustain any fatal injury as a result of the
(Art 6. RPC) shooting, considering that he and his
companions even went in pursuit of
Q: X stabbed Y in the abdomen penetrating petitioner after the inddent. RTC found
the liver and chest of Y. Y was rushed to the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
hospital, was given immediate medical the crime of frustrated homicide to which the
treatment, and survived. Is X liable for CA affirmed. Is petitioner guilty of the crime
consummated homicide? charged?
A: NO, because the prompt medical treatment A: NO. It cannot be reasonably concluded that
received by the offended party saved his life. petitioner's use of a firearm was sufficient proof
(People v. Honroda, C.R. No. 112178-79, April 21, that he had intended to kill the victim. After all, it
1995) is settled that "Intent to kill cannot be
automatically drawn from the mere fatt that the
Q: Villostas went to a nearby videoke bar to use of firearms is dangerous to life." Rather,
buy cigarettes. Once inside the bar, be was ,.Animus interficendi must be established with
stabbed by Olarte, Ario, and Pasquin on the same degree of certainty as is required of the
different parts of his body. When Villostas other elements of the crime. The inference of
was rushed to the hospital, he was treated intent to kill should not be drawn in the absence
and the doctor testified that all the injuries of circumstances sufficient to prove such intent
suffered by Villostas were fatal and would beyond reasonable doubt. When the intent to kill
cause his death were it not for the timely is lacking, but wounds are shown to have been
medical attention given to him. Is Olarte, Ario, inflicted upon the victim, as in this case, the crime
and Pasquin guilty ofFrustrated Homicide? is not frustrated or attempted homicide but
physical injuries only. (Etino v. People, C.R. No.
A: YES. All the elements of frustrated homicide 206632, February 14, 2018)
are present. First, their intent to kill is manifested
by the weapon used which is a pointed sharp Crimes without frustrated stage
object. Second, the victim suffered numerous
fatal wounds, but he did not die due to the timely 1. Rape - the gravamen of the offense is carnal
medical assistance given to him. Third, none of knowledge, hence, the slightest penetration to
the qualifying circumstances for murder is the female organ consummates the felony.
present. 2. Corruption of public officers - mere offer
consummates the crime.
Q: A, a doctor, conceived the idea of killing his 3. Physical injury - consummated at the
wife, B. To carry out his plan, he mixed instance the injuries are inflicted.
arsenic with the soup of B. Soon after taking 4. Adultery - the essence of the crime is sexual
the poisonous food, A suddenly had a change congress.
5. Theft- the essence of the crime is the taking of before he could do anything. he was already
property belonging to another. Once the thing apprehended by the household members. can
has been taken, or in the possession of he be charged with attempted robbery?
another, the crime is consummated. (2014
BAR) A: NO. The at1: of entering alone is not yet
indicative of robbery although he may have
Attemnted Celnnx planned to do so. Instead, he may be held liable
for trespassing.
There is an attempt when the offender
commences the commission of a felony directly Q: One night Jugueta, with his cohorts, had
by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of gone to the residence of the victim where they
execution which should produce the felony, by violated his domicile by first pulling off the
reason of some cause or accident other than his sack that covers their nipa hut where they
own spontaneous desistance. (Art 6, RPC) slept. The victim pleaded to accused-Jugueta
to stop but the latter instead fired a shot
NOTE: The word directly emphasizes the wherein the victim used his body to cover his
requirement that the attempted felony is that family. Jugueta still fired volleys of shots
which is directly linked to the overt act which landed fatally on the body of the
performed by the offender, not the felony he has daughters of the victim. The two daughters
in his mind. expired upon arrival in the hospital. Is
Jugueta liable for double murder and multiple
Attempted felony vis-a-vis Frustrated felony attempted murder?
NOTE: The SC held that in case of killing, whether dangerous drugs. (People v. Lay/o, G.R. No.
parricide, homicide, or murder, the killing will be 192235,july 6, 2011)
in the frustrated stage if the injury sustained is
fatal, sufficient to bring about death but death Formal crimes vis-A-xis Material crimes
did not supervene because the immediate
medical intervention. If the wound inflicted was FORMAL CRIMES MATERIAL CRIMES
not fatal, the crime is only in its attempted stage
Consummated in one There are three
because the offender still has to perform another
instant. no attempt stages of execution
act in order to consummate the crime. (People v.
(e.g. physical injuries,
Gutierrez, G.R. No.188602, February 4, 2010)
faJse testimony, oral
defamation)
Insrances wherein the sraees ofa crime wm
notaoolx CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL
1. Offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws, ART. 8, RPC
unless otherwise provided for;
2. Formal crimes (e.g. slander, adultery, false Consniracx
testimony, etc.);
3. Impossible crimes; Exists when two or more persons come to an
4. Crimes consummated by mere attempt or agreement concerning the commission of a felony
proposal or by overt act (e.g.attempt to flee to and decide to commit it. (1996, 1997, 1998,
an enemy country, corruptlon of minors,
2003, 2005 BAR)
treason);
5. Felonies by omission; and GR: When conspiracy exists, the degree of
6. Crimes committed by mere agreement (e.g. participation of each conspirator is not
betting in sports, corruption of public officers). considered because the act of one is the act of all·
thus, they have equal criminal responsibility.
Q: Two police officers dressed as civilians
were conducting surveillance In Binangonan, XPN: Even though there was conspiracy, if a co
IUzal. They went near a store when suddenly conspirator merely cooperated in the
Rolando and his wife arrived and approached commission of the crime with insignificant or
the police officers not knowing their real minimal acts, such that even without his
identity. Rolando spoke to one of the officers cooperation, the crime could be carried out as
and asked "gusto mo bang umi-score ng well, such co-conspirator should be punished as
shabu?" The officer replied, •bakit meron ka an accomplice only. (People v. Niem, CA No. 521,
ba?" Rolando answered in the affirmative and
December 20, 1945)
then he took a sachet of shabu and showed it.
When the officer asked bow much the shabu XPN to the XPN: When the act constitutes a
was, Rolando replied P200. Upon seeing the single indivisible offense.
sachet, the police officers immediately
introduced themselves and arrested Rolando Requisites of conspiracy
and his wife. They were charged of attempted
illegal sale of dangerous drugs which is found 1. Two or more persons came to an agreement:
under Sec 26 of R.A. 9165. Can there be an 2. Agreement concerned the commission of a
attempted stage in the illegal sale of crime; and
dangerous drugs? 3. Execution of a felony was decided upon.
A: YES. According to the SC, the identities of the NOTE: Mere knowledge, acquiescence to, or
buyer and seller are present. The seller was approval of the act, without cooperation or at
Rolando while the buyers would be the officers. least, agreement to cooperate, is not enough to
The corpus delicti was also established. However, constitute a conspiracy. Except when he is the
there was no delivery because they immediately mastermind in a conspiracy, it is necessary that a
introduced themselves as police officers. conspirator should have performed some overt
Therefore, the consummated sale of the drugs act as a direct or indirect contribution in the
was aborted by the act of the police introducing execution of the crime planned to be committed.
themselves and arresting Rolando. Hence, the
crime committed is only attempted illegal sale of The overt act may consist of:
1. Active participation in the actual commission planned the crime as well, or the man
of the crime itself, who pressed the button of a remote
2. Moral assistance to his co-conspirators by control bomb and the bomb exploded a
being present at the commission of the few streets away).
crime;or
3. Exerting moral ascendancy over the other co Q: Juan and Arturo devised a plan to murder
conspirators. Joel. In a narrow alley near Joel's house, Juan
will hide behind the big lamppost and shoot
Two kinds ofconsniracx Joel when the latter passes through on his
way to work. Arturo will come from the other
1. Conspiracy as a crime - The mere end of the alley and simultaneously shoot Joel
conspiracy is the crime itself. This is only from behind.
true when the law expressly punishes the
mere conspiracy. Otherwise, the conspiracy On the appointed day, Arturo was
does not bring about the commission of the apprehended by the authorities before
crime because conspiracy is not an overt act reaching the alley. When Juan shot Joel as
but a mere preparatory ac.t. planned, he was unaware that Arturo was
arrested earlier. Discuss the criminal liability
Conspiracy must be proven on the same of Arturo, if any.
quantum of evidence as the felony subject of
the agreement of the parties. It may be A: Arturo, being one of the two who devised the
proved by direct or circumstantial evidence plan to murder Joel, thereby becomes co
consisting of acts, words, or conduc.t of the principal by direct conspiracy. What is needed
alleged conspirators prior to, during, and only is an overt ac.t and both will incur criminal
after the commission of the felony to achieve liability. Arturo's liability as a conspirator arose
a common design or purpose. (Franco v. from his participation in jointly devising the
People, G.R.No.171328, February 16, 2011) criminal plan with Juan - to kill Joel and it was
pursuant to that conspiracy that Juan killed Joel.
Examples: Conspiracy to commit treason, There being a conspiracy, the act of one is the act
conspiracy to commit rebellion, conspiracy of all. Arturo, therefore, should be liable as a co
to commit acts like sale, importation and conspirator.
distribution of drugs, conspiracy to commit
access devise fraud, conspiracy to commit Effecr of cnnsoiracx if not all the elements of
terrorism the crime is oresent as reeacds the m
conspirator
NOTE: If one of the traitors/rebels at1:ually
commits treason/rebellion, conspiracy loses GR: When there is conspiracy, it is immaterial if
its juridical personality and it becomes a the element of the offense is not present as
mode to commit a crime. regards one of the conspirators.
a. The other crime was committed in their implement, or in furtherance of, another
presence and they did not prevent its conspiracy in the next level of which the actor is
commission; not an active party. (People v. Sondiganboyan, C.R.
b. When the other crime is the natural No. 158754, August 10, 2007)
consequence of the crime planned (e.g.
homicide resulting from physical Chain consoiracxin daoeerons denes
injuries); or
c. When the resulting crime was a These are series of overlapping transactions
composite crime or a special complex which are construed to involve only one overall
crime. agreement. The different transactions are
considered the links in the overall agreement,
2. Implied Conspiracy - The offenders acted in which is considered the chain. However, the
concert in the commission of the crime. Their transactions will only be considered links in a
acts are coordinated or synchronized in a chain if each link knows that the other links are
way indicative that they are pursuing a involved in the conspiracy and each link has a
common criminal objective, and they shall be vested interest in the success of the overall series
deemed to be acting in conspiracy and their of transactions. (Bruno v. U.S., 308 U.S. 287,
criminal liability shall be collective, not December 4, 1939)
individual.
There is successive communication and
Insrances where uoirv of m,coose and cooperation in much the same way as with
intention in the commission of the crime is legitimate business operations between
� manufacturer and wholesaler, then wholesaler
and retailer, and then retailer and consumer.
1.Spontaneous agreement at the moment of (Estrado v. Sandiganboyan, C.R. No. 148965,
the commission of the crime is sufficient to February 26, 2002)
create joint responsibility.
2. Active cooperation by all offenders in the Wheel or rirfle coosoiracx no olunder
perpetuation of a crime will create joint
There is a single person or group called the
responsibility. "hub," dealing individually with two or more
other persons or groups known as the "spoke"
Q: Cesario died as he was stoned, shot, and and the rim that encloses the spokes is the
was attempted to be pierced by an arrow by common goal in the overall conspiraty. (Estrada
his relatives. Eddie was the one who shot the v. 5andiganboyan, C.R. No. 148965, February 26,
victim while the other accuseds threw stones 2002)
and fired an arrow (but missed). They were
all adjudged guilty of murder by conspiring Evident premeditation in conspiracy
with each other. They claimed that it was only
Eddie who shot Cesario and therefore the Evident premeditation is not automatic in
others shall not be liable. Who are liable? conspiracy. It shall depend on the kind of
conspiracy employed. It may be appreciated in
A: All are liable. Conspiracy was proven in this express. In implied conspiracy, generally, it
case. Conspiracy may also be proven by cannot be appreciated, absent any proof showing
circumstantial evidence when it can be inferred how and when the plan to kill the victim was
from the acts which would prove a joint purpose hatched or the time that elapsed when it was
and design, concerted action, and community of carried out.
interest.
criminal participation, shall not render one Q: Can a head of office be held criminally
criminally liable as co-conspirator. liable as conspirator on the basis of command
responsibility?
NOTE: In order to hold someone criminally liable
for implied conspiracy, in addition to mere A: NO. A head or chief of office cannot be held
presence, there should be overt acts that are criminally liable as a conspirator simply on the
closely-related and coordinated to establish the basis of command responsibility. All heads of
presence of common criminal design and offices have to rely to a reasonable extent on
community of purpose in the commission of the their subordinates and on the good faith of those
crime. who prepare bids, purchase supplies, or enter
into negotiations. It would be a bad precedent if a
Proof ofa orevious aereement to commit a head of office plagued by all-too-common
crime not a requirement problems - dishonest or negligent subordinates,
overwork. multiple assignments or positions, or
In conspiracy, it is not necessary to adduce direct plain incompetence - is suddenly swept into a
evidence of a previous agreement to commit a conspiracy convic.tion simply because he did not
crime. Proof of a previous agreement and personally examine every single detail,
decision to commit the crime is not essential. It is painstakingly trace every step from inception,
sufficient that the malefactors acted in unison and investigate the motives of every person
pursuant to the same objective. (People v. Agacer, involved in a transaction before affixing his
eta/., C.R. No.177751, December 14, 2011) signature as the final approving authority. (Arias
v. Sandiganbayan, C.R. No. 81563, December 19,
Conspiracy may be proven by direct or 1989)
circumstantial evidence consisting of acts, words,
or conduct of the alleged conspirators before, Q: Abubakar, Baraguir, and Farouk were
during, and after the commission of the felony to public officials of the DPWH-ARMM at the
achieve a common design or purpose. Proof of time of the commission of the offense. After
the agreement need not rest on direct evidence the creation of the ARMM, the national
and may be inferred from the conduct of the government allotted funds for the
parties indicating a common understanding implementation of infrastructure projects of
among them with respect to the commission of the region, and a portion of the funds were
the offense. It is likewise not necessary to show transferred to DPWH-ARMM. The Office of the
that such persons met together and entered into President received reports of irregularities
an explicit agreement setting out the details of an attending the implementation of the
unlawful scheme or the details by which an infrastructure projects,. Thus, the COA
illegal objet1:ive is to be carried out. (People v. conducted an investigation and yielded the
Pepino and Gomez, C.R. No. 174471, January 12, following findings: (1) Overpayment; (2)
2016) Excessive advance payments; and (3)
Improper conduct of public bidding. The
Q: Does conspiracy exist when the acts of the report found out that DPWH-ARMM officials
accused were caused by their being awarded several contractors certificate of
frightened by the police officers who were mobilization a week before the conduct of the
allegedly in full battle gear and the fortuitous public bidding. The contractors were also
and unexpected character of the encounter allowed to mobilize their equipment on the
and the rapid turn of events? site. DPWH-ARMM offidals also granted and
allowed disbursement of 30% advance
A: YES. The rapid turn of events cannot be payment to one contractor, with amount was
considered to negate a finding of beyond the 15% limit set by law. Based on the
conspiracy. Unlike evident premeditation, there report, Abubakar, Baraguir, and Guiani were
is no requirement for conspiracy to exist that charged with violation of Sec. 3(e), R.A. 3019.
there be a sufficient period of time to elapse to Before the Court, the petitioners invoked the
afford full opportunity for meditation and Arias Doctrine to exonerate them from
reflection. Instead, conspiracy arises on the very liability. Is the Arias Doctrine applicable to
moment the plotters agree, expressly or exonerate the accused from liability?
impliedly, to commit the subject felony. (People v.
Carandang, eta/., C.R. No. 175926,July 6, 2011) A: NO. The application of the doctrine is subject
to the qualification that the public official has no
foreknowledge of any facts or circumstances that
NOTE: If there is conspiracy to commit Rebellion, Continued crime is different team Icansitocx
and Rebellion is thereafter committed, the .£!i!!!!
accused is liable only for rebellion, the conspiracy
now being merely proofof the Rebellion. Transitory crime, also called "moving crime", is a
concept in criminal procedure to determine the
venue. It may be instituted and tried in the court
Consoiracxvis-a-vis Pronnsaltncommita of the municipality, city, or province where any of
felony
the essential elements thereof took place.
COMPLEX CRIMES (ART. 48, RPC) AND 2. Complex crime proper - when an offense is
COMPOSITE CRIMES the necessary means for committing the
2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2015 BAR) other. (Art 48, RPC)
Imprudence Resulting in Homidde and public office belonging to the military or national
Damage to Property. Can lvler be convicted police. Art. 48 of the Code may apply under the
with the two offenses? (2013 BAR) conditions therein provided.
Requisites of self-defense (URL) [19931 1996, 2. The attack or assault must be actual, or at
2002 2003 2005 RAB) least. imminent; and
3. The attack or assault must be unlawful.
1. Unlawful aggression; (People v. Mopait, G.R. No. 172606, November
2. Reasonable necessity of the means 23,2011)
employed to prevent or repel it; and
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of Lawfulaeeression
the person defending himself.
The fulfillment of a duty or the exercise of a right
No transfer of burden of proof when pleading in a more or less violent manner.
self-defense
Example:
The burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable
doubt is not lifted from the shoulders of the State The act of a chief police who used violence by
which carries it until the end of the proceedings. throwing stones at the accused when the latter
It is the burden of evidence that is shifted to the was running away from him to elude arrest for a
accused to satisfactorily establish the fact of self crime committed in his presence, is not unlawful
defense. In other words, only the onus probandl aggression, it appearing that the purpose of the
shifts to the accused, for self-defense is an peace officer was to capture the accused and
affirmative allegation that must be established place him under arrest. (People v. Gayramo, G.R.
with certainty by sufficient and satisfactory Nos. L-39270 and L-39271,October 30,1934)
proof. (People v. Del Castillo et al., G.R. No. 169084,
January 18, 2012) NOTE: If a public officer exceeded his authority,
he may become an unlawful aggressor.
NOTE: Unlawful aggression is an indispensable
requisite or condition slne qua non for self Two kinds of unlawful aggression
defense to arise.
1. Actual or material unlawful aggression
Nature of the unlawful aggression [BAR 1993, which means an attack with physical force or
� with a weapon, an offensive act that
positively determines the intent of the
If there is no unlawful aggression, there is aggressor to cause the injury; and
nothing to prevent or repel. The second requisite
of defense will have no basis. (Reyes, 2017) 2. Imminent unlawful aggression which is an
attack that is impending or at the point of
For unlawful aggression to be appreciated, there happening; it must not consist in a mere
must be an .. ac.tual, sudden and unexpected threatening attitude. (People v. Mapoi� G.R.
attack. or imminent danger thereof, not merely a No. 172606, November 23, 2011)
threatening or intimidating attitude" and the
accused must present proof of positively strong Kind of threat that will ammmt to unlawful
act of real aggression. (People v. Sabella, G.R. No . aeeression
183092, May 30, 2011; People v. Camposand
Acoba, G.R. No. 176061,july 4,2011) In case of threat, it must be offensive and strong,
positively showing the wrongful intent to cause
NOTE: Self-defense is not feasible as in case of a injury. It presupposes actual, sudden,
fight. There is no unlawful aggression when there unexpected, or imminent danger · not merely
was an agreement to fight and the challenge to threatening and intimidating action. It is present
fight has been accepted. The parties are only when the one attacked faces real and
considered aggressors as aggression is bound to immediate threat to one's life. (People v.
arise in the course of the fight. But aggression Maningding, G.R. No.19S665, September 14, 2011
which is ahead of a stipulated time and place is reiterating People v. Gabrino and People v.
unlawful. Manulit)
1. There must be a physical or material attack or The test for the presence of unlawful aggression
assault; under the circumstances is whether the
aggression from the victim puts in real peril the
life or personal safety of the person defending
himself. (People v. Mapai� G.R. No. 172606, Example: There is self-defense even if the
November 23, 2011) aggressor used a toy gun provided that the
accused believed it to be a real gun.
Q: Spouses Jesus and Ana Del Mundo went to
sleep in their nipa hut. Upon arriving, the Person who employed the unlawful
spouses saw Ampong and Nora Castillo having aeeressino
sex. Aghast at what he saw, Jesus shouted
invectives at Ampong and Nora who both Oed To constitute an element of self-defense, the
away. Jesus pursued Ampong and Nora at the unlawful aggression must come, direc.tly or
house of Ampong's aunt but neither Ampong indirec.tly, from the person who was
nor Nora was there. Thereafter, be walked at subsequently attacked by the accused. (People v.
home when he was then blocked by Ampong Gutierrez, G.R. No.31010, September 26, 1929)
and bis fellow accused. Without provocation,
Ampong and his fellow accused hit Jesus with Q: A claims that the death of B was an accident
a stone on different parts of his body. The and his act was just for self-defense when his
accused then left Jesus on the ground, revolver accidentally hit the victim while he
bloodied. After the x-ray examinations, Jesus was struggling the same with his real enemy,
was found to have sustained a crack in his C. Is his contention correct?
skull. Are the evidence presented sufficient
evidence: first, to prove that justifying A: NO. In this case, A was not repelling any
circumstances existed; and second, to convict unlawful aggression from B, thereby rendering
the petitioners? his plea of self-defense unwarranted. His act
amounted to aberratio ictus. (Matic v. People, G.R.
A: NO. Ampong and his fellow accused failed to No.180219, November 23, 2011)
present sufficient evidence to prove that
justifying circumstance of self-defense and Bem,isUes to sarisfv the "'reasonable necessitv
defense of a relative exist. therefore resulting to ofrhemeans emnlnvedtnnrevent or renel ir
their conviction. Petitioners' entire defense rests
on proof that it was fesus who initiated an assault 1. Nature and quality of the weapon used by the
by barging into the premises of petitioners' aggressor;
residences, hacking Victor's door, and 2. Physical condition, character. size, and other
threatening physical harm upon petitioners and circumstances of both the offender and
their companions. That is, that unlawful defender; and
aggression originated from fesus. 3. Place and occasion of the assault
Contrary to what a successful averment of self NOTE: Perfect equality between the weapons
defense or defense of a relative requires, used by the one defending himself and that of the
petitioners offered nothing more than a self aggressor is not required. What the law requires
serving, uncorroborated claim that Jesus is rational equivalence.
appeared out of nowhere to go berserk in the
vicinity of their homes. They failed to present Doctrine of Rational Equivalence
independent and credible proof to back up their
assertions. The Regional Trial Court noted that it The reasonable necessity of the means employed
was highly dubious that Jesus would go all the does not imply material commensurability
way to petitioners' residences to initiate an between the means of attack and defense. What
attack for no apparent reason. (Velasquez v. the law requires is rational equivalence, in the
People, G.R. No. 195021, March 15, 2017, as consideration of which will enter the principal
penned byJ. Leonen) factors: the emergency, the imminent danger to
which the person attacked is exposed, and the
EO:ea ifthere wasamistake nftaa on the nart instinct, more than the reason. that moves or
of the accused impels the defense, and the proportionateness
thereof does not depend upon the harm done, but
In relation to mistake of fatt, the belief of the rests upon the imminent danger of such injury.
accused may be considered in determining the (Espinosa v. People, G.R. No. 181071, March 15,
existence of unlawful aggression. 2010)
Factors taken into consideration in NOTE: The aggression ceases except when
dererminine the reasonableness of means retreat is made to take a more advantageous
emoloved bx thenersoo defendine himself position to ensure the success of the attack which
has begun as unlawful aggression still continues.
1. Means were used to prevent or repel;
2. Means must be necessary and there is no Q: One night, Lina, a young married woman,
other way to prevent or repel it; and was sound asleep in her bedroom when she
3. Means must be reasonable - depending on the felt a man on top of her. Thinking it was her
circumstances, but generally proportionate to husband Tito, who came home a day early
the force of the aggressor. from his business trip, Lina allowed him to
have sex with her. After the act, the man said,
lnsraoces when there can he lack of sufficient "I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did." Not
provocation on the person defending himself recognizing the voice, it dawned upon Lina
that the man was not Tito, her husband.
1. No provocation at all was given to the Furious, Lina took out Tito's gun and shot the
aggressor by the person defending himself; man. Charged with homidde, Lina denies
2. Even if provocation was given, it was not culpability on the ground of defense of honor.
sufficient; Is her claim tenable? (1998, 2000 BAR)
3. Even if provocation was sufficient, it was not
given by the person defending himself; A: NO. Lina's daim that she acted in defense of
4. Even if provocation was given by the person honor is not tenable because the unlawful
defending himself, it was not proximate and aggression on her honor had already ceased.
immediate to the act of aggression; and Defense of honor, as included in self-defense,
5. Sufficient means proportionate to the damage must have been done to prevent or repel an
caused by the act. and adequate to stir one to unlawful aggression. There is no defense to speak
its commission. of where the unlawful aggression no longer
exists.
1.ack of sufficient orovorarion
Q: Gain, Mercado, Rey, and Manzo were
Sufficient provocation should not come from the strolling at the Municipal Park, when they
person defending himself, and it must were blocked by four (4) persons, namely
immediately precede the aggression. Lalog. Concepcion, Ramirez, and Litada.
Mercado was walking ahead of Gain. When he
Control of blows nfnecsnndefendinehimself looked back, he saw Gain being ganged upon
by the group of the accused-appellants who
The person defending himself cannot be expected held both the hands of Gain, while Lalog
to think clearly so as to control his blow. The stabbed Gain. Lalog admitted stabbing Gain in
killing of the unlawful aggressor may still be self-defense. Will his defense lie?
justified as long as the mortal wounds are
inflicted at a time when the elements of complete A: NO. Lalog's defense will not lie. To avail of self
self-defense are still present. defense as a justifying circumstance so as not to
incur any criminal liability, it must be proved
Q: A unlawfully attacked B with a knife. B then with certainty by satisfactory and convincing
took out his gun which caused A to run away. evidence which excludes any vestige of criminal
B, after treating his wounds, pursued A and aggression on the part of the person invoking it.
shot him. Can B invoke self-defense?
The testimony of prosecution witness Mere.ado
A: NO. The unlawful aggression, which has that Gain was stabbed at his back by Lalog while
begun, no longer exists. When the aggressor runs both his hands were being held by the other
away, the one making a defense has no more appellants is more logical, believable, and in
right to kill or even to wound the former consonance with the physical evidence.
aggressor. In order to justify homicide on the Furthermore, the number of wounds sustained
ground of self-defense, it is essential that the by Gain is indicative of Lalog's desire to kill the
killing of the deceased by the defendant be former and not really defend himself because not
simultaneous with the attack made by the a single moment of the incident was his life and
deceased, or at least both atts succeeded each limb being endangered which is the essence of
other without appreciable interval of time. self-defense.
The crime committed was murder because "Battered Woman Syndrome· (BWS)
treachery is present in this case. (People v. la/og, (Discussedfurther on Special Peno/ lows)
G.R. No.196753, April 21, 2014)
It refers to a scientifically defined pattern of
Self-defense vis-a-vis Retaliation psychological and behavioral symptoms found in
women living in battering relationships as a
SELF-DEFENSE RETALIATION result of cumulative abuse. (Sec. 3, por. C, R.A.
9262)
The unlawful The inceptual
aggression still unlawful aggression Battered women include wives or women in any
existed when the had already ceased form of intimate relationship with men. (Reyes,
aggressor was when the accused 2017)
injured or disabled attacked him.
by the person making Battery
the defense.
It is any act of inflicting physical harm upon the
"Sraod eronnd when in the riehrdoctrine woman or her child resulting to physical,
psychological, or emotional distress. (Sec. 3, par.
A rule which does not require a person, who is 8, R.A. 9262)
where he has a right to be, to retreat in the face of
a rapidly advancing attacker threatening him cvcre ofYinlence
with a deadly weapon, but entitles him to do
whatever he believes is necessary to protect The battered woman syndrome is charac.terized
himself from great bodily harm. (U.S. v. Domen, by the so-called cycle of violence, which has 3
G.R. No.l-12963, October 25, 1917) phases:
NOTE: Stand ground when in the right dot1:rine is 1. Tension building phase;
the rule followed in the Philippines as opposed to 2. Acute battering incident; and
the retreat to the wall doctrine. 3. Tranquil, loving (or at least non-violent)
phase.
Retreattnthe wall doctrine
NOTE: The defense should prove all three (3)
This doctrine makes it the duty of a person phases of cycle of violence characterizing the
assailed to retreat as far as he can before he is relationship of the parties. (People v. Genosa, G.R.
justified in meeting force with force. (U.S. v. No. 135981,Jonuory 15, 2004)
Domen, G.R. No. l-12963, October 25, 1917)
BWS used asadefense (2014 2015RABJ
ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR
CHILDREN ACT OF 2004 Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to
R.A. 9262 be suffering from battered woman syndrome do
not incur any criminal or civil liability
Battered woman notwithstanding the absence of any of the
elements for justifying circumstances of self·
A woman who is repeatedly subjected to any defense under the RPC. (Sec. 26, R.A. 9262)
forceful physical or psychological behavior by a
man to coerce her to do something he wants her In layman's terms, if an abused woman kills or
to do without any concern for her rights. inflicts physical injuries on her abusive husband
or live·in partner. and the trial court determines
NOTE: To be classified as a battered woman, the that she is suffering from "Battered Woman
couple must go through the battering cycle at Syndrome," the court will declare her not guilty.
least twice. Any woman may find herself in an (People v. Genoso, G.R. No. 135981, January 15,
abusive relationship with a man once. If it occurs 2004)
a second time, and she remains in the situation,
she is defined as a battered woman. (People v. The law now allows the battered woman
Genosa, G.R. No. 135981,Jonuary 15, 2004) syndrome as a valid defense in the crime of
parricide independent of self-defense under the
BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME RPC. (Sec. 26, RA 9262)
In the determination of the state of mind of the NOTE: If the degree of consanguinity or affinity is
woman who was suffering from battered woman beyond the fourth degree, it will be considered
syndrome at the time of the commission of the defense of a stranger.
crime, the courts shall be assisted by expert
psychiatrists/psychologists. (Sec. 26, R.A. 9262) NOTE: Death of one spouse does not terminate
the relationship by affinity established between
NOTE: Only a certified psychologist or the surviving spouse and the blood relatives of
psychiatrist can prove the existence of a Battered the deceased. (Intestate Estate of Manalita
Woman Syndrome in a woman. Gonzales Vda. De Carungcang v. People, G.R. No.
181409, February 11, 2010)
Women who ran avail ofRWS asadefense
NOTE: Motive is relative in this kind of defense.
1. Wife;
2. Former wife; DEFENSE OF A STRANGER
3. A woman with whom the person has or had a ART.11(3), RPC
sexual or dating relationship;
Beonisites ofdefense ofstcaneer
NOTE: The "dating relationship" that the law
contemplates can exist even without a sexual 1. Unlawful aggression;
intercourse taking place between those 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed
involved. to prevent or repel it; and
3. The person defending be not induced by
4. A woman with whom he has a common child, revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.
or against her child whether legitimate or
illegitimate, within or without the family Whoare deemed stcaneecs?
abode.
Any person not included in the enumeration of
DEFENSE OF RELATIVES relatives mentioned in par. 2, ArL 11 of RPC.
ART. 11(2), RPC
AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL OR
BeoniSites ofdefense nfrelarives STATE OF NECESSITY
ART.11(4), RPC
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed Beonisites nfsrate ofneressitvCl990RABl
to prevent or repel it; and
3. In case the provocation was given by the 1. Evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
person attacked, the one making a defense 2. Injury feared be greater than that done to
had no part therein. avoid it;
3. There be no other practical and less harmful
Meanina ofthe thicctremtisite means of preventing it; and
4. That the state of necessity or emergency was
There is still a legitimate defense even if the not due to the fault or negligence of the
relative being defended has given provocation person claiming the defense.
Relatives covered under the iusrifu'ioe NOTE: The state of necessity must not have been
rircnmsrance brought about by the negligence or imprudence
by the one invoking the justifying circumstances.
1. Spouse; (1998, 2004 BAR)
2. Ascendants;
3. Descendants; Doctrine of Self-help
4. Legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and
sisters, or relatives by affinity in the same "The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has the
degree (namely: ascendants-in-law, right to exclude any person from the enjoyment
descendants-in-law, and siblings-in-law); and and disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may
5. Relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil use such force as may be reasonably necessary to
degree. repel or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful
physical invasion or usurpation of his property.•
(Art 429, New Civil Cade)
Materiality of good faith on the part of the The following are exempted from criminal
suhocdinare liahilirx (If-SAC-If)
If he obeyed an order in good faith, not being 1. An !mbeclle or an insane person, unless the
aware of its illegality, he is not liable. However, latter has acted during a lucid interval;
the order must not be patently illegal. If the order
is patently illegal, this circumstance cannot be 2. A child ,E.ifteen years of age or under is
validly invoked. exempt from criminal liability under R.A.
9344; (1998 BAR)
NOTE: Even if the order is patently illegal, the
subordinate may still be able to invoke an 3. A person who is Sixteen to seventeen years
exempting circumstance: (1) having acted upon old, unless has acted with discernment. in
the compulsion of an irresistible force; or (2) which case, such child shall be subject to
under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear. appropriate proceedings in accordance with
R.A. 9344; (2000 BAR)
Q: Mayor Adalin was transferred from the
provincial jail of Eastern Samar to the 4. Any person who, while performing a lawful
residence of Governor Ambil upon the act with due c.are, causes an injury by mere
issuance of the order granting the jail warden ,iccident without the fault or intention of
of such actions. causing it; (1992, 2000 BAR)
Gov. Ambil tried to justify the transfer by 5. Any person who acts under the ,!;ompulsion
stating that it was caused by the imminent of an irresistible force;
threats upon Mayor Adalin. Sandiganbayan
convicted the jail warden and Gov. Ambil 6. Any person who acts under the Impulse of
guilty for violating Sec 3(e) of R.A 3019. May an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater
the governor's actions b e justified on the injury; and
ground that be merely acted in the fulfillment
of bis duty? 7. Any person who f.ails to perform an act
required by law, when prevented by some
May the actions of the jail warden be justified lawful or insuperable cause. (1994 BAR)
as be was merely following orders from the
governor? Basis fnr exemorion from criminalliahiHrv
A: NO. A governor of a province has no power to
EXEMPTING
order the transfer of a detention prisoner. Nor BASIS
CIRCUMSTANCE
can the provincial jail warden follow such an
unlawful order. Thus, neither of them can invoke Insanity/Imbecility Lack of intelligence
the justifying circumstance of lawful exercise of
Minority Lack of intelligence
office or obedience to a lawful order. (Ambil v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 175457,July 6,2011) Accident without fault
Lack of criminal
or intention of
intent
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES causin2. it
ART. 12, RPC Compulsion of
Lack of freedom
irresistible force
ExemotineCirn,msrances Cnon-imourahmtxl Uncontrollable fear Lack of freedom
Prevented by some
These are grounds for exemption from Lack of criminal
lawful or insuperable
punishment because there is wanting in the agent intent
cause
of the crime any of the conditions which make
the att voluntary or negligent. (Reyes, 2017) Q: In cases of exempting drcumstances, is
there a crime committed?
GR: No criminal liability, but there is civil liability
A: YES. There is a crime committed but no
XPN: Par. 4 and Par. 7 are exempted from both criminal liability arises from it because of the
criminal and civil liability complete absence of any of the conditions which
constitute free will or voluntariness of the act.
doctors, this event triggered the mental mentaJ condition or ailment and that such
disability since when he returned to the deprivation manifest itself during the commission
Philippines, his attitude had changed of the crime. He is clinically diagnosed as a
considerably. The prosecution claimed that schizophrenic. and that in the recent years and
during the commission of the crime, it was a immediately before the incident. it was apparent
lucid interval for Rosalino because when he that he was not in the right state of mind since his
was being treated in the mental hospital, he eyes were bloodshot and not acting accordingly.
was shouting that he killed Mrs. Sigua. Can (Verdodero v. People, G.R. No. 216021, Morch 2,
defense of insanity be appreciated? 2016)
A: NO. Insanity in our law exists when there is a Effeas nfinsanitx ofthe accused
complete deprivation or intelligence. The
statement of one of the witnesses that the accused 1. At the time of the commission of the crime -
knew the nature or what he had done makes it exempted from criminal liability.
highly doubtful that he was insane when he 2. During trial - proceedings are suspended
committed the act charged. Generally. in criminal until the mental capacity of the accused is
cases, every doubt is resolved in favor of the restored to afford him fair trial. Accused is
accused. But in the defense or insanity, doubt as to then committed to a hospital.
the fact or insanity should be resolved in favor or 3. After judgment or while serving sentence -
sanity. The burden or proving the affirmative execution or judgment is suspended and the
allegation or insanity rests on the defense. The accused will be committed to a hospital. The
quantum of evidence required to overthrow the period of confinement in the hospital is
presumption of sanity is proof beyond reasonable counted for the purpose of the prescription
doubt. Insanity is a defense in a confession and of the penalty.
avoidance and as such must be proved beyond
reasonable doubt. Insanity must be clearly and Other instances of insanity
satisfactorily proved in order to acquit the accused.
In this case, Rosalina has not successfully 1. Dementia proecox (Schizoprenia) is covered
discharged the burden of overcoming the by the term insanity because homicidal
presumption that he committed the crime as attack is common in such form of psychosis.
charged freely, knowingly, and intelligently. It is characterized by delusions that he is
(People v. Dungo, G.R. No 89420,July 31,1991) being interfered with sexually, or that his
property is being taken, thus the person has
Aooceciarinn of insanitv as an exemorine no control over his acts. (People v. Bonoan,
circumstance G.R. No. L-45130, February 17, 1937
2. Kleptomania or presence of abnormal,
Insanity presupposes that the accused was persistent impulse or tendency to steal, to be
completely deprived of reason or discernment and considered exempting will still have to be
freedom of will at the time of the commission of investigated by competent psychiatrist to
the crime. Only when there is a complete determine if the unlawful act is due to
deprivation of intelligence at the time of the irresistible impulse produced by his mental
commission of the crime should the exempting defect, thus loss of willpower. If such mental
circumstance of insanity be considered. (People v. defect only diminishes the exercise or his
Bulogao, G.R. No. 184757, October 5, 2011) willpower and did not deprive him of the
consciousness of his acts, it is only
Q: Verdadero, the accused in this case, mitigating.
repeatedly stabbed Romeo, the victim, with a 3. Epilepsy which is chronic nervous disease
Rambo knife. He was successfully detained by characterized by compulsive motions of the
the police officers. Accused testified that he is muscles and loss of consciousness may be
insane during the commission or the crime and covered by the term insanity.
that he is clinically diagnosed as a 4. The SC considered the following as included
schizophrenic that relapses often in the recent in the term ·insanity": lack or controlled
years prior to the incident that happened. Is he consciousness, such as while dreaming
liable for homidde? (People v. Toneo, G.R. No. l·37673, Morch 31,
1933), and somnambulism or sleep-walking.
A: NO. The accused was able to interpose the (People v. Gimeno, G.R. No. L-33877, February
defense of insanity which requires that the person 6,1931)
be completely deprived of intelligence due to the
AGE CRIMINAL
TREATMENT
Accident
BRACKET LIABILITY
15 years old Exempt The child shall It is something that happens outside the sway of
or below be subjetted to our will, and although it comes about through
a community- some act of our will, lies beyond the bounds of
based humanly foreseeable consequences. It
intervention presupposes a lack of intention to commit the
oroe:ram. wrong done. (People v. Del Cruz, G.R. No. 187683,
Above 15 Exempt The child shall February 11, 2010)
years old but be subietted to
If the consequences are plainly foreseeable, it will firearm with its barrel pointed towards the giver
be a case of negligence. or any other person was not proper. That he did
these improper acts despite his training and
Elements of Accident: experience as a security guard undermines any
notion that he had acted with due care during the
1. A person is performing a lawful act; subject incident. (People v. Lanuza, G.R. No.
2. With due care; 188562, August 17, 2011)
3. He causes injury to another by mere
COMPULSION OF IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
accident; and
ART. 12(5), RPC
4. Without fault or intention of causing it.
Q: A and B are both security guards. A turned Nan,ce nfohvsiral force ceaniced in oar s
over to B a service firearm who held it with
both hands, with the muzzle pointed at A and The force must be irresistible to reduce the actor
the butt towards B. At that moment, B held to a mere instrument who acts not only without a
opposite the muzzle of the gun where the will but against his will. The duress, force, fear,
trigger is, and almost slip with it while in the or intimidation must be present. imminent and
act of gripping and then immediately the gun impending, and of such a nature as to induce a
went off and accidentally shot A. A was able to well-grounded apprehension of death or serious
recover from the shot. B was then charged bodily harm if the act is not done. A threat of
with frustrated homicide. can B raise the future injury is not enough. The compulsion must
defense of accident to mitigate his liability? be of such a character as to leave no opportunity
to the accused for escape or self-defense in equal
A: NO. It is axiomatic that a person who invokes combat. (People v. Lorena, G.R. No. L-54414,July 9,
accident must prove that he acted with due 1984)
care. This was belied by the conduct of the
accused when he allegedly received the shotgun Q: Baculi, who was not a member of the band
from the private complainant. As he himself which murdered some American school
admitted, he received the shotgun by placing his teachers, was in a plantation gathering
pointer linger, also known as the trigger finger, to bananas. Upon hearing the shooting, he ran.
squeeze the trigger, inside the trigger guard and However, Baculi was seen by the leaders of
over the trigger itself. Worse, he did so while the the band who called him, and striking him
barrel of the gun was pointed at the private with the butts of their guns. They compelled
complainant him to bury the bodies. Is he liable as an
accessory to the crime of murder?
According to him, he knew that it was not proper
for a person to receive a firearm from another by A: NO. Baculi is not criminally liable as accessory
immediately inserting a finger inside the trigger for concealing the body of the crime of murder
guard. Likewise, he knew that the hand-over of a committed by the band because he acted under
the compulsion of an irresistible force. (U.S. v. leave no opportunity to the accused for escape or
Cabal/eras, G.R. No. 1352, March 29, 1905) self-defense in equal combat.
Q: Rogelio Delos Reyes, along with Roderick In case of uncontrollable fear, it is necessary that
Licayan and Roberto Lara, were charged with the threat that caused the uncontrollable fear on
the crime of Kidnapping for Ransom. In bis the offender must be present, clear, and personal.
defense, Delos Reyes argued that be was It must not only be/merely an imagined threat or
merely passing by at the crime scene when court interfered threat.
one of the co-accused pointed a gun at him
and forced him to guard the victims. Hence, be Irresistible force vis-a-vis Uncontrollable fear
is entitled to the exempting circumstance of
compulsion due to irresistible force. Is the IRRESISTIBLE UNCONTROLLABLE
exempting circumstance of compulsion due to FORCE FEAR
irresistible force present A person is A person is compelled
compelled by by another to commit
A: NO. A person invoking the exempting another to commit a a crime by means of
circumstance of compulsion due to irresistible crime by means of intimidation or
force admits in effect the commission of a violence or physical threat.
punishable act, which must show that the force.
irresistible force reduced him to a mere The irresistible force The uncontrollable
instrument that acted not only without will but must have been fear may be
also against his will. The duress, force, fear, or made to operate generated by a
intimidation must be present. imminent and direttly upon the threatened act
impending; and it must be of such a nature as to person of the directed to a third
induce a well-grounded apprehension of death or accused, and the person, such as the
serious bodily harm if the att is not done. It is injury feared may be wife of the accused
hard to believe that a person who accidentally of a lesser degree who was kidnapped,
discovers kidnap victims would be held at than the damage but the evil feared
gunpoint by the kidnappers to guard said vittims. caused by the must be greater or at
(People v. Licayan, et al., G.R. No. 203961, July 29, accused. least equal to the
2015) damage caused to
avoid it.
UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
ART. 12(6), RPC The person who used the force or created the
fear is criminally and primarily civilly liable, but
Basis nfexemotlon the accused who performed the act involuntarily
and under duress is still secondarily civilly liable.
The absence of freedom. (Art 101, RPC)
Moreover, the reason for their entry to the van 1. Incomplete justifying or exempting
could be taken as their way of keeping Feliciano circumstance (Privileged Mitigating
Tan under further surveillance at a most critical circumstance); (1990, 1996 BAR)
time. (People v. Soldano, G.R. No. 148518, April 15, 2. The offender is under 18 or over 70 years old;
2004) 3. No intention to commit so grave a wrong
(proeter intentionem); (2000, 2001 BAR)
PREVENTED BY SOME LAWFUL OR 4. Sufficient threat or provocation;
INSUPERABLE CAUSE 5. Vindication of a grave offense; (1993, 2000,
ART. 12 (7), RPC 2003 BAR)
6. Passion or obfuscation;
Basis ofthe exemorine drcnmstance 7. Voluntary surrender; (1992, 1996, 1997,
1999 BAR)
The absence of intent. 8. Physical defect;
9. Illness of the offender;
lnsunerahle cause 10. Similar and analogous circumstances; and
11. Humanitarian reasons. Uoril/o v. People, G.R.
Some motive which has lawfully, morally, or No. 164435, September 29, 2009)
physically prevented a person from doing what
the law commands. NOTE: Mitigating circumstances must be present
prior to or simultaneously with the commission
BeoniSites of the offense, except voluntary surrender or
confession of guilt by the accused. (Art 13, par. 7,
1. An act is required by law to be done; RPC)
2. A person fails to perform such act; and
3. Failure to perform such act was due to some Effecrs of mitlearine circumstances in the
lawful or insuperable cause. nature of the crime
NOTE: It applies to felonies by omission. They reduce the penalty but do not change the
nature of the crime.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
ART. 13, RPC Classes nfmitieatlne drcumsrances
Mitiearioe Cica,msrances 1. Ordinary mitigating
2. Privileged mitigating
Those which, if present in the commission of the
crime, do not entirely free the actor from Ordinary mitiearine vis-ta-yjs Privileeed
criminal liability but serve only to reduce the mirieatine
penalty.
ORDINARY PRIVILEGED
One single att cannot be made the basis of more
MITIGATING MITIGATING
than one mitigating circumstance. Hence, a
mitigating circumstance arising from a single act Can be offset by Can never be offset by
absorbs all the other mitigating circumstances aggravating any aggravating
arising from the same act. circumstances circumstance
Ordinary mitigating Privileged mitigating
Basis ofmitiearine drcumsrances circumstances, if not circumstances operate
The basis is diminution of either freedom of offset, will operate to to reduce the penalty
action, intelligence, or intent or on the lesser reduce the penalty to by one to two degrees,
perversity of the offender. the minimum period, depending upon what
provided the penalty the law provides
NOTE: It is not considered in Art. 365. is a divisible one
Not considered in the Always considered
Circumstances which can mitigate criminal determination of the regardless of the
liability proper penalty when penalty imposed
the penalty
prescribed by law for
the single crime is a
sinQ/e indivisible
1. Some of the conditions required to justify the 2. If aside from the element af unlawful
deed or to exempt from criminal liability are aggression� another requls;te but not all ls
lacking; present- privileged mitigating circumstance
2. The majority of such conditions are
nonetheless present; and NOTE: In such a case, the imposable penalty
3. When the circumstance has an indispensable shall be reduced by one or two degrees
element. that element must be present in the depending upon how the court regards the
case. (Regalado, 2007) importance of the requisites present
Applicable only to offenses resulting to physical Threat need not he offensive and oosWvetv
injuries or material harm. Hence, it cannot be £tl:l2il£
appreciated in cases of defamation or slander.
(Reyes, 2017) Threat should not be offensive and positively
strong because if it was, the threat to inflict real
NOTE: The mitigating circumstance of lack of injury becomes unlawful aggression, which may
intent to commit so grave a wrong as that give rise to self-defense and, thus, no longer a
actually perpetrated cannot be appreciated mitigating circumstance.
where the at-ts employed by the accused were
reasonably sufficient to produce and did actually Provorarinn
produce the death of the victim. (People v. Sales,
G.R. No. 177218, October 3, 2011) Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the
offended party, capable of exciting. inciting. or
Q: Buenamer committed robbery inside a irritating anyone.
passenger FX by threatening to shoot the
passengers if they do not give their wallets "Sufficient threat or provocation as a
and cellphones. Buenamer was successful in mitiaotina Ciccumstoa,e" vis-a-vis ''Threat or
taking the things of the passengers. Tan, one provocation as an element of self-defense•
of the passengers, chased Buenamer who [People v. CA, G.R. No.103613. Feb. 23. 20011
boarded a passenger jeepney in order to
escape. Buenamer boxed Tan when be held on SUFFICIENT
to the handlebar of the jeepney, causing him THREAT OR
THREAT OR
to lose bis grip and fall from the jeepney and PROVOCATION AS
PROVOCATION AS A
thereafter was ran over by the rear tire of AN ELEMENT OF
MITIGATING
said jeepney and died. Buenamer contends DEFENSE
CIRCUMSTANCE
that be should be given the mitigating It pertains to its It pertains to its
circumstance of lack of intent to commit so presence on the part absence on the part of
grave a wrong. Is Buenamer entitled for the of the offended party. the person defending
mitigating circumstance? himself.
A: NO. This mitigating circumstance addresses Sufficiency of threat or provocation depends on:
itself to the intention of the offender at the
particular moment when the offender executes or 1. The act constituting the provocation;
commits the criminal act. This mitigating 2. The social standing of the person provoked;
circumstance is obtaining when there is a notable 3. Time and place the provocation took place
disparity between the means employed by the
Q: Tomas' mother insulted Petra. Petra kills NOTE: This has reference to the honor of a
Tomas because of the insults. Can Petra avail person. It concerns the good names and
of the mitigating circumstance? reputation of the individual. (11.S. v. Ampar, G.R.
Na. L-12883, November 26, 1917)
A: NO. There is no mitigating circumstance
because it was the mother who insulted her, not Beonisites ofvindicationofa erave offense
Thomas. The liability of the accused is mitigated
only insofar as it concerns the harm inflicted on 1. Grave offense has been done to the one
the person who made the provocation, but not committing the felony, his spouse,
with regard to the other victims who did not ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural
participate in the provocation. (U.S. v. Malabanan, or adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by
G.R. No. L-3964, November 26, 1907) affinity within the same degree; and
2. A felony is committed in vindication of such
Beason whx the Jaw ceonires that grave offense.
..ncnxorarion must he immediate to rhe acr ..
(i.e., to the commission of the crime by the "Offense• contemplated
oecson who is oroxokedl
The word offense should not be construed as
If there was an interval of time, the conduct of the equivalent to crime. It is enough that a wrong
offended party could not have excited the doing was committed.
accused to the commission of the crime, he
having had time to regain his reason and to Factors to be considered in determining
exercise self-control. Moreover. the law whether the wrong is grave or not
presupposes that during that interval, whatever
anger or diminished self-control may have I. Age;
emerged from the offender had already vanished 2. Education; and
or diminished. 3. Social status.
As long as the offender at the time he committed Lapse of time allowed between the
the felony was still under the influence of the vindication and the dnine nfthe erave offense
outrage caused by the provocation or threat, he is
acting under a diminished self-control. This is the The word "immediate" in par. 5 is not an accurate
reason why it is mitigating. However, there are translation of the Spanish text which uses the
two criteria that must be taken into term "proxima." A lapse of time is allowed
consideration: between the vindication and the doing of the
grave offense.
1. If there is a material lapse of time and there
is no finding that the effect of the threat or It is enough that:
provocation had prolonged and affected the
offender at the time he committed the crime, 1. The offender committed the crime;
then the criterion to be used is based on time 2. The grave offense was done to him, his
element. spouse, his ascendant or descendant or to his
2. However, if there is that time element and at brother or sister, whether natural, adopted
the same time, there is a finding that at the or legitimate; and
time the offender committed the crime, he is 3. The grave offense is the proximate cause of
still suffering from outrage of the threat or the commission of the crime.
provocation done to him, then, he will still
get the benefit of this mitigating Where four days elapsed from the knowledge of
circumstance. the supposed sexual assault and the attack, there
was sufficient time to regain composure and self·
VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE control. Thus, there was no "immediate
ART. 13(5), RPC vindication of a grave offense." (People v.
Rebucan. G.R. 182551,july 27, 2011)
The offense need not be NOTE: When both are present, they should have
It must
immediate. It is only the effect of two independent mitigating
immediately
required that the circumstances.
precede the
influence thereof lasts
commission of
until the moment the Beonisites nfvolnnracx surrender
the crime.
crime is committed.
I. Offender had not been at1:ually arrested;
Passino /Ohfusrarion vis-A-vis lrcesistlble 2. Surrender was made to a person in authority
� or to the latter's agent; and
3. Surrender was voluntary.
PASSION/ IRRESISTIBLE
OBFUSCATION FORCE Whensurrender is considered as vohmrarv
Mitigating Exempting
circumstance circumstance Surrender is considered voluntary when it is
spontaneous, demonstrating intent to submit
It cannot give rise to
irresistible force himself unconditionally to the person in
It requires authority or his agent, either:
because passion or
physical force.
obfuscation has no
1. Because he acknowledges his guilt; or
h sical force.
2. Because he wishes to save them the trouble
The passion or It must come
from a third and expense necessarily included for his
obfuscation is on the
erson. search and capture.
offender himself.
It must arise from The force used is Whether a warrant of arrest had been issued
lawful sentiments. unlawful. against the offender is immaterial and irrelevant.
The criterion is whether or not the offender had
lnvncarion ofnassinn or obfusvninn gone into hiding or had the opportunity to go into
hiding and the law enforcers do not know of his
As a rule, passion or obfuscation can only be used whereabouts.
as a mitigating circumstance. However, under
Art. 247 (Death or Physical Injuries under GR: There was no voluntary surrender if the
Exceptional Circumstances), it may be used as an warrant of arrest showed that the defendant was,
exempting circumstance_. if an injury is inflic.ted in fact, arrested.
other than serious physical injuries and killing.
XPN: If after committing the crime, the offender
VOLUNTARY SURRENDER AND did not flee and instead woited for the law
CONFESSION OF GUilT enforcers to arrive, and then he surrendered the
ART. 13 (7), RPC weapon he used in killing the victim, voluntary
surrender is mitigating. However, if after
� committing the crime, the offender did not flee
and instead he went with the responding law
The lesser perversity of the offender. enforcers meekly, voluntary surrender is not
applicable.
The offender is willing to accept the
consequences of the wrong he has done which, "Spontaneous"'
thereby, saves the government the effort, time,
and expenses to be incurred in searching for him. It emphasizes the idea of inner impulse acting
without external stimulus. The conduct of the
Miriearioe cica,msrances under this accused, not his intention alone, after the
paragraph commission of the offense determines the
spontaneity of the surrender.
1. Voluntary surrender to a person in authority
or his agents; and Beoniremeot that the accused sncceoder
2. Voluntary confession of guilt before the court prior to the order of arrest
prior to the presentation of evidence for the
prosecution. The law does not require that the accused
surrender prior to the order of arrest. What
matters is the spontaneous surrender of the
accused upon learning that a warrant of arrest
had been issued against him and that voluntary 2. It was made in open court (that is, before the
surrender is obedience to the order of arrest competent court that is to try the case); and
issued against him. (People v. Yec/o, et of., G.R. No. 3. It was made prfor to the presentation of
L-46612, October 14, 1939) evidence for the prosecution.
A: YES. He fled to the scene of a crime not to A: NO. leprox is not entitled to the mitigating
escape but to seek legal advice. circumstance of voluntary surrender as his going
to the police station is only for the purpose of
Q: Y, while alighting from his vehicle, was hit verification of the news that he is wanted by the
by X with his car. This caused Y to be thrown authorities. In order to be mitigating, surrender
four meters away from his jeepney. X was must be spontaneous and that he acknowledges
charged with Frustrated Murder and his guilt. Neither is plea of guilty a mitigating
convicted in the RTC of Frustrated Homicide. circumstance because it was a qualified plea.
Upon appeal in the CA, the crime was Besides, Art. 13(7) provides that confession of
modified to Reckless Imprudence resulting in guilt must be done before the prosecution had
Serious Physical Injuries. X contends that the started to present evidence.
CA should have appreciated voluntary
surrender as a mitigating circumstance in his NOTE: Where in the original information the
favor. ls X's contention correct? accused pleaded not guilty but he pleaded guilty
to the amended information, it is considered as a
A: NO. The mitigating circumstance of voluntary voluntary plea of guilty and considered a
surrender cannot be appreciated in his favor. mitigating circumstance. (People v. Ortiz, G.R. No
Paragraph 5 of Article 365 of the RPC expressly L-19585, Nov. 29, 1965)
states that in the imposition of the penalties, the
courts shall exercise their sound discretion, PHYSICAL DEFECT
without regard to the rules prescribed in Article ART. 13 8), RPC
64 of the Revised Penal Code. (Mariano v. Peap/e,
G.R. No. 178145,July 7, 2014) .lwis
The diminution of the element of voluntariness.
Requisites of confession of guilt fl 999 BAR)
Phvsical defecr
1. The offender spontaneously confessed his
guilt; A person's physical condition, such as being deaf
and dumb, blind, armless, cripple, or stutterer,
1. The offender is deaf and dumb, blind, or NOTE: Schizophrenic reaction is only mitigating
otherwise suffering from some physical not exempting. Schizophrenic reaction, although
defett; and not exempting because it does not completely
2. Such physical defect restricts his means of deprive the offender of the consciousness of his
action, defense, or communication with his acts, may be considered as a mitigating
fellow beings. circumstance under Article 13(9) of the RPC, e.g.,
as an illness which diminishes the exercise of the
Q: Suppose X is deaf and dumb and he has offender's will-power without, however,
been slandered, he cannot talk so what he did depriving him of the consciousness of his acts.
was he got a piece of wood and struck the (People v. Rafanan, C.R. No. L-54135, November
fellow on the head. X was charged with 21, 1991)
physical injuries. Is X entitled to a mitigating
drcumstance by reason of his physical defect? SIMILAR AND ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES
ART. 13(10), RPC
A: YES. The Supreme Court held that being a deaf
and dumb is mitigating because the only way to Eu1moles ofaoalneons circnmsraoces
vindicate himself is to use his force because he
cannot strike back by words. 1. The act of the offender of leading the law
enforcers to the place where he buried the
NOTE: The law says that the offender is deaf and instrument of the crime has been considered
dumb, meaning not only deaf but also dumb, or as equivalent to voluntary surrender.
that he is blind, meaning in both eyes, but even if 2. Stealing by a person who is driven to do so
he is only deaf and not dumb, or dumb but not out of extreme poverty is considered as
deaf, or blind only in eye, he is still entitled to a analogous to incomplete state of necessity
mitigating circumstance under this article as long (People v. Macbul, C.R. No. 48976, October 11,
as his physical defects restrict his means of 1943), unless he became impoverished
action, defense, or communication with his because of his own way of living his life, e.g.
fellowmen. he had so many vices.
3. Defendant who is 60 years old with failing
NOTE: The law does not distinguish between eyesight is similar to a case of a person over
educated and uneducated deaf-mute or blind 70 years of age. (People v. Reantillo and Ruiz,
persons. The Code considers them as being on C.A. C.R. No. 301,july 27, 1938)
equal footing. (Reyes, 2017) 4. Impulse of jealous feeling, similar to passion
and obfuscation.
ILLNESS OF THE OFFENDER 5. Voluntary restitution of property, similar to
ART. 13(9), RPC voluntary surrender.
6. Outraged feeling of the owner of animal
taken for ransom is analogous to vindication
of grave offense.
Diminution of intelligence and intent. 7. Esprit de corps is similar to passion and
obfuscation.
Requisites 8. Wartime state of confusion resulting in
illegal possession of firearm after the
1. Illness of the offender must diminish the liberation (People v. Quemuel, 76 Phil 135), as
exercise of will power; and being similar to lack of intent to commit so
2. Such illness should not deprive the offender grave a wrong.
of consciousness of his acts. 9. Testifying for the prosecution without being
discharged from the information (People v.
If the illness not only diminishes the exercise of Narvasca, et al., C.R. No. L-28107, March 15,
the offender's will power but deprives him of the 1977), as being like a plea of guilty.
10. Acting out of embarrassment and fear caused They are based on the greater perversity of the
by the victim because of gambling debts of offender manifested in the commission of the
the accused (People v. Ong, et al., G.R. No. L- felony as shown by:
34497, January 30, 1975), as akin to passion
or obfuscation. 1. The motivating power itself;
11. Retaliating for having been assaulted during 2. The place of commission;
a public dance where the accused was well 3. The means and ways employed;
known and respected (People v. Libria, 95 4. The time; and
Phil. 398), as similar to vindication. 5. The personal circumstances of the offender
12. When the petitioner submits extrajudicial or the offended party
confession through the handwritten letter
coupled with her act of surrendering the Kinds of aeecavatine ciccumsrances Cl999
redeemed pawn tickets and thereafter going BaW.
to the police station (Frontreras v. People,
G.R. No. 190583, December 7, 2015], as an 1.. Generic - those that can generally appy to
analogous circumstance of voluntary almost all crimes.
surrender.
Examples:
S'ienificance ofthis naraeranb a. Taking advantage of public position
b. Contempt or insult to public authorities
The significance is that even though a particular c. Dwelling
circumstance does not fall under any of the d. Abuse of confidence or obvious
enumerated circumstances in Art. 13, the court is ungratefulness
authorized to consider in favor of the accused e. Palace and places of commission of
"any other circumstance of a similar nature and offenses
analogous to those mentioned." f. Nighttime, uninhabited place, or band
g. Recidivism
In the Jori/lo case, the SC ruled that an abandoned h. Re;teradon
wife, who remained and found guilty of Bigamy, i. Craft. fraud, or disguise
is entitled to a mitigating circumstance of "for j. Unlawful entry
humanitarian reason" as her marriage with the k. Breaking ,vall
complainant was later on declared null and void. I. Aid of minor or by means of motor
(G.R. No.164435, September 29, 2009) vehicle
Circumstances which are neither exempting 2. Specific - those that apply only to particular
normifiearioe crimes
Aercavatlne cica,msrances which do not have 1. Of personal circumstance of the offender; and
the effecr ofincreaSine the oenaltv 2. Used to secure the commission of the crime.
The greater perversity of the offender, as shown Ways of committing the aggravating
by his lack of respect for the public authorities. Circumstance underthis oacaeranb
Requisites of contempt or insult to public The act must be committed:
authoritiesas an aeeravatineCircnmsrance
1. With insult or in disregard of the respect due
1. That the public authority is engaged in the to the offended party on account of his:
exercise of his functions;
2. Such authority is not the person against whom a. Rank
the crime is committed; b. Age
3. Offender knows him to be a public authority; c. Sex
and
4. His presence has not prevented the offender 2. In the dwelling of the offended party, if the
from committing the crime. latter has not given sufficient provocation.
DISREGARD OF RANK, SEX, AGE OR DWELLING Age applies in cases where the vittim is of tender
ART. 14 (3), RPC age or is of old age.
Par. 3 provides for four (4) aggravating The circumstance of lack of respect due to age
circumstances which, if present in the same case, applies in cases where the victim is of tender age
should be considered independently of each as well as of old age.
other and numerically reckoned accordingly.
(People v. Santos, et al., G.R. No. L-4189, May 21, The circumstance of old age cannot be
1952) considered aggravating in the absence of
evidence that the accused deliberately intended
to offend or insult the age of the vittim. (People v.
Diaz. L-24002,January 21, 1974)
The greater perversity of the offender, as shown
by the personal circumstances of the offended
party and the place of commission.
Sex refers to the female sex. not to the male sex. aggravating; however, if one of the dwellers
therein becomes a paramour, the applicable
Disregard for sex is not aggravating in the aggravating circumstance is abuse of
absence of evidence that the accused deliberately confidence;
intended to offend or insult the sex of the victim 3. In the crime of robbery by use of force upon
or showed manifest disrespect to her things;
womanhood. 4. In the crime of trespass to dwelling; and
5. The victim is not a dweller of the house.
What if all fnnraeeravarioe rica,msrances are
present? NOTE: Dwelling is not absorbed or included in
treachery.
They have the weight of one aggravating
circumstance only. (Reyes, 2017) Provocation in the aeeravatine ciro,msrance
of dwelling
When aeeravatioe circnmsrance of diSreeacd
of rank aee or sex not considered for the The provocation must be:
purpose of increasing penalty
1. Given by the owner or occupant of the
1. When the offender acted with passion or dwelling;
obfuscation (All three circumstances); 2. Sufficient; and
2. When there exists a relationship between the 3. Immediate to the commission of the crime.
offended party and the offender; or
3. When the condition of being a woman is NOTE: If all of these are present, the offended
indispensable in the commission of the crime party is deemed to have given provocation and
(e.g. parricide, rape, abduction and seduction). the fact that the crime is committed in the
dwelling of the offended party is NOT an
Pwemoe aggravating circumstance.
Instances when dwellineisnntaeecavatine 1. The offended party had trusted the offender;
2. The offender abused such trust by
1. When the owner of the dwelling gave committing a crime against the offended
sufficient and immediate provocation; party; and
2. When the offender and the offended party are 3. The abuse of confidence facilitated the
occupants of the same house except in case of commission of the crime
adultery in the conjugal dwelling, the same is
Nature of confidence necessary under this circumstance is absorbed in the nature of the
rircumsrance crime. (People v. Perez, 57 O.G. 1598)
The confidence between the parties must be The Chief Executive need not be engaged in
immediate and personal, as would give the his official fugcriogs
accused the advantage or make it easier for him
to commit the crime. The confidence must be a It is NOT necessary that the Chief Executive is
means of facilitating the commission of a crime. engaged in his official functions. The presence of
the Chief Executive alone in any place where the
Instances when abuse of confidence is not crime is committed is enough to constitute the
considered as an aeeravarinecica,msrance aggravating circumstance, but the offender must
be aware of the presence of the President.
1. Malversation (Art. 217, RPC);
2. Qualified Theft (Art 310, RPC); Necessitv of onhlic authorities tnhe eggaged
3. Est.a/a by conversion or misappropriation in the discharee nftheir duties
(Art 315, RPC); and
4. Qualified Seduction (Art 337, RPC) Public authorities must actually be engaged in
the discharge of their duties, there must be some
Reason: Abuse of confidence is inherent in the performance of public functions.
abovementioned crimes; hence, they are not
considered as an aggravating circumstance. Committed jg the oalace of the Chief
Executive vis-A-vis Commjtted in contempt of
Requisites of obvious ungratefulness public authorities
NOTE: To be considered aggravating, the accused 4191, July 18, 1908), the aggravating
must have purposely sought the place for the circumstance of nighttime was not applied.
commission of the crime and that he committed it
there notwithstanding the respect to which it NOTE: Even if the offender sought nighttime, the
was entitled, and not where it was only an moment the scene of the crime has been
accidental or incidental circumstance. (People v. illuminated by any light, nighttime will not be
Jaurigue, eta/., C.A. No. 384, February 21, 1946) considered as an aggravating circumstance.
It means that there are at least four armed 1. The crime is committed on the occasion of a
malefactors acting together in the commission of conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake,
the offense. epidemic, or other; and
2. The offender takes advantage of it.
NOTE: All must be armed; otherwise, the
aggravating circumstance under Art. 14(8) shall "Calamity or misfomme"
apply.
Refers to other conditions of distress similar to
The RPC does not require any particular arms or the enumeration preceded by it.
weapons. Hence, any instrument or implement
which, by reason of intrinsic nature or the AID OF ARMED MEN
purpose for which it was made or used by the ART. 14 (8), RPC
accused, is capable of inflicting serious injuries.
When circumstance is present
NOTE: If the group of two or more persons falls
under the definition of an organized or When the crime to which it is attached to is
syndicated crime group under Art. 62, it is a committed with the aid of:
special aggravating circumstance
1. Armed men; or
Applicability of band as an aggravating 2. Persons who insure or afford impunity.
riccumsrance
Beonisites
1. The aggravating circumstance of by a band is
considered in crimes against property or 1. That armed men or persons took part in the
against persons including the crime of illegal commission of the crime, directly or
detention or treason. indirectly; and
2. That the accused availed himself of their aid
NOTE: This aggravating circumstance is not or relied upon them when the crime is
applicable in crimes against chastity. committed.
2. Inherent in bridandage (not considered as an NOTE: Arms is not limited to firearms. Bolos,
aggravating circumstance). knives, sticks, and stones are included. Aid of
3. Abuse of superior strength and use of armed men includes armed women.
firearms, absorbed in aggravating
circumstance of·by a band". Cira,msrances when aid of armed men is not
4. All armed men must take a dirett part in the considered as anaeecavatlne rica,msrance
execution of the act constituting the crime.
1. When both the attacking party and the party
NOTE: If one of the four armed persons is a attacked were equally armed;
principal by inducement, they do not form a 2. When the accused as well as those who
band. cooperated with him in the commission of
the crime acted under the same plan and for
ON OCCASION OF CONFLAGRATION, the same purpose; and
SHIPWRECK, EARTHQUAKE, EPIDEMIC OR 3. The casual presence of the armed men near
OTHER CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE the place where the crime was committed
ART. 14 (7), RPC when the accused did not avail himself of
their aid or relied upon them to commit the
crime.
The time of the commission of the crime. The Q: What aggravating drcumstance will be
reason is the debased form of criminality met in considered if there are four armed men?
one who, in the midst of a great calamity, instead
of lending aid to the affiitted, adds to their A: If there are four armed men, aid of armed men
suffering by taking advantage of their misfortune. is absorbed in employment of a band. If there are
three armed men or less, aid of armed men may
When considered as an aeeravatine be the aggravating circumstance.
circumstance
Crime committed hv a hand vis-a-vis Crime
committed wilh theaid ofarmed men
One who, at the time of his trial for one crime, Example: The accused was convicted of robbery
shall have been previously convicted by final with homicide which was committed on
judgment of another crime embraced in the same December 23, 1947. He was previous/y convicted
title of the Revised Penal Code. of theft committed on December 30, 1947.
"At the time ofbistrial toe one crime" No matter how long ago the offender was
convicted, if he is subsequently convicted of a
It is also not aggravating when the law in defining Q: Samuel and his wife, Marissa, were talking
the crime includes them (e.g. Fire is not at the doorway of their house when they saw
aggravating in the crime of arson). Ordona loitering by the corner of their house
who appeared to be waiting for someone.
Rules as to the use office After some time, Ordona left but returned live
(5) minutes later. Meanwhile, Hubay emerged
1. Intent was only to bum but somebody died - from the house, holding some food. Ordona
The crime is arson, the penalty is higher approached Hubay with a stainless knife,
because somebody died. called his attention by saying "Pare; and
2. Iffire was used as means ta kill - the crime is suddenly stabbed him in the left shoulder.
murder not arson and fire cannot be Hubay managed to run away but Ordona gave
appreciated as aggravating circumstance. chase and eventually caught up with him.
3. There was an intention ta kill and fire was Ordona stabbed him in the left torso. Hubay
used to conceal the crime- there are two immediately died when he was brought to the
separate crimes: arson and murder. hospital. Was the killing attended with the
qualifying circumstance of evident
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION premeditation?
ART. 14 (13), RPC
A: NO. The killing was not attended with the
qualifying circumstance of evident
premeditation. It is indispensable for the
The ways of committing the crime. prosecution to establish "how and when the plan
to kill was hatched or how much time had
Essence elapsed before it was carried out." It must be
based on external facts which are evident. not
The execution of the criminal ac.t must be merely suspected, which indicate deliberate
preceded by cool thought and upon renection to planning.
carry out the criminal intent during the space of
time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment. There must be direct evidence showing a plan or
preparation to kill, or proof that the accused
NOTE: Evident premeditation is appreciated only meditated and reHetted upon his decision to kill
in crimes against persons. the victim. Criminal intent must be evidenced by
notorious outward acts evidencing a
Requisites determination to commit the crime. In order to
be considered an aggravation of the offense, the
1. Determination - the time when the offender circumstance must not merely be
determined to commit the crime; '"premeditation" but must be "evident
2. Preparation - an att manifestly indicating premeditation." The date and, if possible, the
that the culprit has clung to his time when the malefac.tor determined to commit
determination; and the crime is essential, because the lapse of time
3. Time - a sufficient lapse of time between the for the purpose of the third requisite is computed
determination and execution, to allow him to from such date and time. (People v. Ordona, G.R.
reHect upon the consequences of his act and No. 227863, September 20, 2017, as penned by J.
Leonen)
NOTE: For abuse of superior strength, the test is It exists when the offended party's resisting
the relative strength of the offender and his power is materially weakened.
victim, and whether or not he took advantage of
his greater strength. Superiority in number does NOTE: Means to weaken the defense may be
not necessarily mean superiority in strength. The absorbed in treachery (e.g. when the accused
accused must have cooperated and intended to throws a sand directly into the eyes of his victim,
use or secure advantage from their superiority in this has the effect of weakening the defense of his
strength. (People v. Bosas, C.R. No. L-34251, victim as well as insuring the execution of his act
Jonuory30, 1982) without risk to himself). In this case, only one
aggravating circumstance will be appreciated,
Oerecmination of the nceseoce of abuse of namely treachery, and the circumstance of means
superiority to weaken the defense will already be absorbed.
arising from the defense which the offended with lead pipes and baseball bats. The swiftness
party might make. and the suddenness of the attack gave no
opportunity for the victims to retaliate or even to
Essence of treachery defend themselves. Treachery, therefore, was
present in this case. (People v. Feliciano, G.R. No.
The suddenness, surprise and the lack of 19673S, May S, 2014, as penned by]. Leanen)
expectation that the attack will take place, thus,
depriving the victim of any real opportunity for Elements of treachery
self-defense while ensuring the commission of
the crime without risk to the aggressor. Likewise, 1. The employment of means of execution that
even when the victim was forewarned of the would ensure the safety of the accused from
danger to his person, treachery may still be retaliatory acts of the intended victim and
appreciated since what is decisive is that the leaving the latter without an opportunity to
execution of the attack made it impossible for the defend himself; and
victim to defend himself or to retaliate (People v. 2. The means employed were deliberately or
Vil/ocorto, G.R. No. 186412, September 7,2011). consciously adopted by the offender. (People
v. Nelmido, et al, G.R. No. 184500, September
Q: Seven members of the Sigma Rho fraternity 11, 2012)
were eating lunch in UP Diliman when they
were suddenly attacked by several masked Test of treachery
men who were armed with baseball bats and
lead pipes. Some sustained injuries which The test of treachery is not only the relative
required hospitalization. One of them, position of the parties but more specifically
Venturina, died due to traumatic bead whether or not the victim was forewarned or
injuries. Informations for murder for afforded the opportunity to make a defense or to
Venturina's death, as well a s the attempted ward off the attack.
murder and frustrated murder of some Sigma
Rho members were filed against members of Rules rerardine treacberx
Scintilla Juris fraternity (Feliciano, et al.) and
seven others. The RTC convicted Feliciano, et 1. Applicable only to crimes against persons.
al. of murder and attempted murder, and 2. Means, methods, or forms insure its
acquitted the other co-accused, holding that execution but need not insure
Feliciano, et al. were positively identified by accomplishment of crime.
witnesses a s the attackers. The CA affirmed 3. The mode of attack must be thought of by the
the RTC ruling. but modified their criminal offender, and must not spring from the
liabilities and ruled out the presence of unexpected turns of events hence not
treachery. Is treachery attendant in the applicable when the attack is incidental or
present case? accidental.
A: YES. Treachery attended the attack against Eronral attack does not neeare the oresence of
private complainants. The essence of treachery is treachery
that the attack comes without a warning and in a
swift, deliberate, and unexpected manner, Although frontal, if the attack was unexpected,
affording the hapless, unarmed, and and the unarmed victim was in no position to
unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or repel the attack, treachery can still be
escape. For treachery to be considered, two appreciated. (People v. Pelis, G.R. No. 189328,
elements must concur: (1) the employment of February 21, 2011)
means of execution that gives the persons
attacked no opportunity to defend themselves or Q: One night, while walking. Mailbag
retaliate; and (2) the means of execution were confronted Duhan and without a warning.
deliberately or consciously adopted. Mailbag punched Duhan on the left cheek and
subsequently pulled out bis gun and shot the
The victims in this case were eating lunch on latter which caused his death. Mailbag was
campus. They were not at a place where they charged with Murder and was convicted by
would be reasonably expected to be on guard for the RTC and CA and found that treachery
any sudden attack by rival fraternity men. The attended the killing. Are the courts correct in
victims, who were unarmed, were also attacked appredating treachery despite the attack
being frontal?
A: YES. In People v. Perez, it was explained that a Cirera "to keep quiet." An altercation then
frontal attack does not necessarily rule out ensued between Naval and Cirera when Naval
treachery. The essence of treachery is the sudden asked Austria to go home. Thereafter, Austria
and unexpected attack. without the slightest stood up and felt that be was stabbed. As be
provocation on the part of the party attacked. ran home, he noticed Cirera armed with a
The prosecution was able to prove that Matibag, knife, this time chasing Naval, who was also
who was armed with a gun, confronted Duhan, stabbed on the back. Austria and Naval were
and without any provocation, punched and shot hospitalized and were confined for more than
him on the chest. Although the attack was frontal, a month, and for six days, respectively. Two
the sudden and unexpected manner by which it informations for frustrated murder were filed
was made rendered it impossible for Duhan to against Cirera. RTC found him guilty beyond
defend himself, adding too that he was unarmed. reasonable doubt of the crimes charged, and
(People v. Matibag, C.R. No. 206381, March 25, ruled that there was treachery on Cirera's
2015) end, considering the length of time it took
private complainants to realize that they
NOTE: There is no treachery if the attack was were stabbed. CA affirmed the finding of the
made at the spur of the moment. RTC that there was treachery because •the
attack was so sudden and unexpected, that
Q: On the evening of November 15, 1998, self-defense was not possible." Is treachery
Susan Lalona was at Murillo's Restaurant with present in this case?
her friend Julius Joshua Mata. They were the
only customers at that time. Later, Orozco, A: NO. Treachery did not exist and, hence,
Osir, Castro, and Maturan, apparently drunk, petitioner may only be convicted of two counts of
entered and occupied the table in front of frustrated homicide. The unexpectedness of an
them. Orozco approached Mata from behind attack cannot be the sole basis of a finding of
and stabbed him twice with a small bolo. Mata treachery even if the attack was intended to kill
shouted that be was stabbed. Lalona grabbed another as long as the victim's position was
Orozco and wrestled with him, but be pushed merely accidental. The means adopted must have
her back. When Mata tried to run out, the rest been a result of a determination to ensure
of the accused caught him. success in committing the crime.
While Maturan and Osir held Mata's arms, Petitioner's action was an impulsive reaction to
Castro stabbed him in the chest. The four (4) being dismissed by Austria, his altercation with
accused continued stabbing Mata and ran Naval, and Naval's attempt to summon Austria
away when Lalona shouted for help. Lalona home. Generally, this type of provocation negates
took Mata to the Caraga Regional Hospital on the existence of treachery. There was no
a tricycle, but Mata was pronounced dead on evidence of a modicum of premeditation
arri val. Is the killing was attended by indicating the possibility of choice and planning
circumstances which qualify tbe crime as fundamental to achieve the elements of
murder? treachery. (Cirera v. People, C.R. No. 181843, July
14, 2014, as penned by J. Leanen)
A: YES. The circumstances proved by the
prosecution amply show that treachery attended Aooceciatinn nfrceacberv in eccoc in oersonoe
the killing of Mata. Mata was completely helpless. and aberratio ictus
His hands were held by two other persons while
he was stabbed. To make matters worse, four Treachery is appreciated in error in personae and
persons, who were armed with knives, ganged·up aberratio ictus, provided that the offender
on Mata. Certainly, Mata was completely consciously employed treacherous means to
deprived of any prerogative to defend himself or ensure the execution of the crime and to render
to retaliate. Mata was helpless against a group of the victim defenseless.
persons with knives, who ganged up on him and
held his hands while stabbing him. (People v. Aooceriatinn of both evident ocemedirarinn
Orozco, C.R. Na. 211053, December 29, 2017, as and rceacberv
penned byJ. Leonen)
Evident premeditation and treachery can co-exist
Q: Austria was playing a lucky nine game at a because evident premeditation refers to the
wake. Cirera arrived, asking money from commission of the crime while treachery refers
Austria so be could buy liquor. Austria asked
to the manner employed by the offender in Reyes argues that their guilt is not
committing the crime. established beyond reasonable doubt since
that the testimonies of the witnesses for the
Appreciation of treachery in robbery with prosecution did not dovetail in all particulars:
homicide the weapon used, relative position of
appellants when they inflicted the mortal stab
Treachery can be appreciated in Robbery with wound/s, and who between the appellants
homicide even though it is a crime against was first to inflict the stab wound. Is their
property because one of its components is a contention meritorious?
crime against person.
A: NO. The alleged inconsistencies in the
lnsraoces that max he absorbed bx treachery witnesses' testimonies, if they be such at all,
referred merely to minor and inconsequential
1. Abuse of superior strength details, which did not at all affett the substance of
2. Aid of armed men their testimonies, much less impair their
3. By a band credibility.
4. Means to weaken the defense
5. Craft In the ultimate analysis, what really matters in
6. Nighttime this case is that the prosecution witnesses did in
fact see that it was the appellants who assaulted
Time when rhe element nftreacbecx must he and killed llao that tragic morning. (People v.
present Camposano and De Los Reyes, G.R. No. 207659,
April 20, 2016)
1. When the aggresslon is continuous -
treachery must be present at the beginning IGNOMINY
of the assault. ART. 14 (17), RPC
2. When the assault was not continuous · it is
sufficient that treachery was present when Ienominv
the fatal blow was given.
It pertains to the moral order, which adds
Q: A followed the unsuspecting victim, B when disgrace to the material injury caused by the
he was going home and thereafter, crime. Ignominy adds insult to injury or adds
deliberately stabbed him in the back which shame to the natural effects of the crime.
resulted in B falling to the ground and was Ignominy shocks the moral conscience of man.
thereby further attacked by A. Was there
treachery? Aoolicationofienominv
A: YES. B was defenseless and he was not given 1. Crimes against chastity,
the opportunity to resist the attack or defend 2. Less serious physical injuries,
himself. A employed means which insured the 3. Light or grave coercion; and
killing of Band such means assured him from the 4. Murder.
risk of B's defense. Stabbing from behind is a
good indication of treachery. (People v. Yanson, No ienominv when a man is killed in the
G.R. No. 179195, October 3, 2011) presence of his wife
NOTE: Treachery CANNOT co-exist with passion The circumstance of ignominy will not be
or obfuscation, for while in mitigating appreciated if the offender employed no means
circumstance of passion or obfuscation, the nor did any circumstance surround the act
offender loses his reason and self-control, in the tending to make the effects of the crime more
aggravating circumstance of treachery the mode humiliating.
of attack must be consciously adopted. One who
loses his reason and self-control could not Ienominv when a woman iS caned in the
deliberately employ a particular means, method presence of her husband
or form of attack in execution of crime.
Ignominy can be appreciated. Rape is now a
Q: Several witnesses saw camposano and De crime against persons (R.A 8353). Presence of
Los Reyes chasing llao and when he fell on the the husband qualifies the crime of rape under
ground, appellants took turns in stabbing him Art. 266.
with a deadly weapon. Camposano and De Los
Bem,isites
BREAKING WALL UNLAWFUL ENTRY
1. That at the time of the inflittion of the revoked licenses in accordance with the rules and
physical pain, the offended party is still alive; regulations. (Sec. 3, par. (v}, RA 10591)
and
2. That the offender enjoys and delights in Use of loose firearm considered absorbed as
seeing his victim suffer gradually by the an element of the crime of rebellion
infliction of the physical pain. insucremon or attemored rouu a�ewc
Crnelrv not inherent in crimes aeainst If the use of loose firearm is in furtherance of or
oecsons incident to, or in connection with the crime of:
hand grenade(s), rifle grenade(s), and other Illegal Possession of Firearm is ma/um
explosives, including but not limited to 'pillbox,' prohibitum.
'molotov cocktail bombs,' 'fire bombs,' or other
incendiary devices capable of producing Illustration: The accused was apprehended for
destructive effect on contiguous objects or carrying a cal. 9mm firearm and ammunitions
causing injury or death to any person, which without the proper license to possess the same.
results in the death of any person or persons, the He claimed to be a confidential agent of the AFP
use of such explosives, detonation agents or and in that capacity received the said firearm and
incendiary devices shall be considered as an ammunitions, which are government properties
aggravating circumstance. (Sec. 2, R.A. 8294) duly licensed to the Intelligence Security Group
(ISG) of the AFP and so could not be licensed
PreseoraJion of the firearm roconsider meeal under his name. Although the accused had a
nossession of firearm as an aeeravatine Memorandum Receipt and A Mission Order
circumstance, not necessary issued by ISG, whereby he was entrusted with
such firearm and ammunitions which he was
It is not necessary to present the firearm before authorized to carry around, he was nevertheless
the court in order for illegal possession of firearm convicted for the subject violation for a
to be appreciated as an aggravating Memorandum Receipt and Mission Order cannot
circumstance. It can be appreciated even though take the place of a duly issued firearm license.
the firearm used was not recovered. The actual The accused cannot invoke good faith as a
firearm itself need not be presented if its defense against a prosecution for illegal
existence can be proved by the testimonies of possession of firearm, as this is a ma/um
witnesses or by other evidence presented. prohibitum. (Sayco v. People, G.R. 159703, March
(People v. Agcanas, G.R. No. 174476, October 11, 3, 2008)
2011)
NOTE: If the crime is committed by the person
Insrances cem,iced to he oroven in cases of without using the loose firearm, the violation of
illeeal onssession of firearms this Att shall be considered as a distinct and
separate offense. (par. 3, Sec. 29, R.A. 10591)
In crimes involving illegal possession of firearm,
the prosecution has the burden of proving the USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS
elements thereof, vir. UNDER R.A. 9165 AS QUALIFYING
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
1. The existence of the subject firearm; and
2. The fact that the accused who owned or Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to the
possessed it does not have the license or contrary, a positive finding for the use of
permit to possess the same. The essence of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying
the crime of illegal possession is the aggravating circumstance in the commission of
possession, whether actual or constructive, a crime by an offender, and the application of the
of the subject firearm, without which there penalty provided for in the Revised Penal Code
can be no conviction for illegal possession. shall be applicable. (Sec. 25, R.A. 9165) (2005,
2009 BAR)
After possession is established by the
prosecution, it would only be a matter of course NOTE: The drug test in Section 15 does not cover
to determine whether the accused has a license persons apprehended or arrested for any
to possess the firearm. Possession of any firearm unlawful acts listed under Article II of R.A. 9165.
becomes unlawful only if the necessary permit or Thus, this qualifying aggravating circumstance
license is not first obtained. The absence of shall be considered only to crimes punishable
license and legal authority constitutes an under R.A. 9165. (Dela Cruz v. People, GR 200748,
essential ingredient of the offense of illegal July 23, 2014)
possession of firearm and every ingredient or
essential element of an offense must be shown by Other aeeravatine circnmsrances in drne
the prosecution by proof beyond reasonable celared rases
doubt. (People v. Agcanas, G.R. No. 174476,
October 11, 2011) 1. If the sale trading, administration,
dispensation, delivery, distribution or
Good faith i s not a valid defense against transportation of any dangerous and/or
nrnsec,1tj00 COr illeeal onssessinn offirearm controlled precursor and essential chemical
transpired within one hundred (100) meters Requisites to be exempted from prosecution
from the school. (Sec. 5, par. 2, R.A 9165) and o,miShmentunderBA 9165
2. For drug pushers who use minors or
mentally incapacitated individuals as Any person who:
runners, couriers and messengers, or in any
other capacity directly connected to the 1. Has violated Section 7 (Employees and
dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor Visitors of a Den, Dive or Resort), Section 11
and essential chemical trade. (Sec. 5, par. 3, (Possession of Dangerous Drugs), Section 12
R.A 9165) (Possession of Equipment, Instrument,
3. If the victim of the offense is a minor or Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for
mentally incapacitated individual, or should Dangerous Drug), Section 14 (Possession of
a dangerous drug and/or controlled Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus and Other
precursor and essential chemicals involved Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs During
in any offense be the proximate cause of the Parties, Social Gatherings or Meetings),
death of the victim. (Sec.5, par. 4, R.A. 9165) Section 15 (Use of Dangerous Drugs), and
4. In case the clandestine laboratory is Section 19 (Unlawful Prescription of
undertaken or established under the Dangerous Drugs), Article II of RA. 9165
following circumstances:
2. Voluntarily gives information about any
a. Any phase of the manufacturing process violation of:
was condutted in the presence or with a. Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/
the help of minor/s; or Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals (Sec. 4, R.A 9165);
b. Any phase of the manufacturing process b. Sale, Trading, Administration,
was established or undertaken within Dispensation, Delivery, Distribution and
one hundred (100) meters of a Transportation of Dangerous Drugs
residential, business, church or school and/or Controlled Precursors and
premises; Essential Chemicals (Sec.5, R.A9165);
c. Any clandestine laboratory was secured c. Maintenance of a Den, Dive or Resort
or protected by booby traps; (Sec. 6, R.A.9165);
d. Any clandestine laboratory was d. Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs
concealed with legitimate business and/or Controlled Precursors and
operations; or Essential Chemicals (Sec.8, R.A9165);
e. Any employment of a practitioner, e. Manufacture or Delivery of Equipment,
chemical engineer, public official or Instrument, Apparatus, and Other
foreigner. (Sec.8, R.A 9165) Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs
and/or Controlled Precursors and
5. In case the person uses a minor or a mentally Essential Chemicals (Sec.10, R.A9165);
incapacitated individual to deliver f. Possession of Dangerous Drugs During
equipment, instrument. apparatus, and other Parties, Social Gatherings or Meetings
paraphernalia for dangerous drugs. (Sec. 10, (Sec.13, R.A.9165);
par. 3, R.A. 9165) g. Cultivation or Culture of Plants
6. Any person found possessing any dangerous Classified as Dangerous Drugs or are
drug during a party, or a social gathering or Sources Thereaf(Sec. 16, R.A9165);
meeting. or in the proximate company of at h. The offenses mentioned if committed by
least two (2) persons. (Sec.13, R.A. 9165) a drug syndicate; or
7. Possession or having under his/her control i. Leading to the whereabouts, identities
any equipment, instrument, apparatus and and arrest of all or any of the members
other paraphernalia fit or intended for thereof
smoking, consuming, administering,
injecting, ingesting or introducing any 3. Willingly testifies against such persons as
dangerous drug into the body, during parties, described above.
social gatherings or meetings, or in the
proximate company of at least two (2) Provided, that the following conditions
persons. (Sec.14, R.A.9165) concur:
a. The information and testimony are immunity as provided above, his/her immunity
necessary for the conviction of the shall be removed and he/she shall likewise be
persons described above; subject to contempt and/or criminal prosecution
b. Such information and testimony are not as the case may be, and the enjoyment of all
yet in the possession of the State; rights and benefits previously accorded him
c . Such information and testimony can be under the Law or in any other law, decree or
corroborated on its material points; order shall be deemed terminated. (Sec. 34, R.A.
d. The informant or witness has not been 9165)
previously convitted of a crime involving
moral turpitude, except when there is no MINOR OFFENDERS UNDER R.A. 9165
other direct evidence available for the
State other than the information and Sec. 66, R.A. 9165 - An accused who is over
testimony of said informant or witness; fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the
and commission of the offense mentioned in Sec. 11
e. The informant or witness shall strictly of R.A. 9165 but not more than eighteen (18)
and faithfully comply without delay, any years of age at the time of when the judgment
condition or undertaking. reduced into should have been promulgated alter having been
writing. lawfully imposed by the State as found guilty of said offense, may be given the
further consideration for the grant of benefits of a suspended sentence, subject to the
immunity from prosecution and following conditions:
punishment.
1. He/she has not been previously convicted
Provided, further, that this immunity may be of violating any provisions of this Act, or of
enjoyed by such informant or witness who the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, as
does not appear to be most guilty of the amended; or of the Revised Penal Code; or
offense with reference to which his/her any special penal laws;
information or testimony were given. 2. He/she has not been previously
committed to a Center or to the care of a
Provided, finally, that there is no direct DOH-accredited physician; and
evidence available for the State, except for 3. The Board favorably recommends that
the information and testimony of the said his/her sentence be suspended.
informant or witness.
NOTE: If the accused first-time minor offender
NOTE: This applies notwithstanding the violates any of the conditions of his/her
provisions of Section 17, Rule 119 of the Revised suspended sentence, the applicable rules and
Rules of Criminal Procedure and the provisions regulations of the Board exercising supervision
of R.A. No. 6981 or the Witness Protet1:ion, and rehabilitative surveillance over him,
Security and Benefit Act of 1991. including the rules and regulations of the Center
should confinement be required, the court shall
Ierminatlnn of immunitv Ctom orosea,rion pronounce judgment of conviction and he/she
and punishment shall serve sentence as any other convicted
person. (Sec. 69, R.A 9165)
The immunity shall not attach should it turn out
subsequently that the information and/or Grant of probation or community service in
testimony is false, malicious or made only for the case ofa first-time minor offender
purpose of harassing, molesting or in any way
prejudicing the persons described in Sec. 33 The court may grant probation or community
against whom such information or testimony is service in lieu of imprisonment in case of a first
directed. In such case, the informant or witness time minor offender. Upon promulgation of the
shall be subject to prosecution and the enjoyment sentence, the court may, in its discretion, place
of all rights and benefits previously accorded him the accused under probation. even if the sentence
under the Law or any other law, decree or order provided under this Act is higher than that
shall be deemed terminated. provided under existing law on probation or
impose community service in lieu of
In case an informant or witness under the Law imprisonment.
fails or refuses to testify without just cause, and
when lawfully obliged to do so, or should he/she NOTE: If the sentence promulgated by the court
violate any condition accompanying such requires imprisonment. the period spent in the
for the crime of falsification. (Reyes, G.R. Na. 26867, August 10, 1927) or
2012) in a case when a father raped his
own daughter. (People v. Parras,
The exemption does not include G.R. No. 38107, October 16, 1933)
strangers who cooperate in the
commission of the crime. b. In physical injuries
i. Serious physical lnjuries - even if the
2. Mitigating: offended party is a descendant of the
offender; except when committed by
a. In crimes against property, by analogy to the parent who shall inflict physical
Art. 332 which exempts the accused from injuries to his child due to excessive
criminal liability for the crimes of theft, chastisement.
estafa and maJicious mischief, relationship ii. Less serlous physical injurles or slight
is mitigating in the crimes of Robbery physical injuries - if the offended
(Arts. 294-302, RPC), Usurpation (Art 312), party is a relative of a higher degree
fraudulent insolvency (Art 314) and Arson of the offender
(Arts 320-322, 325-326, RPC; P.D. 1613
repealed Articles 321, 322, 323, 325 to 326 INTOXICATION
ofthe RPC. ART. 15 (3), RPC
b. In physical tnJunes, relationship is
mitigating when the offense committed is Intoxicatjon as an alternative circumstance
less serious physical injuries or slight
physical injuries, and the offended party is It is an alternative circumstance because it
a relative of a lower degree (Reyes, 2008). impairs the exercise of one's will-power. When a
c. In cases of infanticide (Art. 255, RPC) and person is under the influence of liquor, his
abortion (Art 258, RPC), the killing or exercise of will power is impaired and his
abortion to conceal dishonor is a resistance to evil is lessened. (People v. Tambis,
mitigating circumstance. In infanticide, the G.R. Na. 124452, July 28, 1999)
concealment made by the maternal
grandparents is mitigating. (Boado, 2008). Intoxication considered mitigating {2000.
d. In trespass to dwelling. (U.S. v. Ostreo, G.R. 2002 RAB)
No.1114, March 31, 1903)
If intoxication is:
3. Aggravating: (1994 BAR)
1. Not habitual;
a. In crimes against person 2. Not subsequent to the plan to commit a
i. Where the offended party is a felony; or
relative of a higher degree than the 3. At the time of the commission of the crime,
offender. the accused has taken such quantity of
ii. When the offender and the alcoholic drinks as to blur his reason and
offended party are relatives of the deprive him of certain degree of control.
same level, such as killing a
brother; (El Puebla de Filipinos v. To be mitigating, the state of intoxication of the
Alisub, G.R. Na. 46588, January 20, accused must be proved. Once intoxication is
1940), brother-in-law (People v. established by satisfactory evidence, in the
Mercado, G.R. No. 27415, Navermber absence of proof to the contrary, it is presumed
29, 1927), a half-brother (People v. to be non-habitual or unintentional.
Nargatan, G.R. Na. 24619-20,
December 16, 1925), ar adopted· NOTE: As a mitigatigating circumstance, it finds
brother. (People v. Mangcol, G.R. No. its reason in the fact that when a person is under
L-2544, June 30, 1950) the influence of liquor, his exercise of will is
iii. In case of murder or homicide, if impared (Reyes, 2017).
the act resulted in the death of the
victim even if the accused is a tnroxivninn considered aeeravatine
relative of a lower degree
iv. In rape, relationship is aggravating If intoxication is:
when a stepfather raped his
stepdaughter (People v. De Lean, 1. Habitual; or
The basis is the effect of the alcohol upon the NOTE: If the offender is a lawyer who committed
offender, not the quantity of the alcoholic drink rape, the fact that he has knowledge of the law
he had taken in. will not aggravate his liability; but, if a lawyer
committed falsification, that will aggravate his
NOTE: Under R.A. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against criminal liability if it be proven that he used his
Women and Their Children Act of 2004), raising special knowledge as a lawyer and he took
defenses as being under the influence of alcohol, advantage of his learning in committing the
any illicit drug, or any other mind-altering crime.
substance shall not be appreciated. (Sec. 27, R.A.
9262) Lack and hieh deecee of instn1ction and
education are two djstinct circumstances
DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION
One may not have any degree of instruction but is
Aooredation ofinstn1ction or education nevertheless educated.
LACK OR LOW DEGREE HIGH DEGREE OF Low degree of education is never aggravating in
OF INSTRUCTION AND INSTRUCTION the manner that high degree is never mitigating.
EDUCATION AND EDUCATION
GR: lack or low degree High degree of ABSOLUTORY CAUSES
of instruction is instruction or
mitigating in all crimes. education is Ahsolntncv causes
aggravating when
XPN: Not mitigating in: the offender took Those where the act committed is a crime but for
1. Crimes against advantage of his reasons of public policy and sentiment there is no
property (e.g. arson, learning in the penalty imposed.
estafa, threat) commission of the
2. Theft and robbery crimes. Examoles ofahsnlutocv rm,ses
(People v. Macatanda,
G.R. No. L-51368, 1. Spontaneous desistance in attempted
November 6, 1981) or felonies ( Art 6, par. 3, RPC);
assault upon the
ersons of another.
2. Light felonies in the attempted or frustrated Happens when a public officer induces an
stage, except in crimes against persons or innocent person to commit a crime and would
property (Art 7, RPC); arrest him upon or after the commission of the
3. Accessories in light felonies (Art 16, RPC); crime.
4. Accessory is a relative of the principal, except
when he has profited or assisted in profiting A private person is liable with the person
from the effects of the crime (Art. 20, RPC); instigated.
5. Discovering secrets of ward through seizure
of correspondence by their guardian (Art NOTE: In instigation, the offender simply acts as
290, RPC); a tool of the law enforcers. Therefore, he is acting
6. When only slight or less serious physical without criminal intent because without the
injuries are inflicted by the person who instigation, he would not have done the criminal
surprised his/her spouse or daughter in the act which he did upon instigation of the law
ac.t of sexual intercourse with another person enforcers. This is based on the rule that a person
(Art 247, RPC); cannot be a criminal if his mind is not criminal.
If death or serious physical injuries were Person who may commit instigation
inflicted by the accused under the situation
subject of ArL 247, no absolutory cause can Only public officers or private detet1:ives may
be involved but in effect a mitigating commit such. If the one who made the instigation
circumstance is present, since the accused is is a private individual, not performing a public
criminally liable but he is punished with the function, both he and the one induced are
reduced penalty of destierro; criminally liable, the former as principal by
inducement and the latter as principal by direct
7. Crime of theft, swindling or malicious participation.
mischief committed against as spouse,
ascendant, or descendant or if the offender is Eotcaamentis NOI an ahsolutnrv cause
a brother or sister or brother-in-law or Entrapment does not exempt the offender. nor
sister-in-law of the offended party and they mitigate his criminal liability.
are living together (Art 332, RPC);
8. Instigation; Peterminarinn of whether the acr is an
9. Trespass to dwelling when the purpose of eotranmeot or iostieafinn
entering another's dwelling against the
latter's will is to prevent some serious harm Courts have adopted the objective test. In the
to himself, the occupants of the dwelling or a case of People v. Doria (G.R. No. 125299, January
third person, or for the purposes of 22, 1999), the SC held that the conduct of the
rendering some services to humanity or apprehending officers and the predisposition of
justice, or when entering c.afes, taverns, inns the accused to commit the crime must be
and other public houses, while the same are examined:.
open. (Art 280, par. 2, RPC)
In buy-bust operations, the details of the
Q: Are the grounds for total extinguishment of purported transaction must be clearly and
criminal liability (RPC, ArL 89) and express adequately shown. This must start from the
pardon or marriage of the accused and the initial contact between the poseur-buyer and the
victim in crimes against chastity (RPC, ArL pusher, the offer to purchase, the promise or
344) absolutory causes? payment of the consideration until the
consummation of the
A: NO. An absolutory cause prevents criminal sale by the delivery of the illegal drug subject of
liability from attaching or arising from the acts of the sale.
the accused. Art. 89 which speaks of
extinguishment of criminal liability presupposes The manner by which the initial contac.t was
that the accused was deemed criminally liable; made· whether or not through an informant· the
otherwise there would be no liability to offer to purchase the drug · the payment of the
extinguish. The same is true with respect to "buy-bust" money· and the delivery of the illegal
marriage of the parties in crimes against chastity. drug · whether to the informant alone or the
police officer, must be the subjet1: of strict
Instigation scrutiny by courts to ensure that law-abiding
NOTE: Corpses and animals cannot be passive A conspirator who does not appear at the scene
subjects because they have no rights that may be of the crime is not liable. His non-appearance is
impaired, except in the cases of corpses, the deemed a desistance on his part unless he is the
crime of defamation may be committed if the mastermind.
imputation tends to blacken the memory of one
who is dead. (Art 353, RPC) Iiahmtx of consoiratocs COc annthec
consoinnoc's acrs whifh differ cadicallv and
PRINCIPALS substantially from that which is intended to
ART. 17, RPC he c.ommiued
Different classifications of criminal Conspirators are liable for the acts of another
resnnnSihiliTY conspirator even though such atts differ radically
and substantially from that which they intend to
1. Individual criminal responsibility - When commit.
there is no conspiracy, each of the offenders
is liable only for his personal act. IiahWtx of consoiratncs fnc annthec's killine
2. Quasi-collective criminal responsibility - which is not covered in the conspiracy
Some offenders in the crime are principals
and the others are accomplices. When the conspirators select a particular
3. Collective criminal responsibility - Where individual to be a victim, and another person was
there is conspiracy, the act of one is the act of killed by one of them, only that conspirator who
all. All conspirators are liable as co-principals killed another person would be liable.
regardless of the extent and charatter of
their participation. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCEMENT
1. The principal by dirett participation must be Q: A induced B to kill X by giving him Php 500,
at the scene of the commission of the crime, 000. For his part, B induced C to kill for
personally taking part in its execution; and Php300, 000. C induced D t o kill X for Php200,
2. If there is conspiracy, although he was not 000. D killed X. Are A, B, and C principals by
present in the scene of the crime, he is inducement?
equally liable as a principal by direct
participation.
A: A and B are not principals by inducement iii. Words used must be so direct, so
because they did not directly induce D to kill X. efficacious, and powerful as to
However, C is a principal by inducement because amount to physical or moral
he diret1:ly induced D to kill X. coercion;
iv. Words of command must be uttered
NOTE: Inducement must be strong enough that prior to the commission of the
the person induced could hardly resist. This is crime; and
tantamount to an irresistible force compelling v. Material executor of the crime has
the person induced to carry out the execution of no personal reason to commit the
the crime. Thoughtless expression without crime.
intention to produce the result is not an
inducement to commit a crime. NOTE: The one who used the words of
command is a principal by inducement; while
Wavs ofhecomineaorinfioalbx inducement the one committing the crime because of the
words of command is a principal by direct
1. Directly forcing another to commit a crime participation. There is a collective criminal
by: responsibility.
a. Using irresistible force - such physical Extent of inducement for a person to be held
force that would produce an effet1: upon liable as principal by inducement
the individual that in spite of all
resistance, it reduces him to a mere The inducement must be "so influential in
instrument. producing the criminal act that without it, the act
b. Causing uncontrollable fear - compulsion would not have been performed."
by means of intimidation or threat that
promises an evil of such gravity and In People v. Sanchez, et al., (G.R. No. 121039-45,
eminence that the ordinary man would January 25, 1999), the Court ruled that,
have succumbed to it. notwithstanding the fact that Mayor Sanchez was
not at the crime scene, evidence proved that he
NOTE: Only the one using force or causing fear was the mastermind of the criminal act or the
is criminally liable. The material executor principal by inducement.
is not criminally liable because of exempting
circumstances of irresistible force and Thus, because Mayor Sanchez was a co-principal
uncontrollable fear under par. 5 & 6 of Art. 12. and co·conspirator, and because the act of one
conspirator is the ac.t of all, the mayor was
2. Directly induc-Jng another to commit a crime rendered liable for all the resulting
by: crimes. (People v. Janjalani et. al., G.R. No.
188314,January 10, 2011)
a. Giving price, offering, reward or promise
mnstrative cases of orincioal hv inducement
Requisites: by using words of command
i. Inducement must be made directly
with the intention of procuring the 1. In a prosecution for falsification of public
commission of the crime; and documents by ·causing it to appear that
ii. Such inducement be the determining persons participated in an act or a
cause of the commission of the crime proceeding when they did not in fact so
by the material executor. participate", Ltc. Guillergan ordered
Technical Sergeant Button to sign the
b. By using words of commands "received" portion of the payrolls as payee to
make it appear that persons whose names
Requisites: appeared on the same had signed the
i. The one uttering the words of document when they in fact did not.
command must have the intention of (Guillergan v. People, G.R. 185493, February 2,
procuring the commission of the 2011)
crime; 2. A married woman suggested to her
ii. He must have an ascendancy or paramour, with whom she had been
influence over the person who ac.ted; maintaining illicit relations to kill her
husband. After killing the husband, the guilty
parties immediately escaped and lived materialized." (People v. Jonjalani et of, G.R. No.
together as husband and wife until the time 188314,Januory 10, 2011)
of their arrest. (U.S. v. lndanan, G.R. No. L-
8187,January 29, 1913) Q: Marivic confided to her friend Gigi that her
marital life had been miserable because she
Q: A asked B to kill C because of grave married an irresponsible and philandering
injustice done to A b y C. A promised B a husband. Gigi remarked: "A husband like that
reward. B was willing to kill C, not so much deserves to be killed." Marivic killed her
because of the reward promised to him but husband. Is Gigi a prindpal by inducement?
because he also had his own long-standing
grudge against C, who had wronged him in the A: NO. A thoughtless expression is not an
past. If C is killed by B, would A be liable as a inducement to kill. The inducement must precede
principal by inducement? (2002 BAR) the act induced and must be so influential in
producing the criminal act that without it the act
A: NO. A would not be liable as principal by would not have been perfected.
inducement because the reward he promised 8 is
not the sole impelling reason which made B to When the criminal liability of the principal by
kill C. To bring the about criminal liability of a co inducementacise
principal, the inducement made by the inducer
must be the sole consideration which caused the It arises only when the crime is committed by the
person induced to commit the crime and without principal by direct participation.
which the crime would not have been committed.
The facts of the case indicate that B, the Principal by inducement vis-�-vis Proposal to
killersupposedly induced by A, had his own commitafelony
reason to kill C out of a long-standing grudge.
PRINCIPAL BY PROPOSAL TO
Q: While in training, Asali and others were INDUCEMENT COMMIT A FELONY
told that their mission was to plant bombs in
In both, there is an inducement to commit a
malls, the LRT, and other parts of Metro
crime.
Manila. Rohmat called Asali to confirm that
Trinidad would get two kilos of TNT from Liable only when GR: Proposal to commit a
him, as they were ..about to commence" their the crime is felony is not punishable.
"first mission." They made two separate committed by the
attempts to bomb a bus in Metro Manila, but principal by direct XPN: Proposal to commit
to no avail. The day before the Valentine's participation. treason, coup d'etat,
Day bombing. Trinidad got another two kilos rebellion, sedition
of TNT from Asali. On Valentine's Day, the Abu
Sayyaf Group announced that they had a gift NOTE: However, the
for the former President, Gloria Macapagal person to whom the
Arroyo. On their third try, their plan finally proposal is made should
succeeded. Right after the bomb exploded, the not commit the crime;
Abu Sayyaf Group declared that there would othenYise, the
be more bombings in the future. Asali then proponent becomes a
received a call from Rohmat, praising the principal by
former: "So wakas nag success din yung tinuro inducement.
ko sayo". What is the liability of Rohmat?
Effect of the acm,ittal of the orineiaal by
A: Rohmat is criminally responsible as "principal direct participation on the liability of the
by inducement." The instructions and training he orineiaalby inducement
had given Asali on how to make bombs - coupled
with their careful planning and persistent 1. Conspiracy is negated by the acquittal of co
attempts to bomb different areas in Metro Manila defendant.
and Rohmat's confirmation that Trinidad would 2. One cannot be held guilty of having
be getting TNT from Asali as part of their mission instigated the commission of a crime without
- prove the finding that Rohmat's co-inducement first being shown that the crime has been
was the determining cause of the commission of attually committed by another.
the crime. Such "command or advice was of such
nature that, without it. the crime would not have
NOTE: If the one charged as principal by direct Illustration: When Sergio had sexual intercourse
participation is acquitted because he acted with the complainant against her will by
without criminal intent or malice, his acquittal is employing force and intimidation, the crime
not a ground for the acquittal of the principal by committed is rape through direct participation.
inducement. When he aided Berto and made it possible for the
latter to have carnal knowledge of complainant
PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSIBLE also against her will and through force and
COOPERATION intimidation, the accused committed another
crime of rape through indispensable cooperation.
Principal by indispensable cooperation are those Thus, Sergio is guilty of two crimes of
who: consummated rape.
The accessory comes into the picture when the generic term to refer
crime is already consummated, not before the to any kind of
consummation of the crime. unlawful taking, not
iust theft or robberv
NOTE: One cannot be an accessory unless he Mere possession of There is no
knew of the commission of the crime; however. stolen items creates a presumption of
he must not have participated in its commission. presumption of being an accessory
fencine
If the offender has already involved himself as a Fencing is a principal It is necessary to
principal or an accomplice, he cannot be held as crime in itself. As prove that the
an accessory any further even if he performed such, it can stand on principal
acts pertaining to an accessory. its own. There is no committed the
need to prove that crime. Hence,
lnsrances when accessories are not criminallx one is guilty of theft before an accessory
liaJ2I& or robbery could be held liable,
the principal must
1. When the felony committed is a light felony. have been
2. When the accessory is related to the convicted first of
principal as spouse, or as an ascendant, or the crime chare.ed
descendant or as brother or sister whether The penalty is higher Penalty is less than
legitimate, natural or adopted or where the than the penalty of an that imposed in
accessory is a relative by affinity within the accessorv fencine
same degree, unless the accessory himself Mo/um Ma/um in seand
profited from the effet'tS or proceeds of the prohibitum and therefore there is a
crime or assisted the offender to profit therefore there is no need to prove
therefrom. (Art 20, RPC) need to prove criminal intent
criminal intent
Reason: The ties of blood and the The fence need not be Natural person only
preservation of the cleanliness of one's a natural person but
name compels one to conceal crimes may be a firm,
committed by relatives association,
corporation or
PROFITING OR ASSISTING OFFENDER TO partnership or other
PROFIT BY THE EFFECTS OF THE CRIME organization
Illustration: If a person not having participated
One who is charged as a n accessory under Art.
as principal or accomplice in robbery or theft but
1911) may be likewise charged under P.D.
knowing that the property being offered to him is
the proceeds or subject matter of the said crime, 1612 fnr the sameact
bought or purchased or dealt in any manner with
What is prohibited under the Constitution is the
which such property, obtaining benefit from said
prosecution of the accused twice for the same
transattion or helping the thief or robber to
offense.
profit therefrom.
NOTE: The State may choose to prosecute the
NOTE: The accessory must receive the property
offender either under the RPC or P.O. 1612
from the principal. He should not take it without
although preference for the latter would seem
the consent of the principal. If he took it without
inevitable considering that fencing is a
the consent of the principal, he is not an
crime ma/um prohibitum, and P.O. 1612 creates a
accessory but a principal in the crime of theft.
presumption of fencing and prescribes a higher
penalty based on the value of the property.
Po 1612 CFeorioel vis-A-visArt 19C1l of the (Dizon-Pamintuan v. People,, C.R. No. 111426, July
BPC CAccessorvl 11, 1994)
committed, but does not include the identity of Illustration: Abusing his public office, the
the person who committed it. president of the town of Cabiao refused to
prosecute the crime of homicide and thus made it
The corpus delicti is the body of the crime, not possible for the principal to escape. He refused to
necessarily the corpse. Thus, even if the corpse is make an investigation of the serious occurrence,
not recovered, as long as the killing is established of which complaint was made to him. The
beyond reasonable doubt, criminal liability will municipal president was found guilty as an
arise and if there is someone who destroys the accessory. (U.S. v. Yaca� G.R. No. 110, October 24,
corpus deUctl in order to prevent discovery, such 1902)
act would make him an accessory. (lnovero v.
Coronel, 65 O.G. 3160) If the public officer assisted in the escape of an
accomplice or an accessory. he is not liable under
Elements Qf COCPUS ctelirti Art. 19 par. 3 of the RPC. He is liable, however,
under P.D. 1829 for obstruction of justice.
1. The existence of a certain ac.t or result
forming the basis of the criminal charge; and 2. Private person
2. The existence of a criminal agency as the
cause of the act or result. Requisites:
a. Accessory is a private person;
The mere att of a person of carrying the cadaver b. He harbors, conceals, or assists in the
of one unlawfully killed, when it was buried to escape of the author of the crime (he
prevent the discovery thereof is sufficient to could be a principal, accomplice, or an
make him responsible as an accessory under par. accessory); and
2 of Art. 19. (People v. Gal/eto, G.R. No L-1095,july c. The crime committed by the principal is
31, 1947) either:
i. Treason
Misleading the investigating police officer to ii. Parricide
prevent the discovery of the crime or to help the iii. Murder
offender escape is also an act of destroying iv. Attempt against the life of the
the carpus delicti. President
v. That the principal is known to be
HARBORING OR CONCEALING AN OFFENDER habitually guilty of some other
crime.
Persons that max he held euUtx as an Correlation of guilt of the principal and
accessory bx barhnrioe concealine or
assistlne in the escaoe of the orinfioal of the accessory
wm.e. GR: The accessory cannot be held criminally
1. Public officers liable without the principal being found guilty of
any such crime.
Requisites:
a. Accessory is a public officer; XPN: When the principal was not held liable
b. He harbors, conceals, or assists in the because of an exempting circumstance under Art.
escape of the principal; 12.
c. He acts with abuse of his public
functions; and ACCESSORIES WHO ARE EXEMPT
d. The crime committed by the principal is FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY
any crime, provided it is not a light ART. 20, RPC
felony.
Accessories who are exemnt from criminal
In the case of a public officer, the crime liability (1998. 2004-. 2010 BAR)
committed by the principal is immaterial. Such
officer becomes an accessory by the mere fact GR: An accessory is exempt from criminal
that he helped the principal escape by harboring, liability, when the principal is his:
concealing, making use of his public funttion and
thus, abusing the same, but the offender whom 1. Spouse
he harbors, conceals, or assist in the escape must 2. Ascendant
be a principal. 3. Descendant
4. Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother, A week later, Jake was apprehended by the
sister, or relative by affinity within the same police. can Jake's mother and aunt b e made
degree. criminally liable as accessories to the crime of
murder? (2010 BAR)
XPN: Accessory is not exempt from criminal
liability even if the principal is related to him, if A: The mother is exempt from criminal liability
such accessory: under Art. 20 of the RPC as a result of her
relationship to her son; however, the aunt is
1. Profited by the effects of the crime; or liable as an accessory under Art. 19 paragraph 3
2. Assisted the offender to profit from the of the RPC if the author of the crime is guilty of
effects of the crime. murder. The relationship between an aunt and a
nephew does not fall within the dassification for
The exemption provided in this article is based exemption.
on the ties of blood and the preservation of the
cleanliness of one's name, which compels one to MULTIPLE OFFENDERS
conceal crimes committed by relatives so near as (DIFFERENCES, RULES, AND EFFECTS
those mentioned in this article. Nephew and
niece are not included. 1. Recidivism - the offender at the time of his
trial for one crime shall have been previously
A public officer contemplated under par. 3 of Art convicted by final judgment of another crime
19 is exempt by reason of relationship to the embraced in the same title of the RPC.
principal, even such public officer acted with
abuse of his public functions. 2. Reit.eracion - the offender has been
previously punished for an offense which the
Certain accnmolices to he onniShed as law attaches an equal or greater penalty or
principals in certain crimes against chastity for two or more crimes to which it attaches a
lighter penalty.
Under Article 346 of RPC, an ascendant, guardian,
curator. teacher and any person who, by abuse of 3. Habitual delinquency - the offender within
authority or confidential relationship, shall the period of 10 years from the date of his
cooperate as an accomplice in the perpetration of release or last conviction of the crimes of
the crimes embraced in Chapter 2, 3, and 4 of serious or less serious physical injuries,
Book 2, Title 11 (Crimes against Chastity) shall be robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, is found
punished as principals. (Amurao, 2008) guilty of any of the said crimes a third time or
oftener. (Art 62, RPC)
Q: DCB, the daughter of MSB, stole the
earrings of a stranger. MCB pawned the NOTE: It is important that the previous
earrings with TBI Pawnshop as a pledge for convictions refer to the felonies enumerated
PhpS00 loan. During the trial, MCB raised the in Art. 62 of the RPC. If, for example, the
defense that being the mother of DCB, she accused was convicted for illegal sale of
cannot be held liable as an accessory. Will dangerous drugs, he cannot be considered a
MCB's defense prosper? (2004 BAR) habitual delinquent. (People v. Dalawis, G.R.
No. 197925, November 9, 2015)
A: NO. MCB's defense will not prosper because
the exemption from criminal liability of an 4. Quasi-recidivism - Any person who shall
accessory by virtue of relationship with the commit a felony after having been convic.ted
principal does not cover accessories who by final judgment before beginning to serve
themselves profited from or assisted the offender such sentence or while serving such sentence
to profit by the effects or proceeds of the crime. shall be punished by the maximum period
This non-exemption of an accessory, though prescribed by law for the new felony. (Art
related to the principal of the crime, is expressly 160, RPC)
provided in Art. 20 of the RPC.
Recidivism and Relteradon are generic
Q: Immediately after murdering Bob, Jake aggravating circumstances which can be offset by
went to his mother to seek refuge. His mother mitigating circumstances. Habitual delinquency
told him to hide in the maid's quarter until and Quasi-Recidivism, on the other hand, are
she finds a better place for him to hide. After special aggravating circumstances which cannot
two days, Jake transferred to his aunt's house. be offset.
Bem,isites of habitual delinouencx as an NOTE: The total penalties must not exceed 30
aeeravatinecircnmsrance years. (Art 62, RPC)
A: NO. For purposes of the effect of quasi that the offender ·shall be punished by the
recidivism under Article 160 of the Revised Penal maximum period of the penalty prescribed by
Code, it will be appreciated whether the crime for law for the new felony." Notwithstanding,
which an accused is serving sentence at the time therefore, the existence of mitigating
of the commission of the offense charged, falls circumstances of voluntary surrender and plea of
under said Code or under a special law. (People v. guilty, the imposition of the supreme penalty is in
Peralta, et al., G.R. No. L-15959, October 11, 1961) order. (People v. Alicia and Bangayan, G.R. No. L·
38176, January 22, 1980)
Q: Defendant-appellant, while serving
sentence for the crime of homicide, killed one Pardon of a quasi-recidjvist
Sabas Aseo, for which the CFI of Manila found
him guilty with the crime of murder, meting GR:
him the penalty of death. On appeal to the 1. When he has reached the age of 70 and has
Supreme Court, appellant contend that the already served out his original sentence; or
CFI erred in applying Article 160 of the RPC as 2. When he shall complete it after reaching said
it is applicable only when the new crime age
which is committed by a person already
serving sentence is different from the crime XPN: Unless by reason of his conduct or other
for which he is serving sentence. Is the circumstances, he shall not be worthy of such
defendant correct? clemency.
A: NO. As the new offense need not be different NOTE: This is only directory as the President
or be of different character from that of the cannot be compelled to grant pardon.
former offense. The deduction of the appellant
from the head note of Article 160 of the word Quad-recidivism and rfittrofioa cannot en
·another" is not called for. The language is plain �
and ambiguous. There is not the slightest
intimation in the text of article 160 that said Quasi-recidivism refers to a situation where the
article applies only in cases where the new second crime is committed DURING the service of
offense is different in character from the former sentence for the first crime. Reiteracion refers to
offense for which the defendant is serving the a situation where the second crime is committed
penalty. Hence, even if he is serving sentence for AFTER service of sentence for the first crime. As
homicide and was later found to be guilty of to reiteracion, the law says "previously
murder, Article 160 applies. (People v. Yabut, G.R. punished."
No. 39085, September 27, 1933)
Q: Layson, Ragub, Fugoso, and Garces were all
Q: While serving sentence for robbery in the serving their sentences in Davao Penal
New Bilibid Prisons, defendants attacked and Colony. One morning, the four, armed with
stabbed three inmates who were confined in bladed weapons, entered the cell of the victim
the prison hospital, resulting in the death of Gasang. Without warning and acting in
one and the infliction of numerous stab concert they swiftly took turns in stabbing
wounds on the others. After said incident, the Gasang. and as a result, the victim died. The
defendants voluntarily surrendered to the four were charged with and convicted of
authorities and plead guilty to said crimes. murder under Article 248, in relation to
The lower court found the defendants guilty Article 160 of the RPC, with the aggravating
of the crime of murder and imposed the circumstances of (1) recidivism against
penalty of death. On automatic review by the Layson and Ragub, and (2) all of them with
Supreme Court, defendants contend that they two or more prior convictions. Is the RTC
should have been given the benefit of the judge correct?
mitigating circumstances of voluntary
surrender and plea of guilty. Is their A: NO. It was error for the trial judge to consider
argument correct? against the accused the aggravating circumstance
of having been previously punished for two or
A: NO. As quasi-recidivism cannot be offset by more crimes to which the law attaches lighter
ordinary mitigating circumstances. Quasi penalties because the said aggravating
recidivism is a special aggravating circumstance circumstance of "relteracion" requires that the
which imposes the maximum of the penalty for offender against whom it is considered shall have
the new offense. Article 160 specifically provides served out his sentences for the prior offenses.
HABITUAL
REITERACION RECIDIVISM QUASI-RECIDIVISM
DELIQUENCY
There are two There are at least two There are at least three Felony was committed
convictions. It is convictions. No convictions. Within a after having been
necessary that the prescriptive period on period of 10 years from convicted by final
offender shall the commission of the the date of release or last judgment of an offense,
have served out offense; it does not conviction of the crimes before beginning to
his sentence for prescribe. It is enough covered, he is found serve sentence or while
the first offense. that a final judgment guilty of any of said serving the same.
has been rendered in crimes a third time or
the first offense. oftener.
The previous and Requires that the Crimes covered are First and subsequent
subsequent offenses be included in serious or less serious conviction may or may
offenses must not the same Title of the physical injuries, not be embraced by the
be embraced by Code robbery, theft, estafa, same title of the RPC
the same Title of and falsification
the RPC
Not always It increases the penalty Shall suffer additional Shall be punished by the
aggravating; its to its maximum period penalty maximum period of the
appreciation is penalty prescribed by
within the law for the new felony
discretion of the
court
Includes offenses Felonies under RPC Limited to serious or less First crime for which
under special law only serious physical injuries, the offender is serving
robbery, theft, estofa and sentence need not be a
falsification crime under the RPC but
the second crime must
be one under the RPC
NOTE: If recidivism and relteradon are both present, only recidivism must be appreciated because it is
easier to prove.
1829 penalizes the act of any person, without primarily on the moral rightfulness of the
any distinction, who knowingly or wilfully punishment inflicted. (Albert)
obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the
apprehension of suspec.ts and the investigation NOTE: The basis of the right to punish violations
and prosecution of criminal cases, which is an of penal law is the police power of the State.
act of an accessory. Thus, those exempted as
accessory to the crime committed under the IMPOSABLE PENALTIES
Revised Penal Code can still be prosecuted as ART. 21, RPC
principals for Obstruction of Justice under P.O.
1829. The benefits of the exception provided in Only that penalty prescribed by law prior to the
Art. 20 of the RPC do not apply to P.O.1829 since commission of the felony may be imposed. No
under Art.10 of the Revised Penal Code, offenses person shall be subject to criminal prosecution
which are punishable under special laws are not for any act of his until after the State has defined
subject to the provisions of the Code and shall the crime and has fixed a penalty therefore (US.
only be supplementary to such laws. P.O. 1829, v. Parrone, G.R. No. l-7038,January 7, 1913). It is
being a special law, is thus controlling, with a guaranty to the citizen of this country that no
regard to offenses specially punished. act of his will be considered criminal until the
government has made it so by law and has
Accessncx chareed simulraneoustv underArt provided a penalty.
19(3) and for violating P.D.1829
Siniarinns when a defendant max benefit
A person who harbors, conceals, or assist in the Ctom a tavnrahle cetcoacrive effecr ofa new
escape of an author of the crime can be charged .!.i!.l!!.
simultaneously as accessory under Art. 19(3)
and for violating P.O. 1829. What the 1. The crime has been committed and
Constitution prohibits is putting an accused prosecution begins;
twice in jeopardy for the same offense. 2. Sentence has been passed but service has
not begun; and
PENALTIES 3. The sentence is being carried out. (Escalante
v. Santos, G.R. Na. l-36828, February 2 ,
1932)
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
The State has an existence of its own to ACT PROHIBITING THE IMPOSITION OF
maintain, a conscience to assert, and moral DEATH PENALTY IN THE PHILIPPINES
principles to be vindicated. Penal justice must, (R.A. 9346)
therefore, be exercised by the State in the
service and satisfaction of a duty and rests
Penalries imaosed in Heu of rhe death Repeals by implication are not favored as
oenaltv laws are presumed to be passed with
deliberation and full knowledge of all laws
1. Reclusion perpetua - when the law violated existing on the subject, the congruent
makes use of the nomenclature of the application of which the courts must
penalties of the RPC; or generally presume. (Philippine International
2. Life imprisonment - when the law violated Trading Corp. v COA, G.R. No. 183517, June
does not make use of the nomenclature of 22, 2010)
the penalties of the RPC. (Sec. 2, R.A. 9346)
EFFECT OF PARDON BY THE
Persons convicted of offenses punished with OFFENDED PARTY
recluslon perpetua, or whose sentences will be ART. 23, RPC
reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of this
Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. GR: Pardon by the offended party does NOT
4103 otherwise known as the Indeterminate extinguish the criminal liability of the offender.
Sentence Law. (as amended R.A. 9346, Sec 3)
Reason: A crime committed is an offense against
Purpose of the law the State. Only the Chief Executive can pardon
the offenders. In criminal cases, the intervention
For justice, because the State has an existence of of the aggrieved parties is limited to being
its own to maintain, a conscience to assert. and witnesses for the prosecution. (Reyes, 2017)
moral principles to be vindicated. Penal justice
Compromise upon the civil liability arising from in rape where there are two or more
an offense may be had; but such compromise principals involved.
shall not extinguish the public action for the
imposition of the legal penalty. (Art. 2034, Civil MEASURES OF PREVENTION OR SAFETY
Code) WHICH ARE NOT CONSIDERED AS PENAL TIES
ART. 24, RPC
A contract stipulating for the renunciation of the
right to prosecute an offense or waiving the Measures of prevention that are not
criminal liability is VOID. (Arts. 1306, 1352, 1409, considered as nenaltx
Civil Code)
1. The arrest and temporary detention of
XPN: Pardon by the offended party will bar accused persons, as well as their detention
criminal prosecution in the following crimes: by reason of insanity or imbecility, or illness
requiring their confinement in a hospital;
1. Adultery ond Concubinage (Art 344, RPC) 2. The commitment of a minor to any of the
institutions mentioned in Art. 80 (now P.D.
EXPRESS or IMPLIED pardon must be given 603, amended by Sec. 36, par 2 & 3 of R.A
by the offended party to BOTH offenders. 9344, as amended by R.A 10603) and for the
Pardon must be given PRIOR to the purposes specified therein;
institution of criminal action. 3. Suspension from the employment or public
office during the trial or in order to institute
2. Seduction, Abduction, Acts of Lasciviousness proceedings;
(Art 344, RPC) 4. Fines and other corrective measures which,
in the exercise of their administrative or
Pardon must be given PRIOR to the disciplinary powers, superior officials may
institution of the criminal action. However, impose upon their subordinates; and
marriage between the offender and the 5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations
offended party EVEN AFTER the institution which the civil law may establish in penal
of the criminal action or conviction of the form.
offender will extinguish the criminal action
or remit the penalty already imposed NOTE: The aforementioned measures are not
against the offender, his co-principals, penalties because they are not imposed as a
accomplices, and accessories after the fact. result of judicial proceedings. They are
(People v. Dela Cerna, G.R. No. 136899-904, PREVENTIVE MEASURES only.
October 9, 2002)
Pnrnnses tor theimooSitlonofoeoalrv under
Pardon by the offended party under Art. 344 the BPC
is only a bar to criminal prosecution; it is not
a ground for extinguishment of criminal 1. Retribution or expiation - penalty is
liability. Civil liability may be extinguished commensurate with the gravity of the
by the express waiver of the offended party. offense.
2. Correctfon or reformation - as shown by the
Article 89, providing for total extinction of rules which regulate the execution of the
criminal liability, does not mention pardon penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty.
by the offended party as one of the causes of 3. Socio/ defense - shown by its inflexible
totally extinguishing criminal liability. severity to recidivists and habitual
(Reyes, 2017) delinquents.
Scale in Art. 25 • General classification based on Articles 226, 227, and 228, punishing infidelity
severity, nature, and subject matter. of public officers in the custody of documents,
provide for temporary special disqualification as
Scale in Art. 70 - For successive service of a principal penalty.
sentences imposed on the same accused, in
consideration of the severity and nature. NOTE: It is necessary to employ legal
terminology in the imposition of penalties
Scale in Art 71 -For graduating penalties by because of the substantial difference in their
degrees in accordance with the rules of Art 61. corresponding legal effetts and accessory
penalties. (Boado, 2008)
Prindoal nenalfies accnrdine to their
diviSihilitv Thus, a sentence of '"five years in Bilibid" is
defective because it does not specify the exact
DIVISIBLE INDIVISIBLE penalty on RPC. (U.S. v. Avillar, G.R. No, 9609-11,
Those that have Those which have no October 2, 1914)
fixed duration and fixed duration.
are divisible into e.g. Death, reclusion FINE
three periods. perpetua, perpetual ART.26, RPC
absolute or special As amended by R.A. 10951
disqualification,
ubllc censure. Imnnsitlon offines
Penaltiesaccordine to snhiecr-mauec When a fine is considered afflictive,
correctional or liaht aenalcv
1. Corporal (death)
2. Deprivation of freedom (reclusion, prision, FINE
arresto) Set. Z, R.A. 10951
3. Restriction of freedom (destierro) Aftl1Cbve Over Pl,200,000
4. Deprivation of rights (disqualification and Correctional P40,000 · Pl,200,000
suspension) Li ht Not exceedin P40,000
5. Pecuniary {fine)
NOTE: Same basis may be applied by analogy to
Penalriesaccordine to their eravitv Bond to keep the peace.
imprisonment if the penalty of fine is not Reclusion 20 yrs. and 1 day to 4-0
paid. (Regalado, 2007) perpetua yrs.
2. More particularly, the wealth or means of Reclusion 12 yrs. and 1 day to 20
the culprit temporal yrs.
6 yrs. and 1 day to 12
NOTE: This is the main consideration in the yrs., except when
imposition of fines. Prision mayor disqualification is
and temporary accessory penalty, in
Penalty cannot b e imposed in the alternative disqualification which case its duration
is that of the principal
The law does not permit any court to impose a penalty
sentence in the alternative, its duty being to
indicate the penalty imposed definitely and 6 mos. and 1 day to 6
positively. (People v. Mercadejas, CA, 54 O.G. yrs., except when
Prision
5707; People v. Tabije, CA, 59 O.G.1922) suspension is an
correccional,
accessory penalty, in
suspension, and
Under the Bench Book in Criminal Procedure which case its duration
destierro
issued by the SC, the imposition of the is that of the principal
alternative penalty may be considered during penalty.
the plea bargaining in the pre-trial of criminal 1 mo. and 1 day to 6
cases. Arresto mayor
mos.
Q: E and M are convicted of a penal law that Arresto menor 1 day to 30 days
imposes a penalty of fine or imprisonment or The period during
both fine and imprisonment. The judge which the bond shall
sentenced them to pay the fine, jointly and Bond to keep the
be effective is
severally, with subsidiary imprisonment in peace
discretionary on the
case of insolvency. (BAR 2005) court
NOTE: If the convict should enter the prohibited When will he be credited with four-fifths
places, he will be committing the crime of C4/Sl of the tlme durine which be has
evasion of service of sentence under Art. 157. uodereone ncevenlive imariSnnment7
Cases when ctestierco ran he imonsed If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide
by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon
1. Serious physical injuries or death under convicted prisoners, he shall do so in writing
exceptional circumstances (Art. 247); with the assistance of a counsel and shall be
2. In the crime of grave threat or light threat, credited in the service of his sentence with four
when the offender is required to put up a fifths of the time during which he has
bond for good behavior but failed or refused undergone preventive imprisonment.
to do so (Art. 284);
3. As a penalty for the concubine in Credit for preventive imprisonment for the
concubinage (Art 334); and penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be dedutted
4. In cases where after reducing the penalty by from thirty (30) years.
one or more degrees, destlerro is the proper
penalty. Whenever an accused has undergone preventive
imprisonment for a period equal to the possible
PERIOD OF PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT maximum imprisonment of the offense charged
DEDUCTED FROM THE TERM to which he may be sentenced and his case is not
OF IMPRISONMENT yet terminated, he shall be released immediately
ART. 29, RPC as amended by R.A. 10592 without prejudice to the continuation of the triaJ
thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the same
Pceveotiyetmarisonmeot is under review.
Refers to the detention of accused while the case Computation of preventive imprisonment for
against him is ongoing trial either because the purposes of immediate release under this
crime he committed is a non-bailable offense paragraph shall be the actual period of detention
and evidence of guilt is strong; or the crime with good conduct time allowance: Provided,
committed is a bailable offense but he does not however, that if the accused is absent without
have the funds. justifiable cause at any stage of the trial, the
court may motu proprio order the rearrest of the
accused: Provided, finally, that recidivists,
habitual delinquents, escapees and persons
To prevent the Hight of the accused. charged with heinous crimes are excluded from
the coverage of this AcL
GR: Offenders or accused who have undergone
preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the In case the maximum penalty to which the
service of their sentence consisting of accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall
deprivation of liberty, with the full time during be released after thirty (30) days of preventive
which they have undergone preventive imprisonment.
imprisonment if:
NOTE: A child in conflict with the law shall be
The detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in credited in the services of his/her sentence with
writing, after being infonned of the effects the full time spent in the actual commitment and
thereof with the assistance of counsel, to abide detention. (Sec. 41, RA 9344)
by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon
convicted prisoners. EFFECTS OF THE PENALTIES ACCORDING
TO THEIR RESPECTIVE NATURE
XPNs: ART. 31-35, RPC
1. When they are recidivists, or have been Effecrs nroduced hv the oeoaltjes of
convicted previously twice or more times of perpetual or temporary absolute
any crime; and disqualification for public office (Art 30.
2. When upon being summoned for the BW
execution of their sentence, they have failed
to surrender voluntarily. 1. Deprivation of public offices and
employments, even if by election;
2. Deprivation of right to vote or be elected to earlier cited, provides that the penalty of
such office; perpetual absolute disqualification has the effect
3. Disqualification for the offices or public of depriving the convitted felon of the privilege
employments and for the exercise of any of to run for elective office. lja/osjos v. COMELEC,
the rights mentioned; and C.R. No. 205033,June 18, 2013)
4. Loss of right to retirement pay or pension
for any office formerly held. Pernetual absolute dismialification xis-A-xis
Temporary absolute disqualification
Iemonrnrx absolute disoualifiration
GR: In temporary absolute disqualification, the PERPETUAL TEMPORARY
disqualification shall last during the term of the ABSOLUTE ABSOLUTE
sentence. DISQUALIFICATION OISQUALIFICATION
2. If suspended from public office, the offender 1. Present two sufficient sureties who shall
cannot hold another office having similar undertake that the offender will not commit
functions during the period of suspension. the offense sought to be
prevented, and that in case such offense be
DiSaualificatlon is notadenial ofooe·s rieht committed they will pay the amount
determined by the court; or
Disqualification is withholding of privilege only. 2. Deposit such amount with the clerk of court
It is imposed for protection not for punishment. to guarantee said undertaking; or
The presumption is that one rendered infamous 3. The offender may be detained, if he cannot
by conviction of felony, or other base offenses give the bond, for a period not to exceed 6
indicative of moral turpitude, is unfit to exercise months if prosecuted for grave or less
the privilege of suffrage or to hold office. (People grave felony, or for a period not to exceed 30
v. Corral, G.R. No. 42300, January 31, 1936) days, if for a lightfelony.
Q: Cataquiz argues that the imposition of the Rood to keen the neace vis-ti-vis Railhood
prindpal penalty of dismissal i s rendered
impossible by his removal from
office. Consequently, citing the rule that the BOND TO KEEP
BAIL BOND
accessory follows the principal, he insists THE PEACE
that the accessory penalties may no longer be
imposed on him. Is he correct? It is imposed as a It is posted for the
distinct provisional release of
A: NO. The accessory penalties of penalty (Art. 284). an accused person
disqualification from re-employment in public after his arrest or
service and forfeiture of government retirement during trial but
benefits can still be imposed on him, before final
notwithstanding the impossibility of effecting judgment of
the principal penalty of dismissal because of his conviction. (Rule 114,
removal from office. Even if the most severe of Revised Rules of
administrative sanctions - that of separation Crlmlnal Procedure
from service - may no longer be imposed, there
are other penalties which may be imposed on Bond to keep peace vis-�•vis Bond for good
her if she is later found guilty of administrative behavior
offenses charged against her, namely, the
disqualification to hold any government office
and the forfeiture of benefits. (O.P. v. BOND TO KEEP THE BOND FOR GOOD
Catoquiz, G.R. No. 183445, September 14, 2011 PEACE BEHAVIOR
reiterating Pagano v. Nazarro, Jr.)
Failure to post a bond The legal effect of
Cjyjl lnrecdittion (BPC An 14 RPC) to keep the peace failure to post a
results to bond for good
It is an accessory penalty which produces the imprisonment either behavior is not
following effects: for 6 months or 30 imprisonment
days, depending on but destierro under
1. Deprivation of the rights of parental whether the felony Article 284
authority or guardianship of any ward; committed is grave or
2. Deprivation of marital authority; and less grave on one
3. Deprivation of the right to manage his hand, or it is light only
property and of the right to dispose of such
property by any act or any conveyance inter It is not applicable to It is applicable only
vivos. any particular case to cases of grave
threats and light
NOTE: Offender may dispose such property threats
by will or donation mortis causa.
PARDON, ITS EFFECTS
Duties of a person sentenced to give bond to ART. 36, RPC
keep the peace CArt 3S. RPCI
Effecrs ofoacdon hv rhe ncesideor·
GR: A pardon shall not restore the right to hold Chief Executive can
public office or the right of suffrage. (2015 BAR) order the immediate
incarceration of the
XPN: When any or both such rights is/are offender under the
expressly restored by the terms of the pardon; Administrative Code.
or if it is an absolute pardon
NOTE: Offended party can waive the civil
NOTE: Pardon shall not exempt the culprit from liability. Pardon should be given before the
the payment of the civil liability. institution of criminal prosecution and must be
extended to both offenders (Art. 344, RPC).
Limitations upon the exercise of the
nacdonine oower This is applicable only in cases of private crimes:
either Article 45 of the Revised Penal Cade and NOTE: For Nos. 1 and 2, see table on the
Section 20 of R.A. No. 9165, would be a part of application of Articles 50-57 of the RPC.
the penalty to be prescribed. The determination
of whether or not any article confiscated in PRIVILEGED ORDINARY
relation to the unlawful act would be subject of MITIGATING MITIGATING
forfeiture could be made only when the
judgment is to be rendered in the
CIRCUMSTANCE
Adjust . .. ... . . . ..
CIRCUMSTANCE
.
proceedings. (PDEA v. Brodett, G.R. No. 196390,
September 28, 2011)
b de ree
Not subject to the
offset rule
.. to the offset
APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
ART. %-77, RPC What are the privileged mitigating
Ciccumsrances1mdectheBPC?
Penalties are applied based on:
1. When the offender is a minor under 18
1. The stages of commission of the felony: years of age (Art 68, RPC) (2013, 2014
a. Consummated BAR);
b. Frustrated 2. When the crime committed is not wholly
c. Attempted excusable (Art 69, RPC);
3. When there are l\vo or more mitigating
2. The offenders and their participation: circumstances and no aggravating
a. Principal circumstance, the court shall impose the
b . Accomplice penalty next lower to that prescribed by law,
c. Accessory in the period that it may deem applicable,
according the number and nature of such
3. Aggravating and mitigating circumstances. circumstances (Art 64, par. 5, RPC) (1997
BAR);
COMPUTATION OF PENALTY 4. Voluntary release of the person illegally
detained within 3 days without the offender
Eaaors that should he considered in attaining his purpose and before the
commnine the orooer imonsahleoenaltx institution of the criminal action (Art 268,
par. 3, RPC);
1. Prescribed or graduated penalty 5. Abandonment without justification by the
2. Indivisible or divisible penalty offended spouse in case of adultery (Art
3. Applicability or non-applicability of the 333, par. 3, RPC); and
Indeterminate Sentence Law 6. Concealing dishonor in case of infanticide.
(Art. 255, par. 2, RPC)
PRESCRIBED OR GRADUATED PENALTY
NOTE: If it is the maternal grandparent who
committed the offense to conceal dishonor, the
Prescribed oenaltx penalty imposed is one degree lower. If it is the
The prescribed penalty is that found in Book II of pregnant woman who committed the offense to
the Revised Penal Code. conceal dishonor, the penalty imposed is two
degrees lower. In case of concealing dishonor by
Graduated penalty a pregnant woman in abortion, the imposable
penalty is merely lowered by period and not by
The graduated penalty is the imposable penalty degree, hence, not a privileged mitigating
after taking into consideration certain circumstance.
graduating factors.
What are the orivHeeed mitieatlne
What are the graduating factors? drcumsrances contemolared1mderArt 69 of
theBPC,
1. Stages of execution;
2. Nature of participation; and 1. Incomplete justifying circumstances (Art 11,
3. Presence of privileged mitigating RPC); and
circumstance. 2. Incomplete exempting circumstance (Art
12, RPC)
Provided, that the majority of their conditions Compound penalty - composed of two
are present. penalties
Complex penalty- consists of three penalties.
For Art. 69 of the RPC to apply, it is necessary
that: Whether the prescribed penalty is single,
compound, or complex, the graduated penalty is
1. Some of the conditions required to justify single and full penalty.
the deed or to exempt from criminal
liability are lacking; Examples:
2. The majority of such conditions are a. Homicide - prescribed penalty is single
nonetheless present; and penalty of reclusion temporal:
one degree lower is prision mayor
NOTE: If there are only two requisites, the two degrees lower is prision
presence of one is already considered as correctional
majority.
b. Murder - prescribed penalty is compound
3. When the circumstance has an penalty of reclusion perpetua to death:
indispensable element, that element must one degree lower is reclusion temporal
be present in the case. (Regalado, 2007) two degrees lower is prision mayor
maximum period to prlsfon mayor in its Second rule: The law prescribes two (2)
medium period: indivisible penalties
one degree lower is arrestor mayor in its
maximum period to prlsfon correcclonal When the penalty is composed of two indivisible
in its medium period penalties, the following rules shall be observed:
two degrees lower is destlerro in its
maximum period to arresto mayor in its 1. When there is only one aggravating
medium period circumstance, the greater penalty shall be
imposed;
Third rule: When the prescribed penalty is 2. When there is neither mitigating nor
composed of a full penalty and penalties with aggravating circumstances, the lesser penalty
period shall be imposed;
3. When there is a mitigating circumstance and
Example: no aggravating circumstance, the lesser
Section S(b) of R.A. 7610 - the prescribed penalty shall be imposed; and
penalty is rec/uslon temporal in its medium 4. When both mitigating and aggravating
period to reclusion perpetuo - the graduated circumstances are present, the court shall
penalty must be a complex period one degree allow them to offset one another. (1995
lower is prision mayor in its medium period to BAR)
recluslon temporal in its minimum period.
There is only one prescribed penalty consisting
DIVISIBLE OR INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES of two (2) indivisible penalties, that is reclusion
perpetua to death for the following crimes under
BUI&5 FOB THE APPI.ICAIION OF the RPC:
INOIYISIRI EPENAtIIES (ABT 61 RPQ
1. Parricide; (Art 246, RPC)
What are the indivisible penalties? 2. Robbery with homicide; (Art. 294, par. 1,
1. Reclusion perpetua; RPC)
2. Death; and 3. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
3. Reclusion perpetua to death. (Componil/a, without intention to exort ransom; and (Art
2017) 267, RPC)
4. Rape committed with the use of a deadly
first rule· The law ncesccihes a Sinele weapon or by two or more persons. (Art
indiv'isihle nenaltv 266-8, RPC)
Whatever may be the nature or number of Applying the off-set rule, only one aggravating
aggravating or mitigating circumstance that may circumstance will remain. Thus, the greater
have attended the commission of the crime, the penalty which is death is the proper imposable
court shall apply the prescribed penalty. penalty. However, because of R.A. 9346, the
penalty will be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
Examples:
a. Simple rape - the prescribed penalty is Q: The crime is parridde. There are two (2)
reclusion perpetua aggravating drcumstance and two (2)
b. Qualified rape - the prescribed penalty is mitigating drcumstance. What is the proper
death imposable penalty?
Q: The crime committed is simple rape, and A: Applying the off-set rule, no modifying
the penalty is reclusion perpetua. There are circumstance will remain. Since there is neither
two mitigating drcumstances. Can you mitigating nor aggravating circumstance, the
apprecfate the two mitigating circumstances, lesser penalty which is reclusion perpetua is the
to appreciate the special mitigating proper imposable penalty.
drcumstance, for purposes of making the
penalty one degree lower? Two kinds nfceduSino necnernaIACNo15-
8-2 Auaust4 201n
A: NO. The special mitigating circumstance
consisting of two mitigating circumstances is 1. Reclusion perpetua as a reduced penalty -
found under Art. 64. There is no special the penalty is death but it was reduced to
circumstance in Art. 63 of the RPC. reclusion perpetua because ofR.A. 9346.
When the penalty is composed of three (3) Rule in increasing the penalty of fine by one
periods, the following rules shall be observed: or more decrees CAa 75 RPQ
a. When there is neither aggravating nor Fines shall be increased or reduced for each
mitigating: the penalty in its medium period degree by 1/4 of the maximum amount. The
shall be imposed; minimum amount prescribed by law shall not be
b. When there is only a mitigating circumstance: changed.
the penalty in its minimum period shall be
imposed;
c. When there is only an aggravating
circumstance: the penalty in its maximum
period shall be imposed;
d. When there are aggravating and mitigating -
the court shall offset those of one class
against the other according to relative
weight;
e. Two or more mitigating and no aggravating -
penalty next lower, in the period applicable,
according to the number and nature of such
circumstances; and
f. No penalty greater than the maximum period
of the penalty prescribed by law shall be
imposed, no matter how many aggravating
circumstances are present.
NOTE:
GR:
1. Penalties are imposed upon the principals.
2. Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony in general terms, it shall be understood to
applyto a consummated felony.
thus direct assault is there to confuse the unlawful aggression. But there was no
examiner. What should be considered is the provocation coming from Bruno, therefore, there
penalty for homicide since it is graver. The was a lack of sufficient provocation. Hence, two
maximum should not exceed what is prescribed elements of self-defense are present.
by the penalty. The minimum should be a period
less than what is prescribed as a minimum for Q: How about the 3rd element of self-defense,
the penalty. reasonable necessity of the means employed
to prevent or repel the attack, is this present?
When oenaltv is imonsed
bx Soefial Penal JawCl994 RABl A: NO. The third element of self-defense is
absent because based on the facts proven by
1. Maxlmum Term - must not exceed the Bruno, although it was the man who attacked
maximum term fixed by said law. Bruno first, he prevailed upon the man because
2. Minimum Term - must not be less than the he made use of a knife and stabbed the man.
minimum term prescribed by the same. While the man attacked Bruno by means of his
(2003 BAR) fist, it is not reasonably necessary for Bruno to
make use of a knife in killing the man. So what
Q: Bruno was charged with homidde for we have is an incomplete self·defense.
killing the 75-year old owner of his rooming
house. The prosecution proved that Bruno Under paragraph 1 of Article 13, in case of
stabbed the owner causing his death, and incomplete self-defense, if aside from unlawful
that the killing happened at 10 in the evening aggression, another element is present but not
in the house where the victim and Bruno all, we have a privileged mitigating
Jived. Bruno, on the other hand, successfully circumstance. Therefore, this incomplete self
proved that he voluntarily surrendered to defense shall be treated as a privileged mitigating
the authorities; that he pleaded guilty to the circumstance.
crime charged; that it was the victim who
first attacked and did so without any Q: The prosecution was able to prove that the
provocation on his (Bruno's) part, but he man is 75 years old. Would you consider the
prevailed because he managed to draw his aggravating circumstance of disrespect of
knife with which he stabbed the victim. The age?
penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal.
Assuming a judgment of conviction and after A: NO. Even if Bruno killed the said 75-year-old
considering the attendant circumstances, man, there was no showing in the problem that
what penalty should the judge impose? (BAR he disrespected the age of the man.
2013)
Q: Would you consider nighttime as an
A: Bruno should be sentenced to an aggravating circumstance?
indeterminate sentence penalty of arresto
mayor in any of its period as minimum to A: NO. Even if the problem says that the crime
prision correccional in its medium period as was committed at 10 in the evening, it did not
maximum. Bruno was entitled to the privileged say whether the house was lighted or not. There
mitigating circumstances of incomplete self· was also no showing that the offender
defense and the presence of at least two deliberately sought nighttime to commit the
ordinary mitigating circumstances (voluntary crime.
surrender and plea of guilt) without any
aggravating circumstance under Art. 69 and 64 Q: Would you consider dwelling?
(5) of the RPC respectively, which lowers the
prescribed penalty for homicide which is A: NO. In the said dwelling both Bruno and the
reclusion temporal to prision correccional. victim are residing. Therefore, dwelling is not an
aggravating circumstance because both of them
furtherExolanatlon are living in the same dwelling. It cannot be said
that when Bruno killed the man, he disrespected
In this kind of question, the Bar examiner wants the dwelling of the said man. Therefore, we have
you to determine whether there was self· no a99ravatln9 drcumstance present.
defense or not. The problem provides that the
defense was able to prove that it was the man Bruno was able to prove voluntary surrender,
who first attacked Bruno; therefore, there was voluntary plea of guilt, and then we have an
correccional; from 250 to 499 grams, prision graduation of penalties reduce the imposable
mayor; and 500 to 749 grams, reclusion penalty beyond or lower than prision
temporal. Parenthetically, fine is imposed as a correcdonal. It is for this reason that the three
conjunctive penalty only if the penalty is component penalties in the second paragraph of
reclusion perpetuo to death. Section 20 shall each be considered as an
independent principal penalty, and that the
Now, considering the minimal quantity of the lowest penalty should in any event be prision
marijuana subject of the case at bar, the correcdonal in order not to depreciate the
imposable penalty under RA. 6425, as amended seriousness of drug offenses.
by R.A. 7659, is prision correccional, to be taken
from the medium period thereof pursuant to c. YES.
Article 64 of the Revised Penal Code, there being
no attendant mitigating or aggravating Since drug offenses are not included in nor has
circumstance. Simon committed any act which would put him
within the exceptions to said law and the penalty
b. YES. to be imposed does not involve reclusion
perpetua or death; provided, of course, that the
In the past, it was held that in imposing the penalty as ultimately resolved will exceed one
penalty for offenses under special laws, the rules year of imprisonment.
on mitigating or aggravating circumstances
under the RPC cannot and should not be applied. R.A. 6425, as now amended by R.A. 7659, has
A review of such doctrines as applied in previous unqualifiedly adopted the penalties under the
cases, however, reveals that the reason therefor RPC in their technical terms, hence with their
was because the special laws involved provided technical signification and effects. In fact, for
their own specific penalties for the offenses purposes of determining the maximum of said
punished thereunder, and which penalties were sentence, the Court applied the provisions of the
not taken from or with reference to those in the amended Section 20 of said law to arrive
RPC. at prision correccional and Article 64 of the RPC
to impose the same in the medium period. Such
The situation, however, is different where offense, although provided for in a special law, is
although the offense is defined in and ostensibly now in effect punished by ond under the RPC.
punished under a special law, the penalty
therefor is actually taken from the RPC in its Correlatively, to determine the minimum, we
technical nomenclature and, necessarily, with its must apply the first part of Section 1 of the
duration, correlation and legal effet-ts under the Indeterminate Sentence Law which directs that
system of penalties native to the RPC. "in imposing a prison sentence for an offense
punished by the RPC, or its amendments, the
In the case of the Dangerous Drugs Act, as now court shall sentence the accused to an
amended by R.A. 7659, by the incorporation and indeterminate sentence the maxlmum term of
prescription therein of the technical penalties which shall be that which, in view of the
defined in and constituting integral parts of the attending circumstances, could be properly
three scales of penalties in the RPC, with much imposed under the rules of the RPC, and
more reason should the provisions of the RPC on the minimum which shall be within the range of
the appreciation and effects of all attendant the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the
modifying circumstances apply in fixing the RPC for the offense."
penalty. Likewise, the different kinds or
classifications of penalties and the rules for It is thus both amusing and bemusing if, in the
graduating such penalties by degrees should case at bar, Simon should be begrudged the
have supplementary effect on R.A. 6425, except if benefit of a minimum sentence within the range
they would result in absurdities. Mitigating of arresto mayor� the penalty next lower
circumstances should be considered and applied to prlsion correcdonal which is the maximum
only if they affect the periods and the degrees of range the Court has fixed through the
the penalties within ratfonal limits. application of Articles 61 and 71 of the RPC. For,
with fealty to the law, the court may set the
While modifying circumstances may be minimum sentence at 6 months of arresto
appreciated to determine the periods of the mayor, instead of 6 months and 1 day of prision
corresponding penalties, or even reduce the correccional. The difference, which could
penalty by degrees, in no case should such thereby even involve only one day, is hardly
worth the creation of an overrated tempest in If the culprit has to serve 2 or more penalties, he
the judicial teapot. shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of
the penalties will so permit. Otherwise, the
Therefore, in view of the foregoing, Simon penalties shall be served successively on the
must be sentenced to serve an indeterminate order of their severity as follows:
penalty of six (6) months of arresco mayor, a s
the minimum, to six (6) years of prision 1. Death
correccional, as the maximum thereof. (People 2. Reclusion perpetua
v. Simon, G.R. No. 93028, July 29, 1994) 3. Reclusion temporal
4. Prls;on mayor
THREE-FOLD RULE S. Prls;on correcdonal
ART. 70, RPC 6. Arresto Mayor
7. Arresto Menor
Systems of penalties relative to two or more 8. Destlerro
nenalties imnosed on one and the same 9. Perpetual absolute disqualification
accused 10. Temporary absolute disqualification
11. Suspension from public office, the right to
1. Material accumulation system · no vote and be voted for, the right to follow
limitation whatsoever. All the penalties for profession or calling
all violations were imposed even if they 12. Public censure
reached beyond the natural span of human
COSTS
life. ART. 37, RPC
2. Juridical accumulation system · limited to
not more than the three-fold length of time
wts.
corresponding to the most severe penalty Cost shall include fees and indemnities in the
and in no case exceed 40 years. (2013 BAR) course of judicial proceedings.
3. Absorption system · the lesser penalties are
absorbed by the graver penalties. It is
Io wham rosrs are chareeable
observed in the imposition of the penalty in 1. In case of conviction - chargeable to the
complex crimes, continuing crimes, and accused.
specific crimes like robbery with homicide, 2. In case of acquittal - costs are de officio; each
etc. party shall bear his own expenses.
NOTE: It is the Director of Prisons that shall Such matter rests entirely upon the discretion of
compute and apply the Three-Fold Rule, NOT the courts. The Government may request the court
judge. to assess costs against the accused, but not as a
right.
Aoolionionofthe Three-Fold Buie
PECUNIARY LIABILITIES
The rule applies if a convict has to serve at least ART. 38, RPC
four sentences, continuously.
Pecnniarx Hahili[ies of necsons criminaHx
NOTE: All the penalties, even if by different liable (2005 RAB)
courts at different times, cannot exceed three
fold of the most severe penalty. 1. Reparation of damage caused
2. Indemnification of the consequential
Buie if the a,lorit bas to serve 2 or more damages
nenalties Met 70 BPQ 3. Fine
4. Costs of proceedings proof. (People v. Villar G.R. No. 202708, April 13,
2015)
This article applies when the property of the
offender is not sufficient to pay for all of his SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
pecuniary liabilities. ART. 39, RPC
It is a disposition under which a defendant, after The Trial Court may, after it shall have convicted
conviction and sentence, is released subject to and sentenced a defendant upon application by
conditions imposed by the court and to the said defendant within the period for perfecting
supervision of a probation officer. an appeal, suspend the execution of the sentence
and place the defendant on probation for such
NOTE: Probation only affects the criminal aspect period and upon such terms and conditions as it
of the case and has no bearing on his civil may deem best; Provided, that no application for
liability. probation shall be entertained or granted if the
defendant has perfected an appeal from the
Prnhatlon Officer judgment of conviction. (2014 BAR)
One who investigates for the court a referral for NOTE: The accused cannot avail probation if he
probation or supervises a probationer or both. appeals his conviction irrespective of the
purpose of the appeal even if it is only to
PROCESS
question the propriety of the penalty imposed. institution, when required for that
(Sandavol, 2010) purpose;
e. Pursue a prescribed secular study or
NOTE: When a judgment of conviction imposing vocational training;
a non-probationable penalty is appealed or f. Attend or reside in a facility established
reviewed and such judgment is modified for instruction, recreation or residence
through the imposition of a probationable of persons on probation;
penalty, the defendant shall be allowed to apply g. Refrain from visiting houses of ill
for probation based on the modified decision repute;
before such decision becomes final. The h. Abstain from drinking intoxicated
application for probation based an the modified beverages to excess;
decision shall be filed in the trial court where the i. Permit the probation officer or an
judgment of conviction imposing a non authorized social worker to visit his
probationable penalty was rendered, or in the home and place of work;
trial court where such case has since been re j. Reside at premises approved by it and
raffled. (Sec. 1, R.A. 10707) not to change his residence without its
prior written approval;
NOTE: In a case involving several defendants k. Satisfy any other condition related to
where some have taken further appeal, the other the rehabilitation of the defendant and
defendants may apply for probation by not unduly restrictive of his liberty or
submitting a written application and attaching incompatible with his freedom of
thereto a certified true copy of the judgment of conscience; or
conviction. (Sec. 1, R.A. 10707) I. Plant trees.
Avamoe the benefits ofProbation Iaw if the Saottioos imnosed if the nrohatlonec
sentenceimonsed isamerefine commits aov serious violation of the
rooditioos ofocohatioo
Probation may be granted whether the sentence
imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. 1. The court may issue a warrant for the arrest
of a probationer.
Effea on accessory neoalries once ncohatino 2. If violation is established, the court may:
is eranred a. Revoke his probation; or
b. Continue his probation and modify the
Accessory penalties are deemed suspended. conditions thereof. This order is not
appealable.
Conditions of probation 3. If probation is revoked, the probationer
shall serve the sentence originally imposed.
1. Present himself to the probation officer
designated to undertake his supervision at CRITERIA OF PLACING AN
such place as may be specified in the order OFFENDER ON PROBATION
within seventy-two hours from receipt of
said order; Criteria on determining whether an offender
2. Report to the probation officer at least once maxhe olared on orobation
a month at such time and place as specified
by said officer; In determining whether an offender may be
3. The court may also require the probationer placed an probation, the court shall consider all
to: information relative to the character,
a. Cooperate with a program of antecedents, environment, mental and physical
supervision; condition of the offender, and available
b. Meet his family responsibilities; institutional and community resources.
c. Devote himself to a specific employment
and not to change said employment When ncoharion shall he denied
without the prior written approval of
the probation officer; If the court finds that:
d. Undergo medical, psychological or
psychiatric examination and treatment 1. The offender is in need of correctional
and enter and remain in specified treatment that can be provided most
a probationable penalty, the defendant shall be provisions regarding release on bail of persons
allowed to apply for probation based on the charged ,vith a crime shall be applicable.
modified decision before such decision becomes
final. The application for probation based on the TERMINATION OF PROBATION; EXCEPTION
modified decision shall be filed in the trial court
where the judgment of conviction imposing a Termination nforohatlon C2005 RABl
non·probationable penalty was rendered, or in
the trial court where such case has since been The court may order the final discharge of the
re-raffled. In a case involving several defendants probationer upon finding that he has fulfilled the
where some have taken further appeal, the other terms and conditions of probation.
defendants may apply for probation by
submitting a written application and attaching NOTE: The mere expiration of the period for
thereto a certified true copy of the judgment of probation does not ipso facto terminate the
conviction. (Sec. 1, R.A 10707) probation. Probation is not co-terminus with its
period. There must be an order from the Court of
PERIOD OF PROBATION final discharge terminating the probation. If the
accused violates the condition of the probation
Period nforohation before the issuance of said order, the probation
may be revoked by the Court (Manuel Bala v.
1. The period of probation of a defendant Martinez, 181 SCRA 459).
sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not
more than one year shall not exceed two Effecrs of termination ofnrohafion
years, and in all other cases, said period
shall not exceed six years. 1. Case is deemed terminated.
2. Restoration of all civil rights lost or
2. When the sentence imposes a fine only and suspended.
the offender is made to serve subsidiary 3. Totally extinguishes his criminal liability as
imprisonment in case of insolvency, the to the offense for which probation was
period of probation shall not be less than granted.
nor be more than twice the total number of
days of subsidiary imprisonment. (2005 Pardon vis-ta-vis Pcoharioo
BAR)
PARDON PROBATION
ARREST OF PROBATIONER Includes any crime Exercised
and is exercised individually by the
Court may issue a warrant of arrest against a individually by the trial court.
probationer President.
Merely looks It promotes the
The court may issue the warrant for violations of forward and relieves correction and
any condition of the probation. the offender from rehabilitation of an
the consequences of offender by providing
Effect after the arrest of the probationer an offense of which him with
he has been individualized
He shall be immediately brought before the convitted; it does treatment; provides
court for hearing, which may be informal and not work for the an opportunity for
summary, of the violation charged. If the restoration of the the reformation of a
violation is established, the court may revoke or rights to hold public penitent offender
continue his probation and modify the office, or the right of which might be less
conditions thereof. suffrage, unless such probable if he were
rights are expressly to serve a prison
If revoked, the court shall order the probationer restored by means of sentence; and
to serve the sentence originally imposed. The pardon. prevent the
order revoking the grant of probation or commission of
modifying the terms and conditions thereof shall offenses.
not be appealable. Exercised when the Must be exercised
person is already within the period for
NOTE: The defendant may be admitted to bail convitted. oerfectine: an anneal.
pending the hearing and in such case, the
Beine a private act Beine a erant bv the
by the president. it trial court, it follows NOTE: The court shall not order the detention of
must be pleaded and that the trial court a child in a jail pending trial or hearing of
proved by the also has the power to his/her case except in youth detention homes
person pardoned. order its revocation established by local governments. (Sec. 35, R.A.
in a proper case and 9344)
under proper Other alternative to imorisonment mav be
circumstances. availed bv a child in conflicr with rhe law
Does not alter the Does not alter the under RA 9344
fact that the accused fact that the accused
is a recidivist as it is a recidivist as it The court may, after it shall have convicted and
produces only the provides only for an sentenced a child in conflict with the law, and
extinction of the opportunity of upon application at any time, place the child on
personal effects of reformation to the probation in lieu of service of sentence. (Sec. 42,
the oenaltv. oenitent offender. R.A. 9344)
Does not extinguish Does not extinguish
the civil liability of the civil liability of CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITIES
the offender. the offender.
MODIFICATION AND EXTINCTION
Persons mmHfied tn avail the benefits of OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
probation
Extinguishment of criminal liability
A first-time minor offender even if the penalty
imposed is more than six (6) years. However, the Criminal liability may be extinguished either,
crime must be illegal possession of dangerous partially or totally.
drugs only.
Partial ex[inttion ofcriminal liability
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE
ACT OF 2006 1. By conditional pardon;
R.A. 9344 2. By commutation of the sentence; and
3. For good conduct allowances which the
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE SYSTEM culprit may earn while he is undergoing
preventive imprisonment or serving his
JuvenileInstiee and Welfare Sxstem sentence. (Art 94, RPC as amended by R.A.
10592)
It refers to a system dealing with children at risk
and children in conflict with the law, which Nanice ofconditional nacdon
provides child-appropriate proceedings,
including programs and services for prevention, When delivered and accepted, it is considered a
diversion, rehabilitation, re-integration, and contract between the sovereign power of the
aftercare to ensure their normal growth and executive and the convict that the former will
development. (Sec. 4, R.A. 9344) release the latter upon compliance with the
condition.
"ChildjgConflict wUb the I,aw"
Obliearion incnrced bvauecson ecanted with
It refers to a child, who is alleged as, accused of, conditional pardon [Art 9S. RPCI
or adjudged as, having committed an offense
under Philippine laws. (Sec. 4{e], R.A. 9344) He shall incur the obligation of complying
strictly with the conditions imposed therein;
Where a child is detained the cm,a max otherwise, his noncompliance with any of the
order the fnllowine conditions specified shall result in the
revocation of the pardon and the provisions of
1. The release of the minor on recognizance to Art. 159 on violation of conditional pardon shall
his/her parents and other suitable persons; be applied to him.
2. The release of the child in conflict with the law
on bail; or Nanice ofrommutation ofsenrence
3. The transfer of the minor to a youth detention
home/youth rehabilitation center. It is a change of the decision of the court made
by the Chief Executive by reducing the degree af
the penalty inflicted upon the convict, or by NOTE: An appeal by the accused shall not
decreasing the length of the imprisonment or the deprive him of entitlement to the above
amount of the fine. allowances for good conduct. (Art 97, RPC as
amended by R.A. 10592)
Effect of commutation of sentence [Art. 96.
B£Q. Pecsnn eranrine time allowance (Art 99 BPC
as amended hxBA 105921
The commutation of the original sentence for
another of a different length and nature shall Whenever lawfully justified, the Director of the
have the legal effect of substituting the latter in Bureau of Corrections, the Chief of the Bureau of
the place of the former. fail Management and Penology, and/or the
Warden of a provincial, district. municipal or city
Cases where commutJtion is orov'ided fnr hx jail shall grant allowances for good conduct.
the Code Such allowances once granted shall not be
revoked. (Art 99, RPC as amended by R.A. 10592)
1. When the convict sentenced to death is over
70 years of age (Art 83, RPCJ; and Special time allowance for loyalty of prisoner
2. When eight justices of the Supreme Court fArt 98 BPCosomeaaea hvBA 105921
fail to reach a decision for the affirmance of
the death penalty. (Reyes, 2008) It is a deduction of one-fifth (1/5) of the period
of sentence of a prisoner who, having evaded his
Nan,ce of eood conductallowances CArt 97 preventive imprisonment or the service of his
RPCasamended byBA 105921 sentence during the calamity or catastrophe
mentioned in Art. 158, gives himself up to the
Allowances for good conduct are deductions authorities within 48 hours following the
from the term of sentence for good behavior. issuance of the proclamation by the President
The good conduct of any offender qualified for announcing the passing away of the calamity or
credit for preventive imprisonment pursuant to catastrophe. A deduction of two-fifths of the
Article 29 of the Code, or of any convitted period of his sentence shall be granted in case
prisoner in any penal institution, rehabilitation said prisoner chose to stay in the place of his
or detention center or any other local jail shall confinement notwithstanding the existence of a
entitle him to the following deductions from the calamity or catastrophe enumerated in Article
period of his sentence: 158 of this Code.
Causes of extinction of criminal liability vis Distinction should be made between simple and
;\-ViS the causes of h1stificarion or exemnrinn grave slander. Grave slander prescribes in six (6)
<Beres 20001 months while simple slander prescribes in two
(2) months.
CAUSES OF
CAUSES OF
EXTINCTION OF Pcescciotlnn of the crimes onnishable by
JUSTIFICATION OR destierro
CRIMINAL
EXEMPTION
LIABILITY
The causes of the The causes of justification Classified as a correctional penalty under Art.ZS,
extinction arise or exemption arise from and according to Art. 90, ten (10) years should
after the the circumstances existing be the prescription period. (Dalaa v. Geronimo,
commission of either before the C.R. Na. L-5969, April 29, 1953)
the offense. commission of the crime or
at the moment of its Pcescciotlnn of the crimes onniShable by
commission. .li.w:s.
PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES
Fines are also classified as afflictive, discovery thereof and the institution of judicial
correctional, or light penalties under Art. 26, proceeding for its investigation and punishment.
that is, in 15 years, 10 years, and 2 months, (Sec. 2, Act No. 3326)
respectively.
Prescription does not divest court of
The subsidiary penalty for non-payment of the jurisdiction; it is a ground for acquittal of the
fine should not be considered in determining the accused. Thus, the court must exercise
period of prescription of such crimes (People v. jurisdiction, and not inhibit itself. (Santos v.
Bosa/a, 101 Phil. 57). In addition, in light felonies 5uperintenden� 55 Phil. 345)
when a fine of P200 is also provided, such fine
should not be considered correctional. Interruption of the running of the
ncesrriotive nerind fnr crimes or vinlatloos
Basis fnr orescriotion when fine is an mmisbable bv the BPC snerial law &
alternative penalty higher than the other ordinance
penalty which is by imprisonment
The running of the prescriptive period shall be
Prescription herein is based on fine. (People v. interrupted:
Bosa/a, supra)
1. Crime punishable by the RPC - interrupted
NOTE: The ruling in Baso/o applies even if the upon the filing of the case before the fiscal's
penalty is arresto mayor and fine. office.
2. Crime punishable by special law
Prescriotive oeriod of offenses mmishahle interrupted upon the filing of the case
under soedal lawsand municioal ordinances before the fiscal's office even for purposes of
preliminary investigation.
Act No. 3763, amending No. 3326, provides: 3. Violation of municipal ordinance
interrupted upon the filing of the case
1. Offenses punished only by a fine or by before the appropriate court.
imprisonment for not more than one month
- after one year; Oerermioioe ocescriotlno ofnffeoses fAa 91
2. Offenses punished by imprisonment for BW.
more than one month, but less than two years
- after 4 years; The period of prescription commences to run
3. Offenses punished by imprisonment for two from the day the crime is committed:
years or more but less than six years - after
8 years; 1. The perfod of prescription commences to run
4. Offenses punished by imprisonment for six from the doy on which the crime is
years or more - after 12 years; discovered by the offended party, the
5. Offenses under Internal Revenue Law - authorities or their agents.
after 5 years; 2. It is interrupted by the filing of the complaint
6. Violation of municipal ordinances - after 2 or information.
months; 3. It commences to run again when such
7. Violations of the regulations or conditions of proceedings terminate wlthout the accused
certificate of convenience by the Public being convicted or acquitted or are
Service Commission - after 2 months. unjustifiably stopped for any reason not
(Reyes, 2008) imputable to him.
4. The term of prescription shall not run when
NOTE: Act 3326 is not applicable where the the offender is absent from the Philippines.
special law provides for its own prescriptive
period. (People v. Romos, 83 SCRA 1) NOTE: The term "proceedings" should now be
understood to be either executive or judicial in
Buonine of rhe ncescriofive nerinds fnc charac.ter: execut;ve when it involves the
vinlatlnos oeoaJized bx soecial Jaws and investigation phase; and, judidal when it refers
ordinances to the trial and judgment stage. With this
clarification, any kind of investigative
Prescription shall begin to run from the day of proceeding instituted against the guilty person,
the commission of the violation of the law, and if which may ultimately lead to his prosecution
the same be not known at the time, from the should be sufficient to toll prescription.
(Panaguiton, Jr. v. DO/, G.R. No. 167571, was discovered by the NBI authorities only
November 25, 2008) when Albert revealed to them the commission of
the crime. Hence, the period of prescription of
s•iniarions whifh do not fnHnw Art 91 20 years for homicide commenced to run only
{Computation ofprescription of offenses) from the time Albert revealed the same to the
NBI authorities.
1. Continulng crimes - prescriptive period will
start to run only at the termination of the Q: A killed his wife and buried her in the
intended result. backyard. He immediately went into hiding
2. In crimes against false testimony - in the mountains. Three years later, the
prescriptive period is reckoned from the day bones of A's wife were discovered by X, the
a final judgment is rendered and not at the gardener. Since X had a standing warrant of
time when the false testimony was made. arrest, he hid the bones in an old clay jar and
3. Election offense - kept quiet about it. After two years, Z, the
caretaker, found the bones and reported the
a. If discovery of the offense is incidental matter to the police.After 15 years of hiding.
to judicial proceedings, prescription A left the country but returned 3 years later
begins when such proceeding to take care of his ailing sibling. Six years
terminates; or thereafter, be was charged with parricide,
b. From the date of commission of the but he raised the defense of prescription.
offense.
a. Under the Revised Penal Code, when
NOTE: In computing the period of prescription, does the period of prescription of a crime
the first day is excluded and the last day is commence to run?
included. (Art 13, New Civil Code) b. When is it interrupted?
c. Is A's defense tenable? Explain. (2010
Q: One fateful night in January 1990, while 5- BAR)
year old Albert was urinating at the back of
their house, he beard a strange noise coming A:
from the Jutchen of their neighbor and a. Under Art 91 of the RPC, the period of
playmate, Ara. When be peeped inside, be prescription commences to run upon
saw Mina, Ara's stepmother, very angry and discovery of the crime by the offended party,
strangling the 5-year old Ara to death. Albert the authorities, or their agent.
saw Mina carry the dead body of Ara, place it
inside the trunk of the car and drive away. b. It is interrupted upon filing of the complaint
The dead body of Ara was never found. Mina or information in court.
spread the news in the neighborhood that
Ara went to Jive with her grandparents in c. NO, parricide prescribes in 20 years. The
Ormoc City. For fear of his life, Albert did not period of prescription started only when Z
tell anyone, even his parents and relatives, reported the matter to the police, which is
about what be witnessed.Twenty and a half equivalent to 10 years of hiding from the
(20 & ½) years after the inddent, and right time of reporting to Z. The period of three
after his graduation in Criminology, Albert years shall not be counted since he is absent
reported the crime to NBI authorities. The from the Philippines. The filing of the charge
crime of homicide prescribes in 20 years. Can 6 years thereafter is well within the
the State still prosecute Mina for the death of prescriptive period.
Ara despite the lapse of 20 and 1/2 years?
(2000BAR) PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTIES
ART.92, RPC
A: YES. The State can still prosecute Mina for the
death of Ara despite the lapse of 20 and ½ years. Prescription ofpenalties (Art 92. RPQ {1993.
Under Article 91 of the RPC, the period of 1994 1997 2004 2010 RAB)
prescription commences to run from the day on
which the crime is discovered by the offended 1. Death and reclusion perpetua in twenty (20)
party, the authorities or their agents. In the case years;
at bar, the commission of the crime was known 2. Other afflictive penalties (reclusion temporal
only to Albert, who was not the offended party to prision mayor) in fifteen (15) years;
nor an authority or an agent of an authority. It
3. Corret1:ional penalty (prision correccional) in than a year later, Tanega through counsel
ten (10) years; moved to quash the warrant of arrest, on the
4. Arresto mayor in five (5) years; and ground that the penalty had prescribed.
5. Light penalties in one (1) year. Tanega claimed that she was convicted for a
light offense and since light offenses
Rules in ocescriotinn of oenalties (Art 93 prescribe in one year, her penalty had
B£Q. already prescribed. Is the motion
meritorious?
1. The period of prescription of penalties
commences to run from the date when the A: NO. The penalty has not prescribed as she did
cu/prlt evaded the service of his sentence. not evade her service of sentence. For purpose of
(2015BAR) prescription of penalties, Art. 93 of the Revised
Penal Code, which provides that the prescription
2. It is interrupted if the convict- of penalties "shall commence to run from the
date when the culprit should evade the service
a. Gives himself up; of his sentence," must be understood in the light
b. Be captured; of Art. 157, as the concept of evasion of sentence
c. Goes to a foreign country with which is readily provided for in this Article. (Tanega v.
we have no extradition treaty (2015 Masakayan, G.R. No. l·27191, February 28, 1967)
BAR); or
d. Commits another crime before the Prescriotinn of crimes vis-a-vis Presrriotinn
expiration of the period of nfnenalries
prescription.
XPN: Pardon by an offended party in the crimes A pardon, whether absolute or conditional, is in
of adultery and concubinage will be a bar to the nature of a deed, for the validity of which is
criminal prosecution, provided, they pardoned an indispensable requisite. Once accepted by the
both offenders. Provided further, it must be made grantee, the pardon already delivered may not
before the institution of criminal prosecution. be revoked by the granting authority. (Reyes,
Pardon here may be implied. (Art 344, RPC) 2008)
The extinguishment of criminal liability by the 1. The power can be exercised only after
marriage of the offended woman to her offender convic.tion; and
in seduction, abduction, rape and acts of 2. Such power does not extend to cases of
lasciviousness is not an absolute rule. The impeachment.
marriage must be contracted in good faith.
Hence, a marriage contracted only to avoid ExtioeuiShmeot of rhe effea of rhe accessory
criminal liability is devoid of legal effetts. oenaUies attached to it hv oardnn of the
(People v. Santiago, 51 Phil. 68) orineioal nenaltx
Comocomise does NOT exfioeuish criminal GR: Pardon of the principal penalty does not
liahilitv extinguish the effect of the accessory penalties
attached to it. When the principal penalty is
A crime is a public offense which must be remitted by pardon, only the effett of that
prosecuted and punished by the Government on principal penalty is extinguished. The rights are
its own motion even though complete reparation not restored unless expressly restored by the
should have been made of the damagesuffered terms of the pardon.
by the offended party. (People v. Benitez, 59 O.G.
140 7) XPN: When an absolute pardon is granted after
the term of imprisonment has expired, it
NOTE: There may be a compromise upon the removes all that is left of the consequences of
civil liability arising from an offense; but such conviction. (Cristobal v. Labrador, G.R. No. l-
compromise shall not extinguish the public 47941, December 7, 1940)
action for the imposition of the legal penalty.
(Art 2034, New Civil Code) Pardon hx the Chief Executive yjs-A-vis
Pardon by the offended party {1994- BAR)
PARDON BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
PARDON BY THE PARDON BY THE
Pardon CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFENDED PARTY
It extinguishes the It does not extinguish
It is an act of grace proceeding from the power criminal liability of criminal liability of the
entrusted with the execution of the laws which the offender. offender.
exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed It cannot exempt the Offended party can
from the punishment the law inflicts for the offender from the waive the civil liability
crime he has committed. payment of the civil which the offender
indemnity. must pay.
It is granted only after Pardon should be latter crime occurred because of Homicide. Is
conviction and may given before the A's contention correct?
be extended to any of institution of criminaJ
the offenders. prosecution and must A: NO. Pardon by the Chief Executive must
be extended to both specify the crime and does not include those not
offenders. (Art 344, specified in the pardon.
RPCJ
CIVIL LIABILITY
AMNESTY
PERSONS CIVILLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES
Amnestv
GR: Every person criminally liable for a felony is
It is an act of sovereign power granting oblivion also civilly liable. (RPC, Art. 100)
or a general pardon for a past offense, and is
rarely, if ever exercised in favor of a single XPNs:
individual, and is usually exerted in behalf of
persons, who are subject to trial, but have not 1. If there is no damage caused by the
yet been convicted. (Brown v. Walker, 161 U.S. commission of the crime, the offender is not
602) civilly liable.
2. There is no private person injured by the
Pardon vis-ta-vis Amnestv C2006 201SRABl crime.
PARDON AMNESTY
Basis ofCivilliahilirv
The convict is The criminal
excused from serving complexion of the act A crime has dual charatter: (1) as an offense
the sentence but the constituting the crime against the state because of the disturbance of
effects of conviction is erased, as though social order; and (2) as an offense against the
remain unless such act was innocent private person injured by the crime. In the
expressly remitted by when committed; ultimate analysis, what gives rise to the civil
the pardon; hence, for hence the effects of the liability is really the obligation of everyone to
pardon to be valid, convic.tion are repair or to make whole the damage caused to
there must be a obliterated. another by reason of his act or omission,
sentence already final whether done intentionally or negligently and
and executory at the whether or not punishable by Jaw. (Decena v.
time the same is /camina, G.R. No. 82146,January 22, 1990)
2ranted.
The grant is in favor Amnesty is granted in Q: S ince a person criminally liable is also
of individual favor of a class of civilly liable, does his acquittal in the
convicted offenders, convitted offenders, criminal case mean extinction of his civil
not to a class of not to individual liability?
convicted offenders. convic.ted offenders.
The crimes subject of The crimes involved A: NO. Civil liability may exist. although the
the grant may be are generally political accused is not held criminally liable, in the
common crimes or offenses not common following cases:
political crimes. crimes.
The grant is a private It is a public att that 1. Acquittal on reasonable doubt
act of the Chief requires concurrence
Executive which does of the Philippine NOTE: There is no need for a separate civil
not require the Senate. action. The reason is the accused has been
concurrence of any accorded due process. To require a separate
other public officer. civil action would mean needless clogging of
court dockets and unnecessary duplication
Q: A, while serving sentence for homidde of litigation with all its attendant Joss of
escaped but was re-arrested, and was time, effort, and money on the part of all
sentenced for evasion of service of sentence. concerned. (Padilla v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
Later on, he was granted absolute pardon for No. L-39999, May 31, 1984)
homicide. He now claims that the pardon
includes the evasion of service since the 2. Acquittal from a cause of non-imputability
XPN: The exemption from criminal liability If there be no such persons, those doing the act
in favor of an imbecile or an insane person, shall be liable secondarily.
and a person under fifteen years of age, or
one who over fifteen but under eighteen CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS UNDER
years of age, who has acted without JUSTIFYING CIRCUMS TANCES
discernment, and those acting under
compulsion of an irresistible force or under GR: There is no civil liability in justifying
the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an circumstances.
equal or greater injury does not include
exemption from civil liability. (Art 101, XPN: In par. 4 of Art. 11 of RPC, there is civil
RPC) liability, but the person civilly liable is the one
who benefited by the act which caused damage
3. Acquittal in the criminal action for to another.
negligence does not preclude the offended
party from filing a civil action to recover SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY OF
damages, based on the new theory that the INNKEEPERS, TAVERNKEEPERS, AND
ac.t is a quasi-delict PROPRIETORS OF ESTABLISHMENTS
4. When there is only civil responsibility Elements under oaraeranh1 ofArt 102 BPC
1. No civil liability in paragraph 4 of Article 12 Elements under oarae-ranh2 ofArt 102 BPC
of the RPC (injury caused by mere accident);
2. No civil liability in paragraph 7 of Article 12 1. The guests notified in advance the
of the RPC (failure to perform an act innkeeper or the person representing him of
required by law when prevented by some the deposit of their goods within the inn or
lawful or insuperable cause). house;
2. The guests followed the directions of the
Persons civillyliable fnr theaas ofao insane innkeeper or his representative with respect
or minor to the care of and vigilance over such goods;
and
If the persons having legal authority or control 3. Such goods of the guests lodging therein
over the insane or minor are at fault or were taken by robbery with force upon
negligent, then they are the persons civilly liable things or theft committed within the inn or
for the acts of the latter. house.
NOTE: If there is no fault or negligence on their GR: No liability shall attach in case of robbery
part; or even if they are at fault or negligent but with violence against or intimidation of persons.
insolvent; or should there be no person having
such authority or control, then the insane, XPN: When it is committed by the inkeeper's
imbecile, or such minor shall respond with their employees, there is civil liability.
own property not exempt from execution.
SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY
Persons CiviUv liable COc aas committed hv OF OTHER PERSONS
persons acting under irresistible force or
unconrcollahle rear Iiahilitv of emolovec teacher or necson or
cocooration CArt 103 of the BPP
The person using violence or causing the fear is
primarily liable.
Q: X, the chauffer or driver of the car owned Q: can restitution be made even if the thing is
by Y, bumped the car driven by Z. X was already found in the possession of a third
found guilty but was insolvent. Is Y person who has acquired it by lawful means?
subsidiary liable?
A: GR: YES. The thing itself shall be restored,
A: NO. Y is a private person who has no business even though it be found in the possession of a
or industry and uses his automobile for private third person who has acquired it by lawful
persons. (Steinmetz v. Valdez, C.R. No. 47655, means, saving to the latter his action against the
April 28, 1941) proper person who may be liable to him. (Art
105, par. 2, RPC)
Q: Can the persons mentioned in Art. 103
invoke the defense of diligence of a good XPN: Art. 105 is not applicable in cases in which
father of a family? the thing has been acquired by the third person
in the manner and under the requirements
A: NO. It will be seen that neither in Art. 103 nor which, by law, bar an action for its recovery.
any other article of the RPC, is it provided that (Art 105, par. 3, RPC)
the employment of the diligence of a good father
of a family in the selection of his employees will 1. An innocent purchaser for value for property
exempt the parties secondarily liable for covered by a Torrens Title, cannot be
damages. (Arambulo v. Manila Electric Company, required to return the same to its owner
C.R. No.L-33229, October 23, 1930) unlawfully deprived of it;
2. When the sale is authorized, the property
WHAT CIVIL LIABILITY INCLUDES cannot be recovered.
The civil liability is not governed by the Civil Indemnification of consequential damages shall
Code but by Articles 100-111 of the Penal Code. include:
The sentence should be for the return of the very
thing taken (restitution), or, if it cannot be done, 1. Those caused the injured party;
for the payment of the value (reparation). The 2. Those suffered by his family or by a third
purpose of the law is to place the offended party person by reason of the crime. (Art 107,
as much as possible in the same condition as he RPC)
was before the offense was committed against
him. (People v. Montesa, G.R. No. 181899, Q: Who has the obligation to make
November 27, 2008) restoration, reparation for damages, or
indemnification for consequential damages?
NOTE: Under the Civil Code, the person who has
not lost any personal property or has been A: The obligation to make restoration or
unlawfully deprived thereof cannot obtain its reparation for damages and indemnification for
return without reimbursing the price paid consequential damages devolves upon the heirs
therefor, only when the possessor: (a) acquired of the person liable. (Art 108, par. 1, RPC)
it in good faith; and (b) at a public sale.
NOTE: The heirs of the person liable have no
Q: A was convicted of estafa for having obligation if restoration is not possible and the
pawned the jewels which had been given to deceased has left no property.
him by B to be sold on commission. Can B file
a petition to require the owner of the Q: Who may demand for restitution?
pawnshop to restore said jewels?
A: The ac.tion to demand restoration, reparation
A: YES, the owner of the pawnshop may be and indemnification likewise descends to the
obliged to make restitution of the jewels, heirs of the person injured. (Art 108, par. 2, RPC)
because although he acted in good faith, he did
not acquire them at a public sale. (Varela v. Aoooctionment ofCivilIiahmtv
Finnick, G.R. No. L-3890,January 2, 1908)
If there are two or more persons civilly liable for
REPARATION a felony, the courts shall determine the amount
for which each must respond. (Art 109, RPC)
nerecminatinn nfBenaration
SEVERAL AND SUBSIDIARY LIABILITY OF
The court shall determine the amount of PRINCIPALS, ACCOMPLICES, AND
damage, taking into consideration: ACCESSORIES OF FELONY
1. The price of thing, whenever possible; and
2. Its special sentimental value to the injured. The principaJs, accomplices and accessories,
(Art 106, RPC) each within their respective class, shall be
severally liable (in so/idum) among themselves
NOTE: Reparation will be ordered by the court if for their quotas, and subsidiarily for those of the
restitution is not possible. It is limited to those other persons liable. (Art 110 par. 1, RPC)
caused by and flowing from the commission of
the crime. Q: How is the subsidiary cMI liability
enforced?
Q: Does the payment of an insurance
company relieve the accused of his obligation A: The subsidiary liability shall be enforced:
to pay damages?
First, against the property of the principals;
A: NO, the payment by the insurance company Next, against that of the accomplices; and
was not made on behalf of the accused, but was Lastly, against that of the accessories. (Art.
made pursuant to its contract with the owner of 110 par. 2, RPC)
the car. But the insurance company is
subrogated to the right of the offended party as Q: A stole a diamond ring worth Pl000 and
regards the damages. gave it to B, who not knowing the illegal
origin of the sale, accepts it. B later sells the
INDEMNIFICATION ring for PS00 to Y, a foreigner who left the
country. In case A is insolvent, can 8, a
person who partidpated gratuitously in the death was belatedly conveyed to the court.
proceeds of a felony, be subsidiarily liable? Does his death extinguish bis criminal and
civil liabilities?
A: YES, any person who has participated
gratuitously in the proceeds of a felony shall be A: YES. Florencio's death prior to the court's
bound to make restitution in an amount final judgment extinguished his criminal and
equivalent to the extent of such participation. civil liability ex delicto pursuant to Article 89(1)
(Art 111, RPC) Thus, B shall be subsidiarily of the Revised Penal Code. (People v. Agacer, G.R.
liable in the sum not exceeding PSOO which is No.177751,January 7, 2013)
the gratuitous share in the commission of the
crime. Death of the accused pending appeal of his
conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as
EXTINCTION AND SURVIVAL well as the civil liability based solely thereon.
OF CIVIL LIABILITY According to Justice Regalado, "the death of the
accused prior to final judgment terminates his
Civil liability shall be extinguished in the same criminal liability and on/y the civil
manner as other obligations in accordance with liability direct/y arising from and based solely on
the provisions of the Civil Law: the offense committed, i.e., civil liability ex
deHcto in senso strictiore." Corollarily, the claim
1. By payment or performance; for civil liability survives notwithstanding the
2. By the loss of the thing due; death of accused, if the same may also be
3. By the condonation or remission of debt; predicated on a source of obligation other than
4. By the confusion or merger of the rights of delict. Article 1157 of the Civil Code enumerates
creditor and debtor; these other sources of obligation. (People s.
5. By compensation; Boyotas, G.R. No. 102007 September 2, 1994)
6. By novation.
Q: On July 23, 2014, Renato, Gariguez, Jr., and
Other causes: annulment, rescission, fulfillment Larido were held guilty beyond reasonable
of a resolutory condition, and prescription. (NCC, doubt of the special complex crime of
Art 1231) IGdnapping for Ransom with Homicide. They
collectively moved for reconsideration. The
NOTE: Civil liability is extinguished by Court denied such motion with finality in its
subsequent agreement between the accused and Resolution dated September 24, 2014.
the offended party. Express condonation by the However, before the finality of its resolution,
offended party has the effect of waiving civil the Court received a letter from the Bureau
liability with regard to the interest of of the of Corrections dated September 16, 2014
injured party. informing them of the death of one of the
accused-appellants in this case, Renato, on
Survival of Civil Liability June 10, 2014. Is Renato Dionaldo y Ebron
criminally liable of special complex crime of
The offender shall continue to be obliged to IGdnapping for Ransom with Homicide?
satisfy the civil liability resulting from the crime
committed by him, notwithstanding the fact he A: NO, Dianaldo's liability is extinguished by his
has served his sentence consisting of deprivation death. As provided under Article 89 of the
of liberty or other rights, or has not been Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is totally
required to serve the same by reason of extinguished by the death of the convict, as to
amnesty, pardon, commutation of sentence or the personal penalties; and as to pecuniary
any other reason. (Art. 113, RPC) penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only
when the death of the offender occurs before
NOTE: While amnesty wipes out all traces and final judgment. Consequently, Renato's death on
vestiges of the crime, it does not extinguish civil fune 10, 2014 renders the Court's July 23, 2014
liability of the offender. A pardon shall in no case Resolution irrelevant and ineffectual as to him,
exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil and is therefore set aside. Accordingly, the
indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence. criminal case against Renato is dismissed.
(People v. Diana/do, GR No. 207949, September 9,
Q: Florencio was an appellant of a case for 2015,)
the crime of murder. Pending his appeal, be
died while in confinement and notice of bis
NOTE: The levying of war must be with intent to How rceason maxhe ocoved
overthrow the government and not merely to
resist a particular statute or to repel a particular 1. Testimony of two witnesses, at least, to the
officer. same overt oct (Two·witness rule); or
2. Confession of the accused in open court.
Adherence ro enemies
Two-witness rule
There is adherence to enemies when a citizen,
intellettually or emotionally, favors the enemies It is a rule which requires the testimony of at
and harbors sympathies or convictions disloyal least two witnesses to prove the overt act of
to his country's policy or interest. giving aid or comfort. The two-witness rule is
severely restrictive and requires that each of the
Adherence alone without aid and comfort does witness must testify to the whole overt act; or if
not constitute treason, but such adherence may it is separable, there must be two witnesses to
be inferred from the acts committed by a person. each part of the overt att. (People v. Esc/eto, G.R.
No. l-1006,june 28, 1949)
Aid and comfort
Illustration: Witness A testified that he saw the
It means overt acts which strengthen or tend to defendant going to the house of X in search of
strengthen the enemy of the government in the the latter's revolver. Witness B testified that
conduct of war against the government or an act when X went to the garrison, the defendant
which weakens or tends to weaken the power of required him (X) to produce his revolver. It was
the government to resist or to attack the held that the search for the revolver in the house
enemies of the government. of X is one overt act and the requirment to
produce the revolver in the garrison is another.
Soecified acrs ofaid and comfort constin,tine Thus, there must be two witnesses for each act.
treason (People v. Abad, G.R. No. L·430,July 30, 1947)
1. Serving as informer and active member of the Adherence need not be proved by the oaths of
enemy's military police. two witnesses. Criminal intent and knowledge
2. Serving in the enemy's army as agent or spy.
may be gathered from the testimony of one crime of treason cannot be considered
witness, or from the nature of the act itself, or crimessenarate from treason
from circumstances surrounding the act.
The common crimes committed in furtherance
On the other hand, an overt att must be of treason are the overt acts of aid and comfort
established by the deposition of two witnesses. in favor of the enemy and are therefore
Each of the witnesses must testify to the whole inseparable from treason itself. They become an
of the overt act; or if it is separable, there must element of treason.
be two witnesses to each part of the overt ac:t.
(People v. Adriano, G.R. No. L-477,June 1947) However, if the prosecution should elect to
prosecute the culprit specifically for these
Confession crimes, instead of relying on them as an element
of treason, punishment for these common
It means confession of guilt in an open court: crimes is not precluded. (People v. Prieto, G.R. No.
that is, before the judge, while actually hearing L-399,January 29, 1948)
the case. Extrajudicial confession or confession
made before the investigators is not sufficient to Aeecavatine circumsrances in the crime of
convict a person of treason. treason
Q: X furnished women to the enemy. Does the 1. Cruelty;
act constitute treason? 2. Ignominy;
3. Rape; and
A: NO. Commandeering of women to satisfy the 4. Wanton robbery of personal gains and
lust of the enemies or to enliven the brutality with which the killing or physical
entertainment held in their honor was NOT injuries are carried out which can be
treason even though the women and the regarded as cruelty and ignominy.
entertainments helped to make life more
pleasant for the enemies. (People v. Perez, G.R. NOTE: Evident premeditation, superior strength,
No. L-856, April 18, 1949) and treachery are circumstances inherent in
treason, and therefore, not aggravating.
Accepting a public office under the enemy
does not rnostiture the felnnv nftceason Q: A was charged with the crime of treason.
In his defense, he asserts that he can no
Mere acceptance of a public office and the longer be prosecuted for treason since he
discharge of the duties connetted therewith do already lost his Filipino citizenship under
not constitute per se the crime of treason, unless paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 of the Commonwealth
such office was accepted as an aid and for the Act No. 63, which provides that • ...a Filipino
comfort of the enemy and that the person who may lose his citizenship by accepting
accepted the office adheres to the enemy. commission ln the mllitary, naval, or air
service of a foreign country .. ." when he
Treason asacontinuine offense joined the Japanese armed forces. Is his
defense tenable?
It can be committed by a single act or by series
of acts. It can be committed in one single or A: NO. A cannot divest himself of his Philippine
different time. In treason, there is only one citizenship by the simple expedient of accepting
criminal intent. a commission in the military, naval, or air
service of such country. If such contention would
A person who commits treason is not criminally be sustained, the very crime would be the shield
responsible for as many crimes of treason as the that would protect him from punishment.
overt acts as he has intentionally committed to (People v. Manayoo, G.R. No. L-322,july 28, 1947)
give aid to the enemy.
Susnended alleeiance or cbanee of
NOTE: The offender can still be prosecuted even sovereig·nty cannot be used as a defense to
after war. the crime of treason because ofthe fnllnwine
reasons
Common crimes (e.g. murder, robbery,
acsnnl committed in the furtherance of the 1. A citizen owes an absolute and permanent
allegiance to his government;
2. The sovereignty of the Government is not 3. Proposes its execution to some other person
transferred to the enemy by mere or persons.
occupation;
3. The subsistence of the sovereignty of the The mere conspiracy and proposal to commit
legitimate Government in a territory treason are punishable as felonies under Article
occupied by the military forces of the enemy 115. This is due to the fact that in treason, the
during the war is one of the rules of very existence of the State is endangered.
International Law; and
4. What is suspended is merely the exercise of Two-wiroess rule does not anolv tn
the rights of sovereignty. (Laurel v. Misa, C.R. conspiracy and proposal to commit treason
No. L·409,Jonuory30, 1947)
It is because conspiracy and proposal to commit
NOTE: The defense of duress or uncontrollable treason is separate and distinct offense from
fear, and lawful obedience to a de facto that of treason. (U.S. v. Bautista, C.R. No. 2189,
Government are good defenses in treason. (Go November 3, 1906)
Kim Cham v. Valdez, C.R. No. L·S, September 17,
1945; People v. Bagwis, C.R. No. L-262, March 29, Crime committed if actual acts of treason are
1947) rommitted after the consoiracx or afrer the
nroonsal is ac.rented
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO
COMMIT TREASON The crime of treason is already consummated
ART. 115, RPC since the perpetrator had already executed what
was agreed upon or what was proposed to be
Conspiracy to commit treason done. The conspiracy or proposal is then
considered merely as means in the commission
Conspiracy to commit treason is commited thereof.
when, ln tlmes ofwar, two or more persons come
to an agreement to levy war against the MISPRISION OF TREASON
government or to adhere to the enemies and to ART. 116. RPC
give them aid or comfort, and decide to commit
it. (Reyes, 2017) Elements C2010RABJ
Elements of conspiracy to commit treason 1. That the offender who is not a foreigner must
be owing allegiance to the Government; and
1. The Philippines is at war; 2. That he has knowledge of any conspiracy to
2. Two or more persons come to an commit treason against the Government;
agreement to: andThat he conceals or does not disclose or
a. Levy war against the government. or make known the same as soon as possible to
b. Adhere to enemies and to give them the Governor or Fiscal of the province or
aid or comfort; and Mayor or Fiscal of the city in which he
resides.
3. They decide to commit it.
This crime is an exception to the rule that mere
Pcnonsal to commit rceason silence does not make a person criminally liable.
It is a crime of omission.
Proposal to commit treason is committed when
in time of war a person who has decided to levy NOTE: ART. 116 does not apply when the crime
war against the Government or to adhere to the of treason is already commited by someone and
enemies and to give them aid or comfort. the accused does not report its commission to
proposes its execution to some other person or the proper authority.
persons. (Reyes, 2017)
MisociSion of treason cannot he committed
Elements ofaroaosal to commit rceason hvacesidentalien
1. The Philippines is at war; The offender must be owing allegiance to the
2. A person who has decided to levy war Government without being a foreigner.
against the government. or to adhere to the
enemies and give them aid and comfort: and
Penalty (2010 RAB)
Wavs of rnmminine esaionaee under Art NOTE: When the offender is a public officer or
117 and their respective elements employee, the penalty next higher in degree
shall be imposed.
1. By entering, without authority therefor, a
warship, fort, or naval or military Othecaas nfesoinnaee which are nnnisbahle
establishment or reservation to obtain any 1mder CA 616 (Ao Act tn Punish Esoinnaee
information, plans, photographs, or other and Other Offenses aeainsrNarinnal Seo,ritvl
data of a confidential nature relative to the
defense of the Philippines. 1. Unlawfully obtaining or permitting to be
obtained information affecting national
Elements: defense;
a. That the offender enters in any place 2. Unlawful disclosing of information affecting
mentioned therein; national defense;
3. Disloyal acts or words in time of peace;
NOTE: The offender is any person, 4. Disloyal acts or words in time of war;
whether a citizen or a foreigner, a 5. Conspiracy to violate preceding acts;
private individual or a public officer. 6. Harboring or concealing violators of law;
and
b. That he has no authority therefor; and 7. Photographing from aircraft of vital military
information.
NOTE: If the offender intended to aid the enemy 3. That the offenders either:
by giving such notice or information, the crime a. Attack or seize that vessel, or
amounts to treason; hence, the penalty is the b. Seize the whole or part of the cargo of
same as that for treason. said vessel, its equipment or personal
It means any waters on the sea coast which are Can only be committed Can be committed by
without the boundaries of the low-water mark, by persons who are any persons,
although such waters may be in the not members of the including the vessel's
jurisdictional limits of a foreign government. The vessel's complement, complement, or the
Convention on the Law of the Sea defines "high or the passengers of passengers of the
seas" as parts of the seas that are not included in the vessel vessel
the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial
seas, or in the internal waters of a State, or in the
archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State. It NOTE: There is, thus, no piracy when members
does not mean that the crime is committed of the vessel's complement or its passengers
beyond the three-mile limit of any State. attack or seize the vessel or its cargo on high
seas. The offense would then be theft or robbery
Court which has jurisdiction over piracy
cognizable by Philippine courts, if the crime is
committed in the hieh seas committed on a Philippine ship, pursuant to par.
1, Art. 2 of the RPC.
Pirates are in law hastes humani gener;s. Piracy
is a crime not against any particular state but
against all mankind. It may be punished in the
Mutinx
competent tribunal of any country where the It is the unlawful resistance to a superior officer,
offender may be found or into which he may be or the raising of commotions and disturbances
carried. on board a ship against the authority of its
commander.
The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes
has no territorial limits. As it is against aJI so
may it be punished by all. Nor does it matter that
Piracx xis-ta-xisMutinx
the crime was committed within the
jurisdictional 3-mile limit of a foreign state, "for PIRACY MUTINY
those limits, though neutraJ to war. are not
neutral to crimes." (People v. lo-lo ond Saraw, Offenders are Offenders are
G.R. No. 179S8, February 27, 1922) strangers to the vessel. members of the
Hence, offenders are complement or the
Q: If piracy was committed outside the neither passengers passengers of the
Philippine waters, will the Philippine courts nor crew members vessel
have jurisdiction over the offense?
Done with anlmo Against the authority
A: YES. For piracy falls under Title I Book 2 of furandijintent to of
the Revised Penal Code. As such, it is an stea/and with
exception to the rule on territoriality in criminal the intention of the commander of
law under Artide 2. universal hostility the ship
The same principle applies even if the offenders Intent to gain is an The offenders only
were charged, not with a violation of qualified element of piracy intend to ignore the
piracy under the Code but under a special law, ship's officers. Intent
P.D. 532 which penalizes piracy in Philippine to gain is immaterial.
waters. (People v. Catontan, G.R. No. 11807S,
September S, 1997) Attack from the Attack from the
outside inside
Piracy underthe BPCxis-a-visPiracyunder
PD 532
QUALIFIED PIRACY
ART. 123, RPC
PIRACY UNDER THE PIRACY UNDER
RPC P.D. 532
XPN: When the peace officers acted in good faith The offender The offender
even if the grounds mentioned above are not is a public may be any
Asto the
obtaining. there is no arbitrary detention. officer person
capacity of
possessed
Illustration: Two BIR secret agents, strangers in the
with authority
offender
the municipality who were spying the to make
neighborhood of the market place and acting arrests
generally in a manner calculated to arouse the The purpose The purpose
suspicion of any one not advised as to their duty, for detaining is to accuse
were arrested by policemen of the town. The the offended the offended
Supreme Court held that the police officers acted party is to party of a
in good faith and cannot be held liable for deny him of crime he did
arbitrary detention. (U.S. v. Batalliones, G.R. No. his liberty not commit,
7284, August 23, 1912) to deliver the
Asto the
person to the
NOTE: R.A. 7438 mandates the duties of purpose of
proper
arresting officer under pain of penalty detainment
authority, and
(imprisonment of 8 years to 10 years or fine of to file the
Php 6,000 or both) in case of failure to comply. necessary
charges in a
Arhitrarx dereotion can he committed tho, way of trying
imoa,dence to incriminate
him.
Illustration: A police officer re-arrests a woman
who had been released by means of verbal order Q: X, a police officer, falsely imputes a crime
of the judge. The police officer acted without against A to be able to arrest him but he
malice, but did not verify the order of release appears to be not determined to file a charge
before proceeding to make the re-arrest. He is against him. What crime, if any, did X
liable for arbitrary detention through simple commit?
imprudence. (People v. Miso, 36 O.G. 3496)
A: The crime is arbitrary detention through
Arhitrarx derention vis-A-vi£ meeal unlawful arrest. (Boado, 2008)
deteotioo
DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED
PERSONS TO THE PROPER
ARBITRARY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
BASIS ILLEGAL
DETENTION ART. 125, RPC
DETENTION
The principal The principal Elements fl990 BAR)
Asto the
offender must offender is a
principa/'s
be a public private person 1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
capacity
officer 2. He has detained a person for some legal
The offender The offender, ground; and
who is a even if he is a 3. He fails to deliver such person to the proper
public officer public officer, judicial authorities within:
Asto his
has a duty does not
duty to
which carries include as his a. 12 hours for crimes/offenses punishable
detain a
with it the function the by light penalties or their equivalent;
person
authority to power to arrest b. 18 hours for crimes/offenses punishable
detain a and detain a by correctional penalties or their
person person equivalent;
c. 36 hours for crimes/offenses punishable
Arhitrarx derention vis-ta-visIInlawful arrest by afflictive penalties or their
equivalent.
2. Hot Pursuit · When an offense has in fact Rights of the person detained
been committed, and he has probable cause
to believe based on personal knowledge of 1.He shall be informed of the cause of his
facts and circumstances that the person to detention; and
be arrested has committed it. 2. He shall be allowed, upon his request to
communicate and confer at anytime with his
Probable cause such facts and attorney or counsel.
circumstances which could lead a
reasonable discreet and prudent man to NOTE: The illegality of detention is not cured by
the filing of the information in court.
NOTE: Wardens and jailers are the public NOTE: Pursuant to Sec. 69 of the Revised
officers most likely to violate this article. Administrative Code, only the President of the
Philippines is vested with authority to deport
EXPULSION aliens.
ART. 127, RPC
The crime of expulsion is also committed when a
Punishable acts Filipino who, after voluntarily leaving the
country, is illegally refused re-entry by a public
1. Expelling a person from the Philippines; and officer because he is considered a victim of being
2. Compelling a person to change his forced to change his address.
residence.
Punishable acts {2002. 2009 BAR) Qualifying circumstances under Art. 128
1. Entering any dwelling against the will of the 1. If committed at night time; and
owner thereof; 2. If any papers or effects not constituting
2. Searching papers or other effects found evidence of a crime are not returned
therein without the previous consent of immediately after the search is made by the
such owner; and offender.
3. Refusing to leave the premises after having
surreptitiously entered said dwelling and SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLV
after having been required to leave the OBTAINED ANO ABUSE IN THE SERVICE
same. OF THOSE LEGALLV OBTAINED
ART. 129, RPC
NOTE: What is punished is the refusal to leave,
the entry having been made surreptitiously. r,miShahle aCJs
"Aeainst the will nfrhe ownec:: 1. Procuring a search warrant without just
cause
It presupposes opposition or prohibition by the
owner, whether express or implied, and not Elements:
merely the absence of consent. a. That the offender is a public officer or
employee;
NOTE: When one voluntarily admits to a search b. That he procures a search warrant: and
or consents to have it made upon his person or c. That there is no just cause.
premises, he is precluded from later complaining
thereof. The right to be secure from 2. Exceeding his authority or by using
unreasonable searches may, like every right, be unnecessary severity in executing a search
waived and such waiver may be either expressly warrant legally procured.
or impliedly.
Elements:
Common elements a. That the offender is a public officer or
employee;
1. Offender is public officer or employee; and b. That he has legally procured a search
2. He is not authorized by judicial order to warrant; and
enter the dwelling and/or to make a search c. That he exceeds his authority or uses
for papers and for other effects. unnecessary severity in executing the
same.
Trespass to dwelling
Search warrant
The crime committed is trespass to dwelling
when the punishable acts under Art. 128 are It is an order in writing, issued in the name of
committed by a private person. the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge
and directed to a peace officer, commanding him
AonHcahilitx of ocoxiSioos under Art 126 iC to search for personal property described
the ocnmaot nfrhe ncemises is not the owner therein and bring it before the court.
Beonisite fnr the issuance of search warrnnt to his liability for the commission of any other
offense.
A search warrant shall not issue except upon
probable cause in connection with one specific Elements of exceedine authoritv or usine
offense to be determined personally by the judge unnecessary severity in executing a search
after examination under oath or affirmation of waccant leeallv nrna,ced·
the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce, and particularly describing the place to 1. That the offender is a public officer or
be searched and the things to be seized which employee;
may be anywhere in the Philippines. (Sec. 4, Rule 2. That he has legally procured a search
126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure) warrant; and
3. That he exceeds authority or uses
NOTE: A search warrant shall be valid for 10 unnecessary severity in executing the same.
days from its date. Thereafter, it shall be void.
SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES
Search warrant iHeeallx nhrained ART. 130
liability for the crime is still incurred through 2. He performs any of the acts mentioned
the following situations: above
1. The search warrant was irregularly Necessity that the offender be a stranger to
obtained; the meetlne that bas been iorerrnnted and
2. The officer exceeded his authority under the dissolved
warrant;
3. The public officer employs unnecessary or To be held liable under Art. 131, it is necessary
excessive severity in the implementation of that the offender be a stranger to the meeting
the search warrant: or that has been interrupted and dissolved. If the
4. The owner of dwelling or any member of the offender is a participant of the meeting. he is
family was absent. or two witnesses residing liable for unjust vexation.
within the same locality were not present
during the search. Oolvaonblic officeror emolnvee ran commit
this crime
Q: Suppose, X, a suspected pusher lives in a
condominium unit. Agents of the PDEA If the offender is a private individual, the crime
obtained a search warrant but the name of is disturbance of public order defined in Article
the person in the search warrant did not tally 153.
with the address indicated therein.
Bemlirine a nermit before aov meetlne or
Eventually, X was found but in a different assembly cannot be construed as preventing
address. X resisted but the agents insisted on neacefnl assemblies
the search. Drugs were found and seized and
X was prosecuted and convicted by the trial The permit requirement shall be in exercise only
court. Is the search valid? of the government's regulatory powers and not
really to prevent peaceful assemblies. This
A: NO, because the public officers are required requirement is legal as long as it is not being
to follow the search warrant by its letter. They exercised as a prohibitory power.
have no discretion on the matter. Their remedy
is to ask the judge to change the address NOTE: But if such application for permit is
indicated in the search warrant. arbitrarily denied or conditions which defeat the
exercise of the right to peaceably assemble is
PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION AND dictated by the officer, this article applies.
DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS
ART. 131, RPC Prohibition lnreramtlno or PissnlnJino of
Peaceful Meetings vis-:1-vis Tumults and
Punishable acrs nther Disturbances
1. Prohibiting or interrupting, without legal PROHIBITION,
TUMULTS AND
ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting, or INTERRUPTION,
OTHER
by dissolving the same; OR DISSOLUTION
DISTURBANCES
2. Hindering any person from joining any OF PEACEFUL
Art 153
lawful association or from attending any of MEETINGS
its meetings; and Art 131
3. Prohibiting or hindering any person from The public officer is The public officer is a
addressing. either alone or together with not a participant. As participant of the
others, any petition to the authorities for far as the gathering assembly
correction of abuses or redress of is concerned, the
grievances. public officer is a
third ar
Elements The offender must The offender could be a
be a public officer private person,
In all three cases, the following elements must whether a participant
concur: of the assembl or not
Persons who meet for the purpose of religious A: NO.The SC held that the act imputed to the
worship, by any method which is not indecent accused does not constitute the offense
and unlawful, have a right to do so without being complained of. At most, they might be
molested or disturbed. (U.S. v. Balcorta, 25 Phil chargeable with having threatened the parish
279) priest or with having passed through a private
property without the consent of the owner.
OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS
ART. 133, RPC An act is said to be notoriously offensive to the
religious feelings of the faithful when a person
Elements ridicules or makes light of anything constituting
a religious dogma; works or scoffs at anything
1. Acts complained of were performed: devoted to religious ceremonies; plays with or
damages or destroys any object of veneration by
a. In a place devoted to religious the faithful.
worship; or
b. During the celebration of any The mere act of causing the passage through the
religious ceremony churchyard belonging to the Church, of the
funeral of one who in life belonged to the Church
2. Acts must be notoriously offensive to the of Christ, neither offends nor ridicules the
feelings of the faithful. religious feelings of those who belong to the
Roman Catholic Church. (People v. Boes, ibid.)
NOTE: It is not necessary that there is religious
worship. Q: While a "pabasa• was going on at a
municipality in the Province ofTarlac, Reyes
NOTE: Art. 133 is the only crime against the and his company arrived at the place,
fundamental law of the State that may be carrying bolos and crowbars, and started to
committed not only by public officer but also by construct a barbed wire fence in front of the
a private person. chapel.
A: YES. Since the killing of Manatad is a mere Mere giving of aid or comfort is not criminal in
component of rebellion or was done in cases of rebellion. There must be an actual
furtherance thereof. It is of judicial notice that participation. Hence, mere silence or omission of
the sparrow unit is the liquidation squad of the the public officer is not punishable in rebellion.
New People's Army with the objective of
overthrowing the duly constituted government. Theory ofAhsornrion in Rebellion
It is therefore not hard to comprehend that the
killing of Manatad was committed as a means to If common crimes like homicide, murder,
or in furtherance of the subversive ends of the physical mJunes, and arson have been
NPA. committed in furtherance of or in connection
with rebellion, then it is considered as absorbed
Consequently, appellant is liable for the crime of in the crime of rebellion. But before these
rebellion, not murder with direct assault upon a common crimes can be absorbed, it is necessary
person in authority. as the former crime absorbs that there is evidence to show that these
the crime of direct assault when done in common crimes have promoted or espoused the
furtherance thereof. (People v. Dosig, et. al., G.R. ideals of rebels. Absent any of these, it cannot be
No. 100231, April 28, 1993) absorbed in the crime of rebellion.
Q: On May S, 1992, at about 6:00 a.m., while Behemon xis-a-vis Terrorism under BA
Governor Alegre of Laguna was on board his 9372 {2019 BAR)
car traveling along the National Highway of
Laguna. Joselito and Vicente shot him on the
head resulting in his instant death. A t that TERRORISM
REBELLION
time, Joselito and Vicente were members of Sec. 3, R.A. 9372
the liquidation squad of the New People's The uprising is The sowing and
Army and they killed the governor upon against the creating a condition
orders of their senior officer Commander government of widespread and
Tiago. extraordinary fear
·
and the
NOTE: Rebellion is a crime punishable under the A: The perpetrators, being persons belonging to
RPC. On the other hand, Under the Human the Armed Forces, would be guilty of the crime
Security Act of 2007, specifically in terrorism, of coup d'etat. under Article 134-A of the
the crime of rebellion is included in list of Revised Penal Code, as amended, because their
predicate crimes. In essence, rebellion becomes attack was against vital military installations
an element of the crime of terrorism. which are essential to the continued possession
and exercise of governmental powers, and their
COUP D'ETAT purpose is to seize power by taking over such
ART. 134-A, RPC installations.
Q: On account of the testimony of the A: NO, Father Abraham did not commit a crime.
prosecution's witness, the accused, together His failure to report such conspiracy is due to an
with some more or Jess forty persons who insuperable cause, one of the exempting
were said to be conspiring to overthrow the circumstances under Article 12 of the RPC, as
Government,was heard to have said,"What a under our law, a priest cannot be compelled to
life this is, so full of misery, constantly disclose any information received by him by
increasing. When will our wretchedness end? reason of confession made to him under his
When will the authorities remedy it? What professional capacity.
shall we do?" Is there a conspiracy?
NOTE: In the case of U.S. v. Vergara, the Supreme
A: NONE, as the prosecution failed to establish Court held that persons who may be held
the existence of conspiracy to rebel by showing criminally liable under this Article are those who
that there is (1) an agreement and (2) decision actually conspired with each other, not those
to commit rebellion. Mere words of discontent. who learned and failed to report the same to the
although they reveal dissatisfaction on account authorities.
of the evils, real or fictitious, to which they refer,
are not alone sufficient to prove the existence of DISLOYAL TY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
a conspiracy to rebel, much Jess with the aid of OR EMPLOYEES
force, against the constituted Government. (U.S. ART. 137,RPC
v. Figueras, et al., G.R. No. 1282, September JO,
1903) Punishable acrs nfdidnxaltv
Q: Accused is the founder and leader of the 1. Failing to resist a rebellion by all the means
Congress of Labor Organizations (CLO). The in their power;
theory of the prosecution is that the accused 2. Continuing to discharge the duties of their
has conspired with the Communist Party of offices under the control of the rebels; and
the Philippines by giving monetary aid, 3. Accepting appointment to office under them.
among others,to help the Huks.
The crime presupposes the existence of
Further, he gave speeches advocating the rebellion, but the offender under this article
prindples of Communism and urging his must not be in conspiracy with the rebels;
audience to join the uprising of laboring otherwise, he will be guilty of rebellion, as the
classes against America and the Quirino act of one is the act of all.
administration. Is the accused guilty of
conspiracy to commit rebellion? NOTE: The public officer or employee who
performs any of the acts of disloyalty should not
A: NO, as there was no evidence showing that be in conspiracy with the rebels; otherwise, he
those who heard his speeches there and then will be guilty of rebellion, not merely disloyalty,
agreed to rise up arms to overthrow the because in conspiracy, the act of one is the act of
government. Accused was merely a all.
propagandist and indoctrinator of Communism.
He was not a Communist conspiring to commit Q: can the public officer plead Art. 11 or 12?
the actual rebellion by the mere fact of his
leadership of the CLO. (People v. Hernandez, G.R. A: YES, i.e., insuperable cause. Disloyalty is an
No. L-6025, May 30, 1964) offense by omission.
A: NO. The accused is guilty of sedition, multiple Sedition xis-A-vis Crime of h1mulrs and nther
murder and physical injuries, among others. The disturbance of public order
purpose of the raid and the act of the raiders in
rising publicly and taking up arms was not TUMULTS AND
exactly against the Government and for the OTHER
purpose of doing the things defined in Article SEDITION
DISTURBANCE OF
134 of the Revised Penal code under rebellion. PUBLIC ORDER
The raiders did not even attack the Presidencia, Sedition involves There is no public
the seat of local Government. Rather, the object disturbance of public uprising.
was to attain by means of force, intimidation, etc. order resulting from
one object. to wit, to inflict an act of hate or tumultuous uprising.
revenge upon the person or property of a public
official, namely, Punzalan was then Mayor of Crime committed if there is no ouhJic
Tiaong. Under Article 139 of the same Code this uprising
was sufficient to constitute sedition. (People v.
Umali, et al., G.R. No. L-5803, November 29, 1954) If the purpose of the offenders is to attain the
objects of sedition by force or violence, but there
Sedition vis-A-visBehemon
In inciting to sedition, the offender must not take Q: Arter having his picture taken as one
part in any public or tumultuous uprising. lifeless Alberto Reveniera, hanging by the
end or a rope tied to a limb or a tree, accused
llnerine seditim,s words/soeecbes and Oscar Espuelas sent a suicide note to several
writine ouhlishine or Circnlaline scurrilous newspapers and weeklies, which contain: "If
WWs someone asks to you why I committed
suicide, tell them I did it because I was not
They are punishable when they: pleased with the administration of Roxas; the
government is infested with many Hitlers
and Mussolinis; teach our children to burn
pictures of Roxas." What crime did the courts for the enforcement of the law. (Git/ow v.
accused commit? New York, 268 U.S. 652)
A: The letter is a scurrilous libel against the ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE
Government. Writings which tend to overthrow MEETING OF THE NATIONAL
or undermine the security of the government or ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR BODIES
to weaken the confidence of the people in the ART. 143, RPC
government are against the public peace, and
are criminal not only because they tend to incite Elements
a breach of the peace but because they are
conducive to the destruction of the very 1. That there be a projected or actual meeting
government itself. Such are regarded as of the National Assembly (Congress of the
seditious libels. (Espue/as v. People, C.R. No. L- Philippines) or any of its committees or
2990, December 17, 1951) subcommittees, constitutional committees
or divisions thereof, or any of the provincial
Rules relativeroseditious words board or city or municipal council or board;
and
1. Clear and present danger rule: words 2. Offender who may be any person prevents
must be of such nature that by uttering them such meeting by force or fraud.
there is a danger of public uprising and that
such danger should be both clear and The crime is against popular representation
imminent because it is directed against officers whose
public function is to enact laws. When these
2. Dangerous tendency rule: if words used legislative bodies are prevented from
tend to create a danger of public uprising, performing their duties, the system is disturbed.
then those words could properly be subject
of penal clause NOTE: Chief of police and mayor who prevented
the meeting of the municipal council are liable
It is the dangerous tendenty rule that is under Article 143, when the defect of the
generally adopted in the Philippines with meeting is not manifest and requires an
respect to sedition cases. It is enough that the investigation before its existence can be
words used may tend to create danger of public determined.
uprising.
DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS
Instances of inciting t o sedition ART. 144, RPC
1. By using force, intimidation, threats, or 1. Any meeting attended by armed persons for
fraud to prevent any member of the National the purpose of committing any of the crimes
Assembly (Congress of the Philippines) punishable under the Code.
from:
Elements:
a. Attending the meetings of the Assembly a. There is a meeting, a gathering or group
or of any of its committees or of persons, whether in a fixed placed or
subcommittees, constitutional moving;
commissions or committees or divisions b. The meeting is attended by armed
thereof; or persons; and
b. From expressing his opinions; or c. The purpose of the meeting is to commit
c. Casting his vote. any of the crimes punishable under the
Code.
The offender in this case may be any person.
2. Any meeting in which the audience, whether
2. By arresting or searching any member armed or not, is incited to the commission of
thereof while the National Assembly is in the crime of treason, rebellion or
regular or special session, except in case insurrection, sedition or direct assault
such member has committed a crime
punishable under the Code by a penalty Elements:
higher than prision mayor. a. There is a meeting, a gathering or group
of persons, whether in a fixed place or
It is not necessary that the member is actually moving;and
prevented from exercising any of his functions. It b. The audience, whether armed or not, is
is sufficient that Congress is in session and the incited to the commission of the crime
offender, in using force and intimidation, threats, of treason, rebellion or insurrection,
or frauds, has the purpose to prevent a member sedition or direct assault.
of the National Assembly from exercising any of
such prerogatives. (Reyes, 2012) If the person present carries an unlicensed
firearm, the presumption, insofar as he is
concerned, is that the purpose of the meeting is
to commit acts punishable under this Code, and
that he is the leader or organizer of the meeting.
If the presence of a person in the meeting is 1. Founders, directors and president of the
merely out of curiosity, he is not liable because association; and
he does not have an intent to commit the felony 2. Mere members of the association.
of illegal assembly.
Illeeal assemhlx vis-A-xis Illeeal association
Criminal liahilitv nfthe oecson iocitioe
BASIS ILLEGAL ILLEGAL
The person inciting is liable for the crime of ASSEMBLY ASSOCIATION
inciting to rebellion or sedition.
The gathering The formation
for an illegal of or
Gravamen ocmeeal assemhlx purpose organization of
which an association
The gravamen of illegal assembly is mere Basis of constitutes a to engage in an
assembly of or gathering of people for illegal
liability crime under unlawful
purpose punishable by the RPC. Without
the RPC purpose which
gathering, there is no illegal assembly.
is not limited to
a violation of
Persons liable for illegal assembly
the RPC
Necessary Not necessary
1. Organizers or leaders of the meeting; and
that there is that there be an
2. Persons merely present at the meeting. Necessity
an actual actual meeting
ofactual
meeting or
BesnonsihiHtx ofoecsons mereJx nceseot at meeting
assembly
the meeting
Meeting and Act of forming
1. If they are not armed, the penalty is arresto
the attendance or organizing
mayor.
2. If they are armed, the penalty is prision at such and
Acts
meeting are membership in
correccional. punished
the acts the association
punished are the acts
Ifthe eatherine is fnr the commission ofa punished
crime onnisbable under snerial Jaws
If the illegal purpose for the gathering is for the DIRECT ASSAULTS
commission of a crime punishable under special ART. 148, RPC
laws, illegal assembly is not committed. The
crime committed would be illegal association.
waxs of commiltine the crime of dicea
ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS
assa.,lt
ART. 14 7, RPC 1. Without public uprising, by employing force
or intimidation for the attainment of any of
1neeal associations the purposes enumerated in defining the
crimes of rebellion and sedition; and
1. Associations totally or partially organized 2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by
for the purpose of committing any of the employing force or by seriously intimidating
crimes punishable under the Code; or or by seriously resisting any person in
2. Associations totally or partially organized authority or any of his agents, while engaged
for some purpose contrary to public morals. in the performance of official duties, or on
the occasion of such performance. (2009,
PuhHcmorals 2013, 2015 BAR)
of them in the breast with his hand or list, a t Agents of persons in authority are persons who
which instant the policeman seized him by by direct provision of law or by election or by
the wrist and resistance ceased. Is the appointment by competent authority, are
accused guilty of direct assault? charged with maintenance of public order, the
protection and security of life and property, such
A: NO. When the offended party is agent of as barrio councilman, barrio policeman,
person in authority, any force or aggression is barangay leader and any person who comes to
not sufficient constitute to an assault. To come the aid of persons in authority.
within the purview of Art. 148, the force used
against the agent of a person in authority must In applying the provisions of Arts. 148 and 151
be of serious character than that employed in of the RPC, teachers, professors and persons
this case. Logic tells us that resistance is charged with the supervision of public or duly
impossible without force. (U.S. v. Tabiona, C.R. recognized private schools, colleges and
No. L-11847, February 1, 1918) universities, and lawyers in the actual
performance of their professional duties or on
Q: When the news that his carabao, which the occasion of such performance, shall be
earlier destroyed a planted area belonging to deemed persons in authority.
another, was seized and taken to the police
station reached the accused, he confronted Q: Lydia and Gemma, were public school
and protested to the municipal president, teachers. Lydia's son was a student of
who was then inspecting the quarantine of Gemma. Lydia confronted Gemma after
the animals. learning from her son that Gemma called him
a "sissy" while in class. Lydia slapped Gemma
The president, upon hearing his protest, in the cheek and pushed her, thereby causing
promised to intervene in the matter and to her to fall and hit a wall divider.
see whether the carabao could be withdrawn.
Upon hearing this, the accused insulted the As a result of Lydia's violent assault, Gemma
president and gave him a slap on the face. suffered a contusion in her "maxillary area·,
What crime did the accused commit? as shown by a medical certificate issued by a
doctor, and continued to experience
A: The accused committed direct assault upon a abdominal pajns. To what crime, U any, is
person in authority. When the offended party is Lydia liable?
a person in authority, it is not necessary to
ascertain what force the law requires in order to A: Lydia is liable for direct assault upon a person
constitute an assault since the law itself defines in authority. On the day of the commission of the
concretely this force in providing that it consists assault, Gemma was engaged in the performance
in mere laying of hands upon the person. of her official duties, that is, she was busy with
paperwork while supervising and looking after
The degree of force employed by the offender the needs of pupils who are taking their recess in
against the person in authority is immaterial as the classroom to which she was assigned. Lydia
the law simply mentions the laying of hands was already angry when she entered the
sufficient. (U.S. v. Cumbon, C.R. No. L-13658, classroom and accused Gemma of calling her son
November 9, 1918) a "sissf'. Gemma being a public school teacher,
belongs to the class of persons in authority
NOTE: If the intent of the accused is to expressly mentioned in Article 152 of the
embarrass the person in authority, the offense is Revised Penal Code, as amended. (Celig v. People,
Direct Assault with Slander by Deed. C.R. No. 173150,July 28, 2010)
A: The complex crime of direct assault with NOTE: When any person comes to the aid of a
murder was committed. Since A was stabbed at person ln author;ty, he is constituted as an agent
the back when he was not in a position to defend of the person in authority (Art 152, os amended).
himself nor retaliate, there was treachery in the If such person was the one attacked, by
stabbing. Hence, the death caused by such employing violence against him of serious
stabbing was murder. The Barangay Captain was nature or character, the crime would be direct
in the act of trying to pacify B who was making assault.
trouble in the dance hall when he was stabbed to
death. He was therefore killed while in the DISOBEOIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUEO
performance of his duties. BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OR
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS
In the case of People v. Hecto, the Supreme Court ART. 150, RPC
ruled that "as the barangay captain, it was his
duty to enforce the laws and ordinances within Aas mmisbed as diSnhedieoce m the
the barangay. If in the enforcement thereof, he National Assemhlv CCnneressl or
incurs, the enmity of his people who thereafter Constih1tional Commission
treacherously slew him, the crime committed is
murder with assault upon a person in authority." 1. Refusing, without legal excuse, to obey
(People v. Doi/antes, C.R. No. 70639, June 30, summons of the National Assembly, its
1987) special or standing committees and
subcommittees, the Constitutional
INDIRECT ASSA ULTS commissions and its committees,
ART. 149, RPC subcommittees or divisions, or by any
commission or committee chairman or
Elements member authorized to summon witnesses;
2. Refusing to be sworn or placed under
affirmation while being before such
legislative or constitutional body or official;
Resisting the arrest, he called to his But surely petitioner's act of exercising one's
neighbours for help, "there are some bandits right against unreasonable searches to be
Q: When is the disturbance of public order A: YES. As there can be separate crimes of
deemed to be tumultuous? (2012 BAR) physical injuries thru reckless imprudence and
tumultuous disturbance caused by the single act
A: The disturbance shall be deemed tumultuous of firing a submachine gun. The protection
if caused by more than three persons who are against double jeopardy is only for the same
armed or provided with means of violence. offense.
If the escape of the prisoner shall take place P.O. 1829 is absorbed in the crime of delivery of
outside of said establishments by taking the prisoners from jail or infidelity in the custody of
guards by surprise, the same penalties shall be prisoners.
imposed in their minimum period. (Art 156, par.
2, RPC) EVASION BY ESCAPING DURING TERM OF
SENTENCE
Q: A, a detention prisoner, was taken to a ART. 157, RPC
hospital for emergency medical treatment.
His followers, all of whom were armed, went Elements
to the hospital to take him away or help him
escape. The prison guards, seeing that they 1. Offender is a convitt by final judgment;
were outnumbered and that resistance 2. He is serving his sentence which consists in
would endanger the Jives of other patients, deprivation of liberty; and
decided to allow the prisoner to be taken by 3. He evades the service of his sentence by
his followers. What crime, if any, was escaping during the term of his sentence.
committed by A's followers? Why? (2002 (2009 BAR)
BAR)
"finalindemenr
A: They are liable for delivering prisoner from
jail under Art. 156 of the RPC. The crime is not The term ·final judgment'' employed in the RPC
only committed by removing the prisoner from means judgment beyond recall. As long as a
an establishment that the prisoner is confined in judgment has not become executory, it cannot be
but also by helping said person to escape ·by truthfully said that defendant is definitely guilty
other means," such as by allowing the prisoner of the felony charged against him. (People v.
to be taken by those unauthorized to do so, such Bayotas, G.R. No.102007, September 2,1994)
as in the case at bar.
Under Sec. 7 of Rule 16 of the Rules of Court, a
l.iahilitv of rhe ncisnoer or detainee who judgment in a criminal case becomes final after
escaped the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal
or when the sentence has been partially or
1. If a detention prisoner, he does not incur totally satisfied or served, or the defendant has
liability from escaping; or expressly waived in writing his right to appeal.
2. If a convitt by final judgment, he will be (Reyes, 2008)
liable for evasion of service of his sentence
Liability if the one who escaped is only a
Delivering the prisoners in jail vis-3-vis detention prisoner
lofideJiryin the cnstndv nforisonecs
He does not incur liability from escaping.
DELIVERING INFIDELITY IN THE However, if such prisoner knows of the plot to
PRISIDNERS FROM CUSTODY OF remove him from jail and cooperates therein by
escaping, he himself becomes liable for
JAIL PRISONERS
delivering prisoners from jail as a principal by
The offender is not the The offender is the indispensable cooperation.
custodian of the custodian at the time
prisoner at the time of of the Q: On appeal, defendant-appellant questions
the esca e removal. esca e removal. the judgment rendered by the CFI of Manila
finding him guilty of evasion of service of
In both, the offender may be a public officer or a sentence under Art. 157. Defendant
private citizen. The person involved may be a maintains that Art. 157 applies only in cases
convict or a mere detention prisoner. of imprisonment and not when the sentence
imposed upon was "destierro," as in his case.
NOTE: If the offender is a public officer who had Is the defendant correct?
the prisoner in his custody or charge, he is liable
for infidelity in the custody of a prisoner. (Art. A: NO. Art. 157 must be understood to include
223) not only deprivation of liberty by imprisonment
but also by sentence of destierro.
Aoolicahilitv of Po 1829 COhsra,crion of
h,srirel
"Escape" in legal parlance and for purposes of a. Did Manny commit any crime?
Article 157 of the RPC means unlawful departure b. Where should Manny be prosecuted?
of prisoner from the limits of his custody. (1998BAR)
Clearly, one who has not been committed and
never brought to prison cannot be said to have A:
escaped therefrom. (Del Castillo v. Torrecompo, a. YES. Manny committed the crime of evasion
G.R. No.139033, December 18, 2002) of service of sentence when he went to
Dagupan City, which he was prohibited from
Q: Adelaida Tanega failed to appear on the entering under his sentence of destierro. A
day of the execution of her sentence. On the sentence imposing the penalty of destierro is
same day, the judge issued a warrant for her evaded when the convitt enters any of the
arrest. She was never arrested. More than a place/places he is prohibited from entering
year later, Tanega through counsel moved t o under the sentence or come within the
quash the warrant of arrest, on the ground prohibited radius. Although destierro does
that the penalty had prescribed. Tanega not involve imprisonment, it is nonetheless
claimed that she was convicted for a light a deprivation of liberty. (People v. Abilong.
offense and since light offenses prescribe in 82 Phil.172)
one year, her penalty had already prescribed.
Is the motion meritorious? b. Manny may be prosecuted in Manila or
Dagupan City. In the case of Porulan v.
A: NO. The penalty has not prescribed as she did Director of Prisons (G.R. No. L-28519,
not evade her service of sentence. Under Art 93 February 17, 1968), the Court held that the
of the Revised Penal Code, the prescription of crime of evasion of sentence under Article
penalties "shall commence to run from the date 157 of the Revised Penal Code is a
when the culprit should evade the service of his continuing crime. Hence, the accused may be
sentence." To come within the application of Art. prosecuted by the court of either province
157, the culprit must evade one's service of where any of the essential ingredients of the
sentence by escaping during the term of his crime took place.
sentence. This must be so for by the express
terms of the statute, a convict evades '"service of EVASION ON THE OCCASION OF DISOROERS
his sentence" by "escaping during the term of his ART. 158, RPC
imprisonment by reason of final judgment."
Indeed, evasion of sentence is but another Elements
expression of the term "jail breaking." (Tonega v.
Masakoyan, G.R. No. L-27191 February 28, 1967) 1. Offender is a convict by final judgment who
is confined in a penal institution;
Qnalifxinedrcnmsrances 2. There is disorder, which results from:
a. Conflagration
If such evasion takes place by: b. Earthquake
c. Explosion
1. Means of unlawful entry (must be read as d. Other similar catastrophe, or
·scaling/ climbing walls"); e. Mutiny in which he has not
2. Breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs participated;
or floors;
3. Using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit, 3. Offender evades the service of his sentence
violence or intimidation; or by leaving the penal institution where he is
confined on the occasion of such disorder or
during the mutiny; and
4. Offender fails to give himself up to the 2. That he was granted a conditional pardon by
authorities within forty-eight ( 48) hours the Chief Executive; and
following the issuance of a proclamation by 3. He violated any of the conditions of such
the Chief Executive announcing the passing pardon.
away of such calamity.
A convict granted conditional pardon who is
Basis of liability recommitted must be convicted by final
judgment of a court of the subsequent crime or
Liability is based on the failure to return within crimes with which he was charged before the
48 hours after the passing of the calamity, criminal penalty far such subsequent affense(s)
conflagration or mutiny had been announced can be imposed upon him. Since Article 159 of
and not the act of leaving from the penal the Revised Penal Code defines a distinct,
establishment. substantive felony, the parolee or convict who is
regarded as having violated the provisions
..Mutiov"' as referred underthisartlde thereof must be charged, prosecuted and
convicted by final judgment before he can be
The mutiny referred here involves subordinate made to suffer the penalty prescribed in Article
personnel rising against the supervisor within 159. (Torres v. Gonzales, C.R. No. 76872, July 23,
the penal establishment. It is one of the causes 1987)
which may authorize a convict serving sentence
in the penitentiary to leave the jail provided he Gcanfine of oardnn hetoce a iudrment
has not taken part in the mutiny. If one partakes becomes final
in mutiny, he will be liable for the offenses which
he committed during the mutiny whether or not As mandated by Sec. 19, Article VII of the 1987
he returns. (People v. Padilla, G. R. No. 121917, Constitution, no pardon may be extended before
March 12, 1997) a judgment of conviction becomes final. A
judgment of convittion becomes final: (a) when
NOTE: The penalty of commission of this felony no appeal is seasonably perfected, (b) when the
is an increase by 1/5 of the time remaining to be accused commences to serve the sentence, (c)
served under the original sentence, in no case to when the right to appeal is expressly waived in
exceed 6 months. writing. except where the death penalty was
imposed by the trial court. and (d) when the
The special allowance for loyalty (e.g. deduttion accused applies for probation, thereby waiving
of sentence) authorized by Art. 98 and 158(2) his right to appeal. Where the judgment of
refers to those convicts, who having evaded the conviction is still pending appeal and has not yet
service of their sentences by leaving the penal therefore attained finality, executive clemency
institution, give themselves up within 48 hours may not yet be granted by the President. (People
following the issuance of the proclamation by v. Salle.Jr. C.R. Na. 103567, December 4, 1995)
the President announcing the passing away of
the calamity or catastrophe. They will be entitled Rasis of the oower of the President to erant
to a deduction of one-fifth (1/5) of their pardon
respective sentences.
The pardoning power of the President is
A deduction of two-fifths (2/5) of the period of provided for in Article VII as follows: "Except in
his sentence shall be granted in case said cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided
prisoner chose to stay in the place of his in this Constitution, the President may grant
confinement notwithstanding the existence of a reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and
calamity or catastrophe enumerated under Art. remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by
158. (Art 98 as amended by R.A. 10592). final judgment.• (Sec. 19, Art. VII af the 1987
Constitution)
EVASION BY VIOLATION OF
CONDITIONAL PARDON As provided further in Sec. 64[i] of the Revised
ART. 159, RPC Administrative Code, the President has the
power ..to grant to convicted persons reprieves
Elements or pardons, either plenary or partial, conditional,
or unconditional; to suspend sentences without
1. Offender was a convict; pardon, remit fines, and order the discharge of
any convicted person upon parole, subject to
Q: While serving his sentence for the crime of Condjtional pardon vis-3-vis Evasion of
abduction after being found guilty thereof by service ofseoteoce
the Cfl of cavite, defendant-appellant was
pardoned on February 1923. Subsequently, VIOLATION OF EVASION OF
he was tried for the crime of attempted CONDITIONAL SERVICE OF
robbery in band with physical injuries and PARDON SENTENCE
also charged with a violation of the condition
of his pardon with the Cfl of IUzal. On appeal, It is not a public offense It is a public offense
defendant claims that it is the CFI of Cavite for it does not c.ause separate and
that has jurisdiction over the case. Is the harm or injury to the independent from
defendant correct? right of another person any other act.
nor does it disturb
A: NO. It is the court wherein the crime ublic order.
committed, subsequent to the pardon, which has
jurisdiction to determine whether the defendant QUASI-RECIDIVISM
has violated the conditions of the pardon. ART. 160, RPC
NOTE: The condition imposed upon the prisoner Elements (1991 BARl
that he should not commit another crime
extends to offenses punished by special Jaws like 1. Offender was already convicted by final
illegal voting under the Election Law. (Reyes, judgment of one offense; and
2008) 2. That he committed a new felony before
beginning to serve such sentence or while
Q: After serving 2 years, 5 months and 22 serving the same.
days of the total duration of his sentence of
prision mayor, a conditional pardon was NOTE: Under this provision, any person who
granted to the appellant remitting 3 years, 7 shall commit a felony after having been
months, and 8 days. Subsequently, appellant convicted by final judgment, before beginning to
was found guilty of the crime of estafa. By serve such sentence, or while serving the same,
reason thereof, he was prosecuted under Art. shall be punished by the maximum period of the
159 to which he pied guilty. The court then penalty prescribed by Jaw for the new felony.
ordered his recommitment for the term This circumstance has been interpreted by the
remitted by the pardon. The accused Court as a special aggravating circumstance
appealed from this judgment. Is the appeal where the penalty actually imposed is taken
meritorious? from the prescribed penalty in its maximum
period without regard to any generic mitigating
A: YES, By express provision of Art. 159 of the circumstances. (People v. Temporada, G.R. No.
RPC, the prescribed penalty is pns,on 173473, December 17, 2008)
correcdonal in its minimum period. The second
part of said Article, which provides that the Q: The Cfl of IUzal found the defendants
convict shall suffer the unexpired portion of his guilty of the crime of murder and imposed
original sentence should the penalty or term upon them the penalty of death by reason of
crime is forging the signature of the Chief A piece of metal stamped with certain marks and
Executive. made current at a certain value.
A: Such person is not liable for counterfeiting of of destruction of money issued by Central Bank
coin, but for estofo under Art. 318. (Reyes, 2008) of the Philippines, mutilation is not limited to
coins.
"Utter"
AasunniShahle underPP 247
To pass counterfeited coins, deliver or give
away. 1. Willful defacement;
2. Mutilation;
"lmaocr: 3. Tearing;
4. Burning; and
To bring into the Philippines ports any false or 5. Destruction of Central Bank Notes and coin.
counterfeited coins.
NOTE: One who mutilates a coin does not do so
MUTILATION OF COINS, IMPORTATION ANO for the sake of mutilating, but to take advantage
UTTERANCE OF MUTILATED COINS of the metal abstracted, he appropriates a part of
ART. 164, RPC the metal of the coin. Hence, the coin diminishes
in intrinsic value. One who utters said mutilated
Punishable Acrs coin receives its legal value, much more than its
intrinsic value.
1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with
the further requirement that there be intent SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED COIN,
to damage or to defraud another; and WITHOUT CONNIVANCE
2. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, ART. 165, RPC
with the further requirement that there
must be connivance with the mutilator or Punishable ActS
importer in case of uttering.
1. Possession of coin, counterfeited or
Mutilation mutilated by another person, with intent to
utter the same, knowing that it is false or
To take off part of the metal either by filling it or mutilated.
substituting it for another metal of inferior
quality. Elements:
a. Possession (includes constructive
Requisites possession);
b. With intent to utter; and
1. Coin mutilated is of legal tender; and c. Knowledge that such coin is mutilated.
NOTE: This is the only article that requires NOTE: Possession of or uttering false coin
that the mutilated coin be legal tender. does not require that the counterfeiting coin
is legal tender. The possessor should not be
2. Offender gains from the precious metal dust the counterfeiter. mutilator, or importer of
abstracted from the coin. the coins.
Q: A Chinese merchant was paid by a Notes and other obligations and securities
purchaser of goods in the former's store with that may be forged or falsified
a false SO-centavo coin. He placed it in his
drawer. During a search by some 1. Treasury or bank notes;
constabulary officers, the false coin was 2. Certificates; and
found in the drawer. May the Chinaman be 3. Other obligations and securities, payable to
convicted of illegal possession of false coin? bearer.
A: NO, because ArL 165 requires three things as Kinds of tceasurx or hank notes or other
regards possession of false coins, namely: (1) documents that maxhe fnreed
possession; (2) intent to utter; and (3)
knowledge that the coin is false. The fact that the 1. Obligation or security issued by the
Chinaman received it in payment of his goods Government of the Philippines;
and place it in his drawer shows that he did not 2. Circulating note issued by any banking
know that such coin was false. (People v. Go Po, institution duly authorized by law to issue
C.R. No. 42697, August 1, 1985) the same;
3. Document issued by a foreign government;
NOTE: As long as the offender has knowledge and
that the coin is false or mutilated, there is no 4. Circulating note or bill issued by a foreign
need for him to connive with the counterfeiter or bank duly authorized to issue the same.
mutilator.
NOTE: The falsification of PNB checks is not
FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES OR forgery under Art. 166, but falsification of
OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO BEARER; commercial document under Art. 172 in
IMPORTING, AND UTTERING SUCH FALSE OR connection with Art.171.
FORGED NOTES AND DOCUMENTS
ART. 166, RPC Enreerx vis-ta-xis Ealsifiratinn
3. Uttering such false instruments in use said false treasury or bank notes. (Clemente
connivance with the forger or the importer. v. People, C.R. No.194367,June 15, 2011)
NOTE: Connivance is not required in uttering if NOTE: But a person in possession of falsified
the utterer is the forger. document and who makes use of the same is
presumed to be the material author of
Inclusion of instruments or other documents falsification.
ofcredit iSsned bxatoreien eovemmeot
FORGERY
This article covers instruments or other ART. 169, RPC
documents of credit issued by a foreign
government or bank because the act punished AasmmiShable
includes that of importing, without specifying
the country or government issuing them. Forgery is committed by (1999, 2008 BAR):
NOTE: Article 170 does not require that the ii. That such person or persons did not
offender be a private individual. All that the in fact so participate in the act or
provision requires is that the offender has no proceeding.
proper authority to make the alteration. Hence,
the offender may be a private individual or a Q: Atty. Constantino notarized the Joint
public officer. Acknowledgement of the last will and
testament of Severino. Dr. Asuncion was not
FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, present during the execution, but bis name
EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR was not crossed out from the document. He
ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER only signed the document after it was
ART. 171, RPC notarized. With this, Atty. Constantino was
(2015 BAR) charged of the crime of falsifying a public
document under Article 171(2) of the
Elements Revised Penal Code for making it appear that
Dr. Asuncion appeared before him and
1. That the offender is a public officer, witnessed the execution of the Last Will and
employee, notary public, or an ecclesiastical Testament. Is Atty. Constantino guilty beyond
minister; reasonable doubt of the crime of falsifying a
public document?
2. That he takes advantage of his official
position: A: NO. In falsification of public documents
under Article 171(2) of the Revised Penal Code,
a. He has the duty to make or prepare or the prosecution must prove that these elements
to othenYise intervene in the exist: (1) that the offender is a public officer,
preparation of the document; or employee, notary public, or an ecclesiastical
b. He has the official custody of the minister; (2) that he takes advantage of his
document which he falsifies; and official position; (3) that he falsifies a document
by causing it to appear that persons have
3. That he falsified a document by committing participated in any act or proceeding; and (4)
any of the following acts (2008 BAR): that such person or persons did not in fact so
participate in the proceeding.
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any
handwriting, signature, or rubric. Here, the first element has already been proven
since petitioner is a notary public. The second
Elements: element is presumed when the alleged falsity
i. That there be an intent to imitate, committed by the notary public pertains to the
or an attempt to imitate; and notarization. However, the third and fourth
ii. That the two signatures or elements are lacking. Even if Atty. Costantino
handwritings, the genuine and the falsely certified that Dr. Asuncion was an
forged, bear some resemblance to instrumental witness to the execution of the will,
each other. one crucial detail remains: Dr. Asuncion signed
the Joint Acknowledgement after it was
NOTE: The Spanish text of Art. 171 is notarized. Since Dr. Asuncion did not sign the
"fingiendo" or feigning (for imitation). In Joint Acknowledgement before it was notarized,
feigning, there is no originaJ signature, he cannot be considered as having attested and
handwriting or rubric, but a forgery of a subscribed to its due execution at the time of its
signature, handwriting or rubric that notarization. It was not petitioner who made it
does not exist. appear that Dr. Asuncion participated in the
execution of the Joint Acknowledgement. but Dr.
b. Causing it to appear that persons have Asuncion himself. Petitioner. therefore, must be
participated in any act or proceeding acquitted. (Atty. Constantino v. People, G.R. No.
when they did not in fact so participate. 225696, April 8, 2019, as penned by]. Leonen)
made the false statement that she was present the idea of gain or the intent to injure a
eligible to said office although she knew fully third person because in the faJsification of a
well that she was under 23 years old. Was the public document, what is punished is the
charge proper? violation or the public faith and the destruction
or the truth as therein solemnly proclaimed.
A: NO. When the accused certified she was (Galeos v. People, G.R. Nos. 174730-37, February
eligible for the position, she practically wrote a 9, 2011)
conclusion of law. Hence, she may not be
declared guilty or falsification because Art. 171 Q: A counterfeited the signature or B but
punishes untruthful statements ln narratlon of what he entered in the Statement or Assets
facts. (People v. Yanzo, G.R. No. L-12089, April 29, and Liabilities or B are all true. Since there
1960) was no damage to the government, did he
commit a crime?
Makine 11otc11thful sratements vis-A-vis
Perjury A: YES. In falsification or a public document, it is
immaterial whether or not the contents set forth
MAKING therein were false. What is important is the fact
UNTRUTHFUL PERJURY that the signature of another was counterfeited.
STATEMENTS In a crime of falsification of a public document,
The document must The document must the principal thing punished is the violation or
not be subscribed and be subscribed and public faith and the destruction or the truth as
sworn. sworn to. therein solemnly proclaimed. Thus, intent to
gain or injure is immaterial. Even more so, the
Ex: cedulo; driver's NOTE: What is gain or damage is not necessary. (Caubang v.
license violated is the People, G.R. No. L-62634 June 26, 1992)
solemni orthe oath.
Q: Can falsification be committed by
Q: Augustina filed a criminal complaint omission?
against Bernante for falsification or public
document because the latter allegedly A:YES.
falsified leave forms. It was alleged that
Bernante made it appear in his leave Illustration: An assistant bookkeeper who,
application that he was on forced leave and having bought several articles for which he
on vacation leave on certain dates. ln truth, signed several chits,intentionally did not record
Bernante was serving a 20-day prison term in his personal account most of the said chits
because or his conviction or the crime or and destroyed them so that he could avoid
slight physical injuries. Is Bernante liable for paying the amount thereof is guilty or
the crime or falsification or documents? falsification by omission. (People v. Dizon, G.R.
No. L-22560,January 29, 1925)
A: NO. Augustina failed to point to any law
imposing upon Bernante the legal obligation to FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS
disclose where he was going to spend his leave AND USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS
or absence ...Legal obligation· means that there is ART.172,RPC
a law requiring the disclosure or the truth or the
facts narrated. Bernante may not be convicted of PnniShable Aas
the crime or falsification or public document by
making false statements in a narration of facts 1. Falsification or a public, official, or
absent any legal obligation to disclose where he commerdal document by a private
would spend his vacation leave and forced leave. individual.
(Enemecio v. Office of the Ombudsman {Visoyas],
G.R. No.146731,January 13, 2004) Elements (1991, 1992, 1993, 2000, 2009
BAR):
Q: In falsification or public documents, is it a. Offender is a private individual or public
necessary that there be the idea or gain or officer or employee who did not take
intent to injure a third person? advantage or his official position;
b. He committed any att or falsification;
A: NO. In falsification or public or official and
documents, it is not necessary that there be
NOTE: -With the intent to cause damage" means It states that "causing it to appear that persons
that the offender performs some other have participated in any act or proceeding when
independent ac.t in order to make use of it - an they did not in fact participate," the document
act which, while it does not result in prejudice to need not be an authentic official paper since its
a third party, has been done nevertheless with simulation is the essence of falsification. So, the
the intention of causing such prejudice. signatures appearing thereon need not
necessarily be forged.
3. Use of falsified document.
Q: When is damage required under this
Elements: Article?
a. In introducing in a judicial proceeding
i. Offender knew that the document A:
was falsified by another person; 1. When a private document is falsified;
ii. The falsified document is in Arts. 2. When a falsified document is used in any
171 or 172 (1 or 2); proceeding other than judicial.
iii. He introduced said document in
evidence in a judicial proceeding. Q: Is there a complex crime of estafa through
falsification of a private document?
NOTE: Damage is not necessary in the
crime of introducing in judicial A: NONE. The fraudulent gain obtained through
proceeding a false document. deceit in estafa, in the commission of which a
b. In use in any other transaction· private document was falsified is nothing more
or less than the very damage caused by the the Philippines v. Jase Go, et al, G.R. Na. 191015,
falsification of such document. The proper crime August 6, 2014)
to be charged is estafa, if estafa can be
committed without falsification, such as when a Falsification of public document vis-A-vis
private document is falsified to conceal the orivare document
misappropriation of money in possession of the
offender, or when estafa was already
consummated. If estafa cannot be committed BASIS FALSIFICATION
FALSIFICATION
without faJsification, then the crime is OF PUBLIC
OF PRIVATE
falsification such as when the private document DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
is falsified to obtain the money which was later (2013 BAR)
misappropriated.
Asto Mere falsification Aside from
Q: Orient Commerdal Banking Corporation the is enough falsification,
(OCBC), a commercial bank was ordered natur prejudice to a
closed by the BSP. PDIC was designated as eof third person or
the receiver of OCBC. Based on their the intent to cause it,
investigation, it appears that fictitious loans crime is essential
in favor of two entities - Timmy's, Inc. and Can be There is no
Asia Textile Mills, Inc. were approved. After complexed with complex crime of
which, two manager's checks representing other crimes if estafa through
the supposed proceeds of these loans were the act of falsification of a
issued but made payable to two different falsification was private
entities without any documents issued by the the necessary document.
supposed borrowers assigning the supposed Asto means in the Hence, when one
loan proceeds to the two payees. Thereafter, comm commission of makes use of a
these two manager's checks were encashed, ission such crimes, like private
and then deposited in the OCBC Savings ofa estafa, theft. or document. which
Account of Jose Go. PDIC as receiver sent comp/ malversation. he falsified, to
demand letters to the bank's debtor ex defraud another,
borrowers on record, including Timmy's, Inc. crime e.g. Malversation there results
and Asia Textile Mills, Inc. However, it was through only one crime:
discovered that the signatures of the falsification of a that of
corporate officers were forgeries, and the public document; falsification of a
purported loans were obtained through Esta/a through private
falsified loan documents. What crime did Go, falsification of a document.
e t al. commit? ublic document.
A: Go, et. al., are liable for the crime of Esta/a No falsification of orivate document thcoueh
thru Falsification of Commercial Documents. In a negHgence or reckless imprudence
prosecution for estafa, demand is not necessary
where there is evidence of misappropriation or In falsification of private document, there must
conversion. The accused may be convicted of the be, at least, an intent to cause damage there
felony under Article 315, paragraph l(b) of the must be malice. On the other hand, in
Revised Penal Code if the prosecution proved falsification through imprudence, it does not
misappropriation or conversion by the accused necessitate such intent or malice.
of the money or property subject of the
information. Moreover, the falsification of a No such ccime as attemoted/fn,stcated
public. official, or commercial document may be falsifirarion
a means of committing estafa because before the
falsified document is actually utilized to defraud Falsification is consummated the moment the
another, the crime of falsification has already genuine document is altered on the moment the
been consummated, damage or intent to cause false document is executed. However, there may
damage not being an element of the crime of be a frustrated crime of falsification if the
falsification of public, official or commercial falsification is imperfett. (Reyes, 2008)
document. Therefore, the falsification of the
public. official or commercial document is only a
necessary means to commit the estafa. (People af
A: It depends. A private individual cannot But certificate of residence for voting purposes
commit the crime of falsification of telegraphic is certificate of ..similar circumstances." (Reyes,
dispatches by direct participation, unless he is 2017)
an employee of a corporation engaged in the
business of sending or receiving wireless Persons liable under Art 174
telegraph or telephone messages.
1. Physician or surgeon;
But a private individual can be held criminally 2. Public officer; or
liable as principal by inducement in the 3. Private individual who falsified a
falsification of telegraph dispatches or telephone certificate falling in the classes mentioned
messages. If he knowingly uses falsified in nos. 1 and 2.
telegraph, wireless, or telephone messages to
the prejudice of a third person, or with intent to USING FALSE CERTIFICATES
cause such prejudice, it is not necessary that he ART. 175, RPC
be connected with such corporation.
NOTE: When any of the false certificates NOTE: It is essential that the offender
mentioned in Art. 174 is used in the judicial should have performed an act pertaining to
proceeding, Art. 172 does not apply, because the a person in authority or public officer, in
use of false document in judicial proceeding addition to other requirements. (Reyes,
under Art. 172 is limited to those false 2008)
documents embraced in Arts. 171 and 172. Such
use of the false certificates falls under Art. 175. Q: A councHor refused to vacate the office of
the mayor despite an officfal opinion that it is
MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION OF the vice mayor who should discharge the
INSTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR duties of the mayor during the latter's
FALSIFICATION temporary absence. He was charged with
ART. 176, RPC usurpation of authority and officfal functions
but contending that such crime may only be
Punishable Acts committed by private individuals. Is be
correct?
1. Making or introducing into the Philippines
any stamps, dies, marks, or other A: NO. Violation of Art. 177 is not restricted to
instruments or implements for private individuals, public officials may also
counterfeiting or falsification; and commit this crime. (People v. Hilvano, G.R. No. L·
2. Possessing with intent to use the instrument 8583,July 31, 1956)
or implements for counterfeiting or
falsification made in or introduced into the Nnn-aooHrahmrx of the ornxision to an
Philippines by another person. occupant under color of title
NOTE: It is not necessary that the implements This provision does NOT apply to an occupant
confiscated form a complete set for under color of title. This would only apply to a
counterfeiting, it being enough that they may be usurper or one who introduces himself into an
employed by themselves or together with other office that is vacant, or who, without color of
implements to commit the crime of title, ousts the incumbent and assumes to act as
counterfeiting or falsification. an officer by exercising some functions of the
office. (People v. Buena/for, G.R. No. 100992-CR,
OTHER FALSITIES December 17, 1974)
NOTE: The law demands positive, express and a. Offender uses a name other than his real
explicit representation on the part of the name;
offender before he can be convicted of b. He uses the fictitious name publicly; and
usurpation of authority. (Reyes, 2017) c. Purpose of use is to conceal a crime, to
evade the execution of a judgment or to
Q: The National Disaster Risk Reduction and cause damage (to public interest).
Management CouncH requested the release
of P961,550,000 to the Negros Oriental NOTE: If the purpose is to cause damage to
province to finance the rehabilitation of private interest, the crime will be est.afa
various infrastructures damaged by under Art. 315(2)(a).
Typhoon Sendong and a 6.9-magnitude
earthquake. The Office of the President 2. Concealing true name
approved the request. The Department,
through its Regional Office No. VII, issued a Elements:
Special Allotment Release Order which a. Offender conceals his true name and
covered the approved amount. other personal circumstances; and
b. Purpose is only to conceal his identity.
In a June 19, 2012 letter- (Reyes, 2008)
advice, Undersecretary Relampagos
informed Negros Oriental Governor Degamo "fittitlons Name"
that the Department is withdrawing the
Special Allotment Release Order because its Any other name which a person publicly applies
release did not comply with the guidelines on to himself without authority of law. (Id., citing
large-scale fund releases for infrastructure U.S. v. To Lee Piu)
projects. Is Relampagos guilty of Usurpation
of Authority or Official Functions? NOTE: The prisoner who is replaced must
necessarily use the name of another, thus he is
A: NO, Relampagos did not commit the crime of also guilty of using a fictitious name to evode the
usurpation of authority or official functions. The execution ofthe judgment against him.
crime of usurpation of official functions punishes
any person who, under pretense of official The one who takes his place and used a fictitious
position, performs any act pertaining to any name to conceal the crlme is guilty of delivering a
person in authority or public officer of the prisoner from jail.
Philippine Government or any foreign
government, or any agency thereof, without fictltlons name vis-a-vis Concealine rn,e
being lawfully entitled to do so. In this case, �
there was no attempt to represent the President
in the letter. It appears that Relampagos was USE OF FICTITIOUS CONCEALING TRUE
acting on behalf of Secretary Abad, upon the NAME NAME
instructions of the President. Under the doctrine Element of publicity Element of publicity
of qualified political agency, department must be oresent. is not necessarv.
secretaries may att for and on behalf of the The purpose is The purpose is
President on matters where the President is either: merely to conceal
required to exercise authority in their respective a. to conceal a identity.
departments. (Degamo v. Office of the crime, or
Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212416, December 5, 2018, b. to evade the
os penned by]. Leonen) execution of a
judgment. or
USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND c. to cause
CONCEALING TRUE NAME dama•e.
ART. 178, RPC
False testimony is committed by a person who, NOTE: The witness who gave false testimony is
being under oath and required to testify as to the liable even if his testimony was not considered
truth of a certain matter at a hearing before a by the court.
competent authority, shall deny the truth or say
something contrary to it. (Reyes, 2008) Imposition of penalty under this Article
2. He knew that the witness or testimony was d. Offender has the intent to cause the
false; and reduction of the price of the thing
3. Offer was made in a judicial or official auctioned.
proceeding.
NOTE: Mere attempt to cause prospective
NOTE: Art. 184 does not apply when the bidders to stay away from the auction by
offender induced a witness to testify falsely. It means of threats, gifts, promises or any
applies when the offender knowingly presented other artifice with the intent that the thing
a false witness, and the latter testified falsely. auctioned, should command a lesser price, is
The one offering the testimony is liable under sufficient to constitute an offense. The threat
Art. 184 while the witness who testified is liable need not be effective nor the offer or gift
under Arts. 180-183, depending on the accepted.
proceedings on which the testimony was offered
and for whose favor the false testimony was MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS
made. IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE
ART. 186, RPC
FRAUDS
NOTE: Art 186 has been repealed by the
MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS Philippine Competition Act or R.A. 10667
ART. 185, RPC
Violations of Art. 186 of the RPC committed
Punishable ActS and their elements before the effectivity of R.A. 10667 may continue
to be prosecuted, unless the same has been
1. Soliciting any gift or promise as a barred by prescription, and subject to the
consideration for refraining from taking part procedure under Sec. 31 of R.A. 10667. (Sec. 55,
in any public auction; and par. A, R.A. 10667; Reyes, 2017)
PeoalfiesuoderBA 10667
An entity that enters into any anti-competitive
agreement as covered by Chapter Ill, Section
14(a) and 14(b) under this Act shall, for each
and every violation, be penalized by
imprisonment from two (2) to seven (7) years,
and a fine of not less than fifty million pesos
(PS0,000,000) but not more than two hundred
fifty million pesos (P250,000,000.00). The
penalty of imprisonment shall be imposed upon
the responsible officers, and directors of the
entity.
1. Gold
2. Silver
3. Other precious metals
4. Their alloys
Elements
1. Offender imports, sells, or disposes of any of
those articles or merchandise;
PersonsHable Iesrofobscenitx
1. Those who shall publicly expound or 1. Whether to the average person, applying
proclaim doctrines openly contrary to public contemporary standards would find the
morals; work, taken as a whole, appeals to the
2. Authors of obscene literature, published prurient interest;
with their knowledge in any form, the 2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a
editors publishing such literature; and the patently offensive way, sexual conduct
owners/operators of the establishment specifically defined by the applicable state
selling the same; law; and
3. Those who, in theaters, fairs, 3. Whether the work. taken as a whole, lacks
cinematography, or any other place, exhibit serious literary, artistic, political, or
indecent or immoral plays, scenes, acts, or scientific value. (Miller v. California, 413 US
shows, it being understood that the obscene 1S,june 21, 1973)
literature or indecent or immoral plays,
scenes, acts or shows, whether live or in Liability of the author of obscene literature
film, which are proscribed by virtue hereof,
shall include those which: The author becomes liable if it is published with
his knowledge. In every case, the editor
a. Glorify criminals or condone crimes; publishing it is also liable.
b. Serve no other purpose but to satisfy
the market for violence, lust or Viewine nfoornoecanhif materials in orivare
pornography;
c. Offend any race, or religion; If the viewing of pornographic materials is done
d. Tend to abet traffic in and use of privately, there is no violation of Art. 201. What
prohibited drugs; or is protected is the morality of the public in
e. Contrary to law, public order. morals, general. The law is not concerned with the moral
good customs, established policies, of one person.
lawful orders, decrees and edicts; or
Q: The criminal case for violation of Article
4. Those who shall sell, give away, or exhibit 201 of RPC was dismissed because there was
films, prints, engravings, sculptures, or no concrete and strong evidence pointing
literatures which are offensive to morals. them as the direct source of pornographic
materials. Can petitioner now recover the
NOTE: The object of the law is to protect the confiscated hard disk containing the
morals of the public. (1993 BAR) pornographic materials?
NOTE: Mere possession of obscene materials, A: NO. Petitioner had no legitimate expectation
without intention to sell, exhibit, or give them of protection of their supposed property rights.
away, is not punishable under Art. 201, P.D. 969, which amended Art. 201, also states
considering the purpose of the law is to prohibit that 'where the criminal case against any
the dissemination of obscene materials to the violation of this decree results in an acquittal,
public. (Reyes, 2017) the obscene or immoral literature, films, prints,
engravings, sculpture, paintings or other
Obscenity materials and articles involved in the violation
shall nevertheless be forfeited in favor of the
Obscenity is something which is offensive to government to be destroyed." In this case, the
chastity, decency or delicacy. That which shocks destruction of the hard disks and the software
the ordinary and common sense of men as an used in the violation of the subject law,
indecency. addresses the purpose of minimizing, if not
eradicating pornography. (Nogra/es v. People,
Puhlifitv is an essential element of this G.R.Na.191080, November 21, 2011)
offense
VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES
This offense, in any of the forms mentioned, is ART. 202, as amended by R.A. 10158 "An Act
committed only when there is publicity. It is an Decriminalizing Vagrancy"
essential element.
Pcostin,tes
They are women who, for money or profit,
habitually indulge in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct.
and with no malice. (Mendoza v. Villaluz, A.M. No. Manjfestly unjust judgment
L-1797-CCC, August 27, 1981)
A judgment which cannot be explained with
ludement reasonable interpretation or is a clear,
incontrovertible, and notorious violation of a
It is the final consideration and determination of legal precept. It must be patently contrary to law
a court of competent jurisdiction upon the if rendered due to ignorance or inexcusable
matters submitted to it, in an action or negligence.
proceeding. It must be:
NOTE: Before a civil or criminal action against a
1. Written in the official language; judge for violations of Arts. 204 and 205 can be
2. Personally and directly prepared by the entertained, there must be a "final and
judge and signed by him; and authoritative judicial declaration· that the
3. Shall contain clearly and distint1:ly a decision or order in question is indeed unjust.
statement of the facts and the law upon The pronouncement may result from either: (a)
which it is based. an action for certiorari or prohibition in a higher
court impugning the validity of a judgment; or
llninst iudement (b) an administrative proceeding in the Supreme
Court against the judge precisely for
One which is contrary to law or is not supported promulgating an unjust judgment or order. (De
by the evidence or both. Vera v. Pelayo, G.R. Na. 137354,July 6, 2000)
Test in determinine whether an order or criminaJ proceedings for felonies upon being
iudement is interloauorv or final informed of their perpetration.
If it leaves something to be done in the trial 2. Officer of the law - those who are duty
court with respect to the merits of the case, it is bound to cause the prosecution and
interlocutory; if it does not, it is final. punishment of the offenders by reason of
the position held by them.
MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE Iiahilitx ofa ouhHc officer who havine the
ART. 207, RPC duty of prosecuting the offender. harbored.
concealed. or assisted in the escape of the
Elements !tlJ2II.
1. Offender is a judge; He is a pr;ndpal in the crime defined and
2. There is a proceeding in his court; penalized in Art. 208. Such public officer is not
3. He delays the administration of justice; and merely an accessory.
4. The delay is malicious, that is, the delay is
caused by the judge with deliberate intent to Q: If a police officer tolerates the commission
inflict damage on either party in the case. of a crime or otherwise refrains from
apprehending the offender, is be liable for
NOTE: If the delay is not malicious, but dereliction of duty?
committed through gross negligence, the crime
committed is that under R.A. 3019,Sec. 3 (e). A: NO. Such police officer does not have the duty
to prosecute or to move the prosecution of the
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES; offender. It is the Chief of police which has the
NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE duty to do so. He can however be prosecuted as
ART. 208, RPC follows:
1. Offender is a public officer or officer of the NOTE: Officers, agents or employees of the
law who has a duty to cause the prosecution Bureau of Internal Revenue are not covered by
of, or to prosecute, offenses; this article as well.
2. There is dereliction of the duties of his
office, that is, knowing the commission of BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN ATTORNEY OR
the crime, he does not cause the prosecution SOLICITOR - REVELATION OF SECRET
of the criminal, or knowing that a crime is ART. 209, RPC
about to be committed, he tolerates its
commission; and r,miShahle acrs
NOTE: Dereliction of duty caused by poor 1. Cousing domage to his client, either:
judgment or honest mistake is not a. By any malicious breach of professional
punishable. duty;
3. Offender acts with malice and deliberate b. By inexcusable negligence or ignorance.
intent to favor the violator of the Jaw. 2. Revealing any of the secrets of his client
learned by him in his professional capacity.
Offenders under this article
NOTE: Damage is not necessary. The mere
1. Public officer - officers of the prosecution fatt that a secret has been revealed is
department. whose duty is to institute already punishable.
3. Undertaking the defense of the opposing A distinction must be made between confidential
party in the same case, without the consent communications relating to past crimes already
ofhisfirst client, after having undertaken the committed, and future crimes intended to be
defense of said first client, or after having committed by the client. Statements and
received confidential information from said communications regarding the commission of a
client. crime already committed, made by a party who
committed it, to an attorney. consulted as such,
NOTE: If the client consents to it, there is no are privileged communications. Contrarily.
crime. The consent need not be in writing. communications between attorney and client
having to do with the client's contemplated
Illustration: The Code of Professional criminal acts, or in aid or furtherance thereof,
Responsibility mandates lawyers to serve are not covered by the cloak of privileges
their clients with competence and ordinarily existing in reference to
diligence. Rule 18.03 and Rule 18.04 communications between attorney and client.
state: Rule 18.03. A lawyer shall not neglect The existence of an unlawful purpose prevents
a legal matter entrusted to him, and his the privilege from attaching. (People v.
negligence in connection therewith shall Sandiganbayon, G.R. Nos. 115439-41, July 16,
render him liable; Rule 18.04. A lawyer shall 1997)
keep the client informed of the status of his
case and shall respond within a reasonable Procurador fudicial
time to the client's request for information.
A lawyer breached these duties when he A person who had some practical knowledge of
failed to reconstitute or turn over the law and procedure. but not a lawyer, and was
records of the case to his client. His permitted to represent a party in a case before
negligence manifests lack of competence an inferior court.
and diligence required of every lawyer. His
failure to comply with the request of his NOTE: There is no solicitor or procurador
client was a gross betrayal of his fiduciary judicial under the Rules of Court.
duty and a breach of the trust reposed upon
him by his client. His sentiment against his DIRECT BRIBERY
client is not a valid reason for him to renege ART. 210, RPC
on his obligation as a lawyer. The moment
he agreed to handle the case, he was bound Commission of Bribery
to give it his utmost attention, skill and
competence. Public interest requires that he Bribery is committed when a public officer
exert his best efforts and all his learning and receives a gift, present, offer or promise, by
ability in defense of his client's cause. Those reason or in connection with the performance of
who perform that duty with diligence and his official duties. Bribery requires the
candor not only safeguard the interests of concurrence of the will of the corruptor and the
the client, but also serve the ends of public officer. otherwise the crime is not
justice. They do honor to the bar and help consummated. (Boado, 2008)
maintain the community's respect for the
legal profession. (Gone v. Atty. Ga, AC. No. Bribery exists when:
7771, April 6, 2011) 1. The gift is offered voluntarily by a private
person; or
Buie with reeacd to cnmmuoirations made 2. The gift is solicited by a public officer.
with ocosnecrive clients
NOTE: Bribery refers to the att of the receiver.
Under the rules on evidence, communications The act of the giver is corruption of public
made with prospective clients to a lawyer with a official under Art. 212.
view to engaging his professional services are
already privileged even though client-lawyer Punishable acts {1990. 1993. 2001. 2005.
relationship did not eventually materialize 2009 RAB)
because the client cannot afford the fee being
asked by the lawyer. 1. Agreeing to perform or performing an oct
pertaining ta the duties of the office which
Rule as to privileged communications constitutes a crlme - If the act or omission
amounts to a crime. it is not necessary that
Elements Cl990 1993 2001 2005 2009 The fact that the offender agrees to accept a
!WU promise or gift, and deliberately commits an
unjust act or refrains from performing an official
1. Offender is a public officer within the scope duty in exchange for some favors, denotes a
of Art. 203; malicious intent on the part of the offender to
2. Offender accepts an offer or promise or renege on the duties which he owes his
receives a gift or present by himself or fellowmen and society in general. Also, the fact
through another; that the offender takes advantage of his office
3. Such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or and position is a betrayal of the trust reposed on
present received by the public officer: him by the public. It is a conduct dearly contrary
to the accepted rules of right and duty, justice,
a. With a view of committing some crime; honesty and good morals. (Magno v. COMELEC,
or G.R. Na.147904, October 4, 2002)
b. In consideration of the execution of an
act which does not constitute a crime, Q: Suppose the public offidal accepted the
but the ac.t must be unjust; or consideration and !Urned it over to his
c. To refrain from doing something. which superior a s evidence of corruption, what is
is his official duty to do; and the crime committed?
4. That the act which the offender agrees to A: The offense is attempted corruption only and
perform or which he executes be connected not frustrated. The official did not agree to be
with the performance of his official duties. corrupted.
NOTE: There is no frustrated stage, for the NOTE: Under ArL 212, any person who shall
reason that if the corruption of the official is have made the offers or promises or given the
accomplished, the crime is consummated. gifts is liable for corruption of public officers.
The offer of eiftor nromise must he accented Iemoorarv nerfocmance of ouhHc funttion
by the public officer sufficient to constitute a person a public
.affiW:
For the purpose of punishing bribery, the NOTE: The gift is given in anticipation of future
temporary performance of public functions is favor from the public officer. P.D. 46 (Making it
sufficient to constitute a person as a public punishable far public officials and employees to
officer. receive and for private persons to give, gifts on
any occaslon, including Chrlstmas) is committed
Q: Supposed a law enforcer extorts money in the same way. (2006 BAR)
from a person, employing intimidation and
threatening to arrest the latter if he will not Clear intention on the part of the public
come across w'ith money, what crime is officer to take the eiftoffered
committed?
There must be a clear intention on the part of
A: If the victim actually committed a crime and the public officer to take the gift offered and he
the policeman demanded money so he will not should consider the property as his own from
be arrested, the crime is bribery. But if no crime that moment. Mere physical receipt
has been committed and the policeman is falsely unaccompanied by any other sign, circumstance,
charging him of having committed one, or act to show such acceptance is not sufficient
threatening to arrest him if he will not come to convict the officer.
across with some consideration. the crime is
robbery. (Sandoval, 2010) Direct hribecx vis-A-vistodirea bribery
There is no attempted or frustrated indirect NOTE: The crime involved in qualified bribery is
bribery because it is committed by accepting a heinous crime. The public officer need not
gifts offered to the public officer by reason of his receive a gift or present because a mere offer or
office. If he does not accept the gift, he does not promise is sufficient.
commit the crime. If he accepts the gifts, it is
consummated. (Reyes, 2017) CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
ART. 212, RPC
ElementsCl993 2001 2009 RABJ of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts
(illegal exaction); and
1. Offender makes offers, or promise, or gives
gifts or presents to a public officer; and 4. Collecting or receiving directly or indirectly,
2. The offers or promises are made, or the gifts by way of payment or otherwise, things or
or presents are given to a public officer objects of a nature different from that
under circumstances that will make the provided by law, in the collettion of taxes,
public officer liable for direct bribery or licenses, fees and other imposts (illegal
indirect bribery. exaction).
Crime committed when a public officer Elements offraud against public treasury
refusestnhe cornmred
1. Offender is a public officer;
The crime committed is attempted corruption of 2. He should have taken advantage of his
public official only. office, that is, he intervened in the
transaction in his official capacity;
Crime committed when a public official 3. He entered into an agreement with any
acn,allv accented a rnosidecation and interested party or speculator or made use
allowed himselfto he rnrrnnted of any other scheme with regard to:
a. Furnishing supplies; or
The corruptor becomes liable for consummated b. The making of contracts; or
corruption of public official. The public officer c. The adjustment or settlement of
also becomes equally liable for consummated accounts relating to public property or
bribery. funds; and
4. Accused had the intent to defraud the
FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL EXACTIONS Government.
AND TRANSACTIONS
NOTE: It is consummated by merely entering
FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC TREASURY into an agreement with any interested party or
AND SIMILAR OFFENSES speculator. It is not necessary that the
ART. 213, RPC Government is actually defrauded by reason of
the transaction as long as the public officer who
acted in his official capacity had the intent to
Punishable acrs defraud the Government.
1. Entering into an agreement with any
interested party or speculator, or making Essence of rhe crime of kand aeaiosr nnhHc
use of any other scheme, to defraud the treasury
Government, in dealing with any person or
with regard to furnishing supplies, the The essence of this crime is making the
making of contracts, or the adjustment or government pay for something not received or
settlement of accounts relating to public making it pay more than what is due.
property funds (fraud against public
treasury); Three ways ofrnmmittioe meeal exattioos
2. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the 1. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the
payment of sums different from or larger payment of sums different from or larger
than those authorized by law, in the than those authorized by law - Mere demand
collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other will consummate the crime, even if the
imposts (illegal exaction); taxpayer shall refuse to come across with
the amount being demanded.
NOTE: By mere demanding an amount
different, whether bigger or smaller, than NOTE: It is not necessary that payment
what should be paid, even if the debtor demanded be larger than the amount due
refuses, illegal exaction is committed. the government; it may be less than the
amount due to the government.
3. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt as
provided by law, for any sum of money 2. Volutrarily failing to issue a receipt as
colletted by him officially, in the collection provided by law, for any sum of money
The RTC has jurisdittion over the offense NOTE: The mere violation of the prohibition is
regardless of the amount or penalty involved, punished although no actual fraud occurs
because the principal penalty is disqualification. therefrom. The act is punished because of the
possibility that fraud may be, or that the officer
PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS may place his own interest above that of the
ART. 215, RPC Government or of the party which he represents.
(U.S. v. Udarbe, C.R. No. 9945, November 12, 1914)
Elements
Acronarable ouhlic officer A: NO. The law does NOT require that a written
demand be formally made to constitute a prima
An accountable public officer, within the facie presumption of malversation. In U.S. v.
purview of Art. 217 of the RPC, is one who has Kalingo (G.R. Na.11504, February 2, 1917), it was
custody or control of public funds or property by held that the failure of the accused who had
reason of the duties of his office. The nature of custody of public funds to refund the shortage,
the duties of the public officer or employee, the upon demand by the duly authorized offices,
fact that as part of his duties he received public constitutes prima fade evidence of malversation,
money for which he is bound to account and notwithstanding the fact that such demand had
failed to account for it, is the factor which been merely made verbally.
determines whether or not malversation is
committed by the accused public officer or NOTE: Demand is not indispensable to
employee. (Torres v. People, G.R. No. 175074, constitute malversation. It merely raises a prima
August 31,2011) facie presumption that the missing funds have
been put to personal use. (Morang Water District
Q: When a public officer has no authority t o v. Office af the Deputy Ombudsman, G.R. Na.
receive the money for the Government, and 116754, March 17, 2000, citing Nizurtada v.
upon receipt of the same, he Sandiganbayan)
misappropriated it, can he b e held liable for
malversation? Rebuttal of the presumption
A: NO. If the public officer has no authority to The presumption could be overcome by
receive the money for the Government, the satisfactory evidence of loss or robbery
crime committed is estafa, not malversation (U.S. committed by a person other than the accused.
v. Solis, G.R. No. 2828, December 14, 1906), since (U.S. v. Kalinga, G.R. No.11504,February 2, 1917)
he cannot be considered an accountable officer
in that situation. Q: A revenue collection agent of BIR admitted
his cash shortage on his collections to get
Meaning of"'Appropriation"' even with the BIR which failed to promote
him. A spedal arrangement was made
It does not necessarily mean appropriation to between the BIR and the agent wherein the
one's personal advantage but rather, every BIR would withhold the salary of the latter
attempt by one person to dispose of the and apply the same to the shortage incurred
property of another without right. (Tabueno v. until full payment was made. Is the collection
Sondigonbayan, G.R. No. 103501·03 February 17, agent guilty of the crime of malversation of
1997) funds?
Crime of malvecsation ran he committed hv commission of the offense, it will not preclude
neeHeence the reception of evidence to prove the existence
of negligence because both are equally
Q: Mesina, a Local Treasurer Officer I of punishable under Art. 217 of the RPC. (Torres v.
Caloocan City, collected the City's collection People, C.R. No.175074, August 31, 2011)
for June 1998 from Baclit at the Mini City
Hall. Mesina acknowledged the receipt of the Q: When a municipal officer who, in good
said funds. On the same day, Baclit received faith, paid out public funds persons in
several phone calls, including a call from accordance with the resolution of the
Coleto saying that the Patubig Collection was municipal council but the payments were
not remitted. The other phone call was from turned out to be in violation of the law, is
Mesina saying that he did not receive the there criminal liability?
patubig collection.
A: NONE. When an accountable public officer, in
The following morning, Mayor Malonzo good faith, makes a wrong payment through
asked Mesina about the said funds and honest mistake as to the law or to the facts
Mesina denied receiving it. During concerning his duties, he is not liable for
investigation, Mesina's vault was opened for malversation. He is only civilly liable. (U.S. v.
cash count, thereafter Mesina admitted that Elvina, C.R. No. L-7280, February 13, 1913)
he collected the Patubig Collection but kept
the money in his vault. Is Mesina liable for Bemliced oroof io order to coovia an
malversation? accused of malvecsarion
A: YES. Mesina is liable for malversation. All that is necessary to prove is that the
Malversation is committed either intentionally defendant received in his possession public
or by negligence. All that is necessary for a funds, that he could not account for them and
conviction is sufficient proof that the accused did not have them in his possession and that he
accountable officer had received the public could not give a reasonable excuse for the
funds or property, and did not have them in his disappearance of the same. (De Guzman v.
possession when demand therefor was made People, C.R. No. L-54288, December 15, 1982)
without any satisfac.tory explanation of his
failure to have them upon demand. The return of the money malversed is merely a
mitigating circumstance. It cannot exempt the
In the case at bar, Mesina feigned ignorance of accused from criminal liability. (People v.
having received the patubig collection when he Velasquez, C.R.No. L-47741, April 28, 1941)
phoned Baclit to tell her that he did not receive
the collection. (Mesina v. People, C.R. No. 162489, tosraoce when the ouhHc officer cannot he
June 17, 2015) held liable fnr malvecsarioo
Oamaee ro the eovernment is not necessary When the accountable officer is obliged to go out
to constitute malversation of his office and borrow the sum alleged to be
the shortage and later the missing amount is
It is not necessary that there is damage to the found in some unaccustomed place in his office,
government; it is not an element of the offense. he is not liable for malversation. (U.S. v. Pascual,
The penalty for malversation is based on the C.R.No. 8860, December 4, 1913)
amount involved, not on the amount of the
damage caused to the Government. (Reyes, 2008) Commission of malvecsatlon hx a orixare
oerson
Deceitin malvecsation not necessarx
A private person may also commit malversation
Deceit need not be proved in malversation. under the following situations:
Malversation may be committed either through
a positive ac.t of misappropriation of public 1. A private person conspiring with an
funds or property, or passively through accountable public officer in committing
negligence. To sustain a charge of malversation, malversation (People v. Sendaydiego, C.R.No.
there must either be criminal intent or criminal L-33253-54, January 20, 1978);
negligence, and while the prevailing facts of a
case may not show that deceit attended the
NOTE: The refusal to make delivery must be A: NO. To be a public officer, one must:
malicious. Where an official stenographer
retained some stenographic notes and failed to 1. Take part in the performance of public
turn over the same upon demand as he was still functions in the government, or in
going to transcribe the same, he was held not to performing in said government or in any of
have violated this article. (People v. jubila, 38 O.G. its branches public duties as an employee,
1796) agent or subordinate official, or any rank or
class; and
Elements 2. That his authority to take part in the
performance of public functions or to
1. That the public officer has government perform public duties must be by:
funds in his possession; a. Direc.t provision of the law, or
2. That he is under obligation to make b. Popular election, or
payments from such funds; and c. Appointment by competent authority.
3. That he fails to make payment maliciously. (Azarcon v. Sandiganboyan, G.R. No.
116033, February 26, 1997)
NOTE: The fine shall be graduated in such case
by the value of the thing: Provided, that it shall INFIDELITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
not be less than Pl0,000.
CONNIVING WITH OR CONSENTING TO
OFFICERS INCLUDED IN THE PRECEDING EVASION
PROVISIONS ART. 223, RPC
ART.222, RPC
Elements CRAB 1996 20091
Private individuals who maxhe liable under
Art 217-221 1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He has in his custody or charge a prisoner,
1. Private individual who in any capacity either detention prisoner or prisoner by
whatever, have charge of any national, final judgment;
provincial or municipal funds, revenue or 3. Such prisoner escaped from his custody;
property; 4. That he was in connivance with the prisoner
2. Administrator, depository of funds or in the latter's escape. (U.S. v. Bandino, G.R.
property attached, seized or deposited by No. L-9964, February 11, 1915)
public authority even if such property
belongs to a private individual; Classes of prisoners involved
3. Those who acted in conspiracy in
malversation; and 1. Fugitive sentenced by final judgment to any
4. Accomplice and accessories to malversation. penalty; and
2. Fugitive held only as detention prisoner for
NOTE: The word administrator used does not any crime or violation of law or municipal
include judicial administrator appointed to ordinance. (Reyes, 2017)
administer the estate of a deceased person
because he is not in charge of any property Q: Is there a need that the convict has
attached, impounded or placed in deposit by actually Oed for the public officer to b e liable
under this Article?
Q: Is an order to the prisoner to keep close t o If the escape was with consideration, bribery is
the police officer while the latter was also deemed committed because he was
answering the telephone call suffident performing a public function, hence is, at that
precaution? instance, deemed to be a public officer. (Boado,
2008)
A: NO. The adequate precaution which should
have been taken up by him was to lock up the REMOVAL, CONCEALMENT OR
prisoner before answering the telephone call. DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENT
(Remoco/ v. People, G.R. No. 47521, April 8, 1941) ART. 226, RPC
Q: A policeman permitted a prisoner to This crime is also called infidelity in the custody
answer a call of nature in a hidden shed of documents.
outside the building. The policeman
remained near the prisoner by the door. The Elements (2005 201SRABJ
prisoner escaped through the back of the
bath. Is the policeman liable under Art 224? 1. The offender is a public officer;
NOTE: Books, pamphlets or periodicals sent However, if the act is committed by destroying or
through the mail for commercial purposes are concealing documents, proof of illicit purpose is
not considered as documents for the purpose of not required. The reason is that while in
this article. (People v. Agnis, G.R. No. L-19676, removal, the accused may have a lawful or
February 7, 1923) commendable motive, in destroying or
concealing, the offender could not have a good
Damaee contemnlared 1mdec this AclicJe motive. (Reyes, 2008)
The damage in this article may consist in mere When removal is considered ro he for an
alarm to the public to the alienation of its illifit QJICQOSe
confidence in any branch of the government
service. (Kotaniag v. People, G.R. No. L-48398, Removal is for an illicit purpose when the
November 28, 1942) intention of the offender is to:
OFFICER BREAKING SEAL Art. 228 does not require that there be damage
ART. 227, RPC or intent to cause damage. (Reyes, 2008)
Elements
REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN OFFICER
1. Offender is a public officer; ART. 229, RPC
2. He is charged with the custody of papers or
property; Punishable acts
3. These papers or property are sealed by
proper authority; and 1. Revealing any secrets known to the
4. He breaks the seals or permits them to be offending public officer by reason of his
broken. official capacity.
The law has taken into account that a superior The refusal must be without legal motive. (Reyes,
officer may sometimes err, and that orders 2017)
issued by him may proceed from a mistaken
judgment. MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS
ART.235,RPC
For this reason, it entitles a subordinate to
suspend in such cases the order issued, to Elements
submit his reason to his superior in order that
the latter may give them proper wight, if they 1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
are entitled to say. (Reyes, 2017) 2. He has under his charge a prisoner or
detention prisoner; and
REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE 3. He maltreats such prisoner either of the
ART. 233,RPC following manners:
a. By overdoing himself in the correction
Elements or handling of a prisoner or detention
prisoner under his charge either:
1. Offender is a public officer; i. By the imposition of punishments
2. Competent authority demands from the not authorized by the regulations;
offender that he lends his cooperation or
towards the administration of justice or ii. By inflicting such punishments
other public service; and (those authorized) in a cruel or
3. Offender fails to do so maliciously. humiliating manner.
Rule when a person is maltreated by a public 3. He assumes the performance of the duties
officer who has actual charge of prisoners and powers of such office; and
4. He has not taken his oath of office and/or
Two crimes are committed, namely given the bond required by law.
ma/treatment under Art. 235 and physical
injuries. Maltre,atment and physical injuries may PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF
not be complexed because the law specified that DUTIES AND POWERS
the penalty for maltreatment shall be in addition ART. 237, RPC
to his liability for the physical injuries or damage
caused. Elements
Maltreatment refers not only to physical 1. That the offender is holding a public office;
maltreatment but also moral, psychological, and 2. That the period allowed by law for him to
other kinds of maltreatment because of the exercise such function and duties has
phrase "physical injuries or damage caused" and already expired; and
·cruel or humiliating manner.• (Boado, 2008) 3. That the offender continues to exercise such
function and duties.
Buie in cases wherein the oecson malrceared
is notaconvia oradereotion orisoner
The officers contemplated by this article are
The crime committed would either be: those who have been suspended, separated,
declared overaged, or dismissed.
1. Coercion - If the person not yet confined in
jail is maltreated to extort a confession, or ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR POSITION
2. Physical injuries - If the person maltreated ART. 238, RPC
has already been arrested but is not yet
booked in the office of the police and put in Elements
jail.
1. That the offender is holding a public office;
Illustration: If a Barongay Captain maltreats 2. That he formally resigns from his office;
a person alter the latter's arrest but before
confinement. the offense is not The final or conclusive act of a resignation's
maltreatment but physical injuries. The acceptance is the notice of acceptance.
victim must actually be confined either as a (Light Rail Transit Authoriry v. Sa/vailo, C.R.
convict or a detention prisoner. (People v. No. 192074, June 10, 2014, as penned by J.
Baring, 37 O.G. 1366) Leonen)
NOTE: Sec. 25 of R.A. 9372 (Human Security Act 3. That his resignation has not yet been
of 2007) punishes any person who use threat. accepted; and
intimidation, or coercion, or who inflict physical 4. That he abandons his office to the detriment
pain or torment, or mental, moral, or of the public service.
psychological pressure, which shall vitiate the
free-will of a charged or suspected person under Cica,msrancesoualifvine the offense
investigation and interrogation for the crime of
terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit The offense is qualified when the real motive of
terrorism. resignation is to evade the discharge of duties of
preventing, prosecuting or punishing any crime
ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF A Title One, and Chapter One of Title Three of
PUBLIC OFFICE Book Two of the RPC.
ART. 236, RPC
Title One, and Chapter One of Title Three of
Elements Book Two of the RPC refer to the crimes of:
3. That the order or suggestion relates to any prosecuted under the Sec. 28 of R.A. 3019. (Anti
case or business within the exclusive Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)
jurisdiction of the courts of justice.
Essence ofrbe crime abuses aeaiost chastity
The purpose of this article is to maintain the
independence of the judiciary. The essence of the crime is the mere making of
immoral or indecent solicitation or advances.
UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS
ART. 244, RPC wavs ofcommittioe abuses aeaiost rhastirx
Elements
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he solicits or makes any indecent or
immoral advances to a woman; and
3. That the offended party is a woman who is:
The relationship of the offender with the victim There must be a valid subsisting marriage at the
must be: time of the killing, and such fatt should be
alleged in the Information.
1. Legitimate, except in the case of parent and
child; Q: Elias killed Susana. He was charged with
2. In the direct line; and parricide. During the trial, no marriage
3. By blood, except in the case of a legitimate contract was presented. Is the non
spouse. presentation of the marriage contract fatal to
the prosecution of the accused for parricide?
This must be alleged and proved. If not alleged, it
can only be considered as an ordinary A: NO. There is a presumption that persons
aggravating circumstance. living together as husband and wife are married
to each other. The mere fact that no record of the
Q: While Joanne was eating, she noticed that marriage exists in the registry of marriage does
her father, Abenir, seemed restless while he not invalidate said marriage, as long as in the
was preparing for work. Meanwhile, Jessica, celebration thereof and all the requisites for its
Abegail, and Delia were watching television, validity are present. (People v. Borromeo, 133
with Delia seated on the floor near the toilet. SCRA 106, October 31, 1984)
Suddenly, Joanne saw Abenir hit Delia on the The maxim semper praesumitur matr;monio and
head with a maso. A second blow hit the the presumption "that a man and woman
cement wall. Joanne yelled and tried to pacify deporting themselves as husband and wife have
Abenir, asking why he did it. Abenir told her entered into a lawful contract of marriage"
that she caught Delia with a man in their applies pursuant to Sec. 3[aa], Rule 131, Rules of
bathroom. Court. (People v. Majuri, 96SCRA 472, 1980)
However, Joanne saw no one. Della was Q: If a person killed another not knowing
rushed to the hospital but she passed away that the latter was his son, will he be guilty of
shortly after. Is Abenir liable for the crime of parricide? (1996 BAR)
Parricide?
A: YES. The law does not require knowledge of
A: YES. All the elements of the crime of parricide relationship between them.
were sufficiently proved by the prosecution.
There was no dispute as to the relationship
II . 2021
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
GOLDEN NOTES
212
BOOK II - CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
surprises his spouse or daughter, the latter The act done must be a direct result of the
under 18 years of age and living with him, in outrage of the cuckolded spouse. (Reyes,
the act of committing sexual intercourse; 2012) (1991BAR)
2. He or she kills any or both of them or inflicts
upon any or both of them any serious It is not necessary that the spouse actually
physical injury in the act or immediately saw rhe sexual iorerconcse
thereafter; and
3. He has not promoted or facilitated the It is not necessary that the spouse actually saw
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that the sexual intercourse. It is enough that he/she
he or she has not consented to the infidelity surprised them under such circumstances that
of the other spouse. no other reasonable conclusion can be inferred
but that a carnal att was being performed or has
There is no criminal liability when less serious just been committed.
or slight physical injuries are inflicted. The
presence of the requisites enumerated above is Illustration: A bar examinee, who killed the
an absolutory cause. paramour of his wife in a mahjong session, an
hour after he had surprised them in the act of
Art. 247 does not define any crime; thus, it sexuaJ intercourse in his house, since at that
cannot be alleged in an Information. Murder, time, he had to run away and get a gun as the
homicide or parricide needs to be filed first, with paramour was armed, was granted the benefits
Art. 24 7 being raised as a defense. of this article. (People v. Abarca, C.R. No. 74433,
September 14, 1987)
Q: Pedro, a policeman, had slight fever and
decided to go home early. However, he was Q: The accused was shocked to discover his
shocked and enraged when, after opening the wife and their driver sleeping in the master's
door of his bedroom, he saw his brother, bedroom. Outraged, the accused got his gun
Julius completely naked, having sexual and killed both. Can the accused claim that
intercourse with his wife, Cleopatra. Pedro he killed the two under exceptional
shot and killed Julius. Cleopatra Oed from the circumstances? (1991, 2001, 2005, 2007,
bedroom but Pedro ran after her and shot 2011BAR)
and killed her. Is Pedro criminally liable for
the death of Julius and Cleopatra? A: NO. The accused did not catch them while
having sexual intercourse.
A: YES. Under Article 247 of the RPC, Pedro will
be penalized by destierro for killing both Julius Q: A and B are husband and wife. One night,
and Cleopatra. He is also civilly liable. However, A, a security guard, felt sick and cold, hence,
if what was inflic.ted was only less serious or he decided to go home around midnight after
slight physical injuries (not death or serious getting permission from his duty officer.
physical injury), there is no criminal liability. Approaching the master bedroom, he was
surprised to hear sighs and giggles inside. He
Stages contemplated under Art. 247 opened the door very carefully and peeped
inside where he saw his wifeB having sexual
1. When the offender surprised the other intercourse with their neighbor C. A rushed
spouse with a paramour or mistress in the inside and grabbed C but the latter managed
ac.t of committing sexuaJ intercourse. to wrest himself free and jumped out of the
window. A followed suit and managed to
Surprlse means to come upon suddenly or catch C again and after a furious struggle,
unexpectedly. managed also to strangle him to death. A
then rushed back to their bedroom where his
2. When the offender kills or inflitts serious wife B was cowering under the bed covers.
physical injury upon the other spouse and Still enraged, A hit B with fist blows and
paramour while in the act of intercourse, or rendered her unconsdous. The police
immediately thereafter, that is, after arrived after being summoned by their
surprising. neighbors and arrested A who was detained,
inquested and charged for the death of C and
"Immediately thereafter• means that the serious physical injuries ofB.
discovery, escape, pursuit and the killing
must all form part of one continuous act. 1. Is A liable for C's death? Why?
1. That a person was killed; Pemberton points out the lack of any direct
2. That the accused killed him; evidence linking him to the crime. It has been
3. That the killing was attended by any of the the consistent pronouncement of the Supreme
qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. Court that in such cases, the prosecution may
adopted the particular means, methods, or Q: A killed B by stabbing B in the heart which
forms of attack employed by him. (People v. resulted to B's death. The witness is the wife
Lagroon, G.R. No.197807, April 16, 2012) of the victim, who said that a day prior to the
killing, A threatened B. Based on the
NOTE: Killing of a child of tender age is murder testimony of the wife, A was prosecuted for
qualified by treachery. (Reyes, 2017) murder due to evident premeditation. Is the
charge correct?
A frontal attack does not necessarily rule out
treachery. The qualifying circumstance may still A: NO. The crime committed is homicide only. A
be appreciated if the attack was so sudden and mere threat is not sufficient to constitute evident
so unexpetted that the deceased had no time to premeditation.
prepare for his or her defense. (People v. Perez,
G.R. No. 134756, February 13, 2001) Effecr when the anaHfu'ioe cica,msrances
were notthose ocoved in the trial
Q: H and W hailed a jeepney where a drunk
Glino sat beside W. Glino's bead fell on W's Where the qualifying circumstances were not
shoulder. H told Glino to sit properly. The those proved in the trial, the accused cannot be
latter arrogantly retorted, "Anong pakialam convicted of murder because any of the
mo?" and cursed H. Glino then provokingly qualifying circumstances under Art. 248 is an
asked H, "Anong gusto mo?" H replied, "Wala ingredient of murder, not merely a qualifying
akong sinabing masama." After the heated circumstance. The circumstances must be both
verbal tussle, Glino appeared to have calmed alleged and proved in the trial, otherwise, they
down. He told the driver to stop because he cannot be considered because the right of the
would alight. As the jeepney ground to a halt, accused to be informed of the charge against him
Glino drew a 29-inch balisong and stabbed H. will be violated.
H failed to offer any form of resistance and
thereafter, died. Glino contended that he is cn,eltv as a onalitvine cica,msrance of
only liable for homicide since there was no murder CArt 2481 vis-A-vis cn,eltv as a
treachery as the victim was forwarned of the generic aggravating circumstance under Art.
danger. Is the contention of Glino legally li
tenable?
CRUELTY UNDER CRUELTY UNDER
A: NO. The rule is well-settled in this jurisdittion
Art 248 Art. 14
that treachery may still be appreciated even
though the victim was forewarned of the danger Aside from cruelty, Requires that the
to his person. What is decisive is that the attack any act that would victim be alive, when
was executed in a manner that the victim was amount to scoffing or the cruel wounds
rendered defenseless and unable to retaliate. decrying the corpse of were inflicted and,
(People v. Glino, G.R. No. 173793, December 4, the victim will qualify therefore, there must
2007) the killing to murder. be evidence to that
effect.
A killing done at the spur of the moment is not
treacherous. (People v. Nitcha, G.R. No. 113517, HOMICIDE
January 19, 1995) ART. 249, RPC
merely saw luan running. He must have seen the Tumultuous affray exists when at least four
infliction of the wound. persons took part therein.
1. The person or persons who inflitted the did not compose groups organized for the
serious physical injuries are liable; or common purpose of assaulting and attacking
2. If it is not known who inflicted the serious each other reciprocally. In this case, there is no
physical injuries on the deceased, all the tumultuous affray since the participants in the
persons who used violence upon the person rumble belong to organized fraternity.
of the victim are liable, but with lesser
liability. PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN
TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY
Q: M left his house together with R, to attend ART. 252, RPC
a public dance. Two hours later, they decided
to have a drink. Not long after, M left to look Elements
for a place to relieve himself. According to R,
he was only about three meters from M who 1. There is a tumultuous affray as referred to
was relieving himself when a short man in the preceding article;
walked past him, approached M and stabbed 2. A participant or some participants thereof
him at the side. M retaliated by striking his suffer serious physical injuries or physical
assailant with a half-filled bottle of beer. injuries of a less serious nature only;
Almost simultaneously, a group of seven 3. Person responsible thereof cannot be
men, ganged up on M and hit him with identified; and
assorted weapons, i.e., bamboo poles, stones 4. All those who appear to have used violence
and pieces of wood. R, who was petrified, upon the person of the offended party are
could only watch helplessly as M was being known.
mauled and overpowered by his assailants. M
fell to the ground and died before he could be This article will not apply when a person is
given any medical assistance. What crime is killed.
committed in the given case?
Kind of ioincx cnotemolated io the crime of
A: The crime committed is Murder and not ohvSicalinintiesio atnmnltunnsafCtav
Death Caused in Tumultuous Affray. A
tumultuous affray takes place when a quarrel The physical injury should be serious or less
occurs between several persons who engage in a serious and resulting from a tumultuous affray.
confused and tumultuous manner, in the course If the physical injury sustained is only slight, this
of which a person is killed or wounded and the is considered as inherent in a tumultuous affray.
author thereof cannot be ascertained. The
quarrel in the instant case is between a distinct Unlike in Art. 251, the injured party on the crime
group of individuals, one of whom was of physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous
sufficiently identified as the principal author of affray must be one or some of the participants in
the killing, as against a common, particular the affray. (Reyes, 2017)
victim. (People v. Unlagada, G.R. Na. 141080,
September 17, 2002) Pecsoos Ha hie toe thiscrime
Q: A, Band C are members of SFC Fraternity. Only those who used violence are punished,
While eating in a seaside restaurant, they because if the one who caused the physical
were attacked by X, Y and Z members of a injuries is known, he will be liable for the
rival fraternity. A rumble ensued in which physical injuries actually committed, and not
the above-named members of the two under this article.
fraternities assaulted each other in confused
and tumultuous manner resulting in the GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE
death of A. As it cannot be ascertained who ART. 253, RPC
actually killed A, the members of the two
fraternities took part in the rumble and were Punishable acts
charged for death caused in a tumultuous
affray. Will the charge prosper? (2010 BAR) 1. Assisting another to commit suicide,
whether the suicide is consummated or not;
A: NO. The charge of death caused in a (2008 BAR) and
tumultuous affray will not prosper. In death 2. Lending assistance to another to commit
caused by tumultuous affray under Art. 251 of suicide to the extent of doing the killing
the RPC, it is essential that the persons involved himself.
Art. 253 does not distinguish and does not make The discharge towards the house of the victim is
any reference to the relation of the offender with not a discharge of firearm. Firing a gun at the
the person committing suicide. Hence, the house of the offended party, not knowing in
penalty would be the same even if the offender is what part of the house the people were, is only
the father, mother or the child of the one alarms and scandals under Art. 155.
committing suicide. (Reyes, 2017)
Discharge of firearm resulting to the death of
Criminal liability of a person who attempts to a victim
commitsuicide
If the offender discharges the firearm at a person
A person who attempts to commit suicide does to intimidate a person only, however, the bullet
NOT incur any criminal liability because society hit the vital organ of the victim that resulted to
has always considered a person who attempts to his death, the crime committed is either
kill himself as an unfortunate being, a wretched homicide or murder. The moment the victim
person more deserving of pity rather than of dies, intent to kill is presumed.
penalty. However, he may be held liable for the
crime of disturbance of public order if indeed NOTE: Unless the facts of the case are such that
serious disturbance of public peace occurred the act can be held to constitute frustrated or
due to his attempt to commit suicide. attempted parricide, murder, homicide or any
other crime for which a higher penalty is
Euthanasia NOT e'ivine assisrancetnsnifide prescribed by any of the articles of this Code.
Euthanasia is the practice of painlessly putting There is a complex crime of discharge of fireann
to death a person suffering from some incurable with physical injuries when the injuries
disease. Euthanasia is not lending assistance to sustained by the offended party are serious or
suicide. The person killed does not want to die. A less serious. (Reyes, 2017)
doctor who resorts to euthanasia of his patient
may be liable for murder. INFANTICIDE
ART. 255, RPC
DISCHARGE OF FIREARM
ART. 254, RPC [p[aptjcide (2006 RAB)
Elements It is the killing of any child less than 3 days old
or 72 hours of age, whether the killer is the
1. Offender discharges a firearm against parent or grandparent, any relative of the child,
another person; and or a stranger.
2. Offender has no intention to kill the person.
NOTE: Art. 255 does not provide a penalty for
NOTE: There must be no intent to kill. The infanticide. If the killer is the mother, or father,
purpose of the offender is only to intimidate or a legitimate grandparent, although the crime
or frighten the offended party. This does not is still infanticide, the penalty, is that of
apply to police officers in the performance parricide.
of their duties.
If the offender is not so related to the child,
1mno1deoce in meral discharee although the crime is still infanticide, the penalty
corresponding to murder shall be imposed.
The crime of illegal discharge cannot be
committed through imprudence because it Regardless, the penalty for murder and parricide
requires that the discharge must be directed at is the same.
another.
Elements
NOTE: The crime is discharge of firearm even if
the gun was not pointed at the offended party 1. A child was killed;
when it was fired as long as it was initially aimed
by the accused at or against the offended party. NOTE: The child must be born alive and
fully developed, that is, it can sustain an
Discharge towards the house of the victim independent life.
2. Deceased child was less than 3 days old or Q: Suppose the child is abandoned without
less than 72 hours ofage; and any intent to kill and death results as a
3. Accused killed the said child. consequence, what crime is committed?
Elements
BASIS INFANTICIDE PARRICIDE
1. There is a pregnant woman;
The age of the The victim is 2. Violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages
Asuiage of victim is less at least three administered, or that the accused othenvise
victims than three days days old. acts upon such pregnant woman;
old. 3. As a result of the use of violence or drugs or
If done in The CO·
beverages upon her, or any other act of the
conspiracy with conspirator is accused, the fetus dies, either in the womb
a stranger, both liable for or after having been expelled therefrom; and
Asto 4. Abortion is intended.
the parent and murder
liability in the CO· because of the
conspiracy conspirator are absence of NOTE: In intentional abortion, the offender
liable for relationship. should know that the woman is pregnant
infanticide. because the very intention is to cause an
abortion.
Concealment of Concealment
Concealme
dishonor in of dishonor in
ntas
killing the child killing the Persons Habletoe inrentinnal abortion
m itigating
is mitigating. child is not a
circumst.an 1. The person who actually caused the
mitigating
ces abortion under Art. 256; and
circumstance
2. The pregnant woman if she consented under
ArL 258.
NOTE: In both, there is intent to kill the child.
Abortion is not a crime against the woman but A: The crime is frustrated abortion because
against the fetus. The offender must know of the abortion is consummated only if the fetus dies
pregnancy because the particular criminaJ inside the womb.
intention is to cause an abortion. As long as the
fetus dies as a result of the violence used or NOTE: But if the expelled fetus could sustain life
drugs administered, the crime of abortion exists, outside the mother's womb, the crime is already
even if the fetus is over or less is in full term. infanticide.
(Viada as cited in Reyes, 2008)
Q: If the abortive drug used is a prohibited or
Ahoction vis-a-vis iotaotiride regulated drug under the Dangerous Drugs
Act, what are the crimes committed?
A: The crime is complex crime of murder or A: NO. The crime committed is not unintentional
physical injuries with abortion. abortion because there is no violence. The crime
committed is light threats.
Q: If despite the employment of suffident and
adequate means to effect abortion, the fetus NOTE: If violence was employed on the pregnant
that is expelled from the maternal womb is woman by a third person, and as a result, the
viable but unable to sustain life outside the woman and the fetus died, there is complex
maternal womb, what crime is committed? crime of homicide with unintentional abortion.
Q: Suppose the pregnant woman employed The liability of the pregnant woman is mitigated
violence to herself specifically calculated to if the purpose for abortion is to conceal her
bring about abortion, what crime is dishonor. However, if it is the parents who
committed? caused the abortion for the purpose of
concealing their daughter's dishonor. there is no
A: The woman is liable for intentional abortion mitigation, unlike in infanticide.
under Art. 258.
ABORTION PRACTICED BY PHYSICIAN OR
Q: What is the criminal liability, if any, of a MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF ABORTIVES
pregnant woman who tried to commit ART. 259, RPC
suicide by poison, but she did not die and
the fetus in her womb was expelled Elements of thiS crime as mthe ohvsiciao or
instead? (1994, 2012 BAR) midwife
A: The woman who tried to commit suicide 1. There is a pregnant woman who has
incurs no criminal liability for the result not suffered abortion;
intended. In order to incur criminal liability for 2. Abortion is intended;
the result not intended, one must be committing
a felony, and suicide is not a felony. NOTE: If abortion was not intended or was a
Unintentional abortion is not committed since it result of a mistake, no crime is committed. If
is punishable only when caused by violence and the woman is not really pregnant, an
not by poison. There is also no intentional impossible crime is committed.
abortion since the intention of the woman was
to commit suicide and not to abort the fetus. 3. The offender must be a physician or midwife
who causes or assists in causing the
Q: can unintentional ab ortion be committed abortion; and
through negligence? 4. Said physician or midwife takes advantage
of his or her scientific knowledge or skill.
A: YES. Unintentional abortion is a felony
committed by do/o or deliberate intent. But it Tbecaneuric Abortion
can be committed by means of culpa. However,
the culpa lies not in the aspect of abortion but on It is an abortion caused by a physician to save
the violence inflicted on the pregnant woman. the life of a mother. The physician is not
Thus, there can be a crime of Reckless criminally liable. (Estrada, 2011)
Imprudence resulting in Unintentional
Abortion. Elements nfthiS crime as rn rhe ohannarisrs
ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE WOMAN 1. Offender is a pharmacist;
HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS 2. There is no proper prescription from a
ART. 258, RPC physician; and
3. Offender dispenses an abortive.
Elements
As to the pharmacist, the crime is consummated
1. There is a pregnant woman who has by dispensing an abortive without proper
suffered abortion; prescription from a physician. It is not necessary
2. Abortion is intended; and that the abortive is actually used.
3. Abortion is caused by:
a. The pregnant woman herself; If the pharmacist knew that the abortive would
b. Any other person, with her consent; or be used to cause an abortion and abortion
c. Any of her parents, with her consent for resulted from the use thereof, the pharmacist
the purpose of concealing her dishonor. would be an accomplice in the crime of abortion.
(Reyes, 2017)
NOTE: Under (a) and (c) above, the woman
is liable under Art. 258 while the third Q: Suppose the abortion was performed by a
person under b is liable under Art. 256. physician without medical necessity to
warrant such abortion and the woman or her
Mitigation of liability when the purpose of husband had consented. Is the physician
ahnrtlnn is to concealdishonor liable for abortion under Art. 259?
A: YES. The consent of the woman or her there is an unJawful aggression, hence self
husband is not enough to justify abortion. defense can be claimed.
1. The person who killed or inflicted physical It is the lopping or the clipping off of some parts
injuries upon his adversary. or both of the body which are not susceptible to growth
combatants will be liable as principals. again.
2. Seconds will be liable as accomplices.
Kindsofmutllatlnn
Seconds
1. Intentionally mutilating another by
Those persons who make the selet1:ion of the depriving him, either totally or partially, of
arms and fix the other conditions of the fight. some essential organ for reproduction.
Aoalirahilitvofself-defense Elements:
a. There must be a castration, which is
Self-defense cannot be invoked if there was a mutilation of organs necessary for
pre-concerted agreement to fight, but if the generation, such as the penis or
attack was made by the accused against his ovarium; and
opponent before the appointed place and time,
Mutilation must always be intentional. Thus, it Loss of hearing must involve both ears.
cannot be committed through criminal Otherwise_. it will be considered as serious
negligence. physical injuries under par. 3. Loss of the
power to hear in the right ear is merely
There must be no intent to kill otherwise; the considered as loss of use of some other part
offense is attempted or frustrated homicide or of the body.
murder, as the case may be.
3. When the injured:
Q: Suppose there i s no intent to deprive the a. Becomes deformed;
victim of the particular part of the body, what b. Loses any other member of his body;
is the crime committed? c. Loses the use thereof; or
d. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the
A: The crime is only serious physical injury. performance of the work in which he
was habitually engaged in for more than
NOTE: Cruelty, as understood in Art. 14 (21), is 90 days, as a consequence of the
inherent in mutilation, and in fact, that is the physical injuries inflicted.
only felony where said circumstance is an
integral part and is absorbed therein. If the NOTE: In par. 2 and 3, the offended party
victim dies, the crime is murder qualified by must have a vocation or work at the time of
cruelty, but the offender may still claim and injury.
prove that he had no intention to commit so
grave a wrong. 4. When the injured person becomes ill or
incapacitated for labor for more than 30
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES days (but must not be more than 90 days),
ART. 263, RPC as a result of the physical injuries inflicted.
How the crime of serious ohvsiral ininries is When the category of the offense of serious
rommiued· physical injuries depends on the period of
the illness or incapacity for labor, there
1. Wounding; (1993 BAR) must be evidence of the length of that
2. Beating; (1995 BAR) period. Otherwise, the offense will be
3. Assaulting; (1993 BAR), or considered as slight physical injuries.
4. Administering injurious substance. (1992
BAR) Nature of physical injuries
The crime of physical injuries is a formal crime NOTE: The qualified penalties are not
because it is penalized on the basis of the gravity applicable to parents who inflict serious
of the injury sustained. What is punished is the physical injuries upon their children by
consequence and not the stage of execution. excessive chastisement
Hence, it is aJways consummated. It cannot be
committed in the attempted and frustrated Phvsiral ininries vis-A-visMntllarinn
stage.
Mutilation must have been caused purposely
Q: If the offender repeatedly uttered "I will and deliberately to lop or clip off some part of
kill you• but he only keeps on boxing the the body so as to deprive the offended party of
offended party and injuries resulted, what is such part of the body. This intention is absent in
the crime committed? other kinds of physical injuries.
If the accused did not know of the injurious Serious ohvsiral iniurv vis-A-vis less serious
nature of the substances he administered, he ohvSiral iniurv
is not liable under this article. (Reyes, 2017)
3. He had no intent to kill.
SERIOUS LESS SERIOUS
BASIS PHYSICAL PHYSICAL
LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES INJURIES INJURIES
ART. 265, RPC
The injured The offended
ElementsCJ994 1996 2009 BABJ person party is
becomes ill or incapacitated
1. Offended party is incapacitated for labor for incapacitated for labor for
10 days or more (but not more than 30 Ast.o for labor for 10 days or
days), or shall require medical attendance capacity a/ more than 30 more but not
for the same period of time; and iniured days but not more than 30
party more than 90 days, or needs
NOTE: The disjunttive "or'' above means days. medical
that it is either incapacity for work for 10 attendance for
days or more or the necessity of medical the same
attendance for an equal period which wiJI period.
make the crime of less serious physical Medical There must be
injuries. attendance is a proof to the
Importance not period of the
In the absence of proof as to the period of ofMedical important in required
the offended party's incapacity for labor or Assist.once serious medical
required medical attendance, the offense physical attendance.
committed is only slight physical injuries. iniuries.
The phrase "shall require• refers to the
period of actual medical attendance. SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND
MALTREATMENT
2. Physical injuries must not be those ART. 266
described in the preceding articles.
Kinds of dieht ohvsiral ininries and
If a wound required medical attendance for maltreatmentCl990 1994 2003 RABl
only 2 days, yet the injured was prevented
from attending to his ordinary labor for a 1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the
period of twenty-nine days, the physical offended party for labor from 1 to 9 days, or
injuries are denominated as less serious. required medical attendance during the
(U.S. v. Trinidad, 4 Phil.152) same period;
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the
Qnalifxine cica,msrances of less serim,s offended party from engaging in his habitual
physical injuries work or which did not require medical
attendance; or
1. When there is manifest intent to insult or 3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without
offend the injured person; causing any injury.
2. When there are circumstances adding
ignominy to the offense; Slapping the offended party is a form of ill·
3. When the victim is the offenders parents, treatment which is a form of slight physical
ascendants, guardians, curators, or teachers; injuries.
or
4. When the victim is a person of rank or Q: A disagreement ensued between Cindy
person in authority, provided the crime is and carina which led to a slapping incident.
not direc.t assault. Cindy gave twin slaps on Carina's beautiful
face. What is the crime committed by Cindy?
NOTE: Provided, that in case of persons in
authority. it does not constitute the crime of A:
assault upon such persons. a. Slander by deed - if the slapping was done to
cast dishonor to the person slapped.
Presumptions in Art. 266. RPC Elements of rape by a man who shall have
carnal knowledge ofa woman
1. In the absence of proof as to the period of
the offended party's incapacity for labor or 1. Offender is a man;
of the required medical attendance, the 2. Offender had carnal knowledge of the
crime committed is presumed as slight woman; and
physical injuries. 3. Such act is accomplished under any of the
2. When there is no evidence to establish the following circumstances:
gravity or duration of actual injury or to a. Through force, threat or intimidation;
show the causal relationship to death, the (1992 BAR)
offense is slight physical injuries. b. When the offended party is deprived of
reason or is otherwise unconscious;
Q: Suppose the charge contained in the c. By means of fraudulent machination or
information filed was for slight physical grave abuse of authority; or
injuries because it was believed that the d. When the offended party is under 12
wound suffered would require medical years of age or is demented, even
attendance for eight (8) days only, but during though none of the above circumstances
preliminary investigation it was found out mentioned above be present. (1995
that the healing would require more than BAR)
thirty (30) days, Should an amendment of the
charge be allowed? Q: While still intoxicated and asleep, ·AAA·
felt someone kissing her vagina, At first, she
A: YES, The supervening event can still be the thought it was her boyfriend Randy who did
subject of amendment or of a new charge it. She tried to push him away but failed to
without placing the accused in double jeopardy. stop him. Indeed, in no time a t all Caga
(People v. Mano/ong, G.R. No. L-2288, March 30, succeeded in mounting her and in
1950) penetrating her private parts with his penis.
Elements of nme hx sexual assault C2005 the accomplices and be extended to co
.IWU accessories principals in case of
multinJe rane.
1. Offender commits an act of sexual assault; Marital rape not Marital rape recognized
recoeni.zed 11995 BARl
2. The act of sexual assault is committed by
any of the following means: Q: Geronimo, a teacher, was tried and
a. By inserting his penis into another convicted for 12 counts of rape for the sexual
person's mouth or anal orifice; or assault, he, on several occasions, committed
b. By inserting any instrument or object on one of his male students by inserting his
into the genital or anal orifice of another penis in the victim's mouth. On appeal,
person. Geronimo contends that the acts complained
of do not fall within the definition of rape as
3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished defined in the RPC, particularly that rape is a
under any of the following circumstances: crime committed by a man against a woman.
a. By using force or intimidation; Is Geronimo's contention correct?
b. When the woman is deprived of reason
or otherwise unconscious; A: NO. Rape may be committed notwithstanding
c. By means of fraudulent machination or the fact that persons involved are both males.
grave abuse of authority; or R.A. 8353 provides that an act of sexual assault
d. When the woman is under 12 years of can be committed by any person who inserts his
age or demented. penis into the mouth or anal orifice, or any
instrument or object into the genital or anal
Rape by sexual assault is not necessarily orifice of another person. The law, unlike rape
included in rape through sexual intercourse under Art. 266-A, has not made any distinction
unlike acts of lasciviousness. (People v. Bon, C.R. on the sex of either the offender or the victim.
No. 166401, October 30, 2006) Neither must the courts make such distinction.
(Ordinorio v. People, C.R. No. 155415, Moy 20,
When the offender in rape has an ascendancy or 2004)
influence on the offended party, it is not
necessary that the latter put up a determined Amount of force neressarx ro consummate
resistance. the crime of rape
OldAnti-Bane Jaw xis-A-visBA 8353 Jurisprudence firmly holds that the force or
violence required in rape cases is relative; it
OLD ANTI-RAPE does not need to be overpowering or irresistible;
R.A. 8353
LAW it is present when it allows the offender to
Crime against Crime against persons consummate his purpose. (People v. Funesto, C.R.
chastitv No.182237, August 3, 2011)
May be committed Under the 2nd type,
by a man against a sexual assault may be No crime nfto,stcated raoe
woman only committed by any
person against any The slightest penetration of the penis into the
nerson labia of the female organ consummates the
Complaint must be May be prosecuted crime of rape. However, mere touching alone of
filed by the woman even if the woman does the genitals and mons pubis or the pudendum
or her parents, not file a complaint can only be considered as attempted rape, if not
grandparents or acts of lasciviousness.
guardian if the
woman was a minor '"Iouchine"' in raoe
or incanacitated
Private crime Public crime In People v. Compuhan, it was held that
touching when applied to rape cases does not
Marriage of the Marriage extinguishes simply mean mere epidermal contact, stroking
victim with one of the penal action only as or grazing of organs, a slight brush or a scrape of
the offenders to the principal (the the penis on the external layer of the vittim's
benefits not only the person who married vagina. or the mons publs. There must be
nrincina) but also the victim1 and cannot sufficient and convincing proof that the penis
indeed touched the labias or slid into the female party is no longer necessary for its
organ, and not merely stroked the external prosecution. Consequently, rape is no longer
surface thereof, for an accused to be convicted of considered a private crime which cannot be
consummated rape. Thus, a grazing of the prosecuted, except upon a complaint filed by the
surface of the female organ or touching the mans aggrieved party. Hence, pardon by the offended
pubis of the pudendum is not sufficient to party of the offender in the crime of rape will not
constitute consummated rape. Absent any extinguish the offender's criminal
showing of the slightest penetration of the liability. Moreover, an Affidavit of
female organ, i.e., touching of either lobio of the Desistance even when construed as a pardon in
pudendum by the penis, there can be no the erstwhile "private crime" of rape is not a
consummated rape; at most, it can only be ground for the dismissal of the criminal cases,
attempted rape, if not acts of since the actions have already been
lasciviousness. (People v. 8utiong, G.R. No. instituted. To justify the dismissal of the
168932, October 19, 2011) complaints, the pardon should have been made
prior to the institution of the criminal actions.
Effeas of the cecJassifiratinn of cane iota a (People v. 8onaogua, G.R. No. 188897, June 6,
crime aeaiost necsonCJ991 1993 RABl 2011; People v. 8orce, G.R. No. 189579, September
12, 2011)
1. The procedural requirement of consent of
the offended party to file the case is no Absence of snecmarozoa does not neeate the
longer needed because this is now a public r.ommission ofcaoe
crime, unlike when it was still classified as a
crime against chastity; and The basic element of rape is carnal knowledge or
2. There is now an impossible crime of rape sexual intercourse, not ejaculation. Carnal
because impossible crimes can only be knowledge is defined as "the act of a man having
committed against persons or property. sexual bodily connec.tions with a woman." This
explains why the slightest penetration of the
Effeas of m1cdoo on the criminal liahmtv of female genitalia consummates the rape. (People
the accused charged with rape {2002BAR) v. 8utiong, G.R. No. 168932, October 19, 2011)
1. The offended woman may pardon the Q: Accused was charged and convicted of the
offender through a subsequent valid crime of rape of a minor. He claims that his
marriage, the effect of which would be the guilt was not proven because there was no
extinction of the offender's liability. In such hymenal laceration, therefore there was no
case, it is the marriage that extinguishes the evidence showing that he had carnal
offender's liability, not because of the knowledge of the victim. Is his defense
pardon which extinguished criminal liability tenable?
only if granted before the institution of the
criminal case in court: or A: NO. Proof of hymenal laceration is not an
2. Similarly, the legal husband may be element of rape. An intact hymen does not
pardoned by forgiveness of the wife negate a finding that the victim was raped.
provided that the marriage is not void ab Penetration of the penis by entry into the lips of
initio. (Art. 266-C, RPC) the vagina, even without laceration of the
hymen, is enough to constitute rape, and even
Under the new law, the husband may be liable the briefest of contact is deemed rape. (People v.
for rape, if his wife does not want to have sex Crisostomo, G.R. No.183090, November 14, 2011)
with him. It is enough that there is indication of
any amount of resistance as to make it rape. Q: One ofButiong's contentions is that having
(People v. Jumawon, G.R. No. 187495, April 21, sexual intercourse with AAA, a mental
2014) retardate, did not amount to rape, because it
could not b e considered as carnal knowledge
Effea of Affidavit of Pesisrance in rhe crime of a woman deprived of reason or of a female
ofraoe under twelve years of age as provided under
Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as
Rape is no longer a crime against chastity for it is amended. Is he correct?
now classified as a crime against persons. In
effect, rape may now be prosecuted de oficio; a A: NO, Rape is essentially a crime committed
complaint for rape commenced by the offended through force or intimidation, that is, against the
will of the female. It is also committed without minority and her relationship to the perpetrator,
force or intimidation when carnal knowledge of both of which must concur and must be alleged
a female is alleged and shown to be without her in the information. It is immaterial whether the
consent. It should no longer be debatable that relationship was proven during trial if that was
rape of a mental retardate falls under paragraph not specifically pleaded for in the information. In
l(b), of Article 266-A, because the provision this case, relationship with AAA was not duly
refers to a rape of a female "deprived of reason," alleged in the information. Thus, his relationship
a phrase that refers to mental abnormality, with the victim cannot qualify the crimes of rape.
deficiency or retardation. (People v. Butiong, G.R. Ruling otherwise would deprive him of his
No.168932, October 19,2011) constitutional right to be informed of the nature
and cause of accusation against him. (People v.
Insrances to consider rhe crime as mmHfied Armodia, G.R. No. 210654, Juner 7, 2017, as
� penned by J. Leonen)
Q: AAA was raped by his father, Pablo, on two 3. When the victim is under the custody of the
separate occasions. During these instances, police or military authorities or any law
AAA was not able to defend herself due to the enforcement or penal institution.
strength and moral ascendancy of her father, 4. When rape is committed in full view of the
and due to the act of Pablo of placing a bolo husband, parent, any of the children or other
near AAA's head threatening the latter that relatives within the third civil degree of
anyone who subsequently be knowledgeable consanguinity.
of his acts would be killed. 5. When the victim is engaged in a legitimate
religious vocation or calling and is
Pablo was charged with 2 counts of rape, but personally known to be such by the offender
the State failed to include the phrase, "being before or after the commission of the crime.
the father of the victim." Is Pablo guilty of the 6. When the victim is a child below 7 years old.
crime charged, and not of Qualified Rape? 7. When the offender knows that he is inflicted
with HIV/AIDS or any other sexually
A: YES. AAA's testimonies established that she transmissible disease and the virus or
was sexually abused by her father. She disease is transferred to the victim.
categorically and positively identified accused 8. When committed by any member of the AFP
appellant as the perpetrator of the crime. She or paramilitary units thereof or the PNP or
adequately recounted the details that took place, any law enforcement agency or penal
the dates of the incidents, how her father institution, when the offender took
committed carnal knowledge against her, and advantage of his position to facilitate the
his threats to wield the lagting if the crimes commission of the crime.
were revealed to others. Pablo had carnal 9. When by reason or on occasion of the rape,
knowledge of AAA twice, through force and the victim has suffered permanent physical
intimidation. His moral ascendancy also mutilation or disability.
intimidated her into submission. This 10. When the offender knew of the pregnancy of
ascendancy or influence is grounded on his the offended party at the time of the
parental authority over his child, which is commission of the rape.
recognized by our Constitution and laws, as well 11. When the offender knew of the mental
as on the respect and reverence that Filipino disability, emotional disorder, and/or
children generally accord to their parents. physical handicap of the offended party at
the time of the commission of the crime.
Pablo cannot be convicted of qualified rape (Art. 266-8, RPC)
under Article 266-B (1). The said crime consists
of the twin circumstances of the victim's
Q: AAA was a 14-year-old girl with a mental AAA's father, approached AAA and removed
age of only 5 years old. Sometime in 2002, her shorts and panty. AAA tried to push him
AAA informed her sister that she was not away but he was too strong. and he
having her period. They later found out that succeeded in inserting his penis inside her
she was pregnant. AAA's aunt revealed that vagjna. AAA continued resisting despite
Allan Corpuz raped AAA. A neuropsychiatric being afraid that Rubio would hurt her. After
examination was conducted and revealed some time, Rubio ejaculated outside her
that her intelligence level was equivalent to vagjna. Is Rubio guilty of qualified rape?
Moderate Mental Retardation. When AAA
testified, she positively identified Allan as the A: YES. The case falls under Article 266-B (2).
father of her child and that when she was 13 Being AAA's father, Rubio is presumed to have
years old, Allan had sex with her on four (4) employed force and/or intimidation. The fear
occasions, each of which h e gave her money. towards her father was more than enough to
ls the qualifying circumstance of Rape under intimidate her to submit to his lewd advances
Article 266-8 (10) present in this case? without shouting for help. (People v. Rubio, G.R.
No.195239, March 7, 2012)
A: NO. Rape is qualified "when the
offender knew of the mental disability, Q: Paolo and Marga are husband and wife.
emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of Marga refuses to have sexual intercourse
the offended party at the time of the commission with her husband so the latter used force and
of the crime." This qualifying circumstance intimidation against her. Paolo was able to
should be particularly alleged in the penetrate his penis inside Marga's vagjna. Is
Information. A mere assertion of the victim's Paolo guilty of rape?
mental deficienty is not enough. Allan can only
be convicted of four (4) counts of rape under A: YES. A woman is no longer the chattel
Article 266-A l(d) of the Revised Penal Code antiquated practices labeled her to be. A
because the prosecution failed to allege the husband who has sexual intercourse with his
qualifying circumstance in the Information. wife is not merely using a property, he is
(People v. Corpuz, G.R. No. 208013,July 3, 2017, as fulfilling a marital consortium with a fellow
penned by]. Leanen} human being with dignity equal to that he
accords himself. He cannot be permitted to
Q: AAA awoke to the sound of BBB's pleas for violate this dignity by coercing her to engage in a
mercy. Aided by the kerosene lamp placed on sexual act without her full and free consent.
the Door, AAA saw BBB being mauled and (People v. Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495, April 21,
stabbed to death by Alejandro and Angeles. 2014)
Thereafter, Angeles approached AAA and Q: AAA, a 67-year-old woman, was fast asleep
restrained her arms, while Alejandro pulled when Bill covered her mouth, threatened her
AAA's pants and underwear down and with a knife and told her not to scream
started having carnal knowledge of her. After because he will have sexual intercourse with
Alejandro was done, he switched places with her. Thereafter, he removed AAA's
Angeles and the latter took his turn ravishing underwear.
AAA. Are the accused liable for simple rape?
However, his pews was not yet erected so he
A: Alejandro and Angeles are liable for the crime toyed with AAA's sexual organ by licking it.
of Qualified Rape. Court deems it proper to He then made his way up and tried to suck
upgrade the conviction in said case from Simple AAA's tongue. Once done, Bill held his penis
Rape to Qualified Rape. Article 335 of the RPC and inserted it to AAA's vagjna. In his
states that if the rape is committed under certain defense, Bill argued that during the entire
circumstances, such as when it was committed alleged incident, AAA never reacted at all. Is
by two (2) or more persons, the crime will be Bill guilty of rape?
Qualified Rape, as in this instance. (People v.
Alejandro andAngeles, G.R. No. 225608, March 13, A: YES. Bill is guilty of rape. The force, violence,
2017) or intimidation in rape is a relative term,
depending not only on the age, size, and strength
Q: At around two p.m., AAA was sleeping of the parties but also on their relationship with
inside their house with her two-year old each other. AAA was already 67 years of age
sister and three-year old brother. Rubio, when she was raped in the dark by Bill who was
armed with a knife. A woman of such advanced A: YES. Marital rape is recognized in Article 266-
age could only recoil in fear and succumb into C of the RPC which provides that in case it is the
submission. In any case, with such shocking and legal husband who is the offender, the
horrifying experience, it would not be subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the
reasonable to impose upon AAA any standard offended party shall extinguish the criminal
form of reaction. Different people react action or penalty.
differently to a given situation involving a
startling occurrence. (People v. Jastivo, G.R. No. Incestuous rape
199268, February 12, 2014)
It refers to rape committed by an ascendant of
NOTE: Impregnation of a woman is not an the offended woman. In incestuous rape of a
element of rape. minor, proof of force and violence exerted by the
offender is not essential. Moral ascendancy or
Q: On September 22, 2001, XXX, a 16-year old parental authority of the accused over the
girl, and her uncle, Abat, went to poblacion to offended party takes the place of violence.
buy medicine, with permission of XXX's
parents. Q: XXX, a 13-year-old girl, testified that her
father, De Chavez, raped her. Her sister, YYY
Instead of proceeding to the poblacion, Abat saw what happened and testified as well. Dr.
drove to another barangay. Upon reaching Roy camarillo, the Medico-Legal Officer who
the barangay, Abat dragged XXX inside a conducted laboratory examination on XXX,
deserted nipa hut. Abat undressed himself found the presence of deep healed
then laid XXX down on a bamboo bed. Abat lacerations on XXX's organ. De Chavez
inserted his penis into XXX's vagina. XXX contends that the prosecution was not able to
tried to push Abat away but the latter prove the accusations against him beyond
threatened to kill her and and her family if reasonable doubt. Is his contention correct?
she would tell anybody about the ·act". Abat
made a push and pull movement, after which A: NO. His contention is not correct. There is
he ejaculated. sufficient basis to conclude the existence of
carnal knowledge when the testimony of a rape
The following day, Abat brought XXX home. victim is corroborated by the medical findings of
XXX told her parents about the incident. Abat the examining physician as "lacerations, whether
was charged with rape. O n April 24, 2002, healed or fresh, are the best physical evidence of
XXX gave birth to a baby girl. Abat contends forcible defloration." In this case, the victim's
that if it were true that he raped XXX in testimony is corroborated not only by her sister
September 2001, then the baby girl XXX gave but also by the medical findings of the examining
birth to in April 2002 would have been born physician, who testified that the presence of
prematurely; since the baby appeared to be deep healed lacerations on the victim's genitalia,
healthy, she could not have been the result of is consistent with the dates the alleged sexual
the alleged rape in September 2001. Is Abat's acts were committed. (People v. De Chavez, GR.
contention correct? No. 218427, 31 January, 2018)
was with her consent. This is because the identification of the offender is essential only
law presumes that the victim, on account of when there is a question or doubt on whether
her tender age, does not and cannot have a the one alleged to have committed the crime is
will of her own. the same person who is charged in the
information and subject of the trial. (People v.
Q: Suppose a 13-year old retarded woman Garin, GR. No. 222654, Feb. 21, 2018)
with mental capadty of a 5-year old had
sexual intercourse with a man, what is the Q: AAA, 10 years old, went home from school
crime committed? at around 12 noon to have lunch. On the way
home, she met Gutierez at bis house. He
A: Statutory rape. Her mental and not only her brought her to his room, laid her down on the
chronological age are considered. (People v. bed and bad carnal knowledge of her. He
Manlapaz, C.R. No. L-41819, February 28, 1978) then gave her PS.00 before she went back to
school. AAA went back to school at about
Generally to srare the exacr or at least the 2:10 p.m. Her adviser asked her where she
aooroximare dare the onrnorred cane was came from because she was tardy. AAA
committediSnot necessary admitted she came from "Uncle Rod." AAA
then was brought to the comfort room where
GR: Time is not an essential element of the crime another teacher inspected her panties. She
of rape. What is important is that the was eventually brought to a hospital where
information alleges that the victim was a minor she was examined.
under twelve years of age and that the accused
had carnal knowledge of her, even if the accused An Information was filed against Gutierez
did not use force or intimidation on her or charging him of statutory rape under
deprived her of reason. Art.266-A of the RPC. During trial, AAA
disclosed that Gutiere,, had done the same
XPN: The date of the commission of the rape thing to her about 10 times on separate
becomes relevant only when the accuracy and occasions. After each act, be would give her
truthfulness of the complainant's narration ten or five pesos. Gutlere,, denied that AAA
practically hinge on the date of the commission went to his house on the day of the incident
of the crime. (People v. Dion, C.R. No. 181035, July and claimed be was already at work at 1:30
4, 2011) p.m. ls Gutierez guilty of statutory rape
beyond reasonable doubt?
NOTE: The date of the commission of rape is not
an essential element thereof, for the gravamen of A: YES. In statutory rape, force, intimidation and
the offense is carnal knowledge of a woman. The physical evidence of injury are not relevant
discrepancies in the actual dates the rapes took considerations; the only subjett of inquiry is the
place are not serious errors warranting a age of the woman and whether carnal
reversal of the appellant's conviction. What is knowledge took place. The child's consent is
decisive in a rape charge is the victim's positive immaterial because of her presumed incapacity
identification of the accused as the malefactor. to discern good from evil.
(People v. Mercado, C.R. No. 189847, May 30,
2011) In this case, the defense did not dispute the fact
that AAA was 10 years old at the time of the
Q: Romeo was convicted of rape through incident. AAA was able to narrate in a clear and
sexual assault. He claims that be should be categoric.al manner the ordeaJ that was done to
acquitted as the prosecution was not able to her. It is well·settled that when a woman, more
prove the accusations against him beyond so when she is a minor, says she has been raped,
reasonable doubt. He likewise puts in issue she says in effect all that is required to prove the
the fact that there was no in-court ravishment. The accused may thus be convicted
identification. solely on her testimony-provided it is credible,
natural, convincing and consistent with human
A: Jurisprudence consistently holds that nature and the normal course of things. (People
testimonies of minor victims are generally given v. Gutierez, C.R. No. 208007, April 2, 2014, as
full weight and credence as the court considers penned by J. Leanen)
their youth and immaturity as badges of truth
and sincerity. AJso, the fac.t that there was no in· Sweetheart theory in rape
court identification was of no moment. ln·court
As held in People v. Cabanilla, the sweetheart It is settled that each and every charge of rape is
defense is an affirmative defense that must be a separate and distinct crime that the law
supported by convincing proof. Having an illicit requires to be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
affair does not rule out rape as it does not The prosecution's evidence must pass the
necessarily mean that consent was present. A exacting test of moral certainty that the law
love affair does not justify rape for a man does demands to satisfy the burden of overcoming the
not have an unbridled license to subject his appellant's presumption of innocence. (People v.
beloved to his carnal desires against her will. Arpon, C.R. No. 183563, December 14, 2011)
(People v. Cias, C.R. No.194379,June 1, 2011)
Reputation in the prosecution of rape,
The sweetheart theory applies in acts of immaterial
lasciviousness and rape, felonies committed
against or without the consent of the victim. It It is immaterial in rape, there being absolutely
operates on the theory that the sexual act was no nexus between it and the odious deed
consensual. It requires proof that the accused committed. A woman of loose morals could stm
and the vic.tim were lovers and that she be a victim of rape, the essence thereof being
consented to the sexual relations. For purposes carnal knowledge of a woman without her
of sexual intercourse and lascivious conduct in consent. (People v. Navarro, G. R. No. 137597,
child abuse cases under R.A. 7610, the October 24, 2003)
sweetheart defense is unacceptable. A child
exploited in prostitution or subjected to other EV'idence which max he ac-ceored in the
sexual abuse cannot validly give consent to orosen1tlon ofrane
sexual intercourse with another person. (People
v. Udang, C.R. No. 210161, January 10, 2018, as 1. Any physical overt act manifesting
penned byJ. Leonen) resistance against the act of rape in any
degree from the offended party; or
Bane shield rule 2. Where the offended party is so situated as to
render him/her incapable of giving consent.
The character of the woman is immaterial in (Art. 266-D, RPC)
rape. It is no defense that the woman is of
unchaste character, provided the illicit relations Cirn,mstantial Evidence
were committed \Yith force and violence.
In the case of People v. ZZZ, the Supreme Court
"Women's honor" Doctrine ruled that the commission of the crime of rape
may be proven not only by direct evidence, but
Women's honor doctrine or the so-called "Maria also by circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial
Clara Doctrine• posits that, it is a well-known evidence are "proof of collateral facts and
fact that women, especially Filipinos, would not circumstances from which the existence of the
admit that they have been abused unless that main fact may be inferred according to reason
abuse had at1:ually happened. This is due to their and common experience." In the absence of
natural instinct to protect heir honor. (People v. direct evidence, a resort to circumstantial
Tana, 109 Phil. 912, GR No. L-11991, Oct 31, evidence is usually necessary in proving the
1960) commission of rape. This is because rape '"is
generally unwitnessed and very often only the
NOTE: The Supreme Court in People v. Amore/a victim is left to testify for [him or) herself. It
and Rocho (C.R. No. 225642-43, January 17, becomes even more difficult when the complex
2018), through Justice Martires enunciated that crime of rape with homicide is committed
courts must not rely solely on the Maria Clara because the vit1:im could no longer testify. (C.R.
stereotype of a demure and reserved Filipino No. 228828, July 24, 2019, as penned by J.
woman. Rather, courts should stay away from Leonen)
such mindset and accept the realities of a
woman's dynamic role in society today; she who Absence ofSiens ofexrecnal ohxsiral iniuries
has over the years transformed into a strong and does not sienify lack ofresiSrance on the nart
confidently intelligent and beautiful person of the rape victim
willing to fight for her rights.
Resistance from the victim need not be carried
Necessity to prove every count of rape in to the point of inviting death or sustaining
cases of mulriole cane physical injuries at the hands of the rapist.
NOTE: In rape, the force and intimidation must emphasized that a six-year-old child cannot be
be viewed in light of the victim's perception and expected to react similarly as an adult, given her
judgment at the time of the commission of the limited understanding of the evils of this world
crime. As already settled in jurisprudence, not all and the desires of men who have no bounds. It is
victims reac.t the same way. Moreover, for the same reason that this Court cannot
resistance is not an element of rape. A rape subscribe to the defense's assertion that private
victim has no burden to prove that she did all complainant's testimony should not be given
within her power to resist the force or weight. It is unfathomable that a six-year-old
intimidation employed upon her. As Jong as the child would be able to describe in such detail
force or intimidation is present, whether it was how she was ravaged by men she considered
more or less irresistible is beside the point protectors unless her statements were true. Her
(People v. Balda, G.R. No. 175238, February 24, candid, straightforward, and consistent
2009) testimony must prevail over the self·serving
allegations of the defense. Even when she was
Physical resistance need not be established in intimidated by the defense attorney, private
rape when intimidation is exercised upon the complainant, who was then eight (8) years old,
victim who submits against her will to the did not falter, proving the attorney's attempt to
rapist's lust because of fear for her life or disparage her futile. (People v. Sumayod,
personal safety. (People v. Tuazon, G.R. No. supra)
168650, October 26, 2007)
Amedim-leeal findioe in the ocnsecutinn of
Phvsiral resistance need oat he esrahliShed rane cases notiodiSoensable
to prove the commission of rape
The medico-legal findings are ·merely
It has long been established that a victim's corroborative in character and is not an element
failure to struggle or resist an attack on his or of rape". The prime consideration in the
her person does not, in any way, deteriorate his prosecution of rape is the victim's testimony, not
or her credibility. Physical resistance need not necessarily the medical findings; a medical
be established to prove the commission of a rape examination of the victim is not indispensable in
or sexual assault, as the very nature of the crime a prosecution for rape. The victim's testimony
entails the use of intimidation and fear that may alone, if credible, is sufficient to convict an
paralyze a victim and force him or her to submit accused. (People v. Perez, G.R. Na. 191265,
to the assailant. (People v. Sumayad, G.R. No. September 14, 2011)
230626, March 9, 2020, os penned by/. Leonen)
Q: 11-year old "AAA" went to the Pasig public
Q: AAA was 6 years old when she was raped market to buy a pair of slippers. However,
by Eliseo multiple times. AAA revealed this to "AAA" was not able to buy her pair of slippers
BBB, her grandmother. Subsequently, Eliseo because appellant suddenly grabbed her left
was charged with rape and rape by sexual arm and pulled her towardis the nearby Mega
assault. The RTC found Eliseo guilty of the Parking Plaza.
crime charged. On appeal, the CA affirmed
the ruling of the trial court. In bis brief, Upon reaching the fourth Door of Mega
Eliseo put private complainant AAA's Parking Plaza, appellant pulled "AAA's"
credibility in question, contending that the shorts and panty down to her knees.
Regional Trial Court erred in basing their Appellant then sat on the stairs, placed "AAA"
conviction on her testimony given that her on bis lap, inserted bis penis into her vagina
allegations were contrary to common and performed push and pull movements.
experience. He asserted that private "AAA" felt pain in her vagina. Immediately
complainant's Jack of struMle, resistance, or upon seeing the sexual molestations, Boca,
the fact that she did not cry during the rapes the security guard, grabbed appellant's arm,
was unnatural. Is Eliseo's contention correct handcuffed him and brought him to the
thereby absolving him from criminal barangay ball. Is the appellant guilty of the
liability? crime of rape?
A: NO. Different people have varying reactions A: YES. Appellant is guilty of the crime of rape.
during moments of trauma; more so, a six (6) Testimonies of child-victims are normally given
year old child being attacked by people whom full weight and credit, since when a girl,
she believed to be her protectors. It must be particularly if she is a minor, says that she has
been raped, she says in effect all that is When Ricalde returned to the sofa, XXX ran
necessary to show that rape has in fact been toward his mother's room to tell her what
committed. When the offended party is of tender happened. He also told his mother that
age and immature, courts are inclined to give IUcalde played with his sexual organ. XXX's
credit to her account of what transpired, mother armed herself with a knife for self
considering not only her relative vulnerability defense when she confronted Ricalde about
but also the shame to which she would be the incident, but he remained silent. She
exposed if the matter to which she testified is asked him to leave. Is Ricalde guilty of the
not true. Youth and immaturity are generally crime of rape?
badges of truth and sincerity. The absence of
fresh lacerations in Remilyn's hymen does not A: YES. All the elements of rape is present in the
prove that appellant did not rape her. A freshly case at bar. Rape under the second paragraph of
broken hymen is not an essential element of Article 266-A is also known as "instrument or
rape and healed lacerations do not negate rape. objec.t rape," "gender-free rape," or "homosexual
In addition, a medical examination and a medical rape."
certificate are merely corroborative and are not
indispensable to the prosecution of a rape case. Any person who, under any of the circumstances
The credible disclosure of a minor that the mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit
accused raped her is the most important proof of an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis
sexual abuse. (People v. De Jesus, G.R. No. 190622, into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or
October 7, 2013) any instrument or object, into the genital or anal
orifice of another person.
Crime committed if the victim was a minor
The gravamen of rape through sexual assault is
The accused can be charged with either Rape or '"the insertion of the penis into another person's
Child Abuse and be convicted therefor. The case mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or
of People v. Abay (G.R. No. 177752, February 24, objec.t, into another person's genital or anal
2009) is enlightening and instructional on this orifice." (Rica/de v. People, G.R. No. 211002,
issue. If the victim is 12 years or older, the January 21, 2015, as penned byJ. Leanen)
offender should be charged with either sexual
abuse under Section S(b) of R.A. 7610 or rape Hvmenal Lacecation
under Art. 266-A (except par. l[d)) of the RPC.
However, the offender cannot be accused of both Q: AAA narrated that, she had fallen asleep
crimes for the same act because his right against after doing laundry, while her stepfather,
double jeopardy will be prejudiced. A person ZZZ, was doing carpentry works. Suddenly,
cannot be subjected twice to criminal liability for she woke up and found ZZZ on top of her, his
a single criminal act. Likewise_. rape cannot be lower body naked. He then sat on the Ooor
complexed with a violation of Section S(b) of with his penis showing and removed her
R.A. 7610. Under Sec. 48 of the RPC on complex short pants and underwear, after which he
crimes, a felony under the RPC (such as rape) went back on top of her and masturbated, He
cannot be complexed with an offense penalized took AAA's hands and put them on his penis,
by a special law. (People v. Dahilig G.R. No. telling her that if she became pregnant, "he
187083,June 13, 2011) would be happy.· ZZZ then succeeded in
having carnal knowledge with AAA.
Q: XXX (then a 10-year old boy) requested his
mother to pick up Ricalde at McDonald's Bel Upon examination, it was found that there
Air, Sta. Rosa. IUcalde, then 31 years old, is a was redness and abrasion on the right side of
distant relative and textmate of XXX. the victim's labia minora, ·caused by a
smooth, soft object.• ZZZ testified that AAA's
After dinner, XXX's mother told IUcalde to mother, BBB, arrived and she opened the
spend the night at their house as it was late. door at once. BBB asked ZZZ if he raped AAA,
He slept on the sofa while XXX slept on the which he denied. He was around 12 meters
living room Ooor. It was around 2:00 a.m. away from AAA, holding a hammer on the
when XXX awoke as "he felt pain in his anus window. ZZZ claimed that BBB was
and stomach and something inserted in his influenced by her cousins to accuse him. The
anus.· He saw that Ricalde "fondled his cousins were allegedly mad at him and
penis.· wanted BBB and him to separate since he
was "not a useful person.· Is ZZZ guilty of the In reviewing rape cases, the Court is guided by
crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt? three settled principles:
A: YES. AM's recollection on how ZZZ 1. An accusation of rape can be made with
committed the crime was detailed; her facility and while the accusation is difficult
testimony, consistent. Likewise, the absence of to prove, it is even more difficult for the
hymenal laceration fails to exonerate ZZZ. This person accused, although innocent, to
Court has consistently held that an intact hymen disprove;
does not negate the commission of rape. The 2. Considering the intrinsic nature of the
absence of external signs or physical injuries on crime, only two persons being usually
the complainant's body does not necessarily involved, the testimony of the complainant
negate the commission of rape, hymenal should be scrutinized with great caution;
laceration not being, to repeat. an element of the and
crime of rape. (People v. ZZZ, C.R. No. 229862, 3. The evidence for the prosecution must stand
June 19, 2019, as penned byJ. Leonen) or fall on its own merit, and cannot be
allowed to draw strength from the weakness
Attemored raoe vis-a-vis Acrs Qf of the evidence for the defense. (People v.
lasrivin,,sness Ogarte, C.R. No.182690, May 30, 2011)
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL P03 Borja, G.R. No. 199710, August 2, 2017, as
LIBERTY AND SECURITY penned byJ. Leanen)
NOTE: If the offender is a public officer who a. Kidnapping or detention lasts for more
has the authority to arrest or detain a than 3 days; (2014 BAR)
person, the crime committed is Arbitrary b. It is committed simulating public
Detention. authority;
c. Any serious physical injuries are
Q: Ronalyn Manatad was walking with her inflicted upon the person kidnapped or
friend in Quezon City, when a man who was detained or threats to kill him are made;
later identified to be P03 Julieto Borja, or
grabbed Ronalyn's right forearm and took d. The person kidnapped or detained is a
her inside a van where three (3) other men minor, female, or a public officer. (1991,
were wailing. The abductors called Ronalyn's 2005 BAR)
brother, Edwin and demanded Pl00,000 in
exchange for Ronalyn's liberty. Edwin sought NOTE: In case of a minor, the kidnapper must
assistance from the National Anli not be one of the parents.
Kldnapping Task Force. When Edwin and
P03 Borja met at Wildlife Park for the For the crime of kidnapping to exist, there must
exchange of the ransom money, the police be indubitable proof that the actual intent of the
operatives immediately arrested P03 Borja. malefactors was to deprive the offended party of
her liberty, and not where such restraint of her
However, they failed to rescue Ronalyn. The freedom of action was merely incident in the
kidnappers of Ronalyn thereafter took her to commission of another offense primarily
the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency intended by the offenders. (People v. Puno, G.R.
where she was charged with illegal sale of No. 97471, February 17, 1993)
shabu.
Essence ofrbe crime nfkidnannine
The RTC found P03 Borja guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of kidnapping for ransom. The actual deprivation of the victim's liberty,
Can P03 Borja as a public official b e coupled with the intent of the accused to effect
prosecuted for the crime of kidnapping? it. (People v. Jacalne, G.R. No. 168552, October 3,
2011)
A: Although the crime of kidnapping can only be
committed by a private individual, the fact that NOTE: The original Spanish version of Art. 267
the accused is a public official does not used the term lock up (encarcerar) rather than
automatically preclude the filing of an kidnap (sequestrator or raptor) which includes
information for kidnapping against him. A public not only imprisonment of a person but also the
officer who detains a person for the purpose of deprivation of his liberty in whatever form and
extorting ransom cannot be said to be acting in length of time. (People v.Jatulan, GR. No. 171653,
an official capacity. April 14, 2007)
Crimes that maxhe oossihlx rnmmitted when chatting with her. Lerio then told Anniban
a female is transported from one place to that she would take the infant outside to
annthec bask him under the morning sun but the
latter refused,
1. Forcible abduction - If a woman is
transported from one place to another by A few minutes later, Anniban realized that
virtue of restraining her of her liberty and Lerio and her child were no longer in the
that act is coupled with lewd designs. house. After searching, Anniban found her
2. Kidnapping with serious illegal d etention infant child, Lerio's boyfriend, and Lerio on
- If a woman is transported just to restrain board a vessel. Lerio, together with co
her liberty. There is no lewd design or accused were charged with Kidnapping of a
intent. Minor. Are they liable as charged?
3. Grave coercion - If a woman is carried away
just to break her will, to compel her to agree A: YES. All the elements of kidnapping under
to demand or request by the offender. Art. 267, par. 4 are present. The prosecution has
adequately and satisfactorily proven that
Deprivation as contemplated in Article 267. accused-appellant is a private individual; that
lli accused-appellant took one-month old baby
Justin Clyde from his residence, without the
Deprivation required by Article 267 of the RPC knowledge or consent of, and against the will of
means not only the imprisonment of a person, his mother: and that the victim was a minor,
but also the deprivation of his liberty in one-month old at the time of the incident. the
whatever form and for whatever length of time. fact of which accused-appellant herself admitted.
It involves a situation where the victim cannot (People v. Lerio, G.R. No. 209039, December 09,
go out of the place of confinement or detention 2015)
or is restricted or impeded in his liberty to
move. If the victim is a child, it also includes the Q: Suppose the kidnapped victim
intention of the accused to deprive the parents disappeared, will such disappearance negate
of the custody of the child. (People v. Baluya, G.R. criminal liability of the kidnappers?
No. 181822, April 13, 2011)
A: NO, In kidnapping, the essential element is
Q: Jomarie, a minor, was dragged to the deprivation of the victim's liberty and the
house of Gutierrez after she refused to go subsequent disappearance of the victim will not
with him. Upon reaching the house, be tied exonerate the accused from prosecution.
her bands, When Jomarie pleaded that she be
allowed to go home, be refused. Although Otherwise, kidnappers can easily avoid
Jomarie only stayed outside the house, it was punishment by the simple expedient of
inside the gate of a fenced property which is disposing of their victim's bodies. (People v.
high enough such that people outside could Bemal, G.R. No. 113685.June 19, 1997)
not see what happens inside. Was there
kidnapping? Effecr of the xnhrnrarx release of the victim
on the criminal liability of the kidnappers
A: YES. When Gutierrez tied the hands of C2004RABl
Jomarie, the farmer's intention to deprive
jomarie of her liberty has been clearly shown. 1. If it is serious illegal detention, the voluntary
For there to be kidnapping, it is enough that the release has no effect on the criminal
victim is restrained from going home. liability of the offenders.
2. If it is slight illegal detention, the voluntary
Because of her tender age, and because she did release will mitigate the criminal liability of
not know her way back home, she was then and the offenders.
there deprived of her liberty. It has been 3. In kidnapping for ransom, voluntary release
repeatedly held that if the victim is a minor, the will not mitigate the crime.
duration of his detention is immaterial. (People
v.Jacolne, G.R. No. 168552, October 3, 2011) Ransom
Q: Anniban and Lerio are neighbors. Lerio The money, price or consideration paid or
entered the house of Anniban, laid down demanded for the redemption of a captured
beside the infant child of Anniban and began
NOTE: If the victim is kidnapped and A: Kidnapping for ransom with homicide (not
illegally detained for the purpose of double homicide) is committed. Regardless of
extorting ransom, the duration of his the number of killings or death that occurred as
detention is immaterial. (People v. Romos, a consequence of the kidnapping, the
G.R. No. 178039 January 19, 2011) appropriate denomination of the crime should
be the special complex crime of kidnapping for
2. When the victim is killed or dies as a ransom with homicide. (People v. Reyes, G.R. No.
consequence of the detention; 178300, 581 SCRA 691, March 17, 2009)
3. When the victim is raped; or
4. When the victim is subjec.ted to torture or When the rakine of the victim is onlv
dehumanizing acts. incidental to the basic purpose to kill
NOTE: If the vit1:im is a woman or a public The crime is murder and not the special complex
officer. the detention is always serious no matter crime of kidnapping with homicide because the
how short the period of detention is. primordial intent is to kill the victim and the
deprivation of liberty is merely incidental
Soecial comolex crimes that max arise in thereto. (People v. Delim, G.R. No. 142773,
kidnaooine Jonuory 28, 2003)
1. Kidnapping with murder or homicide; When other persons, not the victims
themselves ace kHled on the ocraSioo of
NOTE: Homicide is used in the generic sense kidnaooine
and includes murder because the killing is
not treated as a separate crime but a Two separate crimes of murder or homicide and
qualifying circumstance. kidnapping are committed. The killing would be
treated as a separate crime.
2. Kidnapping with rape; or
If the offender is a public officer or a Jaw stop and frisk search, petitioners failed to cite
enforcer and he arrested or detained, without any suspicious circumstance that warranted
legal or reasonable ground, any person within Pacis' immediate arrest. Petitioners argue that
his jurisdit1:ion for the purpose of delivering him due to the numerous reports of stealing nipa
to the proper authorities, such officer is guilty of leaves, it was reasonable for them to suspect
Arbitrary Detention under Art. 124 of the RPC. that Pacis violated the law. This argument falls
short in light of three (3) things: (1) they were
If the person arrested or detained is not within aware that ALIMANGO existed, whose members
his jurisdiction, the officer's act would constitute were authorized to harvest nipa; (2] they
Unlawful Arrest under this article. personally knew Pacis; and (3) they were
uncertain that Cabalit owns the land where they
Raraoeav kaeawa,d and hacaneav raood not found Pads and his group. (Duropan v. People,
ouhHc officers cnntemolared wUhin the C.R. No. 230825, June 10, 2020, as penned by J.
QUCYiew ofArt 269 Leonen)
judicial authority
within a certain period KIDNAPPING KIDNAPPING
The offender is a The offender is a AND SERIOUS AND FAILURE
BASIS
public officer who has private individual, or ILLEGAL TO RETURN A
the authority to arrest a public officer who DETENTION MINOR
or detain a person has no authority to Asta Offender is not Offender is
arrest or detain a
relation entrusted with entrusted with
person
o/ the custody of the custody of
offender the victim the minor
KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO to the
RETURN A MINOR victim
ART. 270, RPC Illegally What is punished
detaining or is the deliberate
Elements [2002 BAR) kidnapping the failure of the
Asta minor offender having
1. Offender is entrusted with the custody of a octs the custody of
minor person; and punished the minor to
2. He deliberately fails to restore the said restore him to
minor to his parents or guardians. his parents or
uardian
While one of the essential elements of this crime
is that the offender was entrusted with the
custody of the minor, what is actually being INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS HOME
punished is not the kidnapping but the ART. 271, RPC
deliberate failure of that person to restore the
minor to his parents or guardians. Elements
As the penalty for such an offense is so severe, 1. A minor is living in the home of his parents
the Court further explained that "deliberate• as or guardian or the person entrusted with his
used in Article 270 means something more than custody; and
mere negligence · it must be premeditated, 2. Offender induces said minor to abandon
headstrong, foolishly daring or intentionally and such home.
maliciously wrong. (People v. Marquez, G.R. No.
181440, April 13, 2011) Inducement must be actual, committed with
criminal intent, and determined by a will to
Crime can be committed by the parents of the cause damage. The minor should not leave his
.1lli.wU: home of his own free will.
This happens where they live separately and the The minor actually need nN abandon the
custody of the minor is given to one of them, the home to commit the crime
other parent kidnaps such minor from the one
having the lawful custody of the child. It is not necessary that the minor actually
abandon the home to commit the crime. What
Absence of aux of the elements of Art 270 constitutes the crime is the act of inducing a
.!lli. minor to abandon his home or the home of his
guardians and it is not necessary that the minor
If any of the elements of Art 270 is absent, the actually abandons the home.
kidnapping of the minor will then fall under Art
267 (kidnapping and serious illegal detention), Rationale tor oenaHzine the crime of
but if the accused is any of the parents, Art. 267 in ducineaminortnabandon hishome
will not apply. Arts. 270 and 271 will apply.
It is intended to discourage and prevent
Kidoaonine and serious meeal derenfinn viS- disruption of filial relationship and undue
3-vis Kidnapping and failure to return a interference with the parents' right and duty to
.1lli.wU: the custody of their minor children and to rear
them.
1. Failing to render assistance to any person NOTE: A permanent, conscious, and deliberate
whom the offender finds in an uninhabited abandonment is required in this article. There
place wounded or in danger of dying when must be an interruption of the care and
he can render such assistance without protection that a child needs by reason of his
detriment to himself, unless such omission tender age.
shall constitute a more serious offense.
Oualifxine Circnmstaoces under Art 276
Elements: (F-A-W-N) .I!!!!;.
a. The place is .11ot inhabited;
b. Accused found there a person .111:ounded 1. When death of the minor resulted from such
or in danger of dying; abandonment.
c. Accused can render a,s:sistance without
detriment to himself; and NOTE: Intent to kill cannot be presumed
d. Accused fails to render assistance. from the death of the child. The ruling that
intent to kill is conclusively presumed from
2. Failing to help or render assistance to the death of the vit1:im is applicable only to
another whom the offender has accidentally crimes against persons and not to crimes
wounded or injured. against security, particularly the tTime of
abandoning a minor under Art. 276.
NOTE: The character of the place is
immaterial. 2. If the life of the minor was in danger
because of the abandonment.
3. Failing to deliver a child under 7 years of
age whom the offender has found If the offender is the parent of the minor who is
abandoned, to the authorities or to his abandoned, he shall be deprived of parental
family, or failing to take him to a safe place. authority.
NOTE: It is immaterial that the offender did NOTE: Parents guilty of abandoning their
not know that the child is under 7 years. children shall be deprived of parental authority.
offender is absent, the proper authorities 1. Causing any boy or girl under 16 to perform
have not consented to it. any dangerous feat of balancing, physical
strength or contortion, the offender being
NOTE: Only the person charged with the rearing any person;
or education of the minor is liable. 2. Employing children under 16 years of age
who are not the children or descendants of
Elements of the ccime of indifference of the offender in exhibitions of acrobat,
parents [Pa-Ne-Sl gymnast, rope walker, diver, or wild animal
tamer, the offender being an acrobat, etc., or
1. Offender is a ll.il,rent; circus manager or person engaged in any of
2. He neglects his children by not giving them said callings;
education; and 3. Employing any descendant under 12 years
3. His itation in life requires such education of age in dangerous exhibitions enumerated
and his financial condition permits it. in the next preceding paragraph, the
offender being engaged in any of the said
NOTE: For the parents to be penalized for the callings;
crime of Indifference of Parents, it must be 4. Delivering a child under 16 years of age
shown that they are in a position to give their gratuitously to any person if any of the
children the education in life and that they callings enumerated in paragraph 2, or to
consciously and deliberately neglect their any habitual vagrant or beggar, the offender
children. being an ascendant, guardian, teacher or
person entrusted in any capacity with the
Abandonment of Minor hv Person Enrn,sted care of such child; and
with his Custody; Indifference of Parents vis- 5. Inducing any child under 16 years of age to
;\-V"iS AhandonineaMinor abandon the home of its ascendants,
guardians, curators or teachers to follow any
ABANDONME person entrusted in any of the callings
NT OF MINOR mentioned in par. 2 or to accompany any
BY PERSON habitual vagrant or beggar, the offender
ENTRUSTED ABANDONING being any person.
BASIS WITH HIS A MINOR
CUSTODY; Art. 276, RPC NOTE: The exploitation of the minor must be of
INDIFFERENC such nature as to endanger his life or safety in
E OF PARENTS order to constitute the offense described in this
Art. 277, RPC article.
The custody of The custody of
the offender is the minor is Kind of business rnntemolated under Art
specific. that is, stated in ll.11.
Asto
the custody for general.
custody
the rearing or Art. 278 contemplates a business that generally
education of attracts children so that they themselves may
the minor. enjoy working there unaware of the danger to
Asto Minor is under Minor is under their own lives and limb, such as circuses.
age 18 years of age 7 years of age
When the employer is the parent or
Minor is Minor is ascendant of the child who is already 12
delivered to a abandoned in veacs ofaee
public such a way as
Asto
institution or to deprive him The crime of exploitation of minors is not
abando
other person. of the care and committed if the employer is a parent or
nment
protection that ascendant unless the minor is less than 12 years
his tender years old.
need.
If the employer is an ascendant. the law regards
EXPLOITATION OF MINORS that he would look after the welfare and
ART. 278, RPC protection of the child. Hence, the age is lowered
to 12 years. Below that age, the crime is
Punishable acrs committed.
Emlnirarion of Mi noes vis-a-vis BA 761o NOTE: The neglect of child punished under Art.
CSoecial Prorectlon of Children aeainst Child 59(4) of P.O. 603 is also a crime (known as
Abuse Exolniration and DiScriminarion Aal indifference of parents) penalized under the
second paragraph of Art.277 of the RPC. (De
Guzman v. Perez, ibid.) Hence, it is excluded from
BASIS EXPLOITATION
RA
.. 7610 the coverage of R.A. 7610.
OF MINORS
Applies to Applies to ADDITIONAL PENALTIES
Asto its
application minors below minors below FOR OTHER OFFENSES
16 vears of aee. 18 vears old. ART.279, RPC
The business is As long as the
of such kind employment The offender is not only liable for the
that would is inimical - abandonment or exploitation but also for all its
place the life or even though consequences. If as a result, physical injuries or
limb of the there is no death resulted, another crime is committed by
minor in physical risk authority of Art. 279.
danger, even - and
Asto
though working detrimental QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING
dangerto
for him is not to the child's ART. 280, RPC
the child
against the wiJI interest -
of the minor. against moral, Elements (P-E-Al
intellectual,
physical, and 1. Offender is a jlrivate person;
mental 2. He ,tnters the dwelling of another; and
development 3. Such entrance is against the latter's will.
of the minor. (2002, 2009 BAR)
If the child fell No such
and suffered similar
Asto Ifthe offenderisa unhlic officer
physical injuries provision
liability of
while working. exists under If the offender is a public officer or employee,
employer
the employer R.A. 7610. the entrance into the dwelling against the will of
shall be liable
the occupant is violation of domicile punishable 1. Pushing the door violently and maltreating
under Art. 128. the occupants after entering.
2. Cutting of a ribbon string with which the
Owemoe door latch of a closed room was fastened.
The cutting of the fastenings of the door was
A place that a person inhabits or any building or an act of violence.
structure exclusively devoted for rest and 3. Wounding by means of a bolo, the owner of
comfort. Whether a building is a dwelling house the house immediately after entrance.
or not depends upon the use. It includes the
dependencies which have interior Examales nr tcesaass hx means of
communication with the house. It is not intimidation
necessary that it be a permanent dwelling of a
person. 1. Firing a revolver in the air by persons
attempting to force their way into a house.
NOTE: In general, all members of the household 2. The flourishing of a bolo against inmates of
must be presumed to have authority to extend the house upon gaining an entrance.
an invitation to enter the house.
T'respass to dwelling may be committed by
"Aeainst the will" the owner ofrhe hm1se
The entrance is either expressly or impliedly In cases where the owner has allowed the rooms
prohibited. or the houses to be rented by other persons,
trespass to dwelling is committed if the owner
NOTE: There must be an opposition on the part thereof enters the room or house without the
of the owner of the house to the entry of the knowledge and consent and against the will of
accused. Lack of permission does not amount to the boarder or tenant.
prohibition. (People v. De Peralta, G.R. No. L-
17332, August 18, 1921) Circumstanceswhen the crime of tcesaassro
dweHine is not committed (2006 RABl
Instances where prohibition to enter a
dwemoeiSimoHed or oresnmed 1. When the purpose of the entrance is to
prevent serious harm to himself, the
1. Entering a dwelling of another at late hour occupant or third persons.
of the night. 2. When the purpose of the offender in
2. When the entrance is made through means entering is to render some service to
not intended for ingress. humanity or justice.
3. The existence of enmity or strained relations 3. Anyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inns
between the accused and the occupant. and other public houses while they are open.
4. The door is closed even if it is not locked.
Crimes that max he committed when a
Qnalifxinedrcnmsrance ofrheoffense oecson rcesnassesadwelline
If the offense is committed by means of violence 1. If the purpose in entering the dwelling is not
or intimidation, the penalty is higher (prision shown, trespass is committed.
correc.tional in medium and maximum periods; 2. If the purpose is shown, it may be absorbed
fine not exceeding 1'200,000). in the crime as in robbery with force upon
things, the trespass yielding to the more
If violence or intimidation is employed, there is serious crime.
no need for prohibition. In fact, even if violence 3. But if the purpose is not shown and while
or intimidation took place immediately after the inside the dwelling he was found by the
offender has entered the dwelling, there is occupants, one of whom was injured by him,
Qualified Trespass to Dwelling. (US. v. Abanto, the crime committed will be trespass to
G.R. No. 5266, February 16, 1910; U.S. v. Arceo, dwelling and frustrated homicide, physical
G.R. No.1491, Morch 5, 1904) injuries, or if there was no injury, unjust
vexation.
Examoles nftresnass hx means of violence
Q: At about 11:00 in the evening, Dante
forced his way inside the house of Mamerto.
Jay, Mamerto's son, saw Dante and accosted Place entered Place entered is
Astop/oce
him. Dante pulled a knife and stabbed Jay on is inhabited. uninhabited.
his abdomen. Mamerto heard the commotion Act Act constituting
and went out of his room. Dante, who was constituting the crime is
about to escape, assaulted Mamerto. Jay the crime is entering the
suffered injuries which, were it not for the entering the closed premises
timely medical attendance, would have As to oct dwelling or the fenced
caused his death. Mamerto sustained injuries constitution against the estate without
that incapadtated him for 25 days. What the crime will of the securing the
crime/s did Dante commit? (1994 BAR) owner. permission of
the owner or
A: Dante committed qualified trespass to caretaker
dwelling. frustrated homicide for the stabbing of thereof.
Jay, and Jess serious physical injuries for the Prohibition to Prohibition to
assault on Mamerto. The crime of qualified Asto enter is enter must be
trespass to dwelling should not be complexed prohibition express or manifest.
with frustrated homicide because when the implied.
trespass is committed as a means to commit a
more serious crime, trespass to dwelling is GRAVE THREATS
absorbed by the greater crime and the former ART. 282, RPC
constitutes an aggravating circumstance of
dwelling. (People v. Abedoza, 53 Phil 788) Punishable acrs
OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS TO DWELLING 1. Threatening another with the infliction upon
ART. 281, RPC his person, honor, or property, or that of his
family of any wrong amounting to a crime
Elements and demanding money or imposing any
other condition even though not unlawful,
1. Offenders enter the closed premises or the and the offender attained his purpose;
fenced estate of another; 2. By making such threat without the offender
attaining his purpose; and
NOTE: The term premises signifies distinct 3. By threatening another with the infliction
and definite locality. It may mean a room, upon his person, honor or property or that
shop, building or definite area, but in either of his family of any wrong amounting to a
case, locality is fixed. crime, the threat, not being subject to a
condition.
2. Entrance is made while either of them is
uninhabited; Essence of Grave Threats
NOTE: A place is said to be uninhabited if It is essential that there be intimidation. In
there is no one living on such place. intimidation, there is a promise of some future
harm or injury, either to the person, honor, or
3. Prohibition to enter is manifest; and property of the offended party. (Reyes, 2017)
4. Trespasser has not secured the permission
of the owner or the caretaker thereof. It must inspire terror or fear upon another. It is
charatterized by moral pressure that produces
Iresnass ro dwem ne vis-ta-vis Iresnass rn alarm.
oconertv
Threat
TRESPASS TO TRESPASS TO
BASIS
DWELLING PROPERTY It is the declaration of an intention or
Offender is a Offender is any determination to tnJure another by the
Asto commission upon his person, honor, or property
private person.
offender or upon that of his family of some wrong which
oerson.
Offender Offender enters may or may not amount to a crime.
Asto enters a closed premises
commission dwelling or fenced Qualitvine firn,mstance ofrhe offense
house. estate.
If the threat is made in writing or through a 3. There is a w:,mand for money or that other
middleman, the penalty is to be imposed in its condition is imposed, even though lawful;
maximum period. and
4. Offender has attained or has not attained his
Grave Threats vis-a-vis Light Threats .J!.!!.rpose.
The threat is made in The threat is made a government of law and not of men. (People v.
the heat of anger, and with the deliberate Mangosing, CA-G.R. No.1107-R, April 29, 1948)
the subsequent acts of purpose of creating in
the accused showed the mind of the When erave coercion ocn,cs
that he did not persist person threatened the
in the idea involved in belief that the threats Grave coercion arises only if the act which the
offender prevented another to do is not
his threat (U.S. v. will be carried into
prohibited by law or ordinance.
Paguirigan, 14 Phil. effect.
4531
Kindsoferave coecfion
Nanice of otherlieht threats 1. Preventive - The offender uses violence to
prevent the victim from doing what he
It is not subject to a demand for money or any wants to do. Here, the ac.t prevented is not
material consideration and the wrong prohibited by law.
threatened does not amount to a crime.
NOTE: In grave coercion, the act of
GRAVE COERCIONS preventing by force must be made at the
ART. 286, RPC time the offended party was doing or about
to do the att to be prevented. If the act was
Punishable acrs already done when violence is exerted, the
crime is unjust vexation.
1. Preventing another, by means of violence,
threat or intimidation, from doing 2. Compulsive - The offender uses violence to
something not prohibited by law; and
compel the offended party to do what he
2. Compelling another, by means of violence,
threat or intimidation, to do something does not want to do. The act compelled may
against his will, whether it be right or or may not be prohibited by law.
wrong.
No ecave coercion whena oecson nrohihits
Elements CPre-No-YJ'1996 1999 2009 RABl anothertndoan aa because the acr done isa
crime and violence and intimidation ;s
1. A person 11ttvented another from doing emnloved
something not prohibited by law, or that he
compelled him to do something against his There is no grave coercion because the ac.t from
will, be it right or wrong; which a person is prevented from doing is a
2. Prevention or compulsion be effetted by crime. It may only give rise to threat or physical
�iolence, threats or intimidation; and injuries, if some injuries are inflicted.
NOTE: The threat must be present, clear, However, in case of grave coercion where the
imminent and actual. Such threat cannot be offended party is being compelled to do
made in writing or through a middle man. something against his will, whether it be wrong
or not, the crime of grave coercion is committed
3. Person that restrained the will and liberty of if violence or intimidation is employed in order
another has llll authority of law or the right to compel him to do the att.
to do so.
Q: Isagani lost his gold necklace bearing his
NOTE: Coercion is consummated even if the initials. He saw Roy wearing the said
offended party did not accede to the purpose of necklace. Isagani asked Roy to return to him
the coercion. The essence of coercion is an attack the necklace as it belongs to him, but Roy
on individual liberty. refused. Isagani then drew his gun and told
Roy, "If you will not give back the necklace to
Paragraph 2: Penalty next higher in degree me, I will kill you!" Out of fear for his life and
against his will, Roy gave the necklace to
Pucoose of the law in mmishine erave Isagani. What offense did Isagani commit?
coecfion (1998 BAR)
To enforce the principle that no person may A: lsagani committed the crime of grave
take the law into his own hands and that ours is coercion (Art 286, RPC) for compelling Roy, by
means of serious threats or intimidation, to do 2. Robbery- If the value of the property seized
something against the latter's will, whether it be is greater than that of the debt (intent to
right or wrong. Serious threats or intimidation gain is present in this case) and violence and
approximating violence constitute grave intimidation are employed.
coercion, not grave threats. Such is the nature of
the threat in this case because it was committed 3. Esta/a - If there is no obligation on the part
with a gun, is a deadly weapon. of the offended party but was only feigned.
There is estafa because deceit is employed.
Qnalifxinedrcnmsrances ofGrave Coerdoo
COMPULSORY PURCHASE OF MERCHANDISE
1. If the coercion is committed in violation of AND PAYMENT OF WAGES
the exercise of the right of suffrage. BY MEANS OF TOKENS
2. If the coercion is committed to compel ART. 288, RPC
another to perform any religious act.
3. If the coercion is committed to prevent Punishable acts and their elements
another from performing any religious act.
1. Forcing or compelling, diret1:ly or indirectly
LIGHT COERCION or knowingly permitting the act of forcing or
ART. 287, RPC compelling of the laborer or employee of the
offender to purchase merchandise or
Elements (Se-Vi-Cre-Pl commodities of any kind from him.
Elements CPew-5-B-Pl
1. Offender is a 12erson in charge, .c,nployee or
�orkman of a manufacturing or industrial
establishment;
2. Manufacturing or industrial establishment
has a .s_ecret of the industry which the
offender has learned;
It is the taking of personal property belonging to Personal property is the subject ofRobbery
another, with intent to gain, by means of
violence against or intimidation of any person or The property taken must be personal property,
using force upon anything. for if real property is occupied by means of
violence against or intimidation of person, the
NOTE: For the appellant to be guilty of crime is usurpation. (Art 312, RPC)
consummated robbery, there must be
incontrovertible proof that property was taken Q: Is Robbery committed when police officers
from the victim. The appellant is guilty of seized the opium without causing the
attempted robbery only when he commences prosecution of the offenders, and thereafter
the commission of robbery directly by overt acts said police officers appropriated the opium?
and does not perform all the at"tS of execution
which would produce robbery by reason of A: YES. The person from whom the property was
some causes or accident other than his own taken need not be the owner of such. Legal
spontaneous desistance. possession is sufficient. (U.S. v. Sana Lim, G.R No.
9604, November 19, 1914)
lllustration: In a case, Totoy demanded from
the victim, "Toi, pero-pero long ito, dahil Generally identitx of real owner is not
kailangan Jang." The victim refused to part with necessary
his earnings and resisted. He even tried to get
out of the taxicab but Totoy pulled him back and GR: The identity of the real owner is not
stabbed him. Randy, Rot-Rot, and Jon-Jon necessary so long as the personal property taken
followed suit and stabbed the victim with their does not belong to the accused.
bladed weapons. The vit1:im was able to flee
from the vehicle without anything being taken XPN: If the crime is Robbery with Homicide
from him. Totoy and his confederates
commenced by overt acts the execution of the Pcesumation oCintent to eain
robbery, but failed to perform all the at"tS of
execution by reason of the victim's resistance. In unlawful taking of personal property intent to
(People v. Baca/an, G.R. No. 141527, September 4, gain is presumed. The element of personal
2003) property belonging to another and that of intent
to gain must concur.
Classification of robbery
Ocn,crence of violence and intimidation
1. Robbery with violence against, or
intimidation of persons (Arts. 294, 297, and GR: Violence or intimidation must be present
298, RPC); before the taking of personal property is
2. Robbery by the use of force upon things. complete.
(Arts. 299 and 302, RPC)
XPN: When violence results in homicide, rape
Elements nfrnhhecx in eenecal intentional mutilation or any of the serious
physical injuries penalized under pars. 1 and 2
1. There is personal property belonging to of Art 263, the taking of the personal property is
another; (BAR 1992, 1996) robbery complexed with any of those crimes
2. There is unlawful taking of that property; under Art. 294, even if the taking was already
3. Taking must be with intent to gain; and complete when the violence was used by the
4. There is violence against or intimidation of offender.
any person or force upon things. (BAR
1992, 2002, 2005) llnlawfnl taking
The property must belong to another. Thus, one PnniShahle acrs under Art 294 BPC '2000
who, by means of violence or intimidation, took 2005 2010RAB)
his own property from the depositary is not
guilty of robbery. 1. When by reason or on occasion of the
robbery the crime of homicide is committed;
The taking of personal property must be
unlawful to constitute robbery. If the property is 2. When the robbery is accompanied by:
in possession of the offender given to him in a. Rape;
trust by the owner, the crime is est.afa. Also, the b. Intentional mutilation; or
unlawful taking must not be under the claim of c. Arson
title or ownership.
3. When by reason or on the occasion of such
Unlawful taking is complete when robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in:
1. As to robbery with violence against or a. Insanity;
intimidation of persons- from the moment b. Imbecility;
the offender gains possession of the thing c. Impotency; or
even if the culprit had no opportunity to d. Blindness is inflicted
dispose of the same, the unlawful taking is
complete. 4. When by reason or on the occasion of
robbery, any of the physical injuries
2. As to robbery with force upon things- the resulting in the:
thing must be taken out of the a. Loss of the use of speech;
building/premises to consummate the b. Loss of the power to hear or to smell;
crime. c. Loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or
a leg;
Bohherv with violence vis-ta-vis Grave d. Loss of the use of any of such member;
Threats viS-A-visGcave Coecfion or
e. Incapacity for the work in which the
ROBBERY GRAVE injured person is theretofore habitually
GRAVE engaged is inflicted
WITH COERCION
THREATS
VIOENCE
5. If the violence or intimidation employed in
There is No intent to No intent to the commission of the robbery is carried to
intent to gain gain a degree clearly unnecessary for the
eain commission of the crime;
Immediate Intimidation; Intimidation is
harm Promises some immediate and 6. When in the course of its execution, the
future harm or offended party offender shall have inflicted upon any
injury is compelled to person not responsible for the commission
do something of the robbery any of the physical injuries in
against his will consequence of which the person injured:
a. Becomes deformed;
b. Loses any other member of his body;
c. Loses the use thereof;
Bohhervvis-A-vis Bribery d. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he is
ROBBERY BRIBERY habitually engaged for more than 90
days; or
The victim is He parts with his
e. Becomes ill or incapacitated for labor
deprived of his money. in a sense,
for more than 30 days
money or property by voluntarily
force or intimidation
7. If the violence employed by the offender
does not cause any of the serious physical
injuries defined in Art.263, or if the offender The offender must have the intent to take
employs intimidation only. personal property before the killing.
Intent to kill not neressarx
NOTE: The crime defined in this article is a
special camp/ex crime. Article 48 does not apply. In robbery with homicide, the law does not
require that the homicide be committed with
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE intent to kill. the crime exists even though there
is no intention to commit homicide.
Bohherx wUb homicide (2009 2014RAB)
Q: On the occasion of the robbery, the
If death results or even accompanies a robbery, storeowner, a septuagenarian, suffered a
the crime will be robbery with homicide stroke due to the extreme fear which directly
provided that the robbery and the homicide are caused his death when the robbers pointed
consummated. The crime of robbery with their guns at him. Was there robbery with
homicide is a special complex crime or a single homicide?
indivisible crime. The killings must have been
perpetrated by reason or on the occasion of A: YES. It is immaterial that death supervened as
robbery. As long as the homicide resulted, a mere accident as long as the homicide was
during, or because of the robbery, even if the produced by reason or on the occasion of the
killing is by mere accident, robbery with robbery, because it is only the result which
homicide is committed. (People v. Comiling, G.R. matters, without reference to the circumstances.
No. 140405, March 4, 2004) or causes. or persons intervening in the
commission of the crime which must be
NOTE: Even if the killing preceded or was done considered. (People v. Domingo, G.R. No. 82375,
ahead of the robbing, whether intentional or not. April 18, 1990)
the crime is robbery with homicide. If aside from
homicide, rape or physical injuries are also Q: A, B, C committed robbery in the house of
committed by reason or on the occasion of the Angelica. Simeon, the houseboy of Angelica
robbery, the rape or physical injuries are put up a fight. He tried to wrest the gun from
considered aggravating circumstances in the the hand of A. In the process, the gun fired
crime of robbery with homicide. Whenever hitting A who died as a result. Who is liable
homicide is committed as a consequence of or on for the death of A? And what crime is
the occasion of a robbery, all those who took committed?
part as principals in the commission of the crime
will also be guilty as principals in the crime of A: Band Care liable for Robbery with Homicide.
robbery with homicide. Simeon is not liable because his act is in
accordance with law. The crime applies to the
Elements 0-R-A-Hl robbers themselves. The death of their
companion A was by reason or on the occasion
1. The taking of personal property with of robbery.
violence or intimidation against persons;
2. The property taken 11.elongs to another; Q: Suppose the victims were killed, not for
3. The taking was done with llflimo lucrandi; the purpose of committing robbery and the
and idea of taking the money and other personal
4. On the occasion of the robbery or by reason property of the victims was conceived by the
thereof, 11.omicide was committed. (People v. culprits only after killing. Is this a case of
Baccay, G.R. No. 120366, January 16, 1998; robbery with homidde?
People v. Mantung, G.R. No. 130372, July 20,
1999) A: NO. The intention of the perpetrators is really
to kill the victim and robbery came only as an
NOTE: Homicide as used in paragraph (1) of afterthought. The perpetrators are liable for two
Article 294 is to be understood in its generic separate crimes of robbery and homicide or
sense as to include parrlcide and murder. murder, (qualified by abuse of superior
strength). (People v. Domingo, G.R. No. 82375,
Intent to commit robbery must precede the April 18, 1990)
killill£
NOTE: There is no crime of robbery in band with
murder or robbery with homicide in band or
A: fervis and Marlon committed the crime of The crime of robbery with rape is a crime
robbery, while Jonathan committed the special against property which is a single indivisible
complex crime of robbery with homicide. fervis offense. The rape accompanies the robbery. In a
and Marlon are criminally liable for the robbery case where rape and not homicide is committed,
only because that was the crime conspired upon there is only a crime of robbery with rape if both
and actually committed by them, assuming that the robbery and the rape are consummated.
the taking of the cellphones and the cash from
the bank's customers was effected by NOTE: Although the victim was raped twice on
intimidation. They will not incur liability for the the occasion of Robbery, the additional rape is
death of the pedestrian because they have not considered as an aggravating circumstance
nothing to do with it. Only Jonathan will incur in the crime of robbery and rape. There is no law
liability for the death of the pedestrian, aside providing for the additional rape/s or
from the robbery, because he alone brought homicide/s for that matter to be considered as
about such death. Although the death caused aggravating circumstance. It further observed
was not intentional but accidental, it shall be a that the enumeration of aggravating
component of the special complex crime of circumstances under Art. 14 of the RPC is
robbery with homicide because it was exclusive, unlike in Art. 13 of the same Code,
committed in the course of the commission of which enumerates the mitigating circumstances
the robbery. where analogous circumstances may be
considered. (People v. Rega/a, G.R. No. 130508,
No crime of rohherx with multiole homicide April 5, 2000; People v. Sultan, G.R. No. 132470,
{1995. 2007. 2009 BAR) April 27, 2000)
a robbery and not the other way around. This The law does not distinguish whether rape was
special complex crime under Art. 294 of the RPC committed before, during, or after the robbery. It
contemplates a situation where the original is enough that the robbery accompanied the
intent of the accused was to take. with intent to rape. Robbery must not be a mere accident or
gain, personal property belonging to another afterthought.
and rape is committed on the occasion thereof or
as an accompanying crime. (People v. Go/lo, G.R. lllustration: Where 6 accused entered the
No. 181902, August 31, 2011) house of the offended party, brandishing
firearms and knives and after ransacking the
Q: In case there is conspiracy, are all house for money and jewelry, brought the
conspirators liable for the crime of robbery offended party out of the house to a grassy place
with rape? where she was ordered to undress and although
she was able to run away, was chased and
A: YES. In People v. Suyu, it was ruled that once caught, and thereafter raped by all of the
conspiracy is established between several accused, the latter committed robbery with rape.
accused in the commission of the crime of (People v. Villagracia, G.R. No. 94311, September
robbery, they would all be equally culpable for 14, 1993)
the rape committed by anyone of them on the
occasion of the robbery, unless anyone of them Insrances when there could he a senarate
proves that he endeavored to prevent the others crime of robbery and rape
from committing rape. (People v. Go/lo, ibid.)
If the two (2) crimes were separated both by
Q: Together XA, YB, and ZC planned to rob time and space, there is no complex crime of
Miss OD. They entered her house by breaking Robbery with Rape. (People v. Angeles, G.R. No.
one of the windows in her house. After taking 10428S-86, Moy 21, 1993)
her personal properties and as they were
about to leave, XA dedded on impulse to rape Q: can there be such a crime as robbery with
OD. As XA was molesting her, YB and ZC stood attempted rape?
outside the door of her bedroom and did
nothing to prevent XA from raping OD. A: NO. The crime cannot be a complex crime of
robbery with attempted rape under Article 48,
What crime or crimes did XA, YB, and ZC because a robbery cannot be a necessary means
commit, and what i s the criminal liability of to commit attempted rape; nor attempted rape,
each? (2004 BAR) to commit robbery. (People v. Corioga, CA., 54
O.G. 4307)
A: The crime committed by XA, YB, and ZC is the
composite crime of robbery with rape, a single, ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES
indivisible offense under Art. 294(1) of the RPC.
Phvsiral ininries must he serious
Although the conspiracy among the offenders
was only to commit robbery and only XA raped To be considered as such, the physical injuries
CD, the other robbers, YB and ZC, were present must always be serious. If the physical injuries
and aware of the rape being committed by their are only less serious or slight, they are absorbed
co-conspirator. Having done nothing to stop XA in the robbery. The crime becomes merely
from committing the rape, YB and ZC thereby robbery. But if the less serious physical injuries
concurred in the commission of the rape by their were committed after the robbery was already
co-conspirator XA. consummated, there would be a separate charge
for the less serious physical injuries. It will only
The criminal liability of all, XA, YB, and ZC, shall be absorbed in the robbery if it was inflicted in
be the same, as principals in the special complex the course of the execution of the robbery. The
crime of robbery with rape which is a single, same is true in the case of slight physical
indivisible offense where the rape accompanying injuries.
the robbery is just a component.
Q: Suppose a gang robbed a mansion in
Cciminal intent ro eain orecedes intent ro Forbes Park. On the occasion of the robbery,
� physical injuries were inOicted on the
household members. The robbers also
detained the children to compel their
parents to come out with the money. What There is sufficient intimidation where the acts of
crime/sis/are committed by the robbers? the offender inspired fear upon the vic.tim
although the accused was not armed.
A: The detention was a necessary means to
facilitate the robbery. Thus, the offenders will be ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES,
held liable for the complex crimes of robbery COMMITTED IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE
with serious physic.al injuries and serious illegal AND BY A BAND, OR WITH THE USE OF
detention. FIREARM ON A STREET, ROAD OR ALLEY
ART. 295, RPC
But if the victims were detained because of the
timely arrival of the police, such that the Qualifying circumstances
offenders had no choice but to detain the victims
as hostages in exchange for their safe passage, If committed:
the detention is absorbed by the crime of 1. In an uninhabited place;
robbery and is not treated as a separate crime. 2. By a band;
3. By attacking a moving train, street car,
ROBBERY WITH ARSON motor vehicle, or airship;
R.A. 7659 4. By entering the passengers' compartments
in a train, or in any manner taking the
Commission of composite crime passengers thereof by surprise in the
respective conveyances; or
The composite crime would only be committed if 5. On a street, road, highway, or alley, and the
the primordial intent of the offender is to intimidation is made with the use of
commit robbery and there is no killing, rape, or firearms, the offender shall be punished by
intentional mutilation committed by the the maximum periods of the proper
offender during the robbery. Otherwise, the penalties prescribed in Art. 294.
crime would be robbery with homicide, or
robbery with rape, or robbery with intentional Any of these five qualifying circumstances of
mutilation, in that order and the arson would robbery with physicaJ injuries or intimidation
only be an aggravating circumstance. must be alleged in the information and proved
during the trial.
Bohherv mustorecede acsno
Nnn-aooHcahmtx nfrhis actidein nther cases
It is essential that robbery precede the arson, as
in the case of rape and intentional mutilation, This article does not apply in cases of Robbery
because the amendment included arson among with homicide, robbery with intentional
the rape and intentional mutilation which have mutilation, robbery with rape and robbery with
accompanied the robbery. serious physical injuries resulting in insanity,
imbecility, impotency or blindness. This is
NOTE: Arson has been made a component only because the Article omitted these crimes in the
of robbery with violence against or intimidation enumeration. (Reyes, 2008)
of persons but not of robbery by the use of force
upon things. Hence, if the robbery was by the ROBBERY COMMITTED BY A BAND
use of force upon things and therewith arson ART. 296, RPC
was committed, two distinc.t crimes are
committed. Bnhhecx committed hxahand C201ORABJ
OTHER CASES OF SIMPLE ROBBERY Robbery is committed by a band when at least 4
armed malefactors take part in the commission
Any kind of robbery with less serious physical of a robbery.
injuries or slight physical injuries falls under this
specie of robbery. NOTE: If any unlicensed firearm is used, the
penalty imposed upon all the malefactors shall
NOTE: But where there is no violence exerted to be the maximum of the corresponding penalty
accomplish the snatching. the crime committed provided by law, without prejudice to the
is not robbery but simple theft. criminal liability for illegal possession of such
firearms. This is a special aggravating
circumstance applicable only in a case of Art. 298 applies even if the document signed,
robbery in band. executed, or delivered is a private or commercial
document.
l.iahilitv fnr the acrs of the other members of
the band Robbery by execution of deeds vis-a-vis
A member of the band is liable for any of the Gcave coercion
assaults committed by the other members
thereof, when the follov.ring requisites concur: ROBBERY BY
GRAVE COERCION
EXECUTION OF DEEDS
1. That he was a member of the band;
2. That he was present at the commission of a No intent to gain
robbery by that band;
3. That the other members of the band is an intent to There is no intent
committed an assault; and defraud to defraud
4. That he did not attempt to prevent the
assault. ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR
PUBLIC BUILDING OR EDIFICE
In Robbery by o band, all are liable for any DEVOTED TO WORSHIP
assault committed by the band, unless one or ART. 299, RPC
some attempted to prevent the assault.
Elements of the first kind of rnhherx with
ATTEMPTED AND FRUSTRATED ROBBERY fnrce 11000 thines underArt 299
COMMITTED UNDER CERTAIN
CIRCUMSTANCES 1. Offender entered an inhabited house, or
ART. 297, RPC public building, or edifice devoted to
religious worship; (1992, 2007, 2008 BAR)
Aoolicatlnn nfthis amere
2. Entrance was effected by any of the
It applies when homicide is committed on the following means:
occasion of an attempted or frustrated robbery.
a. Through an opening not intended for
The term homicide is used in a generic sense. It entrance or egress;
includes murder, parricide, and infanticide. b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or
breaking any door or window; (2000
The clause "unless the homicide committed shall BAR)
deserve a higher penalty under the provisions of c. By using false keys, picklocks, or similar
this code" may be illustrated thus: In an tools, or
attempted or frustrated robbery, the killing of d. By using any fictitious name or
the victim is qualified by treachery or pretending the exercise of public
relationship. The proper penalty for murder or authority.
parricide shall be imposed because it is more
severe. The whole body of culprit must be inside the
building to constitute entering.
EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF
VIOLENCE OR INTIMIOATION 3. Once inside the building. the offender took
ART. 298 personal property belonging to another
with intent to gain.
Elements CCom-Pe-YJC2001 RABl
force11000 thines
1. Offender has intent to .IIJ:fraud another;
2. Offender compels him to sign, execute, or It requires some element of trespass into the
deliver any public instrument or document; establishment where the robbery was
and committed; e.g. the offender must have entered
3. Compulsion is by means of �iolence or the premises where the robbery was committed.
intimidation. If no entry was effected, even though force may
have been employed in the taking of the
property from within the premises, the crime
will only be the�
It refers to any shelter, ship or vessel b. By taking such furniture or objects away
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons to be broken or forced open outside the
even though the inhabitants thereof are place of the robbery.
temporarily absent therefrom when the robbery
is committed. NOTE: The crime committed would be
estafa or theft, if the Jocked or sealed
Dependencies receptacle is forced open in the building
where it is kept and not taken away to be
It consists of all interior courts, corrals, broken outside.
warehouses, granaries, barns, coach houses,
stables, or other departments, or enclosed ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE
interior entrance connected therewith and AND BY A BAND
which form part of the whole. Orchards and ART. 300, RPC
other lands used for cultivation or production
are not included, even if closed, contiguous to The Robbery mentioned in this article, if
the building, and having direct connection committed in an uninhabited place or by a band,
therewith. shall be punished by the maximum period of the
penalty provided therefor.
Requisites:
Robbery with force upon things (Art 299, RPC),
a. It must be contiguous to the building; in order to be qualified, must be committed in an
b. It must have an interior entrance uninhabited place and by a band (Art 300, RPC)
connected therewith; and while robbery with violence against or
c. It must form part of the whole. intimidation of persons must be committed in an
uninhabited place or by a band. (Art 295, RPC)
Illustration: A small store located on the ground
floor of a house is a dependency of the house, ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR IN
there being no partition between the store and A PRIVATE BUILDING
the house, and in going to the main stairway, one ART. 302, RPC
has to enter the store which has a door. (U.S. v.
Ventura, G.R. No. 13715,January 22, 1919) Elements
false kevs 1. Offender entered an uninhabited place or a
building which was not a dwelling house,
Genuine keys stolen from the owner or any keys not a public building, or not an edifice
other than those intended by the owner for use devoted to religious worship;
in the Jock forcibly opened by the offender.
2. Any of the following circumstances was
Elements of the serond kind of robbery with present:
force noon thinesunder Art 299 a. Entrance was effected through an
opening not intended for entrance or
1. Offender is inside a dwelling house, public egress
building or edifice devoted to religious
worship, regardless of circumstances under NOTE: If the entrance was made
which he entered it; and through the door which was open, or
closed but unlocked, and not through
2. Offender takes personal property belonging the window, the person who took
to another, with intent to gain, under any of personal property from the house with
the following circumstances: intent to gain is guilty only of theft and
gather fruits, cereals or other forest or farm Q: Mario found a watch in a jeep he was
products. riding, and since i t did not belong to him, he
approached policeman P and delivered the
Elements CJ-R-P-Withnnt-C-YJ watch with instruction to return the same to
1. There is taking of jlersonal property; whoever may be found to be the owner. P
2. Property taken b,elongs to another; failed to return the watch to the owner and,
3. Taking was done with intent to gain; instead, sold it and appropriated for himself
4. Taking was donr without the ,onsent of the the proceeds of the sale.
owner; and
5. Taking is accomplished without the use of Charged with theft, P reasoned out that he
.l::,iolence against or intimidation of persons cannot be found guilty because it was not he
of force upon things. (Baltazar v. People, G.R. who found the watch. Moreover, the watch
No. 164545, November 20, 2006) turned out to be stolen property. Is P's
defense valid? (1998 BAR)
Illustration: While praying in church, A felt and
saw his wallet being taken by B, but because of A: NO. In a charge for theft, it is enough that the
the solemnity of the proceedings, did not make personal property subject thereof belongs to
any move; while the taking was with his another and not to the offender. It is irrelevant
knowledge, it was without his consent, and Theft whether the person deprived of the possession
is committed. of the watch has or has no right to the watch.
Theft is committed by one who, with intent to
"Takina" gain, appropriates property of another without
the consent of its owner. Furthermore, the crime
The act of depriving another of the possession is committed even when the offender receives
and dominion of movable property. The taking property of another but acquires only physical
must be accompanied by the intention, at the possession to hold the same. Pis a finder in law
time of the taking, of withholding the thing with liable for theft not estafa.
some character of permanency.
Test to determine whether an object can be
In the case of Pit-og v. People (G.R. No. 76539, the suhiect nftheft
October 11, 1990), the Court acquitted the
petitioner who took the sugarcane and bananas The test of what is the proper subject of larceny
believing them to be her own, due to the absence seems to be not whether the subject is corporeal
of criminal intent to gain. but whether it is capable of appropriation by
another.
Pwnecsbio in theft immaterial
NOTE: In the old ruling, when a person stole a
Ownership is immaterial in theft. The subject of check but was not able to use the same because
the crime of theft is any personal property the check bounced, he shall be guilty of the crime
belonging to another. Hence, as long as the of theft according to the value of the parchment.
property taken does not belong to the accused In the new ruling, however and following the
who has a valid claim thereover, it is immaterial same circumstances, he shall be guilty of an
whether said offender stole it from the owner, a impossible crime. Uacinto v. People, G.R. No.
mere possessor, or even a thief of the property. 162540,july 13, 2009)
(Miranda v. People, G.R. No. 176298, January 25,
2012) Cnmolete unlawful rakine
Illustration: Where the finder of the lost or Unlawful taking is deemed complete from the
mislaid property entrusts it to another for moment the offender gains possession of the
delivery to a designated owner, the person to thing, even ifhe has no opportunity to dispose of
whom it is thus confided, assumes by voluntary the same.
substitution, as to both the property and the
owner, the same relation as was occupied by the tmmaterialirv of carrxine awax of the thine
finder. If he misappropriates it, he is guilty of !l!ll!!.
Theft as if he were the actual finder of the same.
(People v. Avila, G.R. No.19786, March 31, 1923) In theft. it is not required for the thief to be able
to carry away the thing taken from the owner.
The consummation of this crime takes place
upon the voluntary and malicious taking of the Qualified Theft [S-G-V-Co-Fi-Fi) [2007. 2010
property which is realized upon the material BAR)
occupation of the taking, that is, when he had full
possession thereof even if he did not have the 1. If theft is committed by a domestic ,iervant;
opportunity to dispose of the same. 2. If the theft is committed with irave abuse
Proof that the accused is in possession of a of confidence;
recently stolen property gives rise to a valid
presumption that he stole the property. NOTE: If the offense is to be qualified by
abuse of confidence, the abuse must be
No crime nfknsrcared theft grave, like an accused who was offered food
and allowed to sleep in the house of the
Unlawful taking, which is the deprivation of complainant out of the latter's pity and
one's personal property, is the element which charity, but stole the latter's money in his
produces the felony in its consummated stage. At house when he left the place.
the same time, without unlawful taking as an act
of execution, the offense could only be 3. If the property stolen is a motor ll:ehicle,
attempted theft, if at all. With these mail matter or large cattle; (2002 BAR)
considerations, under Artide 308 of the RPC, 4. If the property stolen consist of mconuts
theft cannot have a frustrated stage. Theft can taken from the premises of a plantation;
only be attempted or consummated. (Valenzuela 5. If the property stolen is fish taken from a
v. People, G.R. No. 160188,June 21, 2007) fishpond or fishery; or
6. If property is taken on the occasion of tire,
NOTE: The ability of the offender to freely earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption,
dispose of the property stolen is not a or any other calamity, vehicular accident
constitutive element of the crime of theft. Such or dvil disturbance. (2006 BAR)
factor runs immaterial to the statutory definition
of theft, which is the taking. with intent to gain, Q: Mirto is a Branch Manager of UCC. It was
of personal property of another without the alleged that he used the credit line of
latter's consent. accredited dealers in favor of persons wbo
either had no credit lines or had exhausted
Theft vis-a-vis Esrafq their credit lines. He diverted cement bags
from the company's Norzagaray Plant or La
Union Plant to truckers wbo would buy
THEFT ESTAFA
cement for profit.
If only the physical Where both the
or material material and juridicaJ In these transactions, he instructed the
possession of the possession are customers that payments be made in the
thing is transferred transferred, form of·Pay to Cash" checks, for which he did
misappropriation of not issue any receipts. He did not remit the
the property would checks but these were either encashed or
constitute estaa deposited to bis personal bank account. What
is the crime commjtted?
Theft vis-a-vis Bohherx
A: Qualified theft through grave abuse of
confidence. His position entailed a high degree
THEFT ROBBERY of confidence, having access to funds collected
The offender does The offender uses from UCC clients. As Branch Manager of UCC
not use violence or violence or who was authorized to receive payments from
intimidation or does intimidation or enters a UCC customers, he gravely abused the trust and
not enter a house or house or building confidence reposed upon him by the
building through any through any of the management of UCC. Precisely, by using that
of the means means specified in trust and confidence, Mirto was able to
specified in Articles Articles 299 and 302, perpetrate the theft of UCC funds to the grave
299 and 302, RPC RPC prejudice of the latter. (People v. Mirto, G.R. No.
193479, October 19, 2011)
QUALIFIED THEFT
ART. 310, RPC Q: Mrs. S was a bank teller. In need of money,
she took PS,000.00 from her money drawer
and made it appear that a certain depositor envelopes and was talking to someone on her
made a withdrawal from his account when in phone.
fact no such withdrawal was made. What
crime was committed b y Mrs. S? Later on, Mejares told Torres that she was
A: Qualified theft. Mrs. S was only in material instructed by Gavino to also take a watch and
possession of the deposits as she received the jewelry since thecash was not enough to pay
same in behalf of the bank. Juridical possession the driver in the accident who was
remains with the bank. Juridical possession threatening to sue. Mejares placed
means possession which gives the transferee a everything in a green bag and tried to leave
right over the thing which the transferee may set the condominium. Is Valencia liable of the
up even against the owner. If a bank teller crime of qualified theft?
appropriates the money for personal gain then
the felony committed is theft. Further, since Mrs. A: YES. Normal human experience, as well as the
S occupies a position of confidence, and the bank consistency in and confluence of the testimonies
places money in her possession due to the of prosecution witnesses, lead to no other
confidence reposed on her, the felony of conclusion than that Mejares, taking advantage
qualified theft was committed. (Roque v. People of her being a domestic helper of private
G.R. No. 138954, November 25, 2004) complainant for approximately a year,
committed the crime of qualified theft.
Q: Clepto went alone to a high-end busy shop
and decided to take one of the smaller purses Thus, the Court has been consistent in holding
without paying for it. Overcame by that ·intent to gain or animus lucrandi is an
conscience, she decided to leave her own internal act that is presumed from the unlawful
purse in place of the one she took. Her act taking by the offender of the thing subject of
was discovered and Clepto was charged with asportation. Thus, actual gain is irrelevant as the
theft. She claimed that there was no theft, as important consideration is the intent to gain." In
the store suffered no injury or prejudice this case, it is clear from the established facts
because she had left a purse in place of the that it was Mejares who opened the drawer in
one she took. Comment on her defense. the masters' bedroom and took away the cash
(2014BAR) and valuables it contained. (People v. Mejares,
G.R. No. 2255735,January 10, 2018, as penned by
A: The defense of Clepto has no merit. Theft is ]. Leanen)
already consummated from the moment Clepto
took possession of one of the smaller purses THEFT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE NATIONAL
inside a high-end shop, without paying for it. She LIBRARY AND NATIONAL MUSEUM
took the personal property of another, with ART. 311, RPC
intent to gain, without the consent of the latter.
Damage or injury to the owner is not an element Theft of property of National Library and
of theft, hence, even if she left her purse in lieu of National Museum has a fixed penalty regardless
the purse she took, theft is still committed. of its value, but if the crime is committed with
grave abuse of confidence, the penalty for
Q: On May 22, 2012, according to Raquel qualified theft shall be imposed.
Torres, one of the household helper of
victims Spouses Gavino, Belen Mejares USURPATION
received a call. She hurried to the computer
room and answered the call away from OCCUPATION OF REAL PROPERTY OR
Torres. When Mejares returned, she was USURPATION OF REAL RIGHTS IN PROPERTY
"pale, perspiring. and panicky." When Torres ART. 312, RPC
asked about the identity of the caller,
Mejares did not answer. She told her instead r,miShable acts
that Gavino met an accident and instructed
her to get something from a drawer in the 1. Taking possession of any real property
master's bedroom. belonging to another; and
2. Usurping any real rights in property
Since it was Jocked, Mejares was supposedly belonging to another.
told to destroy it. When Mejares emerged
from the bedroom, she was holding a plastic EJements of occupation of real property or
hamper that contained black wallet and 11s11rnarinn of real riehrs in nronertv
1. Offender takes possession of any real there is only civil liability. (People v. Dimacutak,
property or usurps any real rights in et al., 51 O.G. 1389)
property;
2. Real property or real rights belongs to ALTERING BOUNDARIES OR LANDMARKS
another: ART. 313, RPC
3. Violence against or intimidation of persons
is used by the offender in occupying real Elements
property or usurping real rights in property;
(1996 BAR) and 1. There are boundary marks or monuments of
4. There is intent to gain. towns, provinces, or estates, or any other
marks intended to designate the boundaries
If the accused is the owner of the property which of the same; and
he usurped from the possessor, he cannot be 2. Offender alters said boundary marks.
held liable for usurpation. Considering that this
is a crime against property, there must be intent Intent to gain is not necessary. The mere act of
to gain. In the absence of the intent to gain, the alteration or destruction of the boundary marks
act may constitute coercion. is sufficient.
or property held in trust is a mere circumstantiaJ Unable to sell the ring and the bracelet, Rosa
evidence of misappropriation. delivered both items to Aurelia with the
understanding that Aurelia should, in tum,
In other words, the demand for the return of the return the items to Victoria, Aurelia dutifully
thing delivered in trust and the failure of the returned the bracelet to Victoria but sold the
accused to account for it are circumstantial ring. kept the cash proceeds thereof to
evidence of misappropriation. herself, and issued a check to Victoria which
bounced.
However, this presumption is rebuttable. If the
accused is able to satisfactorily explain his Victoria sued Rosa for estofa under Art. 315
failure to produce the thing delivered in trust, he of the RPC, insisting that delivery to a third
may not be held liable for estafa. In the case at person of the thing held in trust is not a
bar, however. since the medical representative defense in estafa. Is Rosa criminally liable for
failed to explain his inability to produce the estofa under the circumstances? (1999 BAR)
thing delivered to him in trust, the rule that ·the
failure to account, upon demand, for funds or A: NO. Rosa cannot be held criminally liable for
property held in trust is circumstantial evidence estafa. Although she received the jewelry from
of misappropriation• applies without doubt. Victoria under an obligation to return the same
(Filadams Pharma, Inc. v. CA, C.R. No. 132422, or deliver the proceeds thereof, she did not
March 30, 2004) misappropriate it. In fact, she gave them to
Aurelia specifically to be returned to Victoria.
Q: D'Aigle posits that Article 315, paragraph The misappropriation was done by Aurelia, and
l(h) of the RPC requires that the person absent the showing of any conspiraty between
charged was given juridical possession of the Aurelia and Rosa, the latter cannot be held
thing misappropriated. criminally liable for Aurelia's acts.
Here, he did not acquire juridical possession Elements of esmfo hv means of talse
of the things allegedly misappropriated nretenses or fraudulent acrs under Artkle
because his relation to SPis properties was 315 (21
only by virtue of his official functions as a
corporate officer. It is actually SPI, on whose I. Under paragraph (a) -
behalf he has acted, that has the juridical a. Using fictitious name;
possession of the said properties. Is the b. Falsely pretending to possess power,
D'Aigle correct? influence, qualifications, property,
credit. agency, business or imaginary
A: NO. Misappropriation or conversion may be transactions; or
proved by the prosecution by dirett evidence or c. By means of other similar deceits.
by circumstantial evidence. The failure to
account upon demand, for funds or property 2. Under paragraph (b) - Altering the quality,
held in trust, is circumstantial evidence of fineness, or weight of anything pertaining to
misappropriation. his art or business.
As mentioned, D'Aigle failed to account for, upon 3. Under paragraph (c) - Pretending to have
demand, the properties of SPI which were bribed any government employee, without
received by him in trust. This already constitutes prejudice to the action for calumny which
circumstantial evidence of misappropriation or the offended party may deem proper to
conversion of said properties to petitioners own bring against the offender. (2014 BAR)
personal use. (Andre L D'Aigle v. People C.R. No.
174181,june27, 2012) 4. Under paragraph (d) - postdating a check or
issuing a check in payment of an obligation.
Q: Aurelia introduced Rosa to Victoria, a (2014 BAR)
dealer of jewelry. Rosa agreed to sell a
diamond ring and a bracelet to Victoria on a 5. Under paragraph (e) -
commission basis, on the condition that, if a. By obtaining any food, refreshment or
the items cannot be sold, they may be accommodation at a hotel, inn,
returned to Victoria forthwith. restaurant, boarding house, lodging
house or apartment house without
paying therefore, with intent to defraud Effecr of fiJBnce to cnmnlv wUh ademand ro
the proprietor or the manager thereof; settle the nhliearinn
b. By obtaining credit at any of said
establishments using any false pretense; The effect of failure to comply with a demand to
or settle the obligation will give rise to a prima
c . By abandoning or surreptitiously facie evidence of deceit, which is an element of
removing any part of his baggage from the crime of estafa, constituting false pretense or
any of said establishments after fraudulent act as stated in the second sentence
obtaining credit, food, refreshment or of paragraph 2(d), Article 315 of the RPC.
accommodation therein, without paying (People v. Montaner, ibid.)
therefore.
Q: Can the fact that the accused was not the
Elements of estafa under par. 2 {d) of Art. actual maker of the check be put up as a
ill defense?
1. The postdating or issuance of a check in A: NO. In the case of People v. ls/eta, eta/. and
payment of an obligation contratted at the reiterated in the case of Za/gado v. CA, it was
time the check was issued; held that the appellant, who only negotiated
2. Lack of sufficiency of funds to cover the directly and personally the check drawn by
check; and another, is guilty of estafa because he had "guilty
3. Damage to the payee. (People v. Montaner, knowledge that at the time he negotiated the
G.R. No. 184053, August 31, 2011) check, the drawer has no sufficient funds."
(Garcia v. People, G.R. No. 144785, September 11,
Aoalication ofActifle 315 C2l Cdl 2003)
Article 315 (2) (d) applies when: Elements of Estafa through fraudulent means
1. Check is drawn to enter into an obligation underArtkle 315C31
2. Obligation is not pre-existing
1. Under paragraph (a) -
NOTE: The check must be genuine. If the check a. Offender induced the offended party
is falsified and is encashed with the bank or to sign a document;
exchanged for cash, the crime is estafa thru b. Deceit was employed to make him
falsification of a commercial document. sign the document;
c. Offended party personally signed the
llllustration: The accused must be able to document; and
obtain something from the offended party by d. Prejudice was caused.
means of the check he issued and delivered.
Thus, if A issued a check in favor of B for a debt Illlustration: A induced an illiterate owner
he has incurred a month or so ago, the dishonor who was desirous of mortgaging his
of the check for insufficiency of funds in the bank property for a certain amount. to sign a
does not constitute Esta/a. But if A told B to document which he believed was only a
deliver to him Pl0,000 and he would issue in power of attorney but in truth it was a deed
favor of B a check in the sum of Pll,000 as it of sale. A is guilty of Esta/a under par. 3(a)
was a Sunday and A needed the cash urgently, and the damage could consist at least in the
and B gave his Pl0,000 having in mind the profit disturbance in property rights. (U.S. v.
of Pl,000 when he encashed the check on Ma/ong, GR. No. L·12597, August 30, 1917)
Monday and the check bounced when deposited,
A can be held liable for Esta/a. In such case, it 2. Under paragraph (b) - Resorting to some
was clear that B would have not parted with his fraudulent practice to insure success in a
Pl0,000 were it not for the issuance of A's check. gambling game;
Settlement extinguish the criminal liability where the person to whom it was delivered can
for estafa? set off his right to possess even as against the
owner, and the latter should not be expecting
A: NO. Novation is not a mode or extinguishing the immediate return or the property, the
criminal liability for estafa. The criminal liability misappropriation or taking or that property is
therefor is not affected by a compromise or estofa. (U.S. v. Figueroa, G.R. No. 6748, March 16,
novation of contract. Reimbursement or belated 1912)
payment to the offended party or the money
swindled by the accused does not extinguish the Q: A, intending 10 redeem certain jewels,
criminal liability or the latter. (Metropolitan gave the pawnshop tickets 10 B, her servant,
Bank and Trust Company v. Rogelio Reynado ond so that the latter might take care or them
Jose C. Adrondea, GR. No. 164538, August 9, 2010) temporarily.
Robbery vis-A-vis Theft vis-A-vis Estafa One week later, B met C who got the tickets
and refused to return them alleging that the
tickets were or no value notwithstanding the
ROBBERY THEFT ESTAFA
demands made by B. Later, C redeemed the
Only Only personal Subject jewels without the knowledge and consent or
personal property is matter may be A or B. What crime did C commit?
property is involved real property
involved A: Complex crime or theft and estafa, because
the former is a necessary means to commit the
Taking is by Taking is not Taking is not
latter. C, with intent to gain, took the pawnshop
means of by means or by means or
tickets without the consent or either A or B. This
force force upon force upon
is theft. By redeeming the jewels by means or the
upon things things or things or
pawnshop tickets, he committed estofa using a
or violence violence violence
fictitious name. (People v. Yusay, G.R. No. L-
against or against or against or
26957, September 2, 1927)
intimidation intimidation intimidation
of persons. of persons. or persons.
Bsrafq with abuse of ronfidence vis-ti-vis
Penalty does Penalty Penalty Malvecsation
not depends on depends on
necessarily the amount the amount ESTAFA WITH
depend on involved. involved. ABUSE OF MALVERSATION
the amount CONFIDENCE
involved. Funds or property are Involves public funds
always private or property
Offender Offender Offender Offender is a private Offender is usually a
takes the takes the receives the
individual or even a public officer who is
property property property.
public officer who is accountable for public
without the without the not accountable for funds or property
consent or consent of the
public funds or
the owner by owner and
property
using threats, without using
Crime is committed Crime is committed by
intimidation threats,
by misappropriating, appropriating, taking
or violence. intimidation
converting or denying or misappropriating
or violence.
having received or consenting, or,
money, goods or other through abandonment
NOTE: The crime is theft even if the property personal property or negligence,
was delivered to the offender by the owner or permitting any other
possessor, if the latter expects an immediate
person to take the
return or the property delivered, that is, he public funds or
delivered only the physical or material
orooertv
possession or the property. (11.S. v. De Vera, G.R.
Offenders are entrusted with funds or property
No.16961, September 19, 1921)
Continuine offenses
However. if what was delivered was juridical
possession or the property, that is, a situation
Esta/a through false pretense made in writing is usurp legislative powers by judicial legislation
only a simple crime of estafa, not a complex and that in the course of such application or
crime of estofa through falsification. construction, it should not make or supervise
legislation. or under the guise of interpretation,
Estofa vis-A-vis Infidelity in the custody of modify, revise, amend, distort. remodel, or
i f 11 ' I rewrite the law, or give the law a construction
INFIDELITY IN THE which is repugnant to its terms. ( Corpuz v.
ESTAFA CUSTODY OF People, C.R. No.180016, April 29, 2014)
DOCUMENTS
Private individual Public officer entrusted OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING
was entrusted with the document. ART. 316, RPC
with the
document. Othecfncms ofswiodHoe
Intent to defraud. No intent to defraud.
1. Conveying, selling, encumbering, or
Separate charges of estofa and illegal mortgaging any real property, pretending
to be the owner of the same.
cecn,irroeot
Elements:
It is settled that a person may be charged and
a. Thing be immovable;
convicted separately of illegal recruitment under b. Offender who is not the owner of said
RA. No. 8042, in relation to the Labor Code, and
property should represent that he is the
estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the
owner thereof;
Revised Penal Code. We explicated in People v. c. Offender should have executed an act of
Cortez ond Yobut that: In this jurisdiction, it is
ownership (selling, leasing, encumbering
settled that the offense of illegal recruitment
or mortgaging the real property); and
is ma/um prohibltum where the criminal intent d. Att is made to the prejudice of the
of the accused is not necessary for conviction,
owner or of a third person.
while estafa is ma/um ;n se where the criminal
intent of the accused is crucial for NOTE: There must be existing real property
conviction. Conviction for offenses under the
in order to be liable under this Article. If the
Labor Code does not bar conviction for offenses
real property is inexistent, the offender will
punishable by other laws. Conversely, conviction be liable for estofa under par. 2(a).
for estofa under par. 2(a) of Art. 315 of the
Revised Penal Code does not bar a conviction for
2. Disposing real property knowing it to be
illegal recruitment under the Labor Code. It
encumbered even if the encumbrance be not
follows that one's acquittal of the crime of estafa
recorded. (1998 BAR)
will not necessarily result in his acquittal of the
crime of illegal recruitment in large scale, Elements:
and vice versa. (People v. Ochoa, C.R. No. 173792, a. That the thing disposed of is real
August 31, 2011; 2015 BAR) property;
Q: In providing the penalty, may the Court NOTE: If the thing encumbered is a
validly provide penalties for crimes against personal property, it is Art. 319 (selling
property based on the current inflation rate or pledging personal property) which
computing from the time the case was filed? governs and not this Article.
A: NO. There seems to be a perceived injustice b. Offender knew that the real property
brought about by the range of penalties that the was encumbered, whether the
courts continue to impose on crimes against encumbrance is recorded or not;
property committed today, based on the amount
of damage measured by the value of money NOTE: Encumbrance includes every
eighty years ago in 1932. However, this Court right or interest in the land which exists
cannot modify the said range of penalties in favor of third persons
because that would constitute judicial
legislation. c. There must be express representation
by the offender that the real property is
Verily, the primordial duty of the Court is merely free from encumbrance; and
to apply the law in such a way that it shall not
d . Act of disposing of the real property be his bond, or before being relieved from
made to the damage of another. the obligation contracted by him.
NOTE: If the loan had already been granted NOTE: Art. 316 contemplates the existence of
before the property was offered as a actual damage as an element of the offense. Mere
security, Art. 316 (2) is not violated. intent to cause damage is not sufficient.
3. Wrongful taking of personal property from Art 316CJlvis-ta-visArt 315nae 2 Cal
its lawful possessor to the prejudice of the
latter or a third person;
Elements:
a. Offender is the owner of personal
property; offender It is roa er
b. Said personal property is in the lawful exercises or executes, because it can be
possession of another; as part of the false committed even if
c. Offender wrongfully takes it from its representation, some the offender does
lawful possessor; and act of dominion or not execute acts of
d. Prejudice is thereby caused to the ownership over the ownership, as long
possessor or third person. property to the as there was a false
damage and prejudice pretense
4. Executing any fictitious contract to the of the real owner of
prejudice of another; the thin
Other kinds of deceit under Art. 318 [2000 money would be invested in Philam Life Fund
BAR) Management and that its proceeds may be
utilized to pay for Gabriel's insurance premiums.
1. Defrauding or damaging another by any (Osorio v. People, G.R. No. 207711,July 2, 2018, as
other deceit not mentioned in the preceding penned by J. Leanen)
articles; and
2. Interpreting dreams, making forecasts, CHATTEL MORTGAGE
telling fortunes, or taking advantage of the
credulity of the public in any other similar REMOVAL, SALE OR PLEDGE OF
manner, for profit or gain. MORTGAGED PROPERTY
ART. 319, RPC
Deceits in this article include false pretenses and
fraudulent acts. Punishable acrs
Q: Osorio, an agent of Philam Life, offered 1. Knowingly removing any personal property
Gabriel insurance policy. During the meeting, mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law
Osorio presented her ID and calling card. to any province or city other than the one in
Gabriel accepted and consistently paid her which it was located at the time of execution
premiums. Later on, Gabriel received a letter of the mortgage, without the written
from PMlAM thanking her for investing her consent of the mortgagee or his executors,
money with PMIAM. Gabriel confronted administrators, or assigns.
Osorio on why her investment was diverted
to PMlAM, Osorio explained that PMIAM Elements:
investments would yield a higher rate of a. Personal property is mortgaged under
return, Displeased, Gabriel asked for a the Chattel Mortgage Law;
refund of her initial investment. b. Offender knows that such property is so
Consequently, Gabriel received P13,000.00 mortgaged;
from PMIAM. In spite of this, Gabriel insisted c. Offender removes such mortgaged
on the refund. PMIAM informed Gabriel that personal property to any province or
her initial invesbnent and unpaid interest city other than the one in which it was
income would be released to her. located at the time of the execution of
Unfortunately, she was unable to recover it. the mortgage;
Demands were made to Osorio, but these d. Removal is permanent: and
remained unheeded. Osorio was charged e. There is no written consent of the
with estafa under Article 315(2)(e). Is Osorio mortgagee or his executors,
guilty of estafa under Article 315(2)(e)? administrators or assigns to such
removal.
A: NO, Osorio is not guilty of estafa under Article
315(2)(e), but is guilty of other deceits under NOTE: Any person can be the offender.
Article 318 of the RPC. Article 318 of the Revised
Penal Code is broad in application. It is intended 2. Selling or pledging personal property
as a catch-all provision to cover all other kinds of already pledged, or any part thereof, under
deceit not falling under Articles 315, 316, and the terms of the Chattel Mortgage Law,
317 of the RPC. without the consent of the mortgagee
written on the back of the mortgage and
Osorio, in soliciting Gabriel's money, falsely noted on the record thereof in the office of
represented that it would be invested in Philam the register of deeds of the province where
Life and that its proceeds would be used to pay such property is located.
for Gabriel's insurance premiums. This false
representation is what induced Gabriel to part Elements:
with her funds and disregard the payment of her a. Personal property is already pledged
insurance premiums. under the terms of the Chattel Mortgage
Law;
Since Osorio deviated from what was originally b. Offender, who is the mortgagor of such
agreed upon by placing the investment in property, sells, or pledges the same or
another company, Gabriel's insurance policies any part thereof; and
lapsed. Osorio must be criminally liable for c. There is no consent of the mortgagee
misrepresenting to Gabriel that the latter's written on the back of the mortgage and
1. A.ny person who shall burn: (2000 BAR) Pesrn,crive Arson xis-ta-vis Simole Acsnn
underPP No 1613
a. One or more buildings or edifices,
consequent to one single act of burning,
or as a result of simultaneous burnings,
The nature of Destruc.tive Arson is distinguished Q: Mario was hired by the PNB as caretaker
from Simple Arson by the degree of perversity or of its lot situated in Balanga, Bataan.
viciousness of the criminal offender. Consequently, Mario put up on the said lot a
sign which reads "No Trespassing. PNB
Special Aggravating Circumstances in Arson: Property" to ward off squatters. Despite the
1. If committed with intent to gain; sign, Julita, believing that the said lot was
2. If committed for the benefit of another; owned by her grandparents, constructed a
3. If the offender be motivated by spite or nipa hut thereon. Hence, Mario, together
hatred towards the owner; or with four others, tore down and demolished
4. If committed by a syndicate. Julita's hut. She thus filed with the MTC a
criminal complaint for ma licious mischief.
NOTE: The slightest discoloration of a part of a Mario admitted that he deliberately
building is consummated arson. But when a demolished Julita's nipa hut but he contends
person who intends to burn a structure by that the third element of the crime of
collecting and placing rags soaked in a gasoline malidous mischief, i.e., that the act of
and placed them near the wall of the building damaging another's property be committed
but who was discovered as he was about to set merely for the sake of damaging it, is not
fire to the rags is liable for attempted arson. present in this case. He maintains that the
demolition of the nipa hut is for the purpose
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF of safeguarding the interest of his employer.
ART. 327, RPC Was the court correct in convicting Mario of
malidous mischief/
Malidons miScbief
A: YES, Mario's conviction for malicious mischief
The willful damaging of another's property by must be sustained. As to the third element,
any act not constituting arson or crimes of Mario was not justified in summarily and extra·
destruction due to hate, revenge, or mere judicially demolishing fulita's nipa hut. As it is,
pleasure of destroying. Mario proceeded, not so much to safeguard the
lot, as it is to vent out his anger and express his
Elements disgust over the "no trespassing" sign he placed
thereon. Indeed, his act of summarily
1. Offender deliberately caused damage to the demolishing the house smacks of his pleasure in
property of another; causing damage to it. (Valeroso v. People, G.R. No.
2. Such ac.t does not constitute arson or other 149718. September 29, 2003)
crimes involving destruction; and
3. Act of damaging another's property be SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS MISCHIEF OR
committed merely for the sake of damaging QUALIFIED MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
it. ART. 328, RPC
Q: There was a collision between the side
Punishable acrs
view mirrors of two (2) vehicles.
Immediately thereafter, the wife and the 1. Causing damage to obstruct the
daughter of A alighted from the CRV and performance of public functions;
confronted B. A, in view of the hostile 2. Using any poisonous or corrosive substance;
attitude of B, summoned his wife and 3. Spreading any infections among cattle; and
daughter to enter the CRV and while they 4. Causing damage to the property of the
were in the process of doing so, B moved and National Museum or National Library, or to
accelerated his Vitara backward as if to hit any archive or registry, waterworks, road,
them. Was there malicious mischief/ promenade, or any other thing used in
common by the public.
A: YES. The hitting of the back portion of the
CRV by B was clearly deliberate. The act of NOTE: The cases of malicious mischief under
damaging the rear bumper of the CRV does not this article are also called qualified malicious
constitute arson or other crimes involving mischief.
destruction. When the Vitara bumped the CRV, B
was venting out his anger and hate as a result of OTHER MISCHIEFS
a heated encounter between him and A. ART. 329, RPC
(Taguinod v. People, G.R. No.185833, October 12,
2011)
Q: The cows of B caused destruction to the spouse before the same passed into the
plants of A. A s an act of revenge, A and his possession of another; and
tenants killed said cows. What is the crime 3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law
committed? and sisters·in-law, if living together.
A: The crime committed out of hate and revenge, NOTE: The exemption does not apply to
is that of malicious mischief penalized by Art. strangers participating in the commission of the
329, RPC. offense.
Persons liable
Crimesinvolved in thisArtkle
1. Theft;
2. Swindling (estafa); and
3. Malicious mischief.
dwelling is the house of the spouses even if done before the institution or filing of the
the wife happens to be temporarily absent criminal complaint.
therefrom. The woman however must be
brought to the conjugal house by the Q: May a husband be liable for concubinage
accused as concubine to fall under this and adultery at the same time for the same
article. Thus, if the co-accused was act of illicit intercourse with the wife of
voluntarily taken and sheltered by the another man?
spouses in their house, and treated as an
adopted child being a relative of the A: YES. When the husband commits concubinage
complaining wife, her illicit relations with with a married woman and provided that the
the accused husband does not make her a two offended parties, i.e., his wife and the
mistress. husband of his mistress file separate cases
against him.
b. Having sexual intercourse, under
scandalous circumstances, with a ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
woman who is not his wife; or
Kinds of acts of lasciviousness
Illustration: For the crime of
concubinage by having sexual 1. Under Art. 336 (Acts of lasciviousness); and
intercourse under a scandalous manner 2. Under Art. 339 (Acts of lasciviousness with
to exist, it must be done imprudently the consent of the offended party)
and wantonly as to offend modesty and
sense of morality and decency. Thus, ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
where the accused and his mistress ART. 336, RPC
lived in the same room of a house,
comported themselves as husband and Elements
wife publicly and privately, giving the
impression to everybody that they were 1. Offender commits any act of lasciviousness
married, and performed acts in sight of or lewdness;
the community which gave rise to 2. Act of lasciviousness is committed against a
criticism and general protest among person of either sex; and
neighbors, they committed concubinage. 3. It is done under any of the following
circumstances:
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place. a. By using force or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived
Illustration: If the charge is cohabiting of reason or otherwise unconscious;
with a woman not his wife in any other c. By means of fraudulent machination
place, proof of ac.tual sexual intercourse or grave abuse of authority; or
may not be necessary too. But the term d. When the offended party is under 12
"cohabit# means intercourse together as years of age or is demented.
husband or wife or living together as
husband and wife. The cohabitation Under Art. 336, acts of lasciviousness is
must be for some period of time which committed when the act performed with lewd
may be a week, a year or longer as design was perpetrated under circumstances
distinguished from occasional or which would have brought about the crime of
transient meetings for unlawful sexual rape if sexual intercourse was effected. Where
intercourse. circumstances however are indicative of a clear
intention to lie with the offended party, the
3. As regards the woman, she must know him crime committed is Attempted Rape.
to be married.
Illustration: When the accused not only kissed
Parriesincluded in the comolaint and embraced the complainant but also fondled
her breast with particular design to
The complaint must include both parties if they independently derive vicarious pleasure
are both alive. In case of pardon or when the therefrom, the element of lewd design exists.
offended spouse consented, the same shall bar
the prosecution of the offenses, provided it be If lewd design cannot be proven as where the
accused merely kissed and embraced the
complainant either out of passion or other
motive, touching her breast as a mere incident. NOTE: Mere words can constitute sexual
the act would be categorized as unjust vexation. harassment unlike in acts of lasciviousness,
(People v. Climaco, 46 O.G. 3186) where there must be overt acts.
Offended party under this article Punishable acts under the Anti-Sexual
Hacassment Act CRA 76771
The offended party may be a man or a woman:
1. In a work-related or employment
1. Under 12 years of age; or environment, sexual harassment is
2. Being over 12 years of age, the lascivious committed when:
acts were committed on him or her through
violence or intimidation, or while the a. The sexual favor is made as a condition
offender party was deprived of reason, or in the hiring or in the employment, re
otherwise unconscious. employment or continued employment
of said individual, or in granting said
Bemliremeot in order ro sustain convhlino individual favorable compensation,
for acts of lasciviousness terms, conditions, promotions, or
privileges; or the refusal to grant the
It is essential that the acts complained of be sexual favor results in limiting.
prompted by lust or lewd designs and that the segregating or classifying the employee
victim did not consent or encourage such acts. which in a way would discriminate,
deprive or diminish employment
Intent to rape as an element of the crime opportunities or othenvise adversely
affect said employee;
Intent to rape is NOT a necessary element of the b. The above acts would impair the
crime of acts of lasciviousness; othenvise, the employee's rights or privileges under
crime would be attempted rape. existing labor laws; or
c. The above acts would result in an
NOTE: There can be no frustration of acts of intimidating. hostile, or offensive
lasciviousness, rape, or adultery. From the environment for the employee.
moment the offender performs all elements
necessary for the existence of the felony, he 2. In an educational or training
actually attains his purpose and, from that environment, sexual harassment is
moment. all the essential elements of the offense committed:
have been accomplished.
a. Against one who is under the c.are,
Arrs of lascivim,sness xis-ti-vis Attemnted custody or supervision of the offender;
� b. Against one whose education, training,
apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted
ACTS OF to the offender;
ATTEMPTED RAPE c. When the sexual favor is made a
LASCIVIOUSNESS
condition to the giving of a passing
Purpose is only to Purpose is to lie with grade, or the granting of honors and
commit acts of the offended woman. scholarships, or the payment of a
lewdness. stipend, allowance or other benefits,
Lascivious acts are Lascivious acts are but privileges, or considerations; or
themselves the final the preparatory acts to d. When the sexual advances result in an
objective sought by the commission of rape. intimidating. hostile or offensive
the offender. environment for the student, trainee or
apprentice.
Illustration: When the accused lifted the dress
of the offended party, and placed himself on top NOTE: Any person who directs or induces
of her but the woman awoke and screamed for another to commit any act of sexual harassment
help and despite that, the accused persisted in as herein defined, or who cooperates in the
his purpose, tearing the drawers, kissing and commission thereof by another without which it
fondling her breasts, the crime is not only acts of would not have been committed, shall also be
lasciviousness but that of attempted rape. held liable under this Att. (Sec. 3, R.A. 7877)
1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 years and Virginity does not mean physical virginity. It
under 18 years of age by certain persons, refers to a woman of chaste character or
such as, a person in public authority, priest, virtuous woman of good reputation.
home servant, domestic, guardian, teacher,
or any person who, in any capacity shall be NOTE: Virginity is not to be understood in a
entrusted with the education or custody of material sense as to exclude the idea of
the woman seduced; abduction of a virtuous woman of a good
reputation. Thus, when the accused claims he
Elements: (2007 BAR) had prior sexual intercourse with the
a. Offended party is a virgin which is complainant, the latter is still to be considered a
presumed if she is unmarried and of virgin.
good reputation;
b. She is over 12 and under 18 years of SIMPLE SEDUCTION
age; ART. 338, RPC
c. Offender has sexual intercourse with
her; and Elements
d. There is abuse of authority, confidence,
or relationship on the part of the 1.Offended party is over 12 and under 18
offender. years of age;
2. She must be of good reputation, single or
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother, or widow;
descendant by her ascendant, regardless of 3. Offender has sexual intercourse with her;
her age or reputation. In this case, it is not and
necessary that the offended party is still a 4. It is committed by means of deceit
virgin.
The deceit usually takes the form of promise to
Persons liable forqualified seduction marry. If the promise to marry is made after the
sexuaJ intercourse, there is no deceit. Neither is
1. Those who abused their authority: there deceit if the promise is made by a married
a. Person in public authority; man, the woman knowing him to be married.
b. Guardian;
c. Teacher: or NOTE: Virginity of the offended party is not
d. Person who, in any capacity, is required.
entrusted with the education or custody
of the woman seduced. ACTS OF LASCIVI OUSNESS WITH THE
CONSENT OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
ART. 339, RPC
home but the latter refused to d o so. That A: NO. Kim was not taken away after solicitation
night, Kim slept in the room of Tristan and or cajolery. Kim was the one who went to the
they had sexual intercourse. The mother of house of Tristan.
Kim filed a case of Consented Abduction
against Tristan. Will the charge prosper?
Parties who may file the complaint where LIABILITY OFASCENDANTS, GUARDIANS,
offended minor fails to file the same TEACHERS O R OTHER PERSONS ENTRUSTED
WITH THE CUSTODY OF
1. Parents; THE OFFENDED PARTY
2. Grandparents; or ART. 346, RPC
3. Guardian.
Crimes covered
NOTE: The right to file the action granted to the
parents, grandparents or guardian is exclusive 1. Rape;
and successive in the order provided. 2. Acts of lasciviousness;
3. Qualified seduction;
I.real effect of the marriaee of the offender 4. Simple seduttion;
and the offended nartv 5. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of
the offended party;
Marriage of the offender with the offended party 6. Corruption of minors;
in seduction, abduction, ac:t.s of lasciviousness, 7. White slave trade;
and rape extinguishes criminal action or remits 8. Forcible abduction; and
the penalty already imposed. 9. Consented Abduction.
The woman is liable together with the person The offender must be is any
who furnishes the child. (Guevara, as cited in the one who has the person
Reyes, 2008) custody of the child
NOTE: The fact that the child will be benefited The purpose of the The offender is to
by simulation of birth is not a defense since it offender is to avoid cause the child to
creates a false status detriment of members of the obligation of lose its civil status
the family to which the child is introduced. rearing and caring the
child
In People v. Sangalang (74 O.G. 5983), it was
ruled that for the crime to exist. it must be USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
shown that the pretending parents have ART. 348, RPC
registered or caused the registration of the child
with the Registry of Births or that in so doing How crime is committed
they were motivated by a desire to cause the loss
of any trace as to the child's filiation to his It is committed when a person represents
prejudice. himself to be another and assumes the filiation
or the parental or conjugal rights of such
When snhslirntion rakes olace another person. There must be intent to enjoy
the rights arising from the civil status of
Substitution takes place when X is born of A and another.
B; Y is born of C and D; and the offender with
intent to cause the loss of any trace of their tndnsion in riv'il stab1s
filiation, exchanges X and Y without the
knowledge of their respective parents. Civil status includes one's public station or the
rights, duties, capacities, and incapacities which
determine a person to a given class.
Bigamy is a form of illegal marriage. Illegal Q: May the declaration of nullity of the
marriage also includes such other marriages second marriage on the ground of
which are performed without complying with psychological incapadty be raised as a
the requirements of law, or such premature defense in the crime of bigamy?
marriages, or such marriages which was
solemnized by one who is not authorized to A: NO. Although the judicial declaration of the
solemnize the same. nullity of a marriage on the ground of
psychological incapacity retroacts to the date of
the celebration of the marriage insofar as the that the offender has been legally married; (2)
vinculum between the spouses is concerned, it is that the first marriage had not yet been legally
significant to note that said marriage is not dissolved or in case his or her spouse is absent,
without legal effects. Among these effects is that the absent spouse could not yet be presumed
the children conceived or born before the dead according to the Civil Code; (3) that he
judgment of absolute nullity of the marriage contracts a second or subsequent marriage; and
shall be considered legitimate. There is, (4) that the second or subsequent marriage has
therefore, a recognition wr;tten into the Jaw itself all the essential requisites for validity.
that such marriage, although void ab initio, may
still produce legal consequences. Among these In this case, all the elements of bigamy are
legal consequences is incurring criminal liability present. since Vitangcol was still legally married
for bigamy. As long as a marriage is contracted to Gina when he married Alice. His defense of
during the subsistence of a valid first marriage Certification from the Office of the Civil Registrar
the second marriage is automatically VOID, the implying that there is no record of the marriage
nullity of the second marriage is NOT a defense license issued to Vitangcol and his first wife Gina
for the avoidance of criminal liability. (Tenebro v. will not lie because marriages are not dissolved
CA, G.R. No. 150758, February 18, 2004) through mere certifications by the civil registrar.
Q: Can a person convicted of Bigamy still b e Hence, Vitangcol is still considered to be legally
prosecuted for concubinage? married to Gina when he married Alice and is
not exculpated from the bigamy charged.
A: YES, if he or she continues to cohabit with the (Vitangco/ v. People, G.R. No. 207406, January 13,
live-in partner for which he was accused and 2016, as penned by J. Leonen)
tried for Bigamy. (People v. Cabrera, G.R. No.
17855, March 4, 1922) Effecr of execntlnn of an Affidavit of
Pesisrance ducine the neodeocx ofrbeanneal
NOTE: Bigamy is an offense against civil status ina hieamx case
which may be prosecuted only at the instance of
the State. Concubinage is an offense against Q: Prudendo married Arlene In 1994. In
chastity and may be prosecuted only at the 2007, Prudencio abandoned his wife and
instance of the offended party. (Reyes, 2017) children and contracted a subsequent
marriage with Basan In 2010. He was
Commeocement ofocesrriotive oeriod charged for bigamy under Article 349 of the
Revised Penal Code. The trial court convicted
The prescriptive period does not commence him of the crime charged. During the
from the commission thereof but from the time pendency of his appeal in the Court of
of its discovery by the complainant spouse. Appeals, Arlene executed an Affidavit of
Desistance praying that the case be
Q: Vitangcol married Alice Eduardo and dismissed after she had reconcHed with
begot 3 children. After some time, Alice Prudencio. Is Prudencio still guilty for
began bearing rumors that her husband was bigamy despite the Affidavit of Desistance?
previously married to another woman
named Gina Gaerlan. Such marriage was A: YES. Prudencio should still be convicted for
supported by a marriage contract registered bigamy. Affidavits of desistance that were
with the NSO. This prompted Alice to file a executed after judgments of conviction had been
criminal complaint for bigamy against promulgated by trial courts are generally
Vitangcol. In his defense, Vitangcol alleges received with extensive caution.
that he already revealed to Alice that he had
a •rake marriage• with his college girlfriend Arlene's Affidavit of Desistance provides that she
Gina and that there is a Certification from the filed the Complaint due to a misunderstanding,
Office of the Civil Registrar that there is no which both she and Prudencio had agreed to
record of the marriage license issued to reconcile. This Affidavit of Desistance cannot
Vitangcol and his first wife Gina which makes prove the nonexistence of all the elements of
his first marriage as void. Is Vitangcol liable bigamy. The trial court was able to show that the
of the crime of bigamy? four elements were present being: (1) the
marriage between the appellant and the private
A: YES, Vitangcol is liable of the crime of bigamy. complainant is still existing; (2) the same has not
Bigamy consists of the following elements: (1) been legally declared to be dissolved; (3)
PREMATURE MARRIAGES
ART. 351, RPC
making institution where physically and morally A: To be liable for libel under Art. 353 of the
unfit teachers abound. Every defamatory RPC, the following elements must be shown to
imputation is presumed malicious. Rima and exist:
Alegre failed to show adequately their good
intention and justifiable motive in airing the 1. The allegation of a discreditable act or
supposed gripes of the students. As hosts of a condition concerning another;
documentary or public affairs program, Rima 2. Publication of the charge;
and Alegre should have presented the public 3. Identity of the person defamed; and
issues free from inaccurate and misleading 4. Existence of malice.
information. (Filipinos Broadcasting Network,
Inc. v. Ago Medical and educational Center-Bica/ The element of publication is satisfied when,
Christian College of Medicine, G.R. No. 14199, after writing the defamatory matter, the same is
January 17, 2005) made known to someone other than the person
to whom it is being pertained to. If the statement
REQUIREMENT FOR PUBLICITY is sent straight to a person for whom it is written
ART. 354, RPC there is no publication of it. It could not be said,
however, that there was no publication with
Publication of the Hhelons actirJe is not respect to Fe. While the letter in question was
necessary addressed to "Mr. Cerelito & Fe Alejandro," the
invectives contained therein were directed
It is not necessary that the libelous article must against Cerelito only. Writing u, a person other
be published; communication of the defamatory than the person defamed is sufficient to constitute
matter to some third persons is sufficient. It is publication for the person to whom the letter is
not required that the person defamed has read addressed is a thlrd person in relation to its
or heard about the libelous remark. What is writer and the person defamed therein. (Magno
material is that a third person has read or heard v. People, G.R. No. 133B96,January 27, 2006)
the libelous statement· for a man's reputation is
the estimate in which others hold him, not the !:la.liJ:c.
good opinion which he has of himself.
A term used to indicate the fact that the offender
Illustration: The delivery of the libelous article is prompted by personal ill-will or spite and
to the typesetter is sufficient publication. (U.S. v. speaks not in response to duty but merely to
Crame, G.R. No. 4328, February 13, 1908) injure the reputation of the person defamed.
The the sending of a letter to wife which maligns NOTE: Malice is presumed and the test is the
the husband was considered sufficient charatter of the words used. The meaning of the
publication, for the spouse is a third person to writer or author is immaterial.
the victim defamed. (U.S. v. Urbinana, G.R. No.
927, November 8, 1902) Kinds of malice
Q: Dolores Magno was charged and convicted 1. Malice in fact may be shown by proof of ill·
of libel for the writings on the wall and for will, hatred, or purpose to injure.
the unsigned letter addressed to the
Alejandro spouses, containing invectives 2. Malice in Jaw is presumed from a
directed against Cerelito Alejandro. Dolores defamatory imputation. However,
contends that the prosecution failed to presumption is rebutted if it is shown by the
establish the presence of the elements of accused that:
authorship and publication of the malidous
writings on the wall, as well as the unsigned a. Defamatory imputation is true, in case
letter addressed to the Alejandro spouses. the law allows proof of the truth of the
She argues that since the letter was imputation;
addressed to the spouses, Fe (Cerelito's wife) b. It is published with good intention; and
was, insofar as Cerelito is concerned, not a c. There is justifiable motive for making it.
third person for purposes of publication. Is
she liable? Insrances when ma Hee is NOT ncesumed
1. Private communication made by any published and circulated. (Sazon v. CA, C.R. No.
person to another in the performance of 120715,March29, 1996)
any legal, moral, or social duty.
lnvocarion of freedom of sneecb
Requisites:
a. Person who made the Although a wide latitude is given to critical
communication had a legal moral or utterances made against public officials in the
social duty to make the performance of their official duties, or against
communication or at least, he had public figures on matters of public interest. such
an interest to be upheld; criticism does not automatically fall within the
b. Communication is addressed to an ambit of constitutionally protected speech.
officer. or a board, or superior,
having some interest or duty in the If the utterances are false, malicious, or
matter; and unrelated to a public officer's performance of his
c. Statements in the communication duties or irrelevant to matters of public interest
are made in good faith without involving public figures, the same may give rise
malice (in fact). to criminal and civil liability. (Fermin v. People,
C.R. No. 157643, March 28, 2008)
2. Fair and true report made in good faith,
without any comments or remarks, of any Doctrine of Fair Comment
judicial, legislative, or other official
proceedings which are not of confidential While in general every discreditable imputation
nature, or of any statement. report, or publicly made is deemed false, because every
speech delivered in the exercise of their man is presumed innocent until his guilt is
functions. judicially proved, and every false imputation is
deemed malicious, nevertheless, when the
Requisites: discreditable imputation is directed against a
a. That it is a fair and true report of a public person in his public capacity, it is not
judicial, legislative or other official necessarily actionable. In order that such
proceedings which are not of discreditable imputation to a public official may
confidential nature, or of any be actionable, it must either be a false allegation
statement. report or speech of fact or a comment based on a false
delivered in said proceedings, or of supposition. If the comment is an expression of
any other act performed by public opinion, based on established facts, then it is
officers in the exerc-Jse of their immaterial that the opinion happens to be
functions; mistaken, as long as it might reasonably be
b. That it is made in good faith; and inferred from the fatts. (Barjal v. CA, C.R. No.
c. That it is without any comments 126466/anuary 14, 1999)
or remarks.
Privileeed rnmmuniration
NOTE: The instances when malice is not
presumed are examples of malice in fact. It is a communication made bona fide upon any
subject matter in which the party
Q: Do the defamatory remarks and comments communicating has an interest, or in reference
on the conduct or acts of public officers to which he has a duty and the person to whom
which are related to the discharge of their the communication is given has a corresponding
official duties constitute libel? interest.
1. Absolute - not at1:ionable even if the author belated annex to the affidavit- It was
has acted in bad faith: prefaced with !be quotation "For every
extraordinary fortune there is a great crime•
a. Statements made by members of and the text: An example is Marcos. We need
Congress in the discharge of their official not discuss this. Second example is the
functions; Alcantaras. The newsletter then went on to
b. Allegations or statements made by the discuss SEC Case No. 2507 in which Ponce
parties or their counsel in their pleadings accused the Alcantaras of defrauding him of
or motions or during the hearing of his shares in lligan Cement Corporation.
judicial proceedings; Claiming !bat the statements in the
c. Answers given by witnesses in reply to newsletter were defamatory, Alcantara filed
questions propounded to them, in the a complaint for libel. Ponce, on !be other
course of said proceedings, provided that hand, raised privileged communication as a
said allegations or statements are defense. Is the defense tenable?
relevant to the issues, and the answers
are responsive or pertinent to the A: YES. It is a settled principle in this jurisdiction
questions propounded to said witnesses. that statements made in the course of judicial
(Alcantaro v. Ponce, C.R. Na. 156183, proceedings are absolutely privileged. This
February 28, 2007) absolute privilege remains regardless of the
defamatory tenor and the presence of malice if
2. Conditionol or qualified - like a private the same are relevant, pertlnent, or material to
communication made by any person to the cause in hand or subject of the inquiry.
another in the performance of any legal, Furthermore, the newsletter qualified as a
moral, or social duty, and a fair and true communication made bona fide upon any
report, made in good faith, without any subject-matter in which the party
comments or remarks, of any judicial, communicating has an interest. The
legislative or other official proceedings controversial statements were made in the
which are not of confidential nature. Here, context of a criminal complaint against
even if the statements are defamatory, there Alcantara, albeit for other, separate acts
is no presumption of malice. The involving greed and deceit, and were disclosed
prosecution must prove malice in fact to only to the official investigating the complaint.
convict the accused. Liberally applying the privileged communication
doctrine, these statements were still relevant to
Q: In a judicial proceeding, when can a the complaint under investigation because, like
defamatory imputation be said to be a the averments therein, they also involved
privileged communication? Alcantara's alleged deceitfulness. (Alcantara v.
Ponce, C.R. No. 156183, February 28, 2007)
A: The one obstacle that those pleading the
defense of privileged communication must Multi ale Pnhlirarinn Buie in Uhel
hurdle is the test of relevancy. Under this test, a
matter alleged in the course of the proceedings A single defamatory statement, if published
need not be in every case material to the issues several times, gives rise to as many offenses as
presented but should be legitimately related to there are publications. For purposes of Art. 360
the issues or be so pertinent to the controversy of RPC, as amended, every time the same written
that it may become the subject of inquiry in the matter is communicated such communication is
course of trial. (Alcantara v. Ponce, C.R. Na. considered a distinct and separate publication of
156183, February 28, 2007) libel. (Soriano v. /AC, 167 5CRA 222)
NOTE: The imputation must be verbally made or 1. Simple slander by deed - performance of an
uttered. The slanderous remarks need not to be act, not use ofwords.
heard by the offended party as long as they are 2. Grave slander by deed - that is which is of a
uttered in the presence ofa third person. serious crime.
2. Where any of the offended parties actually (People v. Benipoyo, G.R. No. 154473, April 24,
resides at the time of the commission of the 2009)
offense.
Q: A large group of disgruntled plan holders
NOTE: The court where the criminal action or of Pacific Plans, Inc. was sued for libel for
civil action for damages is first filed shall acquire publishing in a website defamatory
jurisdiction to the exclusion of other courts. statements against the owners of Pacific
Plans, Inc. The libel suit was filed before the
Q: Is the author of a libelous article the only Regional Trial Court of Maka ti alleging that it
one liable for libel? is in Makati where the website was first
accessed; hence, it is in Makati where it was
A: NO. Article 360 indudes not only the author first published. Does the RTC Makati has
or the person who causes the libelous matter to jurisdiction over the libel case?
be published, but also the person who prints or
publishes it. Proof of knowledge of and A: NO. The venue of libel cases where the
participation in the publication of the offending complainant is a private individual is limited to
article is not required, if the accused has been only either of two places, namely: 1) where the
specifically identified as "author, editor, or complainant actually resides at the time of the
proprietor· or ·printer/publisher'' of the commission of the offense; or 2) where the
publication. (Fermin v. People, C.R. No. 157643, alleged defamatory article was printed and first
March 28, 2008) published. If the circumstances as to where the
libel was printed and first published are used by
Rationale for the criminal liability of persons the offended party as basis for the venue in the
em,menned in Art 360 of the BPC '2013 criminal ac.tion, the Information must allege with
!WU particularity where the defamatory article was
printed and first published, as evidenced or
It was enunciated in U.S. v. Ocampo, that supported by, for instance, the address of their
according to the legal dot1:rines and editorial or business offices in the case of
jurisprudence of the United States, the printer of newspapers, magazines, or serial publications.
a publication containing libelous matter is liable This pre�condition becomes necessary in order
for the same by reason of his direct connection to forestall any inclination to harass. The same
therewith and his cognizance of the contents measure cannot be reasonably expected when it
thereof. With regard to a publication in which a pertains to defamatory material appearing on a
libel is printed, not only is the publisher but also website on the internet as there would be no
all other persons who in any way participate in way of determining the sltus of its printing and
or have any connection with its publication are first publication. To credit the premise of
liable as publishers. (Fermin v. People, ibid.) equating his first access to the defamatory article
on the website in Makati with "printing and first
Q: The COMELEC Chairman was sued for libel publication• would spawn the very ills that the
due to his defamatory statements against amendment to Article 360 of the RPC sought to
Photokina Marketing Corporation. The discourage and prevent. (Bonifacio et of v. RTC
Chairman raised as a defense the lack of Makoti, C.R. No.184800, Moy 5, 2010)
jurisdiction of the RTC since he delivered the
speech in his official capacity as COMELEC PROOF OF TRUTH
Chair. The RTC ruled that it was ART. 361, RPC
Sandiganbayan and not RTC wbicb has
jurisdiction over the case. ls the RTC correct? Admissibility ofQCOQf Qf tnnh
A: NO. Article 360 of the RPC, as amended by Proof of truth is admissible in any of the
Republic Act No. 4363, is explicit on which court following:
has jurisdiction to try cases of written
defamations: The grant to the Sandiganbayan of 1. When the act or om1ss10n imputed
jurisdiction over offenses committed in relation constitutes a crime regardless of whether
to public office, similar to the expansion of the the offended party is a private individual or
jurisdiction of the MTCs, did not divest the RTC a public officer.
of its exclusive and original jurisdiction to try 2. When the offended party is a government
written defamation cases regardless of whether employee, even if the act or om1ss1on
the offense is committed in relation to office. imputed does not constitute a crime,
provided, it is related to the discharge of his 1. This Administrative Circular does not
official duties. remove imprisonment as an alternative
penalty for the crime of libel under Art. 355
NOTE: Proof of truth must rest upon positive, of the RPC.
direct evidence upon which a definite finding
may be made by the court, but probable cause 2. The Judges concerned may, in the exercise of
for belief in the truth of the statement is sound discretion, and taking into
sufficient. (2009 BAR) consideration the peculiar circumstances of
each case, determine whether the
Proof of truth is NOT suffifieot imposition of a fine alone would best serve
the interests of justice or whether
Proof of truth is not enough since it is also forbearing to impose imprisonment would
required that the matter charged as libelous was depreciate the seriousness of the offense.
published with good motives and for justifiable work violence on the social order, or
ends. otherwise be contrary to the imperative of
justice.
Possible defenses in rhe crime of libel
3. Should only a fine be imposed and the
1. It appears that the matters charged as accused be unable to pay the fine, there is no
libelous is true; legal obstacle to the application of
2. It was published with good motives; and the RPC provision on subsidiary
3. For a justifiable end. imprisonment.
merely to defend his honor against the malicious tncrimimnine an innocent oecson vis-A-vis
messages that earlier circulated around the Perincx hv makine raise accnsatlon
subdivision, which he thought was the
handiwork of the private complainant.
INCRIMINATING AN PERJURY BY MAKING
In Mari v. CA (G.R No. 127694, May 31, INNOCENT PERSON FALSE ACCUSATION
2000), where the crime involved is slander by Committed by The gravamen of the
deed, the Court modified the penalty imposed on performing an act by offense is the
the petitioner, an ordinary government which the offender imputation itself,
employee, from imprisonment to fine of directly incriminates falsely made, before
Pl,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case or imputes to an an officer qualified to
of insolvency, on the ground that the latter innocent person the take an oath
committed the offense in the heat of anger and commission of a crime
in reaction to a perceived provocation.
In Brillante v. CA (G.R. Nos. 118757 & 12157, Limited to the act of Giving of false
November 11, 2005), the Court deleted the planting evidence and statement under oath
penalty of imprisonment imposed upon the like in order to or the making of a
petitioner, a local politician, but maintained the incriminate an false affidavit
penalty of fine of P4,0000.00, with subsidiary innocent person imputing to a person
imprisonment in case of insolvency, in each of the commission of a
the (5) cases of libel, on the ground that the crime
intensely feverish passions evoked during the
election period in 1988 must have agitated
petitioner into writing his open letter; and that tocrimi oatorv machination vis-A-vis
incomplete privileged communication should be Petamatlon
appreciated in favor of petitioner, especially
considering the wide latitude traditionally given INCRIMINATORY
to defamatory utterances against public officials DEFAMATION
MACHINATION
in connection with or relevant to their Offender avails himself
performance of official duties or against public Offender performs
acts to directly impute of written or spoken
figures in relation to matters of public interest
words in besmirching
involving them. to an innocent person
the victim's
the commission of the
reputation.
In Buatis,Jr. v. People (G.R No. 142509, March 24, crime.
2006),the Court opted to impose upon
petitioner, a lawyer, the penalty of fine only for
INTRIGUING AGAINST HONOR
the crime of libel considering that it was his first
ART. 364, RPC
offense and he was motivated purely by his
belief that he was merely exercising a civic or
Intriguing against honor
moral duty to his client when he wrote the
defamatory Jetter to private complainant
Any scheme or plot which may consists of some
trickery.
INCRIMINATING INNOCENT PERSON
ART. 363, RPC
Persons Ha hie
Elements CNot P-1-Al Any person who shall make any intrigue which
has, for its principal purpose, to blemish the
1. Offender performs an a,ct;
honor or reputation of another person.
2. By such act he directly incriminates or
imputes to an innocent person the
commission of a crime; and tntrieuine aeainst honor vis-a-vis Slander
3. Such act does Wl1 constitute jlerjury.
INTRIGUING
SLANDER
NOTE: The crime of incriminatory machinations AGAINST HONOR
is limited to planting evidence and the like, The source of the Offender made the
which tend directly to cause false prosecution. defamatory utterance, where the
utterance is source of the
INTRIGUING INCRIMINATING AN
AGAINST HONOR INNOCENT PERSON
The offender resorts The offender performs
or gossips for the an att that would
purpose of incriminate or impute
disparaging the to an innocent person
honor or reputation the commission of a
of another. crime.
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
Failure in precaution
IMPRUDENCE AND NEGLIGENCE
ART. 365, RPC To avoid wrongful To avoid wrongful
at"tS, one must take the acts, paying proper
necessary precaution attention and using
Punishable aas Cl993 2001 2006 2009 once they are foreseen due diligence in
!WU foreseein them
I. Committing through reckless imprudence
any act which, had it been intentional, would NOTE: The RPC does not draw a well-defined
constitute a grave or less grave felony or demarcation line between negligent acts that are
light felony; delictual and those which are quasi-delittual. It
2. Committing through simple imprudence or is possible that a negligent act may be delictual
negligence an act which would otherwise and quasi-delictual at the same time.
constitute a grave or a less serious felony;
3. Causing damage to the property of another Effect of accident in failuretnbelo or render
through reckless imprudence or simple assistance to annrher whom be bas
imprudence or negligence; and accidentally wounded or injured vis-A-vis
4. Causing through simple imprudence or Effect of accident in imorndence and
negligence some \YT0ng which, if done neeueence
maliciously, would have constituted a light
felony. EFFECT OF EFFECT OF
ACCIDENT IN ACCIDENT IN
Elements of reckless imnn,deoce CM-A-P-V FAILURE TO HELP IMPRUDENCE AND
OR RENDER NEGLIGENCE
£1
ASSISTANCE TO Art. 365
I. Offender does or fails to do an a.ct; ANOTHER WHOM
2. The doing of or the failure to do that act is HE HAS
Jl:Oluntary; ACCIDENTALLY
3. It be without malice; INJURED
4. Material .llamage results;and Art. 275, par. 2
5. There is an inexcusable lack of w-ecaution Falls under Crimes Falls under Criminal
on the part of the person performing or A ainst Securi N Ii ence
failing to perform such act taken into Committed by means Committed by means
consideration: (2007 BAR) of do/o of cul a
Failure to help or Failure to lend help to
a. Employment or occupation render assistance to one's victim is neither
b. Degree of intelligence another whom one has an offense by itself nor
c. Physical condition accidentally wounded an element of the
d. Other circumstances regarding persons, or injured is an offense therein
time and place offense penalized. Its presence
merely increases the
Elements nfsimale imorndence CD-Pl penalty by one degree.
It must be specifically
I. There is lack of J?recaution on the part of the alleged in the
offender; (BAR 2008) and information
2. .D.amage impending to be caused is not
immediate nor the danger clearly GR: Failing to lend help is a qualifying
manifested. circumstance; it raises the penalty one degree
higher.
NOTE: Art 64, relative to mitigating and
aggravating circumstances, is not applicable in XPN: The driver can leave his vehicle without
quasi-offenses. aiding the victims if he:
c. Desires to summon a physician or a nurse 3. The injury suffered must not have been due
for medical assistance to the injured (Sec. to any voluntary action or contribution of
SS, RA 4136). the person injured.
Doctrine of last clear chance NOTE: Under the res ipsa /oquitur rule in its
broad sense_. the fact of the occurrence of an
This states that the contributory negligence of injury, taken with the surrounding
the party injured will not defeat the action if it circumstances, may permit an inference or raise
be shown that the accused might, by the exercise a presumption of negligence, or make out a
of reasonable care and prudence, have avoided plaintiffs prima facie case, and present a
the consequences of the negligence of the question of fact for defendant to meet with an
injured party. explanation. It is not a rule of substantive law
but more a procedural rule. Its mere invocation
Emereencv n,le does not exempt the plaintiff with the
requirement of proof to prove negligence. It
This provides that a person confronted with merely allows the plaintiff to present, along with
emergency may be left with no time for thought, the proof of the accident, enough of the
must make speedy decision based on impulse or attending circumstances to invoke the doctrine
instinct. and cannot be held liable for the same creating an inference or presumption of
conduct as one who had the opportunity to negligence and to thereby place on the
reflect. defendant the burden of going forward with the
proof. (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710·15,
The emergency rule is applicable only when the April 3, 2001)
situation that arises is sudden and unexpected,
and is such to deprive him of all opportunity for Effecr of contributory neeHeence on the nart
deliberation. of the victim
Illustration: An automobile driver who, by the Contributory negligence on the part of the victim
negligence of another and not by his own is not a valid defense to exculpate one from
negligence, is suddenly placed in an emergency criminal liability although it could be mitigated.
and compelled to act instantly to avoid a (Addenbraak v. People, L-22995,June 29, 1967)
collision or injury is not guilty of negligence if he
makes such a choice which a person of ordinary NOTE: Reckless imprudence is not only a mode
prudence placed in such a position might make or means of committing a crime. It is a crime by
even though he did not make the wisest choice itself.
Doctrine nfces iosa Wauit.ur Thus, when a person drove his car recklessly
hitting a pedestrian who was killed, the crime is
"The thing speaks far itself.' Where the thing reckless imprudence resulting in homicide NOT
which causes injury is shown to be under the homicide through reckless imprudence.
management of the defendant, and the accident
is such as in the ordinary course of things does The essence of the quasi offense of criminal
not happen if those who have the management negligence under Article 365 of the Revised
use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, Penal Code lies in the execution of an imprudent
in the absence of an explanation by the or negligent att that. if intentionally done, would
defendant, that the accident arose from want of be punishable as a felony. The law penalizes the
care. ljarcia v. Peap/e, G.R. No. 187926, February negligent or careless att, not the result thereof.
15,2012) The gravity of the consequence is only taken into
account to determine the penalty, it does not
Elements qualify the substance of the offense. And, as the
careless act is single, whether the injurious
1. The accident was of a kind which does not result should affect one person or several
ordinarily occur unless someone is persons, the offense (criminal negligence)
negligent; remains one and the same, and cannot be split
2. The instrumentality or agency which caused into different crimes and prosecutions. (/vier v.
the injury was under the exclusive control of San Pedro, G.R.Na.172716,November 17, 2010)
the person in charge; and
Q: Y while alighting from his vehicle was hit should not be appreciated. Verily. it is the
by X with his car. This caused Y to be thrown inexcusable lack of precaution or conscious
four meters away from his jeepney. X was indifference to the consequences of the conduct
charged with frustrated murder and which supplies the criminal intent in Article 365.
convicted in the RTC or frustrated homicide. The limiting element in the last paragraph or
Upon appeal in the CA, the crime was Article 365 or the RPC. which imposes the
modified to reckless imprudence resulting in penalty next higher in degree upon the offender
serious physical injuries. X contends that he who ""fails to lend on the spot to the injured
is not liable for such crime because he lacked parties such help as may be in his hands to
criminal intent; that he was not negligent in give.•. according to case law, (a) is dependent on
driving his pick-up truck; and that the CA the means in the hands or the offender, i.e., the
should have appreciated voluntary type and degree or assistance that he/she, at the
surrender as a mitigating circumstance in his time and place or the incident. is capable or
favor. ls X's contention correct? giving; and (b) requires adequate proof. X was
able to supply the help according to the extent or
A: NO. The contention or X is wrong. To capabilities. (Gonzaga v. People, C.R. No. 195671,
constitute the offense or reckless driving, the act Jonuory 21, 2015)
must be something more than a mere negligence
in the operation or the motor vehicle. The act is Q: While X was driving his car, he noticed
required to be or willful and wanton disregard or that something was wrong in the accelerator.
the consequences. The fact that Y's body was He drove his car under tha house or A which
thrown four (4) meters away from his jeep is made or light materials. Upon opening the
showed that X was driving his pick-up at a fast hood or his car, he smelled gasoline from
speed when he overtook the jeep ofY. under the car. He lighted his lighter to see
what was wrong. All or a sudden, the car was
The mitigating circumstance or voluntary set aOame. The fire spread to the house or A.
surrender cannot be appreciated in his favor. To save himself, A jumped from the window
Paragraph 5 or Article 365, RPC, expressly states and suffered serious physical injuries. B, wife
that in the imposition of the penalties, the courts or A, failed to get out or the house and was
shall exercise their sound discretion, without burnt to death. C, the son or A and B, suffered
regard to the rules prescribed in Article 64 or the slight physical injuries when he got out of the
RPC. (Mariono v. People, C.R. No. 178145, July 7, house. The motorcycle or C was destroyed.
2014) What crime did X commit?
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS have been twelve (12) years and one (1) day
ofreclusion temporal.
II . 2021
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
GOLDEN NOTES
312
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
You have already applied everything so it NOTE: Recidivists, who are not habitual
will become prision correcclonal ;n its delinquents, are entitled to the benefit of the
medium period. Indeterminate Sentence Law. (People v. Jaronil/a,
G.R. No. L·28S47, February 22, 1974)
4. Determine the minimum term of the
sentence. CONDITIONS OF PAROLE
You go one degree lower and that is arresto Prisoneroualified fnr release on oarole
mayor. Therefore, arresto mayor in its
medium period (or any period in the Prisoner is qualified for release on parole
discretion of the court) is the minimum term whenever he shall:
of the sentence.
1. Have served the minimum penalty imposed
COVERAGE upon him;
2. Appear to the board of indeterminate
Indeterminate sentence applies mandatorily to sentence, from the reports of the prisoner's
violations of both the RPC and special Jaws work and conduct, and from the study and
where imprisonment would exceed one (1) year, investigation made by the board itself that:
and where the penalty is divisible. (Sec. 1, Act
4103) a. Fitted by his training for release;
b. Reasonable probability that such
Persons disqualified from availing the prisoner will live and remain at liberty
benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law without violating the law;
Cl990 2005RAB) c. Release will not be incompatible with
the welfare of society. (Sec. S, Act 4103,
The Indeterminate sentence Jaw shall NOT apply as omended)
to persons:
NOTE: If a prisoner, even if he has already
1. Convicted of: served the minimum sentence but the Board
a. An offense punishable with death found out that he is not fit for release on parole,
penalty, rec/uslon perpetua, or life he shall continue to serve until the end of the
imprisonment maximum term.
b. Treason, conspiracy, or proposal to
commit treason Prisonerno oarnle is entitled to final release
c. Misprision of treason, rebellion, and discbaree
sedition, espionage
d. Piracy; If during the period of surveillance, such paroled
prisoner shall:
2. Habitual delinquents;
3. Those who shall have escaped from 1. Show himself to be a law-abiding citizen;
confinement or evaded sentence; (2007 and
BAR) 2. Not violate any law. (Section 6, Act 4103, os
4. Granted conditional pardon by the Chief amended)
Executive and shall have violated the term
(condition) thereto; (1999 BAR) NOTE: The Board may issue a final certification
5. Whose maximum term of imprisonment in his favor for his final release and
does not exceed one year; (2005 BAR) discharge. (Sec. 6)
6. Who are already serving final judgment upon
the approval of the Indeterminate Sentence Consequences when the prisoner violates
Law. (Sec. 2, Act4103) anv nftheconditions nfhis narole
NOTE: Although the penalty prescribed for the The paroled prisoner may be:
felony committed is death or reclusion perpetua,
if after considering the attendant circumstances, 1. Rearrested; and
the imposable penalty is reclusion temporal or 2. Thereafter, he shall serve the remaining
less, the Indeterminate Sentence Law applies. unexpired portion of the maximum sentence
for which he was originally committed to
prison. (Sec. 8, Act 4103, as amended)
judgment if the conditions are violated. (Bala v. not unduly restrictive of his liberty or
Han. Martinez, G.R. No. L-67301, January 29, incompatible with his freedom of
1990) conscience. (Sec. 10, P.D. 968)
Probation may be granted whether the sentence CrUeria in dererminine whether an offender
imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. max he nlaced on orobation
(Sec. 4, P.D. 968 as amended by R.A. 10707)
In determining whether an offender may be
Effea on accessory neoalries once ncohatino placed on probation, the court shall consider all
is granted information relative to the character,
antecedents, environment, mental and physical
Accessory penalties are deemed suspended. condition of the offender, and available
institutional and community resources.
CONDITIONS OF PROBATION
When nroharion shall he denied
1. Present himself to the probation officer
designated to undertake his supervision at If the court finds that:
such place as may be specified in the order
within seventy-two hours from receipt of 1. The offender is in need of correctional
said order; treatment that can be provided most
2. Report to the probation officer at least once effectively by his commitment to an
a month at such time and place as specified institution;
by said officer; 2. There is an undue risk that during the
3. The court may also require the probationer period of probation the offender will
to: commit another crime; or
3. Probation will depreciate the seriousness of
a. Cooperate with a program of the offense committed. (Sec. 8, P.D. 968)
supervision;
b. Meet his family responsibilities; Remedy if the application for probation i s
c. Devote himself to a specific employment denied
and not to change said employment
without the prior written approval of An order granting or denying probation shall not
the probation officer; be appealable (Sec. 4, P.D. 968 as amended by R.A.
d. Undergo medical, psychological, or 10707). Hence, if granted, the remedy is a Motion
psychiatric examination and treatment for Reconsideration and if denied, a petition for
and enter and remain in specified certlorari.
institution, when required for that
purpose; DISQUALIFIED OFFENDERS
e. Pursue a prescribed secular study or
vocational training; DiSm,aUficatlon to avail the benefits of the
f. Attend or reside in a facility established probation law {2004 BAR)
for instruction, recreation, or residence
of persons on probation; 1. Sentenced to serve a maximum term of
g. Refrain from visiting houses of ill· imprisonment of more than six (6) years;
repute; (1990, 1995, 2002 BAR)
h. Abstain from drinking intoxicated 2. Convicted of any crime against national
beverages to excess; security;
i. Permit the probation officer or an 3. Who have previously been convicted by final
authorized social worker to visit his judgment of an offense punishable by
home and place of work; imprisonment of more than six (6) months
j. Reside at premises approved by it and and one (1) day and/or a fine of more than
not to change his residence without its one thousand pesos (Pl,000);
prior written approval; or 4. Who have been once on probation under the
k. Satisly any other condition related to provision of this Decree;
the rehabilitation of the defendant and
5. Who are already serving sentence at the within the period for perfecting an appeal,
time the substantive provisions of this suspend the execution of the sentence and place
Decree became applicable pursuant to the defendant on probation for such period and
Section 33 hereof; upon such terms and conditions as it may deem
6. If he perfetted an appeal from the judgment best.
of conviction (Sec. 4, P.D. 968 as amended by
R.A.10707); No application for probation shall be entertained
7. If he is convicted of violation of Election or granted if the defendant has perfected the
offenses (Sec. 264, B.P. 881); or appeal from the judgment of conviction:
8. Any person convicted for drug trafficking or Provided, That when a judgment of conviction
pushing under R.A. 9165 regardless of the imposing a non-probationable penalty is
penalty imposed (Sec. 24, R.A. 9165). appealed or reviewed and such judgment is
modified through the imposition of a
NOTE: In multiple prison terms, those imposed probationable penalty, the defendant shall be
against the accused found guilty of several allowed to apply for probation based on the
offenses should not be added up and their sum modified decision before such decision becomes
total should not be determinative of his final.
disqualification from probation since the law
uses the word ..maximum" not "total" term of The application for probation based on the
imprisonment. (Francisco v. CA, et al, G.R. No. modified decision shall be filed in the trial court
108747, April 6, 1995) where the judgment of conviction imposing a
non-probationable penalty was rendered, or in
Q: Arnel Colinares was found guilty of the trial court where such case has since been
frustrated homicide by the RTC. On appeal, re-raffled. In a case involving several defendants
the CA affirmed his conviction. On petition where some have taken further appeal, the other
for review, SC ruled that he was only guilty of defendants may apply for probation by
attempted homidde, which penalty is submitting a written application and attaching
"probationable". thereto a certified true copy of the judgment of
conviction. (Sec. 4, R.A. 10707)
Is Colinares now entitled to apply for
probation upon remand of the case to the PERIOD OF PROBATION
lower court, even after he has perfected his
appeal to a previous conviction (frustrated Period ofnrohation
homicide) which was not "probationable"?
1. The period of probation of a defendant
A: YES. What is clear is that had the RTC done sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not
what was right and imposed on Arne) the correct more than one year shall not exceed two
penalty of two years and four months maximum, years, and in all other cases, said period
he would have had the right to apply for shall not exceed six years.
probation. Arne! did not appeal from a judgment 2. When the sentence imposes a fine only and
that would have allowed him to apply for the offender is made to serve subsidiary
probation. He did not have a choice between imprisonment in case of insolvency, the
appeal and probation. While it is true that period of probation shall not be less than
probation is a mere privilege, the point is not nor be more than twice the total number of
that Arnel has the right to such privilege; he days of subsidiary imprisonment. (2005
certainly does not have. What he has is the right BAR)
to apply for that privilege.
ARREST OF PROBATIONER
If the Court allows him to apply for probation
because of the lowered penalty, it is still up to tssuaoce of waccant of arrest aeaiost a
the trial judge to decide whether or not to grant probationer
him the privilege of probation, taking into
account the full circumstances of his case. The court may issue the warrant for violations of
(Co/inores v. People, G.R. No. 182748, December any condition of the probation.
13, 2011)
Effect after rhe arrest of the orohationer
The trial court may, after it shall have convicted
and sentenced a defendant for a probationable
penalty and upon application by said defendant
He shall be immediately brought before the before the issuance of said order, the probation
court for hearing, which may be informal and may be revoked by the Court (Bala v. Martinez,
summary, of the violation charged. If the G.R. No. L-67301,January 29, 1990)
violation is established, the court may revoke or
continue his probation and modify the Pardon vis-ta-vis Proharion
conditions thereof. If revoked, the court shall
order the probationer to serve the sentence PARDON PROBATION
originally imposed. The order revoking the grant
of probation or modifying the terms and Includes any crime Exercised individually
conditions thereof shall not be appealable. and is exercised by the trial court
individually by the
NOTE: The defendant may be admitted to bail President
pending the hearing and in such case, the Merely looks
provisions regarding release on bail of persons It promotes the
fonvard and
charged with a crime shall be applicable. (Sec. correction and
relieves the
JS, P.O. 968) rehabilitation of an
offender from the
offender by providing
consequences of an
Saoctlons imoosed if the nrohafioner him with
offense of which he
commits any serious violation of the individualized
has been
conditions ofprobation treatment; provides an
convicted; it does
opportunity for the
not work for the
1. The court may issue a warrant for the arrest reformation of a
restoration of the
of a probationer. penitent offender
rights to hold
which might be Jess
public office, or the
2. If violation is established, the court may: probable if he were to
right of suffrage,
serve a prison
unless such rights
a. Revoke his probation; OR sentence; and prevent
are expressly
b. Continue his probation and modify the the commission of
restored by means
conditions thereof. offenses.
ofoardon.
MntocxebicJe Overbauline
Any vehicle propelled by any power other than The cleaning or repairing of the whole engine of
muscular power using the public highways, a motor vehicle by separating the motor engine
except road rollers, trolley cars, street-sweepers, and its parts from the body of the motor vehicle.
sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers graders (Sec. 2(j), R.A. 10883)
fork-lifts, amphibian trucks, and cra�es if no�
used an public highways, vehicles, which run Commission nfrarnannine
only on rails or tracks, and tractors, trailers and
traction engines of all kinds used exclusively for 1. When carnapping is committed WITH
agricultural purposes. (Sec. 2(e), RA 10883) violence against or intimidation of persons,
or force upon things; or
NOTE: Trailers having any number of wheels,
when propelled or intended to be propelled by Illustration: Pedro is about to leave from
attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be classified UST. Upon boarding his car, he was poked
as separate motor vehicle with no power rating. by X with a gun. X, subsequently, took
(Sec. 2(e), R.A.10883) Pedro's car.
chassis of a motor vehide shall be registered 1. For assembly or rebuilding of motor vehicles.
with the LTO. • Any person who shall undertake to
assemble or rebuild or cause the assembly
Effecr if the momr vehifle eneines eneine or rebuilding of a motor vehicle shall first
blocks and chassis are NOT registered secure a certificate of clearance from the
Philippine National Police (PNP).
1. It shall be considered as:
a. Untaxed importation; NOTE: No such permit shall be issued unless
b. Coming from an illegal source; the applicant shall present a statement
c. Carnapped vehicle. under oath containing the type, make, and
serial numbers of the engine, chassis and
2. It shall be confiscated in favor of the body, if any, and the complete list of the
Government. spare parts of the motor vehicle to be
assembled or rebuilt together with the
Duty of collector of customs names and addresses of the sources thereof.
The Collector of Customs of a principal port of In the case of motor vehicle engines to be
entry where an imported motor vehicle, motor mounted on motor boats, motor bancas and
vehicle engine, engine block chassis or body is other light water vessels, the applicant shall
unloaded, shall, within seven (7) days after the secure a permit from the Philippine National
arrival of the imported motor vehicle or any of Police, which office shall in turn furnish the
its parts enumerated herein, report the Office the pertinent data concerning the
shipment to the Land Transportation Office, motor vehicle engines including their type,
specifying the make, type, and serial numbers, if make and serial numbers. (Sec. 12, R.A.
any, of the motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, 10883)
engine block and chassis or body and stating the
names and addresses of the owner or consignee 2. For shipment of motor vehicles, motor vehicle
thereof. engines, engine blocks, chassis or body. - Any
person who shall undertake to ship motor
If the motor vehicle engine, engine block, chassis vehicles, motor vehicle engines, engine
or body does not bear any serial number, the blocks, chassis or body shall first secure a
Collettor of Customs concerned shall hold the certificate of clearance from the Philippine
motor vehicle engine, engine block, chassis or National Police.
body until it is numbered by the Land
Transportation Office; Provided, that a PN P NOTE: The PPA shall not allow the loading of
clearance shall be required prior to engraving motor vehicles in all interisland and
the engine or chassis number. (Sec. 9, R.A 10883) international shipping vessels without a motor
vehicle clearance from the PNP, except cargo
Duty of importers. distributors and sellers trucks and other trucks carrying goods. Land
Transportation Franchising and Regulatory
Any person engaged in the importation, Board (LTFRB)·accredited public utility vehicles
distribution, and buying and selling of motor (PUV) and other motor vehicles carrying
vehicles, motor vehicle engines, engine blocks, foodstuff and dry goods.
chassis or body, shall:
The Philippine Ports Authority shall, within
1. Keep a permanent record of his stocks, seven (7) days upon boarding, submit a report to
stating therein: the Philippine National Police of all motor
a. Their type, make, and serial numbers; vehicles loaded on board the "RORo·, ferry, boat,
and vessell or ship for interisland and international
b. The names and addresses of the persons shipment. (Sec. 13, R.A. 10883)
from whom they were acquired; and
c. The names and addresses of the persons Convicred fnreien nationals deonrted after
to whom they were sold service ofsentence
2. Render an accurate monthly report of his Foreign nationals convicted under this Act shall
transactions in motor vehicles to the Land be deported immediately after service of
Transportation Office. (Sec. 10, R.A. 10883) sentence without further proceedings by the
Bureau of Immigration. (Sec.18, R.A. 10883)
BeouicementofcJearaoce and necmit
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
321 �
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
CRIMINAL LAW
Any person, natural or juridical, public or a. Cut, saw, slice, separate, split. severe,
private. (Sec. 2, R.A. 7832) smelt. or remove any electric power
transmission line/material or meter from
PROHIBITED ACTS a tower, pole, any other installation or
place of installation or any other place or
1. Illegal use of electricity site where it may be rightfully or lawfully
stored, deposited, kept, stocked,
a. Tap, make, or cause to be made any inventoried, situated or located, without
connection with overhead lines, service the consent of the owner. whether or not
drops, or other electric service wires, the act is done for profit or gain;
without previous authority or consent of b. Take, carry away. or remove or transfer,
the private electric utility or rural electric with or without the use of a motor vehicle
cooperative concerned; or other means of conveyance, any
b. Tap, make, or cause to be made any electric power transmission line/material
connection to the existing electric service or meter from a tower, pole, any other
facilities of any duly registered consumer installation or place of installation, or any
without the latter's or the electric utility's place or site where it may be rightfully or
consent or authority; lawfully stored, deposited, kept, stocked,
c. Tamper, instaJI, or use a tampered inventoried, situated or located, without
electric.al meter, jumper, current the consent of the owner. whether or not
reversing transformer. shorting or the act is done for profit or gain;
shunting wire, loop connection, or any c. Store. possess or otherwise keep in his
other device which interferes with the premises, custody or control, any electric
proper or accurate registry or metering of power transmission line/material or
electric current or otherwise results in its meter without the consent of the owner,
diversion in a manner whereby electricity whether or not the act is done for profit
is stolen or wasted; or gain; and
d. Load, carry, ship, or move from one place
Tampering with the electric meter to another, whether by land, air or sea,
any electrical power transmission
Committed by the consumer to prevent line/material, whether or not the act is
the meter from registering the correct done for profit or gain, without first
amount of electric consumed; thus, while securing a clearance/permit for the said
using the same regular power supply, purpose from its owner or the National
they are billed for Jess than what they Power Corporation (NPC) or its regional
actually consumed. Tampering affects office concerned, as the case may be. (Sec.
only the registered usage as renected in 3, R.A. 7832)
the electric meter, not the amount of
electricity actually used, assuming a more Electrical PowerIcaosmiSsiootine/Marerial
or Jess uniform monthly usage of
electricity. (Manito Electric Company v. Electric power transmission steel towers,
Spouses Chua and Paqueo, G.R. No. 160422, woodpoles, cables, wires, insulators, line
July S, 2010) hardwares, electrical conductors, and other
related items with a minimum voltage of sixty
d. Damage or destroy an electric meter, nine kilovolts (69 kv). (Sec. 3, R.A. 7832)
equipment, wire or conduit or allow any
of them to be so damaged or destroyed as PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE
to interfere with the proper or accurate
metering of electric current: and
To constitute prima facie evidence, discovery of Provided, however, that the discovery of
the circumstances must be personally witnessed any of the foregoing circumstances, in
and attested to by an officer of the law or a duly order to constitute prima facie evidence,
authorized representative of the Energy must be personally witnessed and
Regulatory Board (ERB). attested to by an officer of the law or a
duly authorized representative of the
The presence of government agents who may Energy Regulatory Board (ERB). (Sec. 4(o),
authorize immediate disconnections go into the R.A. 7832)
essence of due process. (Quisumbing v. Manila
Electric Company, G.R. No. 142943, April 3, 2002) In the case of Manila Electric Company v. Spouses
Indeed, we cannot allow respondent to act Chua and Paqueo, G.R. No. 160422,july 5,201, the
virtually as prosecutor and judge in imposing Supreme Court held that the inclusion of the
the penalty of disconnection due to alleged phrase "by the consumer concerned'" in the
meter tampering. discovery of any of the circumstances in the IRR
is invalid because it is in excess of what the law
Cica,msranres c.nnstln,rine orima furie being implemented provides. Only the presence
evidence of illegal use of electricity of an authorized government agent, either an
officer of the law or an authorized
Sections 4(a) and 4(b) of R.A. 7832 provide that representative of the ERB, during the MERALCO
the following circumstances shall constitute inspection would allow any of the circumstances
primo focie evidence of illegal use of electricity: enumerated in Section 4 of R.A. 7832 to be
considered prima facie evidence of illegal use of
1. The presence of a bored hole on the glass electricity by the benefited party. The law does
cover of the electric meter, or at the back or not include the consumer or the consumer's
any other part of said meter; representative in this enumeration.
2. The presence inside the electric meter of salt,
sugar and other elements that could result in 9. Possession, control, or custody of
the inaccurate registration of the meter's electric power transmission
internal parts to prevent its accurate line/material by any person, natural or
registration of consumption of electricity; juridical, not engaged in the
3. The existence of any wiring connec.tion which transformation, transmission or
affects the normal operation or registration distribution of electric power, or in the
of the electric meter; manufacture of such elec.tric power
4. The presence of a tampered, broken, or fake transmission line/material shall
seal on the meter, or mutilated, altered, or be prima facie evidence that such
tampered meter recording chart or graph, or line/material is the fruit of the offense
computerized chart, graph or log; defined in Section 3 and therefore such
5. The presence in any part of the building or its line/material may be confiscated from
premises which is subject to the control of the person in possession. control or
the consumer or on the electric meter. of a custody. (Sec. 4(b), R.A. 7832)
current reversing transformer, jumper,
shorting and/or shunting wire, and/or loop The presence of a broken seal and a shunting
connection or any other similar device; wire in petitioner's electric meter will not suffice
6. The mutilation, alteration, reconnection, to support a finding that petitioner was in
disconnec.tion, bypassing or tampering of flagrante delicto. Such circumstances merely
instruments, transformers, and accessories; operate as prima facie evidence of illegal use of
7. The destruction of, or attempt to destroy, any electricity under Section 4 of R.A. No. 7832. (Go
integral accessory of the metering device box v. Leyte II Electric Cooperative, Inc., G.R. No.
which encases an electric meter, or its 176909, February 18, 2008)
metering accessories; and
8. The acceptance of money and/or other DISCONNECTION OF ELECTRIC SERVICE
valuable consideration by any officer or
employee of the electric utility concerned or Wbeo shall there be discoooecrino
the making of such an offer to any such
officer or employee for not reporting the The private elec.tric utility or rural elec.tric
presence of any of the circumstances cooperative concerned have the right and
enumerated in subparagraphs (i), (ii), (iii), authority to disconnett immediately the electric
(iv), (v), (vi), or (vii) hereof. service after serving a written notice or warning
to that effect. without the need of a court or referred to in this section as differential
administrative order, and deny restoration of billing. (Sec. 6, R.A. 7832)
the same when:
Beonisites fnr an electric service orov'ider ro
1. Owner of the house or establishment be authorized ro disconnecr a,sromer's
concerned or someone acting in his eJectric serv'ife on the basis of alleeed
behalf shall have been caught in elecrricitv oilferaee
flagrante delicto doing any of the acts
enumerated in Section 4(a); or 1. An officer of the Jaw or an authorized ERB
representative must be present during the
In Flaerante Delicrn inspection of the electric facilities; and
2. Even if there is prima facie evidence of
Implies positive identification by an illegal use of electricity and the customer is
eyewitness or eyewitnesses to the act of caught in flagrante delitto committing the
tampering so that there is '"direct acts under Section 4(a), the customer must
evidence· of culpability, or "that which still be given due notice prior to the
proves the fact in dispute without the disconnection. (Manila Electric Company v.
aid of any inference or presumption." Navarro-Domingo, G.R. No. 161893, June 27,
(Manila Electric Company v. Spouses 2006)
Chua and Paqueo, G.R. No.160422, July 5,
2010) PRESUMPTION OF BAO FAITH
1. Upon deposit of the amount representing Electricity is a basic necessity, the generation
the differential billing by the person denied and distribution of which is imbued with public
the service, with the private electric utility interest, and its provider is a public utility
or rural elec.tric cooperative concerned or subject to strict regulation by the State in the
with the competent court electric service exercise of police power. Failure to comply with
shall not be immediately disconnected or these regulations will give rise to the
shall be immediately restored. presumption of bad faith or abuse of right
2. If the court finds that illegal use of (Samar II Electric Cooperative, Inc., and Dacula v.
electricity has not been committed by the Quijano, G.R.No.144474, April 27, 2007)
same person, the amount deposited shall be
credited against future billings, with legal BREACH OF CONTRACT
interest chargeable against the private
utility or rural elec.tric cooperative, and the The Supreme Court held that MERALCO's
utility or cooperative shall be made to contractual right to disconnect electric service
immediately pay such person double the arises only after the customer has been notified
value of the payment or deposit with legal of his adjusted bill and has been afforded the
interest, which amount shall likewise be opportunity to pay the differential billing.
creditable against immediate future MERALCO breached its contract of service with
billings, without prejudice to any criminal, the respondents as it disconnected the
civil, or administrative action that such respondent's electric service before they were
person may be entitled to file under ever notified of the differential billing. (Manila
existing laws, rules and regulations. Electric Company v. Spouses Ramos, G.R. No.
3. If the court finds the same person guilty of 195145, February 10, 2016)
such illegal use of electricity, he shall, upon
final judgment, be made to pay the electric DIFFERENTIAL BILLING
utility or ruraJ electric cooperative
concerned double the value of the Differential billing
estimated electricity illegally used which is
Amount to be charged to the person concerned (Manila Electric Company v. MACRO Textile
for the unbilled electricity illegally consumed by Mills Corporation, G.R. No. 126243, January
him. 18, 2002)
It is determined through the use of Any person who shall report to the NPC or police
methodologies which utilize, among others, as authorities any ac.t which may constitute a
basis for determining the amount of monthly violation of Section 3 (Theft of Elet1:ric Power
electric consumption in kilowatt-hours to be Transmission Lines and Materials) shall be given
billed, either: incentive by way of a monetary award in the
minimum of PS,000.
1. The highest recorded monthly consumption
within the five-year billing period preceding The Department of Energy (DOE), in
the time of the discovery; consultation with the NPC, shall issue the
2. The estimated monthly consumption as per necessary guidelines for the proper
the report of load inspection conducted implementation of this incentive scheme. (Sec. 5,
during the time of discovery; RA 7832)
3. The higher consumption between the
average consumptions before or after the IMPOSITION OF SURCHARGES
highest drastic drop in consumption within
the five-year billing period preceding the Private electric utility or rural elec.tric
discovery; cooperative may impose surcharges, in addition
4. The highest recorded monthly consumption to the value of the electricity pilfered, on the bills
within four (4) months after the time of of any consumer apprehended for tampering
discover; or with his electric meter/metering facility
5. The result of the ERB test during the time of installed on his premises, as well as other
discovery and, as basis for determining the violations of contract like direct connection, use
period to be recovered by the differential of jumper, and other means of illicit usage of
billing, either: (1) the time when the elet1:ric electricity found installed in the premises of the
service of the person concerned recorded an consumer.
abrupt or abnormal drop in consumption, or
(2) when there was a change in his service 1. First apprehension Twenty-five
connection such as a change of meter, percent (25%) of the current bill as
change of seal or reconnection, or in the surcharge;
absence thereof, a maximum of sixty (60)
billing months, up to the time of discovery, 2. Second apprehension - Fifty percent
but shall not be less than one (1) year (50%) of the current bill as surcharge;
preceding the date of discovery of the illegal and
use of electricity. (Sec. 6, R.A. 8732)
3. Third and subsequent apprehension
Three methods in computing differential - One hundred percent (100%) of the
hillines current bill as surcharge.
1. Average method - used when the defect Private electric utility or rural elec.tric
discovered was intermittent or on and off; cooperative is authorized to discontinue the
electric service in case the consumer is in
2. Percentage method as found b y the arrears in the payment of the above imposed
meter laboratory - used when the meter surcharges. (Sec. 8, R.A. 8732)
laboratory had been able to arrive at the
percentage registration of the meter when RESTRICTION ON THE ISSUANCE OF
the defect was more or less permanent in RESTRAINING ORDERS OR WRITS OF
nature; and INJUNCTION
The discovery of any person engaging in any of that organization and further elaborated by
the above activities without a lease, license, or regulations to be promulgated by the
permit shall constitute a pr;ma Department of Agriculture. (Sec. 3, R.A. 10654)
facie presumption that the person is engaged in
unauthorizedfisheries activity. Beoortorial Beonirement nuder Sec 36
FAILURE TO SECURE FISHING PERMIT PRIOR Each commercial fishing vessel shall keep a daily
TO ENGAGING IN DISTANT WATER FISHING record offish catch and spoilage, landing points,
Sel"lion BB, R.A. 8550 and quantity and value of fish caught, and off
loaded for transhipment, sale and/or other
It shall be unlawful for any person tofish in the disposal. Detailed information shall be duly
high seas, in the territorial seas, archipelagic certified by the vessel's captain and transmitted
waters, and Exclusive Economic Zones of other to BFAR within the period prescribed in the
states using a Philippine flagged fishing vessel implementing rules and regulations
without first securing a fishing permit from the promulgated by the Department of Agriculture.
Department of Agriculture and authorization Failure to comply shall result to administrative
from the coastal state. and penal sanctions. (Sec.12, R.A.10654)
substance such as sodium cyanide, which wiJI mature, as identified in the implementing rules
kill, stupefy, disable, or render unconscious fish and regulations by the Department of
or fishery species. Agriculture.
XPN: If it is for the purpose of gathering fry, It shall be unlawful for any person or
glass eels, elvers, tabios, and a/among and other corporation to gather, possess, commercially
species that by their nature are small but already transport, sell or export ordinary, semi-precious
1. It is unlawful to fish or take, catch, gather, spawners, eggs, or fry are discovered or seized
sell, purchase, possess, transport. export, to fully cooperate in the investigation conducted
fonvard, or ship out aquatic species listed in by concerned government authorities on the
Appendix I of the Convention on the matter shaJI create a presumption that there is
International Trade in Endangered Species connivance or conspiracy between the company
of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES], or those and the shipper to violate the provisions of RA.
categorized by the International Union for 8550 as amended by R.A. 10654.
Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources (IUCN) as threatened and IMPORTATION OR EXPORTATION OF FISH OR
determined by the Department of FISHERY SPECIES
Agriculture as such. Sertwn 105, R.A. 8550
2. It is unlawful to fish, take, catch, gather, sell, Any importation or exportation of fish or fishery
purchase. possess, transport. export, species in violation of R.A. 8550 as amended by
fonvard, or ship out aquatic species listed in R.A. 10654 is unlawful.
CITES Appendices II and Ill if scientific
assessments show that population of the Failure on the part of the shipping or forwarding
species in the wild cannot remain viable company from whose possession the fish or
under pressure of collec.tion and trade fishery species imported or exported are
except if the taking or fishing of these discovered or seized to fully cooperate in the
species from the wild is for scientific investigation conducted by concerned
research, or conservation breeding government authorities shall create a
simultaneous with commerciaJ breeding. presumption that there is connivance or
conspiracy between the shipping company and
3. It is unlawful to gather, take, possess, the shipper to perpetrate the aforementioned
transport, or export. fonvard, or ship out offense.
captive-bred species that have been
transplanted to the wild. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MINIMUM
SAFETY STANDARDS
CAPTURE OF SABALO AND OTHER Se,·twn 108 R.A. 8550
BREEDERS/SPA\VNERS
Se,·twn 10.1, R.A. 8550 The owner and captain of a commercial fishing
vessel engaged in fishing who, upon demand by
GR: It is unlawful for any person to catch, gather, proper authorities, fails to exhibit or show proof
capture, or possess mature milkfish of compliance with the safety standards
or saba/o and other breeders or spawners of provided in RA. 8550 shall be liable
other fishery species as may be determined by administratively and criminally.
the Department of Agriculture.
FAILURE TO SUBMIT A YEARLY REPORT ON
XPN: For local breeding purposes or scientific or ALL FISHPONDS, FISH PENS AND FISH CAGES
research purposes subject to guidelines that Se,·twn 109, R.A. 8550
shall be promulgated by the Department of
Agriculture. It shall be unlawful for owners and operators of
fishponds, fishpens and fish cages to fail to
EXPORTATION OF BREEDERS, SPAWNERS, submit an annual report to the Department of
EGGS OR FRY Agriculture pursuant to Section 57 of R.A. 8550.
Se,·twn 104, R.A. 8550
Registration of Fish Hatcheries and Private
GR: Exportation of breeders, spawners, eggs or Fishnonds ere
fry is unlawful.
All fish hatcheries, fish breeding facilities, and
XPN: Export of hatchery-bred or captive-bred private fishponds must be registered with the
breeder, spawner, egg or fry, may be allowed LGUs which shall prescribe minimum standards
subject to the regulations to be promulgated by for such facilities in consultation with the
the Department of Agriculture. Department of Agriculture.
Provided, further, That all fishpond, fish pens, The fishing vessel owner, master or operator or
and fish cage operators shall annually report to any other person acting on behalf of any fishing
the Department the type of species and volume vessel who assaults, resists, intimidates,
of production in areas devoted to aquaculture. harasses, seriously interferes with, or unduly
(Sec. 57 ofR.A. 8550) obstructs or delays a fishery Jaw enforcement
officer, authorized inspector or observer, the
NONCOMPLIANCE WITH GOOD deputized fishwarden of the LGU, or any
AQUACULTURE PRACTICES lawfully·boarding government officers, in the
Sectwn llZ, R.A. 8550 exercise of their duties will be penalized.
Fishery operations involving the breeding and Any person who does not allow any authorized
farming of fish and other fishery species shall officer or an observer to exercise any of the legal
comply with good aquaculture practices and the duties shall be deemed to be obstructing that
guidelines for environmentally-sound design officer or person.
and operation for the sustainable development
of the aquaculture industry which shall be NONCOMPLIANCE WITH FISHERIES
promulgated by the Department of Agriculture. OBSERVER COVERAGE
Sectwn 116, R.A. 8550
COMMERCIAL FISHING VESSEL OPERATORS
EMPLOYING UNLICENSED FISHERFOLK, Vessels ProbihUed from samne without a
FISHWORKER OR CREW fisheries Obseryer
Sectwn 113 R.A. 8550
1. Philippine distant water fishing vessel;
Persons Prohibited from Employing 2. Commercial fishing vessels.
lloliceosedFisberfnlk /Eisberwocker/Ccew
NONCOMPLIANCE WITH PORT STATE
1. Owner or operator of a commercial fishing MEASURES
vessel; Sectwn 117, R.A. 8550
2. Philippine flagged fishing vessels engaged in
distant water fishing. 24·hour Prior Notice Beauicement
OBSTRUCTION OF DEFINED No foreign fishing vessel shall be allowed entry
MIGRATION PATHS without providing at least twenty-four (24)-hour
Sectwn 114 R.A. 8550 prior notice. When a foreign fishing vessel is
granted entry, failure to provide a catch report
It shall be unlawful for any person to obstruct shall be deemed unlawful. It is likewise unlawful
any defined migration path of anadromous, for any person to fail to comply with other rules
catadromous, and other migratory species. on port state measures promulgated by the
Department of Agriculture in coordination with
MieratorySorries port state authorities.
Any fishery species which in the course of their Failure to comply with the 24-hour period may
life could travel from freshwater to marine result in denial of permission to enter or use of
water or vice versa. or any marine species which port facilities and the vessel may be subject to
travel over great distances in waters of the onboard inspection and/or impoundment.
ocean as part of their behavioral adaptation for
survival and speciation: NONCOMPLIANCE WITH VESSEL
MONITORING MEASURES
1. Anadromous species - marine fishes which Sectwn 119, R.A. 8550
migrate to freshwater areas to spawn;
No municipal, commercial, or distant water
2. Catadromous species - freshwater fishes fishing vessel shall engage in fishing activity
which migrate to marine areas to spawn. without complying with the vessel monitoring
(Sec. 4, R.A. 8550)
or buys and sells, or in any manner deals in evidence to the defense. Burden of proof is upon
any article or object taken• during that the fence to overcome the presumption.
robbery or theft;
3. The accused knows or should have known Clearance/Permit to Sell/Use Second Hand
that the thing is derived from that crime; Articles
and (1998 BAR)
4. He intends by the deal he makes to gain for All stores, establishments or entities dealing in
himself or for another. (Dimat v. People, G.R. the buy and sell of any good, article item, object
No. 181184,Jonuo,y 25, 2012) or anything of value obtained from an
unlicensed dealer or supplier thereof, shall
Fencing under P.O. 1612 is a distinct crime from before offering the same for sale to the public,
theft and robbery. secure the necessary clearance or permit from
the station commander of the Integrated
Eendne vis-A-viS Bnhhecxand Theft National Police in the town or city where such
store, establishment or entity is located.
The Jaw on fencing does not require the accused
to have participated in the criminal design to The Chief of Constabulary/Director General,
commit, or to have been in any wise involved in Integrated National Police shall promulgate such
the commission of, the crime of robbery or theft. rules and regulations to carry out the provisions
Neither is the crime of robbery or theft made to of this section. Any person who fails to secure
depend on an act of fencing in order that it can the clearance or permit required by this section
be consummated. (People v. Hon. De Guzman, G.R. or who violates any of the provisions of the rules
No. 77368, October 5, 1993) and regulations promulgated thereunder shall
upon conviction be punished as a fence. (Sec. 6,
Eendne is notacontinnine offense P.D. 1612)
Fencing is not a continuing offense. Jurisdiction Q: Arlene i s engaged in the buy and sell of
is with the court of the place where the personal used garments, more popularly known as
property subject of the robbery or theft was "ukay-ukay." Among the items found by the
possessed, bought, kept, or dealt with. The place police in a raid of her store in Baguio City
where the theft or robbery was committed is were brand-new Louis Feraud blazers.
inconsequential. (People v. Hon. De Guzman, G.R. Arlene was charged with "fendng." Will the
No. 77368, October 5, 1993) charge prosper? Why or why not? (2010
BAR)
Required proof in the prosecution of anti
fenfine law A: NO. The charge of "fencing" will not prosper.
For a charge of fencing to prosper, it must first
Presidential Decree 1612 is a special law and, be established that the article subject of the
therefore, its violation is regarded as ma/um alleged "fencing• has been derived from the
prohlbitum, requiring no proof of criminal intent. proceeds of the crime of theft or robbery-a fact
which is wanting in this case.
The prosecution must prove that the offender
knew or should have known that the subject of It should be noted that the suspett is engaged in
the offense he acquired and later sold was the buy and sell of used garments, which are in
derived from theft or robbery and that he the nature of personal property.
intended to obtain some gain out of his acts.
(Di mot v. People, ibid.) In civil law, possession of personal or movable
property carries with it a pr;ma fade
Presumotion nffencine presumption of ownership. The presumption of
"fencingN arises only when the article or item
Mere possession of any good, article, item, involved is the subject of a robbery or thievery.
object. or anything of value which has been the (Sec. 5, P.D.1612)
subject of robbery or thievery shall be primo
focie evidence of fencing.
NOTE: Where the check is drawn by a A: A, who negotiated the unfunded check ofB in
corporation, company, or entity. the person buying a new tire for his car, may only be
or persons who actually signed the check in prosecuted for est.afa if he was aware at the time
behalf of such drawer shall be liable under of such negotiation that the check has no
this AcL (Sec.1, par. 3, B.P. 22) sufficient funds in the drawee bank; otherwise,
he is not criminally liable.
Elements for violation of B.P.22 Cpar.11
B, who accommodated A with his check, may
1. That a person makes or draws and issues nevertheless be prosecuted under B.P. 22 for
any check; having issued the check, knowing at the time of
2. The check is drawn or issued to apply on issuance that he has no funds in the bank and
account or for a vaJuable consideration; that A will negotiate it to buy a new tire, i.e. for
3. The person who makes or draws and issues value. B may not be prosecuted for estafa
the check knows at the time of issue that he because the fat-ts indicate that he is not actuated
by intent to defraud in issuing the check check, that he did not have sufficient funds or
negotiated. Obviously, B issued the postdated credit with the drawee bank for the payment of
check only to help A Criminal intent or dolo is such check in full upon its presentment.
absent.
This knowledge of insufficiency of funds or
Effea when the check was ocesented fnr credit at the time of the issuance of the check is
oavment on the Q6t11 davafter itsdue dare the second element of the offense. In as much as
this element involves a state of mind of the
If the payee presented the check and it bounced, person making, drawing or issuing the check,
even if the payee sends a written notice of which is difficult to prove, Sec. 2 of B.P. 22
dishonor to the drawer, the payee would not be creates a prima facie presumption of such
entitled to a presumption that the drawer had knowledge.
knowledge that he has no funds when the check
was issued. Under Sec. 2 of B.P. 22, the said For this presumption to arise, the prosecution
presumption can only be utilized during the 90· must prove the following: (a) the check is
day period. presented within ninety (90) days from the date
of the check; (b) the drawer or maker of the
Sroleo check cannot rive risetnavinlatlnn of check receives notice that such check has not
B.P.22 been paid by the drawee; and (c) the drawer or
maker of the check fails to pay the holder of the
A stolen check cannot give rise to a violation of check the amount due thereon, or make
B.P. 22 because the check is not drawn for a arrangements for payment in full within five (5)
valuable consideration. Such checks were not banking days after receiving notice that such
made to apply to a valid, due, and demandable check has not been paid by the drawee.
obligation. This, in effett, is a categorical ruling
that the fact from which the civil liability of In other words, the presumption is brought into
respondent may arise does not exist (Ching v. existence only after it is proved that the issuer
Nicdaa, GR 141181, April 27, 2007) had received a notice of dishonor and that
within five days from receipt thereof, he failed to
EVIDENCE OF KNOWLEDGE OF pay the amount of the check or to make
INSUFFICIENT FUNDS arrangements for its payment. A notice of
dishonor received by the maker or drawer of the
Necessitv of actual knnwledee Qf check is thus indispensable before a conviction
insuffieiencx offundsinRP 22 can ensue. (Dica v. CA, G.R. Na. 141669, February
28, 2005; Resteria v. People, G.R. No. 177438,
Knowledge of insufficiency of funds or credit in September 24, 2012)
the drawee bank for the payment of a check
upon its presentment is an essential element of NOTE: The presumption or prima facie evidence
the offense. as provided in this section cannot arise, if such
notice of nonpayment by the drawee bank is not
There is a prima facie presumption of the sent to the maker or drawer, or if there is no
existence of this element from the fact of proof as to when such notice was received by the
drawing, issuing or making a check, the payment drawer, since there would simply be no way of
of which was subsequently refused for reckoning the crucial 5-day period. (Lim Laa v.
insufficiency of funds. It is important to stress, CA, G.R. Na. 119178, June 20, 1997; Resterio v.
however, that this is not a conclusive People, G.R. Na.177438, September 24, 2012.
presumption that forecloses or precludes the
presentation of evidence to the contrary. (Lim Josufficieocx of verbal notice nfdiShnoor
Lao v. CA, G.R.Na.119178,June 20, 1997)
Verbal notice of dishonor is NOT sufficient. The
Notice of dishnonr is ao iodiSoensable notice of dishonor must be in writing. A mere
rem,isUe tor orosea,rinn oral notice or demand to pay would be
insufficient for conviction under the law.
To hold a person liable under B.P. 22, the (Marigamen v. People, G.R. No. 153451, May 26,
prosecution must not only establish that a check 2005; Damagsang v. CA, G.R. No. 139292,
was issued and that the same was subsequently December 5, 2000)
dishonored. It must further be shown that
accused knew, at the time of the issuance of the
If the drawer or maker is an officer of a payment, the same was dishonored for the
corporation, the notice of dishonor to the said reason "Account Closed". She was then
corporation is not notice to the employee or convicted of three counts of violation of B.P.
officer who drew or issued the check for and in 22.
its behalf. It is axiomatic that notice to the
corporation, which has a personality distinct and On appeal, she contended that the
separate from the officer of the corporation, prosecution failed to prove that she received
does not constitute notice to the latter. (Lao v. any notice of dishonor of the subject checks
CA, G.R. No. 119178,June 20, 1997) from the drawee bank. Thus, according to
her, in the absence of such notice, her
Receipt of notice from the drawee bank by conviction under B.P. 22 was not warranted
theoavee for there was no bad faith or fraudulent
intent that may be inferred on her part.
The notice of dishonor may be sent by the
offended party or the drawee bank. (Lim Lao v. May Evangeline be held liable for violation of
CA, G.R. No. 119178, June 20, 1997; Azarcon v. B.P. 22 even in the absence of notice of
People, G.R. No. 185906, June 29, 2010; Resterio v. dishonor?
People, G.R. No.177438, September 24, 2012)
A: NO. In order to create the prima facie
Probative value of the unpaid or presumption that the issuer knew of the
,1i�hnnn11r1>cl rh1>rk with sramoed insufficiency of funds, it must be shown that he
inCOcmatlon "'re· refusalmnax" or she received a notice of dishonor and within
five banking days thereafter, failed to satisfy the
Such is prima facie evidence of: amount of the check or arrange for its payment.
It is only then that the drawer may be held liable
1. The making or issuance of the check; for violation of the subject law.
2. The due presentment to the drawee for
payment and the dishonour thereof; and In order to be punished for the acts committed
3. The fatt that the check was properly under B.P. 22, it is required that not only should
dishonored for the reason stamped on the the accused issue a check that is dishonored but
check (Sec. 3, 8.P. 22) likewise the accused has actually been notified
in writing of the fact of dishonor. (Cabrera v.
Primo foeic evidence of knnwledee of People, G.R. No. 150618,July24, 1989)
insufficientfunds
Dishonor of the check due to a stop payment
GR: There is a prima facie evidence of .ai:w:.
knowledge of insufficient funds when the check
was presented within 90 days from the date Under Sec. 1, Par. 1 of B.P. 22, it is implied that
appearing on the check and was dishonored. when the stop payment order is with a valid
reason, there can be no violation ofB.P. 22.
XPNs:
NOTE: Notwithstanding receipt of an order to
1. When the check was presented after 90 days stop payment, the drawee shall state in the
from date; notice that there were no sufficient funds in or
2. When the maker or drawer: credit with such bank for the payment in full of
such check. if such be the fact. (Sec. 3, BP 22)
a. Pays the holder of the check in cash, the
amount due within five banking days Liability of drawer i n cases of checks issued
after receiving notice that such check in navment nfinsrallmenrs
has not been paid by the drawee;
b. Makes arrangements for payment in full When checks are issued in payment of
by the drawee of such check within five installments covered by promissory notes and
banking days after notice of non· said checks bounced, the drawer is liable if the
payment. checks were drawn against insufficient funds,
especially when the drawer, upon signing of the
Q: Evangeline issued checks to accommodate promissory note, closed his account Said check
and to guarantee the obligations of Boni in is still with consideration. (Caram Resources v.
favour of another creditor. When the checks
issued by Evangeline were presented for
Hon. Contreras, AM.No. MTJ-93-849, October 26, merely guarantee an the offender has
1994) obligation. no funds in the
The issuance of a bank or his funds
Liability of a person who issues guarantee check and not the non- deposited therein
checks whifh were dishonored in violation of payment of obligation were not sufficient
rhe ournose nfthe Jaw is punished. to cover the
amount of the
The mere issuance of any kind of check check.
regardless of the intent of the parties, i.e. Violated if check is Not violated if
whether the check is intended merely to serve as issued in payment of a check is issued in
guaranty or deposit, but which check is pre-existing obligation payment of a pre-
subsequently dishonored makes the person who existinJ? obligation
issued the check liable for BP 22. (Lazaro v. CA, Damage not required There must be
eta/., G.R. Na.105461, November 11, 1993) damaoe
Drawer is given 5 Drawer is given 3
Q: Suppose guarantee checks were issued for banking days to make days to make
the lease of certain equipment but later their arrangements of arrangements of
equipment was pulled out. Is the drawer payment after receipt payment after
liable? of notice of dishonour receipt of notice of
dishonour
A: NO. In the case of Magno v. CA, G.R. No. 96132,
June 26, 1992, the accused issued a check of Recovery from civil action arising from 8.P.
warranty deposit for lease of certain equipment. 22 ncedudes recovery tcom corcesnondine
Civil action arisine from escoc«
Even knowing that he has no funds or
insufficient funds in the bank, he does not incur Double recovery is not allowed by the Jaw.
any liability under B.P. 22, if the lessor of the Settled is the rule that the single act of issuing a
equipment pulled out the loaned equipment. The bouncing check may give rise to two distinct
drawer has no obligation to make good the criminal offenses: estafo and violation ofB.P. 22.
check because there is no more deposit or
guaranty. However, the recovery of the single civil liability
arising from the single act of issuing a bouncing
Violation ofRP 22 in case ofacheck dcawn check in either criminal case bars the recovery of
aeainstadollaraccount the same civil liability in the other criminal
action. While the law allows two simulataneous
The Jaw does not distinguish the currency civil remedies for the offended party, it
involved underB.P. 22. Foreign checks, provided authorizes recovery in only one. In short, while
they are either drawn or issued in the two crimes arise from a single set of facts, only
Philippines, though payable outside thereof, are one civil liability attaches to it (Rodriguez v. Hon.
within the coverage of said law. (De Vi/lo v. CA, Ponferrodo, G.R. Nos. 155531-34, July 29, 2005)
G.R. No. 87416, April 8, 1991)
PREFERENCE OF IMPOSITION OF FINE
Violation ofRP 22 vis-ta-vis Bsrafq
Penaltv that the iudee max imaose for
VIOLATION OF
ESTAFA
xiolatlon ofRP 22
B.P. 22
Malum □rohibitum Malum in se SC-AC No. 12-2000, as clarified by SC-AC No. 13-
2001, established a rule on preference in
Crime against public Crime against
imposing the penalties. When the circumstances
interest property
of the case clearly indicate good faith or clear
Deceit not required Deceit is an
mistake of fact without taint of negligence, the
element
imposition of fine alone may be considered as
Punishes the making The act
the preferred penalty. The determination of the
or drawing of any constituting the
circumstances that warrant the imposition of
check that is offense is
fine rests upon the trial judge only. Should the
subsequently postdating or
judge deem that imprisonment is appropriate,
dishonoured, whether issuing a check in
such penalty may be imposed.
issued in payment of payment of an
an obli•ation or to oblioation when
MIGRANT WORKERS AND OVERSEAS The POEA Governing Board, after consultation
FILIPINOS ACT OF 1995 with the Department of Foreign Affairs, at any
RA. 8042, AS AMENDED BY RA. 10022 time, may terminate or impose a ban on the
deployment of migrant workers:
ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT
While recognizing the significant contribution of
Filipino migrant workers to the national RPC-CETCHUP
economy through their foreign exchange
Illegal recruitment consists of any of the
remittances, the State does not promote
overseas employment as a means to sustain following act. whether for profit or not, when
undertaken by a non-license or non-holder of
economic growth and achieve national
authority:
development. (Sec. 2(c), RA 8042, as amended
by R.A. 10022)
1. Referring;
MIGRANT WORKER 2. E,rocuring workers;
3. .C,anvassing;
4. .C,ontracting;
5. Enlisting;
6. I,ransporting;
When carried out by a group of three (3) or 1. To charge or accept directly or indirectly
more persons conspiring or confederating with any amount greater than that specified
one another. in the schedule of allowable fees
prescribed by the Secretary of Labor and
Elements [NoR-By-31 Employment, or to make a worker pay or
acknowledge any amount greater than that
1. The offender has .I1J2 valid license or actually received by him as a loan or
authority required by law to engage in advance;
recruitment and placement of workers; 2. To furnish or publish any false notice or
2. The offender undertakes any of the information or document in relation to
"recruitment and placement" activities recruitment or employment;
defined in Article 13(b) of the Labor Code, 3. To give any false notice, testimony,
or engages in any of the prohibited information or document or commit any act
practices enumerated under now Section 6 of misrepresentation for the purpose of
of R.A. 8042; and securing a license or authority under the
3. The illegal recruitment is carried out .bx a Labor Code, or for the purpose of
group of three (3) or more persons documenting hired workers with the POEA;
conspiring and/or confederating with one 4. To induce or attempt to induce a worker
another in carrying out any unlawful or already employed to quit his
illegal transaction, enterprise or scheme. employment in order to offer him
(People v. Sison, G.R. No. 187160, August 9, another
2017)
XPN: the transfer is designed to liberate
NOTE: It is not essential that there be actual a worker from oppressive terms and
proof that all the conspirators took a direct part conditions of employment;
in every act. It is sufficient that they acted in
concert pursuant to the same objective. (People 5. To influence or attempt to influence any
v. Sison, G.R. No. 187160, August 9, 2017) person or entity not to employ any
worker who has not applied for
HleealRern,itment in 1.aree Scale employment through his agency;
6. To engage in the recruitment or
When committed against three (3) or more placement of workers in jobs harmful to
persons individually or as a group.
1. Of the province or city where the shall be incorporated in the contract for
offense was committed; or overseas employment and shall be a condition
2. Where the offended party actually precedent for its approval. Such liabilities shall
resides at the same time of the continue during the entire period or duration of
commission of the offense. (Sec. 9, R.A. the employment contract and shall not be
8042, os amended by RA 10022) affected by any substitution, amendment or
modification made locally or in a foreign country
MONEY CLAIMS of the said contract.
Labor Arbiters of the NLRC shall have the Q: A was an able seaman contracted by ABC
original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and Recruitment Agency for its foreign principal,
decide, within 90 calendar days after the filing of Seaworthy Shipping Company (SSC). His
the complaint, the claims arising out of an employment contract provided that he would
employer-employee relationship or by virtue of serve on board the Almieda II for eight (8)
any law or contract involving Filipino workers months with a monthly salary of US$450.
for overseas deployment including claims for
actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of In connection with his employment, he
damage. signed an undertaking to observe the drug
and alcohol policy which bans possession or
The liability of the principal/employer and the use of all alcoholic beverages, prohibited
recruitment/placement agency for any and all substances and unprescribed drugs on board
claims under this section shall be joint and the ship. The undertaking provided that: (1)
several. (Sec. 10, RA 8042) disciplinary action including dismissal would
be taken against anyone in possession of the
Waees ro he recovered hv an meeallv prohibited substances or who is impaired by
diSmissed OverseasFilioioo Worker the use of any of these substances, and (2) to
enforce the policy, random test sampling
Section 10 of R.A. 8042 states that overseas would be done on all those on board the ship.
workers who were terminated from
employment without just. valid, or authorized On his third month of service while the
cause shall be entitled to the full reimbursement Almieda II was docked at a foreign port, a
of his placement fee with interest of 12% per random drug test was conducted on all
annum, plus his salaries for the unexpired members of the crew and A tested positive
portion of his employment contract or for 3 for marijuana. He was given a copy of the
months for every year of the unexpired term, drug test result. In compliance with the
whichever is less. (Sameer Overseas Placement company's directive, he submitted his
Agency, Inc. v. Cabiles, G.R. No. 170139, August 5, written explanation which the company did
2014, as penned by/. Leonen) not find satisfactory.
Q: Andrew Manning Agency (AMA) recruited A month later, he was repatriated to the
Feliciano for employment by lnvictus Philippines. Upon arrival in the Philippines,
Shipping, its foreign principal. Meantime, A filed with the National Labor Relations
AMA and Invictus Shipping terminated their Commission (NLRC) a complaint against the
agency agreement. Upon his repatriation agency and the principal for illegal dismissal
following his premature termination, with a claim for salaries for the unexpired
Feliciano claimed from AMA and lnvictus portion of his contract. Is his claim for
Shipping the payment of his salaries and salaries for the unexpired portion of his
benefits for the unserved portion of the contract tenable? Explain. (2010 BAR)
contract. AMA denied liability on the ground
that it no longer had any agency agreement A: YES. Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042 (as amended
with lnvictus Shipping. Is AMA correct? by R.A No. 10022) provides that in case of
Explain your answer. (2017 BAR) termination of overseas employment without
just. valid or authorized cause as defined by law
A: NO. AMA is not correct. Section 10 of Republic or contract, or any unauthorized deductions
Act 10022 provides that the liability of the from the migrant worker's salary, the worker
principal/employer and the shall be entitled to the full reimbursement of his
recruitment/placement agency for any and all placement fee with interest at 12% per annum�
claims shall be joint and several. This provision plus his salaries for the unexpired portion of his
e. Paik que, high and low, mahjong, persons enumerated under Sec. l(a) of P.D.
domino, and other games using 1602
plastic tiles and the likes; 2. Pn'sion correccional in its maximum period
f. Slot machines, roulette, pinball, and OR a fine of Php 6,000 · imposed upon the
other mechanical contraptions and maintainer or conductor
devices; 3. Pn'sion mayor in its medium period with
g. Dog racing, boat racing, car racing, temporary absolute disqualification OR a
and other forms of races; fine of Php 6,000 · imposed if the
h. Basketball, boxing, volleyball, maintainer, conductor or banker of said
bowling, ping pong, and other gambling schemes is a government official,
forms of individual or team or where such government official is the
contests to include game fixing, player, promoter. referee, umpire, judge or
point shaving, and other coach in case of game fixing, point shaving
machinations; and machination
i. Banking or percentage game, or 4. Pn'sion correccional in its medium period or
any other game or scheme, a fine ranging from Php 400 - Php 2,000 ·
whether upon chance or skill, imposed upon any person who shall,
wherein wagers consisting of knowingly and without lawful purpose in
money, articles of value, or any hour of any day, possess any lottery list,
representative of value are at stake paper or other matter containing letters,
or made. figures, signs or symbols pertaining to or in
any manner used in the games of jueteng,
2. Any person who knowingly permits any jai-alai or horse racing bookies, and similar
form of gambling to be carried on in games of lotteries and numbers which have
inhabited or uninhabited place or in any taken place or about to take place
building, vessel, or other means of 5. Temporary absolute disqualifications
transportation owned or controlled by him. imposed upon any barangay official who,
If the place where gambling is carried on has with knowledge of the existence of a
a reputation of a gambling place or that gambling house or place in his jurisdiction
prohibited gambling is frequently carried on fails to abate the same or take action in
therein, or the place is a public or connection therewith
government building or barangay hall, the 6. Prision correccional in its maximum period
malefactor shall be punished by prision or a fine ranging from Php 500 - Php 2,000
correccional in its maximum period and a imposed upon any security officer, security
fine of six thousand pesos. (Sec. l(a}, P.D. guard, watchman, private or house detective
1602) of hotels, villages, buildings, enclosures and
the like which have the reputation of a
Elements gambling place or where gambling activities
are being held (Sec. 1, P.D.1602)
1. A gambling game was carried on in an
inhabited or uninhabited place or in any Basis of Prohibition Against Gambling
building, vessel, or other means of
transportation; To repress an evil that undermines the social,
2. The place, building, vessel, or other means of moral, and economic growth of the nation.
transportation is owned and controlled by (People v. Punta, C.R. No. 46170, September 20,
the offender; and 1939)
3. The offender permitted the carrying on of
such game, knowing that it is a gambling Gambling is an act beyond the pale of good
game. (Reyes, 2017) morals which, for the welfare of the people,
should be exterminated. It has the effect of
Penalties causing poverty, dishonesty, fraud, and deceit.
Many men have neglected their business and
1. Prison correcclonal in its medium period OR mortgaged their integrity to follow the fickle
a fine ranging from Php 1,000 - 6,000, and Goddess of the cards. Many women have wasted
in case of recidivism� the penalty of prlsion their hours and squandered their substance at
mayor in its medium period or a fine ranging the gambling board while home and children
from Php 5,000 - 10,000 -imposed upon the were forgotten. (U.S. v. Sa/averia, C.R. No. L-
13678, November 12, 1918)
Use of Money i s not an Element in Any and All and perpetual absolute disqualification from
GamesMentioned inPP 1602 public office · if the collector, agent,
coordinator, controller. supervisor,
The purpose of the law was to prohibit maintainer, manager, operator, financier or
absolutely the game of monte in the Philippine capitalist of any illegal numbers game is a
Islands. The mere fact that money was or was government employee and/or public official,
not used in no way constitutes a necessary whether elected or appointed.
element of the game. Any representative of value
or of any valuable consideration or thing used in NOTE: In addition, the accessory penalty of
playing the prohibited game of monte, perpetual disqualification from public office
constitutes a violation of the law. (11.S. v. Rafael, shall be imposed upon any local government
G.R. No. 7380, September 18, 1912) official who, having knowledge of the
existence of the operation of any illegal
Snecratncsare not liable in eamhline numbers game in his/her jurisdiction. fails
to abate or to take action, or tolerates the
A mere bystander or spectator in a gambling same in connection therewith. (Sec. 5, R.A.
game is not criminally liable because he does not 9287}
take part therein, directly or indirectly. The Jaw
does not make the mere presence in a gambling 9. Imprisonment from 6 months and 1 day to 1
house an offense. (U.S. v. Palma, G.R. No. 2188, year OR fine ranging from Php 100,000 ·
May 5, 1905.) 400,000 shall be imposed upon any parent,
guardian or person exerc1smg moral
ILLEGAL NUMBERS GAMES authority or ascendancy over a minor, ward
or incapacitated person, and not othenvise
Any form of illegal gambling attivity which uses falling under any of the foregoing
numbers or combinations thereof as factors in subsec.tions, who induces or causes such
giving out jackpots. (Sec. 2, RA 9287) minor, ward or incapacitated person to
commit any of the offenses punishable in
Penalties this Act.
Any person who serves as a witness for the COMPREHENSIVE LAW ON FIREARMS
government or provides evidence in a criminal AND AMMUNITION
case involving any violation of this Ac.t, or who P.O. 1866, AS AMENDED BY
voluntarily or by virtue of a subpoena RA. 8294 AND R.A. 10591
testificandum or duces tecum, produces,
identifies, or gives testimony shall be immune
from any criminal prosecution, subject to the Srandacdsand reauisires fnr issuance of and
compliance with the provisions of P.O. 1732, ohtainine a license ro own and nossess
otherwise known as Decree Providing Immunity firearms
from Criminal Prosecution to Government
Witnesses and the pertinent provisions of the 1. Applicant must be a Filipino citizen;
Rules of Court. (Sec. 8, R.A 9287) 2. He must be at least 21 years old;
3. Has gainful work. employment, occupation,
PROSECUTION, JUDGMENT AND FORFEITURE or business or has filed an Income Tax
OF PROPERTY Return for the preceding year as proof of
income, profession, business, or occupation;
Confiscated Prooertv or Income shall he in and
Custodia Legis During the Pendency of the 4. He shall submit the following certification
� issued by appropriate authorities attesting
the following:
During the pendency of the case, no property or
income used or derived therefrom which may be a. The applicant has not been convicted of
confiscated and forfeited shall be disposed, any crime involving moral turpitude;
alienated, or transferred and the same shall be in b. The applicant has passed the psychiatric
custodia /egis and no bond shall be admitted for test administered by a PNP·accredited
the release of the same. psychologist or psychiatrist;
c. The applicant has passed the drug test
Eorfein,ce oftheProceeds ofthe Crime condutted by an accredited and
authorized drug testing laboratory or
Upon convittion, all proceeds, gambling clinic;
paraphernalia, and other instruments of the d. The applicant has passed a gun safety
crime including any real or personal property seminar which is administered by the
used in any illegal numbers game operation shall PNP or a registered and authorized gun
be confiscated and forfeited in favor of the State. club;
e. The applicant has filed in writing the
All assets and proeprties of the accused either application to possess a registered
owned or held by him/her in his/her name or in firearm which shall state the personal
the name of another person found to be circumstances of the applicant;
manifestly out of proportion to his/her lawful f. The applicant must present a police
income shall be prima facie presumed to be clearance from the city or municipality
proceeds of the offense and shall likewise be police office; and
confiscated and forfeited in favor of the State.
g. The applicant has not been convicted or
(Sec. 9, R.A 9287) is currently an accused in a pending
criminal case before any court of law for
Any person who, having knowledge or a crime that is punishable with a penalty
information of any offense committed under this of more than 2 years. (Sec. 4, R.A 10591)
Act and who shall disclosed the same which may
lead to the arrest and final conviction of the NOTE: An acquittal or permanent dismissal of a
offender, may be rewarded a certain percentage criminal case before the courts of law shall
of the cash money or articles of value confiscated qualify the accused thereof to qualify and
or forfeited in favor of the government, which acquire a license. (Sec. 4, R.A. 10S91)
shall be determined through a policy guideline
promulgated by the Department of Justice in Cacaine of firearms ontSide of residence or
coordination with the Department of Interior olace ofhuSiness
and Local Government and the National Police
Commission. (Sec.11 R.A 9287)
A light weapon shall be lawfully acquired or For Types 1 to S licenses, a vault or a container
possessed exclusively by the AFP, PNP, and secured by Jock and key or other security
other law enforcement agencies authorized by measures for the safekeeping of firearms shall
the President in the performance of their duties. be required.
importers, or local manufacturers and may be parts thereof, machinery, tool, or instrument
transferred or sold only from a licensed citizen used or intended to be used in the
or licensed juridical entity to another licensed manufacture of firearms, ammunition, or
citizen or licensed juridical entity. parts thereof. (Sec. 32, R.A. 10S91)
5. Arms smuggling (it refers to the import,
During elettion periods, the sale and registration export. acquisition, saJe, delivery,
of firearms and ammunition and the issuance of movement. or transfer of firearms, their
the corresponding licenses to citizens shall be parts and components, and ammunition,
allowed on the condition that the transport or from or across the territory of one country
delivery thereof shall strittly comply with the to that of another country which has not
issuances, resolutions, rules and regulations been authorized in accordance with
promulgated by the Commission on Elections. domestic law in either or both
(Sec.21, R.A. 10S91) country/countries). (Sec. 33, R.A.10S91)
6. Tampering, obliteration, or alteration of
nearb or disahilitv of the holder ofa firearm firearms identification. (Sec.34, R.A.10S91)
licensee 7. Use of an imitation firearm - This refers to a
replica of a firearm or other device that is so
Upon the death or legal disability of the holder of substantially similar in coloration and
a firearm license, it shall be the duty of his/her overall appearance to an existing firearm as
next of kin, nearest relative, legal representative, to lead a reasonable person to believe that
or other person who shall knowingly come into such imitation firearm is a real firearm. An
possession of such firearm or ammunition, to imitation firearm used in the commission of
deliver the same to the FEO of the PNP or Police a crime shall be considered as a real firearm
Regional Office, and such firearm or ammunition and the person who committed the crime
shall be retained by the police custodian pending shall be punished in accordance with R.A.
the issuance of a license and its registration. 10591 (Sec.35, R.A. 10S91)
(Sec.26, R.A.10S91) 8. Violating the procedure regarding firearms
in custodia Jegis · During the pendenty of
NOTE: The failure to deliver the firearm or any case filed in violation of RA. 10519,
ammunition within six (6) months after the seized firearm, ammunition, or parts
death or legal disability of the licensee shall thereof, machinery, tools, or instruments
render the possessor liable for illegal possession shall remain in the custody of the court. If
of the firearm. the court decides that it has no adequate
means to safely keep the same, the court
PUNISHABLE ACTS shall issue an order to turn over to the PNP
Crime Laboratory such firearm,
1. Unlawful acquisition or possession of ammunition, or parts thereof, machinery,
firearms and ammunition. (Sec. 28, R.A. tools, or instruments in its custody during
10591) the pendency of the case and to produce the
2. Use of loose firearm in the commission of a same to the court when so ordered. No bond
crime. (Sec. 29, R.A. 10S91) shall be admitted for the release of the
firearm, ammunition, or parts thereof,
..Loose firearm" refers to an unregistered machinery, tool, or instrument. (Sec. 36, R.A.
firearm, an obliterated or altered firearm, 10591)
firearm which has been lost or stolen, 9. Planting evidence - Willfully and maliciously
illegally manufactured firearms, registered inserting, placing, and/or attaching directly
firearms in the possession of an individual or indirec.tly, through any overt or covert
other than the licensee and those with ac.t, any firearm, or ammunition or parts
revoked licenses in accordance with the thereof in the person, house, effects, or in
rules and regulations (Sec.3(v), R.A. 10591) the immediate vicinity of an innocent
individual for the purpose of implication or
3. Carrying the registered firearm outside incriminating the person or imputing the
his/her residence without any legal commission of any violation of the provision
authority therefore or absence of permit to of R.A. 10591 to said individual. (Sec.38, R.A.
carry outside of residence. (Sec. 31, R.A. 10591)
10591) 10. Failure to notify lost or stolen firearm or
4. Unlawful manufacture, importation, sale, or light weapon. (Sec. 40, R.A. 10S91)
disposition of firearms or ammunition or
P.D. 1866 {as amended by R.A. 82941 vis-a the penalty of prision
visBA 10591 mayor in its minjmum
period shall be
P.D. 1866, AS imposed in addition
AMENDED BY R.A. R.A. 10591 to the penalty for the
8294 crime punishable
In Section 1, a In Section 29, the use of under the RPC or other
person is not liable a loose firearm, when special laws of which
for the violation of inherent in the s/he is found guilty.
the old firearms law commission of a crime
if he also punishable under the
committed another RPC or other special
crime. What is laws, shall be The acts Acts punishable:
punished is the considered as an penalized are as
·other crime• aggravating follow: 1. Unlawful acquisition,
regardless if the circumstance. or possession of
use or possession I.Unlawful firearms, and
of firearms is manufacture, sale ammunition;
inherent or Otherwise, the use or acquisition, 2. Use of loose firearm
necessary in the possession of loose disposition or in the commission of
commission of that firearms and violation possession of a crime;
·other crime.• of other penal law shall firearms or 3.Absence of permit to
be treated as distinct ammunition or carry outside of
If homicide or crimes and will thus be instruments used residence;
murder is punished separately. or intended to be 4.Unlawful
committed with the used in the
use of unlicensed manufacture of manufacture,
firearm, such use of firearms of importation, sale or
an unlicensed ammunition; disposition of
firearm shall be 2. Unlawful firearms or
considered as an manufacture, sale, ammunition or parts
aggravating acquisition, thereof;
circumstance. disposition or 5. Arms smuggling;
If there was no If the crime committed possession of 6. Tampering,
other crime with the use of a loose explosives; obliteration, or
committed, the firearm is penalized by 3. Tampering of alteration of firearms
penalty under the law with a firearm's serial identification;
Section 1 shall be maximum penalty number; 7. Use of imitation
imposed. which is LOWER THAN 4.Repacking or firearm;
that prescribed in the altering the 8.Violation of the
new law for illegal composition of procedure for
possession of firearm, lawfully firearms in custodla
the penalty for illegal manufactured legis;
possession of firearm explosives; 9. Planting evidence;
shall be imposed in Unauthorized 10. Failure to
lieu of the penalty for issuance of notify lost or stolen
the other crime authority to carry firearm or light
charged. firearm and/or weapon
ammunition Illegal transfer/
-If the crime committed outside of registration of firearms.
with the use of a loose residence.
firearm is penalized by IN BOTH LAWS, if the violation is in
the law with a furtherance of or incident to or in connection
maximum penalty with the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or
which is EQUAL to that attempted coup d'etat, such violation shall be
imposed under the new absorbed as an element of the crime of
law for illegal rebellion or insurrection or attempted coup
oossession of firearms, d'etat.
PROHIBITION ON HAZING
5. The application shall be under oath with a representatives of the school to be present
declaration that it has been posted in the during the initiation.
official school bulletin board, the bulletin 2. It is the duty of the school representatives to
board of the office of the fraternity, see to it that no hazing is conducted during
sorority, or organization, and two (2) other the initiation rites and to document the
conspicuous places in the school or in the entire proceedings.
premises of the organization; and 3. Representatives who were present during
6. The application shall be posted from the the initiation shall make a report of the
time of submission of the written notice to initiation rites to the appropriate officials of
the school authorities or head of the school regarding the conduct of the said
organization and shall only be removed initiation: Provided, That if hazing is still
from its posting three (3) days after the committed despite their presence, no
conduct of the initiation rites. liability shall attach to them unless it is
7. The appropriate school authorities shall proven that they failed to perform an overt
have the obligation to disapproved the act to prevent or stop the commission
application to conduct initiation rites that thereof. (Sec. 5, R.A 11053)
do not conform with any of the
requirements of this section, and in REGISTRATION OF FRATERNITIES,
unequivocal terms in a formal advice to the SORORITIES, ANO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
fraternity sorority, or organization
concerned, taking into consideration the All existing fraternities, sororities, and other
safety and security of participants in the organizations otherwise not created or
activity. organized by the school but has existing
8. School officials shall have the authority to members who are students or plans to recruit
impose after due notice and summary students to be its member shall be required to
hearing. disciplinary sanctions, in register with the proper school authorities
accordance with the school's guidelines before it conducts activities whether on or off·
and regulations on the matter, which shall campus, including recruitment of members.
include, but shall not be limited to,
reprimand, suspension, exclusion, or Upon registration, all fraternities, sororities, or
expulsion, to the head and all other officers organizations shall submit a comprehensive list
of the fraternity, sorority and organization of members, which shall be updated not later
which conducts an initiation without first than thirty (30) days from the start of every
securing the necessary approval of the semester or trimester, depending on the
school as required under this section. All academic calendar of the school.
members of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization, who participated in the School official shall have the authority to
unauthorized initiation rites, even if no impose. after due notice and summary hearings,
hazing was conducted, shall also be disciplinary penalties in accordance with the
punished accordingly. school's guidelines and regulations on the
9. In case the written application for the matter including suspension to the head and
conduct of initiation rites contains false or other officers of the fraternity, sorority, or
inaccurate information, appropriate organization who fail to register or update their
disciplinary sanctions in accordance with roster of members as required under this
the school's guidelines and regulations on section.
the matter ranging from reprimand to Failure to comply with any of the requirements
expulsion shall be imposed, after due notice shall result in the cancellation of the
and summary hearing, against the person registration of the fraternity, sorority, or
who prepared the application or supplied organization. (Sec. 6, R.A 11053)
the false and inaccurate information and to
the head and other officers of the fraternity, FACULTY ADVISER
sorority, or organization concerned. (Sec. 4�
R.A 11053) Faculty Adviser
In case of violation of any of the provisions of NOTE: Upon registration, all community-based
this Act, it is presumed that the faculty adviser fraternities, sororities, or organizations
has knowledge and consented to the including their respective local chapters, shall
commission of any of the unlawful acts stated submit a comprehensive list of members and
therein. officers which shall be updated yearly from the
date of registration. (Sec. 9, R.A. 110S3)
NOTE: Schools shall require all fraternities,
sororities, or organizations, as a condition to REGULATION OF INITIATION RITES FOR
the grant of accreditation or registration, to COMMUNITY BASED AND OTHER SIMILAR
submit the name or names of their respective FRATERNITIES, SORORITIES, OR
faculty adviser or advisers who must not be ORGANIZATIONS
members of the respective fraternity, sorority.
or organization. The submission shall also 1. A written application to conduct the same
include a written acceptance or consent on the shall be made to the punong barangay in
part of the selected faculty adviser or advisers. the barangay or municipal or city mayor in
(Sec. 7, R.A. 110S3) the municipality or city where the
community·based fraternity, sorority, or
ROLE OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION organization is based, not later than seven
(7) days prior to the scheduled initiation
1. The responsibility of schools to exercise date;
reasonable supervision in loco parentis 2. The written initiation shall indicate the
over the conduct of its students requires place and date of the initiation rites and the
the diligence that prudent parents would names of the recruits, neophytes, or
employ in the same circumstances when applicants to be initiated;
discriminating and protecting their 3. Such written application shall further
children. contain an undertaking that no harm or any
2. It shall be the duty of schools to take more kind shall be committed by anybody during
proactive steps to protect its students from the initiation rites;
the dangers of participating in activities 4. A medical certificate of the recruit,
that involve hazing. neophyte, or applicant must be attached to
3. Schools shall implement an information the application to ensure fitness to undergo
dissemination campaign at the start of initiation when it involves physical activity
every semester or trimester to provide not failing under the definition of hazing as
adequate information to students and used in this Att;
parents or guardians regarding the 5. The initiation rites shall not last more than
consequences of conducting and three (3) days;
participating in hazing. 6. The application shall contain the names of
4. An orientation program relating to the incumbent officers of the community
membership in a fraternity, sorority. or based fraternity, sorority, or organization
organization shall also be conducted by and any person or persons who will take
schools at the start of every semester or charge in the conduct of initiation rites;
trimester. 7. The application shall be under oath with a
5. Schools shall encourage fraternities, declaration that it has been posted on the
sororities, and organizations to engage in official bulletin board of the barangay hall
undertakings that foster holistic personal or the municipal or city hall where the
growth and development and attivities that community-based fraternity, sorority or
contribute to solving relevant and pressing organization is based, and the bulletin
issues of society. (Sec. 8, R.A. 110S3) board of the office of the community-based
fraternity. sorority or organization; and
REGISTRATION OF COMMUNITY BASED AND 8. The application shall be posted from the
OTHER SIMILAR FRATERNITIES, time of submission of the written notice to
SORORITIES, OR ORGANIZATIONS the punong barangay or municipal or city
mayor and shall only be removed from its
GR: All new and existing community-based posting three (3) days after the conduct of
fraternities, sororities, or organizations, the initiation rites." (Sec.10, R.A.110S3)
including their respective local chapters, shall
register with the barangay, municipality, or city MONITORING OF INITIATION RITES
wherein they are primarily based.
1. The punong barangay of the barangay or the owner or lessee has actual knowledge of the
municipal or city mayor of the municipality hazing conducted therein but failed to take
or city where community-based fraternity, any action to prevent the same from
sorority or organization is based must occurring or failed to promptly report the
assign at least two (2) barangay or same to the law enforcement authorities if
municipal or city officials to be present they can do so without peril to their person
during the initiation and document the or their family.
entire proceedings.
2. Representatives who are present during the 2. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the
initiation shall make a report of the officers or members of the fraternity,
initiation rites to the punong barangay, or sorority, or organization, the parents shall
the municipal or the city mayor regarding be held liable as principals and penalized
the conduct of the initiation. Provided, that with the penalty of reclusion perpetua and a
if hazing is still committed despite their fine of Three million pesos (P3,000,000) .W:
presence, no liability shall attach to them with the penalty of reclusion perpetua and a
unless it is proven that they failed to fine of Two million pesos (P2,000,000)
perform an overt act prevent or stop the when they have actual knowledge of the
commission. (Sec. 11, R.A. 11053) hazing conducted therein but failed to take
any action to prevent the same from
NULLITY OF WAIVER AND CONSENT occurring or failed to promptly report the
same to the law enforcement authorities if
Any form of approval, consent, or agreement, such parents can do so without peril to their
whether written or otherwise, or of an express person or their family.
waiver of the right to object to the initiation rite
or proceeding which consists of hazing, as Other Accomnlice
defined in this Act, made by a recruit, neophyte,
or applicant prior to an initiation rite that The school authorities including faculty
involves inflicting physical or psychological members as well as barangay, municipal, or city
suffering, harm, or injury, shall be void and officials shall be liable as an accomplice and
without any binding effect on the parties. likewise be held administratively accountable
for hazing conducted by the fraternities,
NOTE: The defense that the recruit, neophyte, sororities, other organiz.ations, if it can be
or applicant consented to being subjected to shown that the school or barangay, municipal,
hazing shall not be available to persons or city officials allowed or consented to the
prosecuted under this Act." (Sec.11, R.A 11053) conduct of hazing, but such officials failed to
take an action to prevent the same from
ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS occurring or failed to promptly report to the
law enforcement authorities if the same can be
The responsible officials of the school, the done without peril to their person or their
uniformed learning institutions, the AFP, or the family.
PNP may impose the appropriate
administrative sanctions, after due notice and Prima Carie evidence ofnactifinarino
summary hearing, on the person or the persons
charged under this Act even before their The presence of any person, even if such person
conviction. (Sec.12, R.A 11053) is not a member of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization, during the hazing is prima facie
PERSONS LIABLE AND THE evidence of participation therein as a principal
CORRESPONDING PENALTIES unless such person or persons prevented the
commission of the ac.ts punishable herein or
Other Principals: promptly reported the same to the law
enforcement authorities if they can do so
1. The owner or lessee of the place where without peril, to their person or their family.
hazing is conducted shall be liable as
principal and penalized with the penalty of Joint liability
reclusion perpetua and a fine of Three
million pesos (P3,000,000) !!!. with the The incumbent officers of the fraternity,
penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of sorority, or organization concerned shall be
Two million pesos (P2,000,000) when such
jointly liable with those members who actually Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs and/or
participated in the hazing. Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals (Sec.10, RA 9165);
NOTE: Any person charged under this Act shall 8. Possession of Dangerous Drugs (Sec. 11,
,!!21 be entitled to the mitigating circumstances R.A. 9165) (2015 BAR);
that there was no intention to commit so grave 9. Possession of Equipment, Instrument,
a wrong. Apparatus, and Other Paraphernalia for
Dangerous Drugs (Sec.12, RA 9165);
NOTE: The same shall apply to the president. 10. Possession of Dangerous Drugs During
manager, director, or other responsible officer Parties, Social Gatherings, or Meetings (Sec.
of businesses or corporations engaged hazing 13, R.A. 9165);
as a requirement for employment in the 11. Possession of Equipment. Instrument,
manner provided herein. Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for
Dangerous Drugs During Parties, Social
Gatherings, or Meetings (Sec.14, R.A. 9165);
COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS 12. Use of Dangerous Drugs (Sec.15, R.A. 9165);
DRUGS ACT (R.A. 9165) WITH 13. Cultivation or Culture of Plants Classified as
IMPLEMENTING RULES AND REGULATIONS Dangerous Drugs or are Sources Thereof
(Sec.16, R.A. 9165);
14. Maintenance and Keeping of Original
Dangerous Drugs (2007 BAR) Records of Transactions on Dangerous
Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and
Include those listed in the Schedules annexed to Essential Chemicals (Sec. 17, RA 9165);
the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 15. Unnecessary Prescription of Dangerous
as amended by the 1972 Protocol and in the Drugs (Sec.18, R.A. 9165); and
Schedules annexed to the 1971 Single 16. Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous Drugs
Convention on Psychotropic Substances. (Sec. 3 (Sec.19, R.A. 9165);
(j), R.A. 9165) 17. Misappropriation, misapplication or failure
to account for confiscated, seized or
Controlled Pren,csnrs and Essential surrendered dangerous drugs, plant
ChemiCals sources of dangerous drugs, controlled
precursors and essential chemicals,
Includes those listed in Tables I and II of the instruments/paraphernalia and/or
1988 UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in laboratory equipment including the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. proceeds or properties obtained from the
unlawful at'tS by any public officer or
PUNISHABLE ACTS employee (Sec. 27, R.A. 9165);
18. Benefiting from the proceeds of the
1. Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or trafficking of dangerous drugs, or have
Controlled Precursors and Essential received any financial or material
Chemicals (Sec. 4, R.A. 9165); contributions or donations from natural or
2. Sale, Trading, Administration, juridical persons found guilty of trafficking
Dispensation, Delivery, Distribution, and dangerous drugs by any elective local or
Transportation of Dangerous Drugs and/or national official (Sec. 27, R.A. 9165);
Controlled Precursors and Essential 19. Planting of dangerous drugs, controlled
Chemicals (Sec. 5, R.A. 9165); precursors, or essential chemicals as
3. Maintenance of a Den, Dive, or Resort. (Sec. evidence (Sec. 29, R.A. 9165);
6, R.A. 9165); 20. Consenting to or knowingly tolerating any
4. Employees and Visitors of a Den, Dive, or violation of this Att by a partnership,
Resort (Sec. 7, RA 9165); corporation, association, or any juridic.al
5. Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs and/or entity, the partner, president. director,
Controlled Precursors and Essential manager, trustee, estate administrator, or
Chemicals (Sec. 8, R.A. 9165); officer (Sec.30, par, 1, R.A. 9165).
6. Illegal Chemical Diversion of Controlled 21. Knowingly authorizing, tolerating, or
Precursors and Essential Chemicals (Sec. 9, consenting to the use of a vehicle, vessel,
R.A. 9165); aircraft:, equipment or other facility, as an
7. Manufacture or Delivery of Equipment, instrument in the importation, sale, trading,
Instrument. Apparatus, and Other administration, dispensation, delivery,
1. Importation of any dangerous drug and/or Any person who, unless authorized by law, shall
controlled precursor and essential import or bring into the Philippines any
chemical dangerous drug, regardless of the quantity and
2. Sale, trading, administration, dispensation, purity involved, including any and all species of
delivery, distribution, and transportation of opium poppy or any part thereof or substances
any dangerous drug and/or controlled derived there from even for floral, decorative,
precursor and essential chemical and culinary purposes. (1990, 1992, 2006
3. Maintenance of a den, dive, or resort where BAR)
any dangerous drug is used in any form
4. Manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or DRUG PUSHING
controlled precursor and essential
chemical SALE, TRADING, ADMINISTRATION,
5. Cultivation or culture of plants which are DISPENSATION, DELIVERY, DISTRIBUTION.
sources of dangerous drugs. AND TRANSPORTATION OF DANGEROUS
A: YES. The presence of the following elements is likewise immateriaJ in the distribution of
required for all prosecutions for illegal sale of illegal drugs. (People v. Yang G.R. 148077,
dangerous drugs has been duly established in February 16, 2004)
the instant case: (1) proof that the transat1:ion
or sale took place; and (2) the presentation in Icansnoaine sbabn molum orohihitum
court of the corpus delicti or the illicit drug as
evidence. Enriquez was caught red-handed The act of transporting methamphetamine
delivering one heat sealed plastic sachet hydrochloride is malum prohibitum since it is
containing white crystalline substance to P02 punished as an offense under a special law. The
Cruz, the poseur buyer, in exchange for 500.00. fact of transportation of the sacks containing
P02 Cruz positively identified Enriquez in open dangerous drugs need not be accompanied by
court to be the same person who sold to him proof of criminal intent, motive, or knowledge.
the item which upon examination was (People v. Morillo, G.R. No. 189833, February 5,
confirmed to be methylamphetamine 2014)
hydrochloride or shabu. Upon presentation
thereof in open court P02 Cruz duly identified it No transportation of dangerous drugs if the
to be the same object sold to him by Enriquez. caris srarionarv
(People v. Enriquez, G.R. No. 214503, June 22,
2016) "Transport" as used under the Dangerous
Drugs Act is defined to mean ·10 carry or
Q: Is the presentation of informant convey from one place to another."
necessary in the prosecution for illegal sale
of dangerous drugs? The essential element of the charge is the
movement of the dangerous drug from one
A: As a general rule, NO. In People v. Andaya, place to another. Since the accused was
the confidential informant was not a police arrested inside a car. when the car was not in
officer but he was designated to be the poseur transit such that the car was parked and
buyer himself. The State did not present the stationary, then there is no transportation. The
confidential informant/poseur buyer during the conclusion that the accused transported the
trial to describe how exactly the transat1:ion drugs merely because he was in a motor vehicle
between him and Andaya had taken place. when he was accosted with the drugs has no
There would have been no issue against failure basis and is mere speculation. It is the
to present the confidential informant/poseur responsibility of the prosecution to prove the
buyer except that none of the members of the element of transport of dangerous drugs,
buy-bust team had directly witnessed the namely, that transportation had taken place, or
transat1:ion, if any, between Andaya and the that the accused had moved the drugs some
poseur buyer due to their being positioned at a distance. (San Juan v. People G.R. 177191, May
distance at the moment of the supposed 30, 2011)
transac.tion. The presentation of the
confidential informants as witnesses for the MAINTENANCE OF A DEN, DIVE .OR RESORT
Prosecution in those instances could be excused SEC. 6, R.A. 9165
because there were poseur buyers who direc.tly
incriminated the accused. In this case, however, 1. Any person or group of persons who sail
it was different, because the poseur buyer and maintain own or operate a den, dive, or
the confidential informant were one and the resort where any dangerous drug is used or
same. Without the poseur buyer's testimony, sold in any form or where any controlled
the State did not credibly incriminate Andaya. precursor and essential chemic.al is used or
(People v. Andaya, G.R. No. 183700, October 13, sold in any form.
2014) 2. Any person who organizes. manages, or
at1:S as a "financier" of any of the illegal
Consnmmalion of crime of meeal sale of activities prescribed in this Section.
da,es max be snffirienrlv established even 3. Any person who acts as a
in the absence of an exchange of money "protector/coddler" of any violator of the
provisions under this Section.
The absence of actual or completed payment is
irrelevant, for the law itself penalizes the very If a den. dive. or resort is owned by a third
act of delivery of a dangerous drug, regardless person
of any consideration. Payment of consideration
If such den, dive, or resort is owned by a third teaching, and chemical analysis of dangerous
person, the same shall be confiscated and drugs or such substances that are not intended
escheated in favor of the government. for sale or for any other purpose. (Sec. 3(u), R.A.
9165)
Requisites:
Prima tarie oroof of mannfacn,ce of anv
1. That the criminal complaint shall daneernns drnes
specifically allege that such place is
intentionally used in the furtherance of the Mere presence of any controlled precursor and
crime; essential chemical or laboratory equipment in
2. That the prosecution shall prove such the clandestine laboratory is prima facie proof
intent on the part of the owner to use the of manufacture of any dangerous drugs.
property for such purpose;
3. That the owner shall be included as an ILLEGAL CHEMICAL DIVERSION OF
accused in the criminal complaint. CONTROLLED PRECURSORS
AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS
EMPLOYEES AND VISITORS OF A SEC. 9, R.A. 9165
DEN, DIVE. OR RESORT
SEC. 7, R.A. 9165 "'Chemiral Dixecsion"'
1. Any employee of a den, dive, or resort. who The sale, distribution, supply, or transport of
is aware of the nature of the place as such; legitimately imported, in-transit. manufat1:ured,
and or procured controlled precursors and essential
2. Any person who, not being included in the chemicals. in diluted, mixtures or in
provisions of the next preceding paragraph, concentrated form. to any person or entity
is aware of the nature of the place as such engaged in the manufacture of any dangerous
and shall knowingly visit the same drug, and shall include packaging, repackaging,
labeling, relabeling, or concealment of such
MANUFACTURE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS transaction through fraud, destruction of
AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND documents, fraudulent use of permits,
ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS; EQUIPMENT, misdeclaration, use of front companies, or mail
INSTRUMENT, APPARATUS, AND OTHER fraud. (Sec. 3(d), R.A. 9165)
PARAPHERNALIA FOR DANGEROUS DRUGS
AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND POSSESSION OF:
ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS A. Dangerous drugs (Set.·. 11, R.A. 9165)
SEC. 8, R.A. 9165 B. Equipment, instrument, apparJtus, and
other paraphernalia for
"Manufacture" dangerous drugs (Sec lZ, R.A. 9165)
C. Dangerous drugs during parties, social
The production, preparation, compounding, or gatherings. or meetings (Sec 13, R.A. 9165)
processing of any dangerous drug and/or D. Equipment, instrument, apparatus, and
controlled precursor and essential chemical. other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs
either directly or indirectly, or by extraction during parties, social gatherings, or
from substances of natural ongm, or meetings (Sec14, R.A. 9165)
independently by means of chemical synthesis,
or by a combination of extraction and chemical Evidence in ornsecntinn nfilleeal nnssession
synthesis, and shall include any packaging or nfdaoeerons dnies
repackaging of such substances, design, or
configuration of its form, or labeling, or Requisites:
relabeling of its container
1. The accused is in possession of an item or
NOTE: ·Manufacture· does not include an object identified to be a prohibited or a
preparation, compounding, packaging, or regulated drug;
labeling of a drug or other substances by a duly 2. Such possession is not authorized by law;
authorized practitioner as an incident to and
his/her administration or dispensation of such 3. The accused freely and consciously
drug or substance in the course of his/her possessed the said drug. (People v.
professional practice including research. Mendoza, G.R. No. 186387, August 31, 2011)
NOTE: The act of throwing away the sachet, the convicted of a single offense of possession of
contents of which were later determined to dangerous drugs if he or she was caught in
be shabu, presupposes that accused-appellant possession of different kinds of dangerous
had prior possession of iL (Castro v. People, G.R. drugs in a single occasion. If convicted, the
No. 193379, August 15, 2011) higher penalty shall be imposed, which is still
lighter if the accused is convicted of two (2)
Cora11s ctelicci in the crime of meeal offenses having two (2) separate
oossession ofdaneerons denes penalties. This interpretation is more in
keeping with the intention of the legislators as
The dangerous drug itself constitutes the very well as more favorable to the accused. (David v.
corpus dellcti of the offense and in sustaining a People, G.R. No. 181861, October 17, 2011)
conviction under R.A. 9165, the identity and
integrity of the corpus delicti must definitely be Q: If Paolo Ollero was caught in possession
shown to have been preserved. This of any equipment, instrument, apparatus
requirement necessarily arises from the illegal and other paraphernalia for Dangerous
drug's unique characteristic that renders it Drugs, what is his offense?
indistinct, not readily identifiable, and easily
open to tampering, alteration, or substitution A: He is liable for Possession of Equipment,
either by accident or otherwise. Thus, to Instrument, Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia
remove any doubt or uncertainty on the for Dangerous Drugs under Sec. 12 of R.A. 9165
identity and integrity of the seized drug, and may also be liable for Use of Dangerous
evidence must definitely show that the illegal Drugs under Sec. 15 of the same law since
drug presented in court is the same illegal drug possession of equipment, instrument.
actually recovered from the accused-appellant; apparatus and other paraphernalia for
otherwise, the prosecution for possession dangerous drugs is prlma fade evidence that
under R.A. 9165 fails. (People v. Alcuizar, G.R. the possessor has smoked, consumed,
No.189980, April 6, 2011) administered to himself, injected, ingested, or
used a dangerous drug and shall be presumed
Constructive possession under R.A. 9165 to have violated Sec. 15 of R.A. 9165.
While it is not necessary that the property to be Q: Chuck and Kenneth were walking along
searched or seized should be owned by the Sampaloc when they saw a group of
person against whom the search warrant is policemen approaching them. Chuck
issued, there must be sufficient showing that immediately handed to Kenneth, the sachet
the property is under the accused"s control or of shabu he was carrying inside his pocket.
possession. Constructive possession exists The police saw Kenneth pladng the shabu
when the drug is under the dominion and inside his bag. If Kenneth was unaware that
control of the accused or when he has the right what was inside the sachet given to him was
to exercise dominion and control over the place shabu, i s he nonetheless liable under the
where it is found. The prosecution must prove Dangerous Drugs Act? (2002 BAR)
that the accused had knowledge of the
existence and presence of the drugs in the place A: NO. Kenneth will not be criminally liable if
under his control and dominion and the he can show any proof of the absence of animus
charatter of the drugs. (Del Castillo v. People, possldendi or present any evidence that would
G.R. No. 185128,Jonuory 30, 2012) show that he was duly authorized by law to
possess them. Possession of dangerous drugs
Q: If an accused was caught in possession of constitutes prima focie evidence of knowledge
shabu and marijuana in one occasion, or animus possidendi sufficient to convict an
should he be charged with, and convicted of, accused in the absence of a satisfactory
one offense only? explanation of such possession. Thus, the
burden of evidence is shifted to the accused to
A: YES. The law does not address a case explain the absence of knowledge or an;mus
wherein an individual is caught in possession of possidendi. (Buenaventura v. People, G.R. No.
different kinds of dangerous drugs. However, it 171578, August 8, 2007; People v. 8untuyan, G.R.
is a well-known rule of legal hermeneutics that No. 206912, September 10, 2014)
penal or criminal laws are strictly construed
against the State and liberally in favor of the USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS
accused. Thus, an accused may only be SEC.15, R.A. 9165
Elements of this crime C2005 RABJ escheated in favor of the State, unless the
owner can prove that he has no knowledge of
1. The accused was apprehended for the use such cultivation or culture despite the exercise
of dangerous drugs; of due diligence on his part.
2. He was found to be positive for use of any Any practitioner, manufacturer, wholesaler,
dangerous drugs; and importer, distributor. deaJer, or retailer who
violates or fails to comply with the maintenance
3. No other dangerous drug was found in his and keeping of the original records of
possession. transactions on any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical in
NOTE: Use of Dangerous Drugs under Sec. 15 of accordance with Sec. 40 of this Act.
R.A. 9165 shall not be applicable where the
person tested is also found to have in his/her UNNECESSARY PRESCRIPTION OF
possession such quantity of any dangerous drug DANGEROUS DRUGS
provided for under Section 11 of the same Act. SEC. 18, R.A. 9165
in which case the provisions stated therein shall
apply. (Sec. 15, R.A. 9165) Persons Hable
Q: Does Section 15 cover unlawful acts other Any practitioner, who shall prescribe any
than those provided for under Article II of dangerous drug to any person whose physical
R.A. 9165? or physiological condition does not require the
use or in the dosage prescribed therein, as
A: NO. The drug test in Section 15 does not determined by the Board in consultation with
cover persons apprehended or arrested for any recognized competent experts who are
other unlawful act, but only for unlawful acts authorized representatives of professional
listed under Article II of R.A. 9165. To make the organizations of prac.titioners, particularly
provision applicable to all persons arrested or those who are involved in the care of persons
apprehended for any crime not listed under with severe pain.
Article II is tantamount to unduly expanding its
meaning, given that a drug testing will turn out UNLAWFUL PRESCRIPTION
to be mandatory for all persons apprehended OF DANGEROUS DRUGS
or arrested for any crime. (Dela Cruz v. People, SEC. 19, R.A. 9165
G.R. No. 200748,July 23, 2014)
Persons Hable
CULTIVATION OR CULTURE OF PLANTS
CLASSIFIED AS DANGEROUS DRUGS OR Any person who, unless authorized by law, shall
SOURCES THEREOF make or issue a prescription or any other
SEC.16, R.A. 9165 writing purporting to be a prescription for any
dangerous drug.
Cultlvatlonas contemnlared underBA 9165
PENALTY
Any act of knowingly planting, growing, raising,
or permitting the planting, growing, or raising Addirional nenaltx imonsed ifanx nfthe acrs
of any plant which is the source of a dangerous mmiShable under this Acr iS committed bx
drug. (Sec. 3(i), R.A. 9165) an alien
NOTE: The land or portions thereof and/or After service of sentence, he shall be deported
greenhouses on which any of said plants is immediately without further proceedings. (Sec.
cultivated or cultured shall be confiscated and 31, R.A. 9165)
commission of the crime. (People v. Dela Cruz, coordination with the PDEA. (People v. Unisa,
G.R. No. 205414, April 4, 2016) G.R. No.185721, September 28, 2011)
The delivery of the contraband to the poseur NOTE: The Internal Rules and Regulations is
buyer and the receipt of the marked money silent as to the consequences of the failure on
consummate the buy-bust transaction between the part of the law enforcers to seek the
the entrapping officers and the accused. (People authority of the PDEA prior to conducting a
v. Fermin, G.R. Na.179344, August 3, 2011) buy-bust operation. This silence cannot be
interpreted as a legislative intent to make an
Purpose of using ultra violet powder arrest without the participation of PDEA illegal
or evidence obtained pursuant to such an arrest
The only purpose for treating with ultra-violet inadmissible. (People v. Sabad/ab, G.R. No.
powder the buy-bust money to be used in the 186392, January 18, 2012 reiterating People v.
actual buy-bust operation is for identification, Berdadera)
that is, to determine if there was receipt of the
buy-bust money by the accused in exchange for Q: Gabuya was caught selling illegal drugs
the illegal drugs he was selling. (People v. Unisa, through a buy-bust operation. He contends
G.R.No.18572, September 28, 2011) that be cannot be held guilty because the
failure of the buy-bust team to coordinate
The failure of the police officers to use with the Philippine Drug Enforcement
ultraviolet powder on the buy-bust money is Agency (PDEAJ, among others. Is bis
not an indication that the buy-bust operation contention meritorious?
was a sham. "The use of initiaJs to mark the
money used in a buy-bust operation has been A: NO. Coordination of the buy-bust operation
accepted by the courts.• (People v. Amansec, G.R. with the PDEA is not an indispensable element
No. 186131, December 14, 2011) of the crimes of illegal sale and possession of
dangerous drugs such as shabu; thus, it is not a
Priorsurveillance in huv-hust oneration nm fatal flaw. (People v. Gabuya, G.R. No. 195245,
anreceouisUe February 16, 2015)
Prior surveillance is not a prerequisite for the Presenratinn nfrhe infnrmanr fnr rnnviction
validity of an entrapment or a buy-bust underBA 9165 not essential
operation, there being no fixed or textbook
method for condut1:ing one. It is enough that The presentation of an informant in an illegal
the elements of the crime are proven by drugs case is not essential for the conviction
credible witnesses and other pieces of evidence. nor is it indispensable for a successful
(People v. Vil/ahermosa, G.R. No. 186465, June 1, prosecution because his testimony would be
2011) merely corroborative and cumulative. The
informant's testimony is not needed if the sale
Coordination with PPEA not an of the illegal drug has been adequately proven
indispensable requirement by the prosecution. In People v. Nicolas, the
Court ruled that "police authorities rarely, if
Absence of coordination with PDEA does not ever, remove the cloak of confidentiality with
render the buy bust operation invalid. In People which they surround their poseur-buyers and
v. Roa, the Supreme Court held that informers since their usefulness will be over
coordination with the PDEA is not an the moment they are presented in court.
indispensable requirement before police Moreover, drug dealers do not look kindly upon
authorities may carry out a buy-bust squealers and informants. It is understandable
operation. While it is true that Section 86 of why, as much as permitted, their identities are
Republic At1: No. 9165 requires the National kept secret." (People v. Amansec, G.R. No.
Bureau of Investigation, PNP, and the Bureau of 186131, December 14, 2011)
Customs to maintain "close coordination with
the PDEA on all drug related matters; the Ohiective restin ncovinehuv·hnst nnecatlnn
provision does not, by so saying, make PDEA's
participation a condition sine qua non for every In People v. Doria, the Court laid down the
buy-bust operation. After all, a buy-bust is just "objective test" in determining the credibility of
a form of an inflagrante arrest. A buy-bust prosecution witnesses regarding the conduct of
operation is not invalidated by mere non· buy-bust operations. It is the duty of the
GR: The RPC shall NOT apply to this Act. moment of seizure until it is finally adduced in
evidence. (Castro v. People, G.R. No. 193379,
XPN: In cases of minor offenders where the August 15, 2011)
offender is a minor, the penalty for acts
punishable by life imprisonment to death shall Links that must be established in the chain
be reclusion perpetua to death. oca,stodv inahnx-hnst sinmrion
Enforcement Agency and Customs Task Crucial stage in the chain or custody under
Force. BA 9165
In addition, there were pictures showing Crucial in proving chain or custody is the
Noah with Landicho and other witnesses marking or the seized drugs or other related
were taken during the field-testing. items immediately after they are seized from
marking. and inventory. The seized items the accused. Marking after seizure is the
were brought to a forensic chemist for starting point in the custodial link; thus, it is
laboratory examinations. The test results vital that the seized contrabands are
showed that the seized items contained immediately marked because succeeding
shabu. Is there an unbroken chain or handlers or the specimens will use the markings
custody or the drug seized from the accused? as reference. The marking of the evidence
serves to separate the marked evidence from
A: YES. The four links or chain or custody or the corpus or all other similar or related
evidence were proven: (1) Landicho seized and evidence from the lime they are seized from the
marked the shabu obtained from accused accused until they are disposed or at the end or
appellant; (2) he turned them over to Agent criminal proceedings, obviating switching,
Fajardo; (3) Agent Fajardo delivered them to "planting,.. or contamination of evidence.
Forensic Chemist Arcos; and (4) from the (People v. Manta/aha, G.R. No. 186227, July 20,
Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, the drugs 2011)
were presented in court. There was an
unbroken chain or custody or the seized shabu Marking
from the time or its discovery up to its
presentation in court. (Peoples v. Noah, G.R. No. The placing by the apprehending officer or the
228880, March 6, 2019, as penned by/. Leanen) poseur-buyer or his/her initials and signature
on the items seized. Long before Congress
Q: After laboratory examination or the passed R.A. 9165, the Supreme Court has
seized sachets or marijuana by the forensic consistently held that failure or the authorities
chemist, the PNP Crime Laboratory agreed to immediately mark the seized drugs casts
to turn over custody or the seized items to reasonable doubt on the authenticity or the
an unnamed receiving person at the City corpus delicti. Marking after seizure is the
Prosecutor's Office before they were starting point in the custodial link; hence, it is
submitted as evidence to the trial court. Is vital that the seized contraband be immediately
there compliance to the fourth link in the marked because succeeding handlers or the
chain or custody? specimens will use the markings as reference.
(People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 176350, August 10,
A: NO. The fourth link is the turnover and 2011)
submission or the marked illegal drug seized
from the forensic chemist to the court. It should NOTE: In Sanchez, the Court explained that
be emphasized that the City Prosecutor's Office consistency with the chain or custody rule
is not. nor has it ever been, a part of the chain of requires that the marking or the seized items be
custody or seized dangerous drugs. It has done:
absolutely no business in taking custody or
dangerous drugs before they are brought 1. In the presence or the apprehended
before the court. (People v. De Guzman, G.R. No. violator; and
219955, February 5, 2018) 2. Immediately upon confiscation.
While the procedure on the chain or custody In People v. Resurreccion� it was ruled that
should be perfect and unbroken, in reality, it is "marking upon immediate confiscation" does
almost always impossible to obtain an not exclude the possibility that marking can be
unbroken chain. Thus, failure to strictly comply at the police station or office or the
with Section 21(1), Article II or R.A. No. 9165 apprehending team. (People v. Dela Cruz, G.R.
does not necessarily render an accused No.176350, August 10, 2011)
person's arrest illegal or the items seized or
confiscated from him inadmissible. (Saraum v. Q: Bombasi was caught selling illegal drugs
People, GR No. 205472,January 25, 2016) through a buy-bust operation. Police
marked the sachet subject or the sale with
"MB," corresponding to Bomabasi's initials.
However, the spedmen brought to PNP Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act, cannot
Crime Laboratory was marked "MB-8." be the basis of a finding of guilt. By failing to
Bombasi claims that the integrity of the establish identity of corpus delicti, non
subject shabu was not ensured and its compliance with Section 21 indicates a failure
identity was not established with moral to establish an element of the offense of illegal
certainty. Can he be held liable of sale of sale of dangerous drugs. It follows that this
illegal drugs? non-compliance suffices as a ground for
acquittal. (Lescano v. People, GR Na. 214490,
A: NO. The prosecution failed to establish the January 13, 2016)
identity of the prohibited drug which
constitutes the corpus delicti of the offense, an Strict compliance with Section 21
essential requirement in a drug-related case.
The Court therefore finds that the prosecution Q: Two informations were filed charging
has not been able to prove the guilt of appellant Castillo for violation of R.A. 9165, Article II,
beyond reasonable doubt. The presumption of Sections 5 and 11, for the illegal sale and
regularity in the performance of official duty illegal possession of dangerous drugs. The
invoked by the prosecution and relied upon by information alleged that in a buy-bust
the courts a quo cannot by itself overcome the operation, four (4) plastic sachets
presumption of innocence nor constitute proof containing suspected shabu were retrieved
of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (People v. from castillo/ The officers then brought the
Bombasi G.R. Na. 211608, September 7, 2016) items inside their vehicle, which was still
parked near the place of arrest.
Persons who must be present during
ohvsiral ioveorocx and nb01oeraohx of the There, SP02 Yema marked the plastic sachet
seized items subject of the buy-bust Afterwards, the
officers brought Castillo to the Police
1. Accused or the person/s from whom such Station. There, the seized items were
items were confiscated and/or seized; OR photographed along with the marked money
2. His/her representative or counsel; WITH and Castillo. The seized items were also
3. An elected public official AND inventoried, as witnessed by the
4. A representative of the National Department of Justice representative,
Prosecution Service OR the media. (Sec. Barangay Chair, SP02 Yema, and Castillo,
21(1), R.A 9165 as amended by R.A.10640) who all signed the Certificate of lnventory.
Q: In a buy-bust operation, Lescano was In his defense, Castillo pointed out supposed
caught dealing marijuana. He was then gaps in the chain of custody, including.
brought to the City Anti-Illegal Drug Spedal among others, irregularities in the seized
Operation Team (CAIDSOT) office for items' marking and the belated presence of
investigation. Inside the CAIDSOT office, an the Department of Justice representative,
inventory was allegedly conducted and only arriving at the police station when the
photographs of the marked money and the inventory had already been prepared. The
sachet were taken. Was Section 21 (1) of the RTC nevertheless convicted Jayson as
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act charged. Has Castillo's guilt for violation of
complied with? R.A. 9165 been established beyond
reasonable doubt?
A: NO. While an inventory was supposed to
have been conducted, this was done neither in A: NO. There remains reasonable doubt on
the presence of Lescano, the person from whom Castillo's guilt for the crimes charged. Section
the drugs were supposedly seized, nor in the 21 plainly requires the apprehending team to
presence of his counsel or representative. conduct a physical inventory of the seized items
and the photographing of the same immediately
Likewise, not one of the persons required to be after seizure and confiscation, the inventory
present (an elected public official, and a must be done in the presence of the accused, his
representative of the National Prosecution counsel, or representative, a representative of
Service or the media) was shown to have been the DOJ, the media, and an elected public
around during the inventory and official, who shall be required to sign the copies
photographing. The mere marking of seized of the inventory and be given a copy thereof.
items, done in violation of the safeguards of the The presence of the three witnesses must be
secured not only during the inventory but more accomplished at the place of arrest. When
importantly at the time of the warrantless this is impracticable, the Implementing Rules
arrest. and Regulations of Republic Act No. 9165
allows for two (2) other options: at the nearest
It is at this point in which the presence of the police station or at the nearest office of the
three witnesses is most needed, as it is their apprehending officer/team, whichever is
presence at the time of seizure and confiscation practicable, in case of warrantless seizures.
that would belie any doubt as to the source, To sanction non·compliance, the prosecution
identity, and integrity of the seized drug. Here, must prove that the inventory was condutted in
the absence of witnesses during seizure and either practicable place.
marking casts reasonable doubt on the actual
origin and identity of the drugs introduced in The physical inventory and photographing of
evidence as those allegedly seized from the drugs seized was not done in the place of
accused-appellant. Ultimately, this same arrest, but was done in Camp Karingal, which
absence casts reasonable doubt on accused· was impractical since it was 17 kilometers car
appellant's guilt for the offenses with which he ride away from the place of arrest. The clerical
is charged. (People v. Castillo, C.R. No. 238339, errors and discrepancies in the inventory
August 7, 2019, as penned by/. Leanen) receipt and the chemistry report cannot be
dismissed since they cast doubt as to the origin
Q: Banding was arrested at Mercury Drug of the drug seized. (People v. Banding, C.R. No.
Store Lagro branch in Quezon City for illegal 2333470, August 14, 2019, as penned by /.
sale of dangerous drugs (Section 5, RA. Leanen)
9165). The dangerous drugs sachets
containing white crystalline substance were In the case of People of the Philippines v. Ramos,
marked by PO2 lnway with AB-20-09-10. To the Supreme Court ruled that the witnesses'
avoid the on-going commotion in the area, absence at the time of seizure is not a justifiable
the team proceeded to Camp Karingal which ground for not immediately marking the items,
is 17 kilometers car ride away from the since they should have, at the onset, been
place of arrest. present or near the place of seizure. Since the
law requires the apprehending team to conduct
There, physical inventory and the inventory in front of the required witnesses
photographing required under Sec. 21 of and immediately after seizure, this necessarily
R.A. 9165 was conducted in the presence of means that. in buy·bust operations, the
Banding, the buy-bust team, and a media required witnesses must be present at the time
representative. After the inventory, P03 of seizure. (G.R. No. 225335, August 28, 2019, as
Corona prepared the inventory receipt for penned by/. Leanen)
•a sachet containing marijuana fruiting
tops." This was submitted to the QCPD Crime "Immediately after seizure and confiscation"'
Laboratory. Banding was later on charged
with violation of Section 5 of R.A. 9165. It means that the physical inventory and
Banding argues that he cannot b e convicted photographing of the drugs were intended by
due to lapses in the chain of custody of the the law to be made immediately alter or at the
drugs seized. can Banding be held place of apprehension. It is only when the same
criminally liable under Section 5 of RA. is not practicable that the law allows the
9165? inventory and photographing to be done as
soon as the buy-bust team reaches the nearest
A: NO. Banding cannot be convicted under police station or the nearest office of the
Section 5 of RA. 9165 due to the lapses in the apprehending team/officer.
chain of custody procedure required under
Section 21 of the same law. Section 21 requires Q: In the morning of July 26, 2003, an
strict compliance. The accuracy it requires goes informant reported that a person identified
into the covertness of buy-bust operation and as "Joshua," later identified as Que, was
the very nature of narcotic substance. selling shabu. Acting on this report, P/C
lnsp. Muksan organized a buy-bust
From the language of Section 21, the mandate operation with PO3 Lim as poseur-buyer.
to conduct inventory and take photographs PO3 Lim and the informant then left for the
"immediately after seizure and confiscation· area of Fort Pilar. There, the informant
necessarily means that these shall be introduced PO3 Lim to Que. PO3 Lim then
told Que that he intended to purchase Pl00 Citing People v. Que, what is critical in drug
worth of shabu. Que then handed him shabu cases is not the bare conduct of the inventory,
inside a plastic cellophane. In turn, P03 Um marking, and photographing. Instead, it is the
handed Que the marked Pl00 bill and gave certainty that the items allegedly taken from
the pre-arranged signal to have Que the accused retain their integrity, even as they
arrested. After the arrest, the marked bill make their way from the accused to a officer
and another sachet of shabu were recovered effecting the seizure, to an investigating officer
from Que. The marking of the sachets of to a forensic chemist, and ultimately. to courts
shabu supposedly obtained from accused where they are introduced as evidence. Sec.
appellant was conducted at a police station 21(1)'s requirements are designed to make the
without accused-appellant, or any person first and second links foolproof. Condutting the
representing him, around. There was not inventory and photographing immediately after
even a third person, whose presence was seizure, exactly where the seizure was done, or
required b y Section 21 (1) prior to its at a location as practicably close to it,
amendment - "a representative from the m1mm1zes, if not eliminates, room for
media and the Department of Justice (DOI), adulteration or planting of evidence. (People v.
and any elected public official." Banding, supra)
Que was then brought to the police station Justifiable reasons fnr non-comaHance on
where the sachets of shabu and the marked the Chain of Custody Rule
bill were turned over to the investigator,
SP04 Tubo, who then marked these items Minor deviations from the chain of custody rule
with his initials. This case merely involves is justified when;
0.0157 grams and 0.0783 grams of alleged
shabu. He also prepared the letter request 1. Lapses in procedure were recognized and
for laboratory examination of the sachets' explained in terms of their justifiable
contents. P/C lnsp. Diestro recounted their grounds; AND
office's receipt of a request for laboratory 2. There is showing that the police officers
examination of the contents of two (2) intended to comply with the procedure, but
plastic sachets. She noted that these were thwarted by some justifiable
contents tested positive for shabu. Did the consideration or reasons. (People v.
law enforcers ensure the integrity of Umipang, C.R. No. 190321, April 25, 2012)
the corpus delicti?
Q: In the crime of illegal possession of
A: NO. The prosecution here failed to account dangerous drugs, is the failure of the
for the intervening period between the policemen to make a physical inventory and
supposed handover of the sachet from accused to photograph the two plastic sachets
appellant to P03 Lim, to the marking of the containing shabu render the confiscated
sachets by SP04 Tubo. Likewise, it absolutely items inadmissible in evidence?
failed to identify measures taken during transit
from the target area to the police station to A: NO. In People v. Bralaan, it was ruled that
ensure the integrity of the sachets allegedly non-compliance by the apprehending/buy-bust
obtained and to negate any possibility of team with Sec. 21 is not fatal as long as there is
adulteration or substitution. justifiable ground therefore, and as long as the
integrity and the evidentiary value of the
Well-entrenched in jurisprudence is the rule confiscated/seized items, are properly
that the conviction of the accused must rest, not preserved by the apprehending officer/team.
on the weakness of the defense, but on the Its non-compliance will not render
strength of the prosecution. Since, there is no an accused's arrest illegal or the items
showing that a proper inventory and taking of seized/confiscated from him inadmissible.
pictures was done by the apprehending officers,
the Court is left with absolutely no guarantee of What is of utmost importance is the
the integrity of the sachets other than the self preservation of the integrity and the
serving assurances of P03 Lim and SPOl evidentiary value of the seized items, as the
jacinto. (People v. Que, C.R. No. 212994,Jonuary same would be utilized in the determination of
31, 2018, as penned by]. Leonen) the guilt or innocence of the accused. (lmson v.
People, C.R. No.193003,July 13, 2011)
In cases of dangerous drugs, what is important established to have not been broken and the
and necessary is for the prosecution to prove prosecution did not fail to identify properly the
with moral certainty ·that the dangerous drug drugs seized, it is not indispensable that each
presented in court as evidence against the and every person who came into possession of
accused be the same item recovered from his the drugs should take the witness stand.
possession." (People v. Bautista, G.R. No. 191266, (People v. Amonsec, G.R. No. 186131, December
June 6, 2011) 14, 2011)
Q: As a rule, non-compliance by the Q: SP01 Calupit and P02 Lobrin acted as key
apprehending/buy-bust team with Sec. 21 of persons to the search conducted at the
R.A. 9165 is not fatal as long as there is house of accused Derilo. The testimonies
justifiable ground therefore, and a s long as given by them are bereft of any evidence
the integrity and the evidentiary value of the that show that the plastic sachets
confiscated/seized items, are properly supposedly containing the shabu were ever
preserved by the apprehending marked, whether at the scene or at the
officer/team. When will this provision not police station, and that they were marked in
apply? the presence of the petitioner. Additionally,
the Chemistry Report and the Certification
A: If there were not merely trifling lapses in the of Laboratory Examination show
handling of the evidence taken from the inconsistencies with regard to the
accused but the prosecution could not even referenced markings on the plastic sachets
establish what procedure was followed by the and to the weight of the drug spedmens.
arresting team to ensure a proper chain of Thus, Derilo contended that he should not
custody for the confiscated prohibited drug, be convicted for the manifest
(People v. Ulot G.R. No. 180504,October 5, 2011) inconsistencies in the testimonies and
failure to preserve the links in the unbroken
The madsioeolace heinea"Mndimarea"' chain of custody. Is he correct?
notainstifiahle ernnnd fnr non-comoliance
A: YES. To show an unbroken link in the chain
In the case of People v. Abduloh, the marking of of custody, the prosecution's evidence must
the seized drugs was not done immediately include testimony about every link in the chain,
after accused-appellant's arrest. In his own from the moment the item was seized to the
words, PO3 Temporal revealed that the team time it is offered in court as evidence, such that
decided to mark and inventory the items at the every person who handled the evidence would
barangay hall after deeming the target area to acknowledge how and from whom it was
be unsafe, it being '"a Muslim area". To sustain received, where it was and what happened to it
the police officers' equating of a so-called while in the witness' possession, the condition
"Muslim area'" with dangerous places does not in which it was received and the condition in
only approve of a hollow justification for which it was delivered to the next link in the
deviating from statutory requirements, but chain. The same witness would then describe
reinforces outdated stereotypes and blatant the precautions taken to ensure that there had
prejudices. lslamophobia, the hatred against the been no change in the condition of the item and
Islamic community, can never be a valid reason no opportunity for someone not in the chain to
to justify an officer's failure to comply with have its possession.
Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165. (G.R. No.
243941, Morch 11, 2020, as penned by J. It is from the testimony of every witness who
Leanen) handled the evidence from which a reliable
assurance can be derived that the evidence
No need fnr evervone who came intn rnnracr presented in court is one and the same as that
with the seized drugs to testify in court seized from the accused. (Deri/o v. People, G.R.
No. 190466, April 18,2016)
There is no need for everyone who came into
contact with the seized drugs to testify in court. Q: Pamela, a high school student, was caught
There is nothing in R.A. 9165 or in its using shabu inside the campus of the school
implementing rules which requires that each she is attending. Who shall have the
and everyone who came into contact with the authority to apprehend her?
seized drugs to testify in court. As long as the
chain of custody of the seized drug was clearly
A: All school heads, supervisors and teachers duty required by law; where the official act is
are deemed persons in authority and irregular on its face_. the presumption cannot
empowered to apprehend, arrest or cause the arise. (People v. Ho/gado, C.R. No. 207992,
apprehension or arrest of any person who shall August 11, 2014, as penned by]. Leanen)
violate any of the said provisions of Article II of
Dangerous Drugs Act, pursuant to Section 5, tnstaoces when the school beads
Rule 113 of the Rules of Court. (Sec. 44, IRR of snoervisocs and reacbecs deemed to he
R.A. 9165) persons in authority in the apprehension,
arrest or cause of arrest of necson violarine
Q: POl Aure (poseur-buyer) and an the Act
informant, approached Holgado. Holgado
asked the informant if be was buying drugs. They shall be deemed persons in authority if
The informant introduced POl Aure as a they are in the school or within its immediate
drug user. POl Aure then banded Holgado vicinity, or even beyond such immediate
two marked Php 100 bills. Holgado called vicinity if they are in attendance at any school
Misarez. Misarez stepped out of the or class function in their official capacity as
restroom and banded a plastic sachet school heads, supervisors, and teachers. (Sec.
containing a white crystalline substance to 44, IRR of R.A. 9165)
POl Aure. POl Aure examined the sachet's
contents and took out bis cellphone which Duties of school heads. supervisors, and
was the pre-arranged signal that the sale of teachers if rhev caneht a nersno xinlatioe
drugs bad been consummated. The police the ncnvisinosnfRA 9165
op eratives then approached POl Aure and
apprehended Holgado and Misarez. PO3 1. They shall affett the arrest of any person
Abuyme prepared an inventory of the seized violating Article II of the Act and turn over
items. POl Aure supposedly marked the the investigation of the case to the PDEA;
plastic sachet banded to him by Misarez at 2. They may summon the services of other
the site of the buy-bust operation. Following law enforcement agencies to arrest or
their arrest, Holgado and Misarez were cause the apprehension or arrest of
charged with violating Secs. 5 (sale of persons violating Article II of the Act;
dangerous drugs), 11 (possession of 3. They shall be trained on arrest and other
dangerous drugs), and 12 (possession of legal procedures relative to the conduct of
drug paraphernalia) ofR.A. No. 9165. arrest of violators of the Act along with
student leaders and Parents Teachers
RTC found Holgado and Misarez guilty of Association (PTA) officials; and
illegal sale of dangerous drugs and 4. They shall refer the students or any other
acquitted them of the charges pertaining to violators found to be using dangerous
Sec. 11 as the drugs supposedly seized were drugs to the proper agency/office. (Sec. 44,
not introduced in evidence. Holgado, was IRRofR.A. 9165)
also acquitted of the charges relating to Sec.
12 of as the paraphernalia to which PO2 Promotion of "'drug-free workplaces"'
Castulo testified to in court were different
from those indicated in the inventory The drug-free workplaces are promoted by:
supposedly made. CA affirmed the
conviction. Is the presumption of regularity 1. A National Drug-Free Workplace Abuse
in the performance of duties applicable in Prevention Program shall be formulated by
this case? a tripartite Task Force composed of
representatives from the DOLE, workers'
A: NO. The presumption of regularity in the and employers' groups.
performance of duties cannot be applied in this 2. The Secretary of the DOLE shall issue a
case. Given the flagrant procedural lapses the Department Order creating a Task Force
police committed in handling the seized shabu consisting of tripartite and other agencies
and the obvious evidentiary gaps in the chain of to formulate policies and strategies for the
its custody, a presumption of regularity in the purpose of developing a National Action
performance of duties cannot be made in this Agenda on drug abuse prevention in the
case. The presumption applies when nothing in workplace. Pursuant to the declared policy
the record suggests that the law enforcers of the State and the national workplace
deviated from the standard conduct of official policy, the DOLE shall issue a Department
Order (DO) requiring all private companies It is required that all labor unions, federations,
to adopt and implement drug abuse associations, or organizations in cooperation
prevention programs in the workplace, with the respective private sector partners shall
including the formulation of company include in their collective bargaining or any
policies. similar agreements, joint continuing programs
3. Pursuant to the functions of the Board and information campaigns for the laborers
under Section 81 (a) of the Act, the existing similar to the programs provided under Section
Civil Service rules and policies needed to 47 of the Act with the end in view of achieving a
respond to drug abuse in the public sector drug-free workplace. (Sec. 49, /RR ofR.A. 9165)
shall be adopted. (Sec.47, /RR ofR.A. 9165)
Procedure to he followed in abatement of
Guidelines toe the National Dn,e-fcee drne related nnhJicmlisaoces
Workplace Program to be formulated by the
Board and the DOl:E Any place or premises which have been used on
two or more occasions as the site of the
1. All private sector organizations with ten unlawful sale or delivery of dangerous drugs, or
(10) or more personnel shall implement a used as drug dens for pot sessions and other
drug abuse prevention program. similar activities, may be declared to be a public
nuisance, and such nuisance may be abated,
a The workplace program shall include pursuant to the following procedures:
advocacy and capability building and
other preventive strategies including 1. Any city or municipality may, by ordinance,
but not limited to: company policies, create an administrative board to hear
training of supervisors/managers, complaints regarding the nuisances, to be
employee education, random drug composed of the following:
testing, employee assistance program,
and monitoring and evaluation; a. City/Municipal Health Officer as
b. The workplace program shall be chairperson;
integrated in the safety and health b. City/Municipal Legal Officer as
programs. member, provided that in
cities/municipalities with no Legal
2. DOLE and labor and employers' groups Officer, the City/Municipal
shall also encourage drug-free policies and Administrator shall act as member; and
programs for private companies with nine c. The Local Chief of Police as member.
(9) workers or less.
3. Any officer or employee found positive for 2. Any employee, officer, or resident of the
use of dangerous drugs shall be dealt with city or municipality may bring a complaint
administratively which shall be a ground before the administrative board after
for suspension or termination, subjec.t to giving not less than three (3) days written
the provisions of Article 282 of Book VI of notice of such complaint to the owner of
the Labor Code. the place or premises at his/her last known
4. Private sector organizations may extend address;
the drug education program to the 3. Within three (3) days from receipt of the
employees/personnel and immediate complaint, a hearing shall then be
families to contribute in the promotion of a conducted by the administrative board,
healthy drug-free family, community and with notice to both parties, and the
society. administrative board may consider any
5. All private sector organizations shall evidence submitted, including evidence of
display in a conspicuous place a billboard general reputation of the place or premises;
or streamer with a standard message of 4. The owner/manager of the premises or
"THIS IS A DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE: LET'S place shall also be given an opportunity to
KEEP IT THIS WAY!" or such other present any evidence in his/her defense;
messages of similar import. (Sec. 48, IRR of 5. After hearing, the administrative board
R.A. 9165) may declare the place or premises to be a
public nuisance; and
Inclusion of workplace drug abuse policies 6. The hearing shall be terminated within ten
and programs as part of CBA (10) days from commencement. (Sec. 52,
/RR ofR.A. 9165)
Persons sbarine the cnsr of treatment and shall be signed within sixty (60) days after
rehahmtation of a dn,e deoendent who approval of this IRR. (Sec. 75, /RR of R.A
volnnrarilv submitted himself 9165)
The parent. spouse, guardian, or any relative PROGRAM FOR TREATMENT AND
within the fourth degree of consanguinity of REHABILITATION OF
any person who is confined under the voluntary DRUG DEPENDENTS
submission program or compulsory submission (ARTICLE VIII)
program shall share the cost of treatment and
rehabilitation of a drug dependent. (Sec. 74, /RR Submission for treatment and rehabilitatjon
ofR.A 9165) of a drug dependent who is found guilty of
the use nfdn,es
If the deoendent bas no nacent soonse
guardian or relative within fourth deg·ree of A drug dependent who is found guilty of the use
cnosaneuinitv of dangerous drugs may voluntarily submit
himself for treatment and rehabilitation. The
In case a dependent has no parent. spouse, drug dependent may, by himself/herself or
guardian or relative within the fourth degree of through his/her parent, spouse, guardian or
consanguinity, his/her rehabilitation shall be relative within the fourth degree of
through the auspices of any government consanguinity or affinity, apply to the Board or
rehabilitation center. (Sec. 74, /RR ofR.A 9165) its duly recognized representative. for
treatment and rehabilitation of the drug
Factors in determining costs for the sharing dependency.
in cost nftreatmeotand rehabilitation
Upon such application, the Board shall bring
1. Family income; forth the matter to the Court which shall order
2. Capacity of the province/city/municipality that the applicant be examined for drug
based on their income classification; and dependency. (Sec. 54, R.A 9165)
3. The cost of treatment and rehabilitation
based on a center's facilities, programs and Comnulsncx confinement
services (Sec. 74, /RR ofR.A 9165).
Notwithstanding any law, rule and regulation to
If rhe famHx income is within the oovertv the contrary, any person determined and found
threshold to be dependent on dangerous drugs shall,
upon petition by the Board or any of its
A family whose income is within poverty authorized representative. be confined for
threshold shall be fully subsidized by the treatment and rehabilitation in any Center duly
government. (Sec. 74, /RR of R.A 9165) designated or accredited for the purpose.
Duties of OOH in the treatment and A petition for the confinement of a person
rehabilitation of drug dependent alleged to be dependent on dangerous drugs to
a Center may be filed by any person authorized
1. Formulate standards and guidelines for the by the Board with the Regional Trial Court of
operation and maintenance of all treatment the province or city where such person is
and rehabilitation centers nationwide; found. (Sec. 61, R.A 9165)
2. Develop a system for monitoring and
supervision of all drug rehabilitation Ienerh of confinement fnr rceatment and
centers nationwide; rehabilitation by the drug dependent
3. Create programs which will advocate for
the establishment of LGU-assisted Confinement in a Center for treatment and
rehabilitation facilities in each province; rehabilitation shall not exceed one (1) year,
4. Submit to the Department of Budget and after which time the Court, as well as the Board,
Management (DBM) a budget for the shall be apprised by the head of the treatment
establishment, and operation of drug and rehabilitation center of the status of said
rehabilitation centers; and drug dependent and determine whether further
5. Facilitate the turn-over of all the confinement will be for the welfare of the drug
rehabilitation centers from the PNP and dependent and his/her family or the
NBI thru a Memorandum of Agreement that community. (Sec. 54, R.A 9165)
Public officials and employees shall not, a. Accused is a public official or employee;
directly or indirectly, have any financial or
b. Accused solicited or accepted any loan or than nominal vaJue if such acceptance is
anything of monetary value from any appropriate or consistent with the interests
person; and of the Philippines, and permitted by the
c. Said act was done in the course of the head of office, branch or agency to which he
accused's official duties or in connection belongs. (Sec. 7, R.A. 6713)
with any operation being regulated by, or
any transaction which may be affected by STATEMENTS AND DISCLOSURE
the functions of his office. (Villanueva v.
People, G.R. No. 237738,June 10, 2019) GR: All public officials and employees shall file
under oath their Statement of Assets, Liabilities
Q: Commissioner Marian Torres of the and Net Worth and a Disclosure of Business
Bureau of Internal Revenue wrote Interests and Financial Connections and those
solicitation letters addressed to the Filipino of their spouses and unmarried children under
Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry eighteen (18) years of age living in their
and to certain CEOs of various multinational households. (Sec. 8, R.A. 6713)
corporations requesting donations of gifts
for her office Christmas party. She used the XPNs:
Bureau's official stationery. The response 1. Those who serve in an honorary
was prompt and overwhelming so much so capacity; and
that Commissioner Torres' office was 2. Laborers and casual or temporary
overcrowded with rice cookers, radio sets, workers. (Sec. 8, R.A. 6713)
freezers, electric stoves and toasters. Her
staff also received several envelopes Statements of Assets and Liabilities and
containing cash money for the employees' Financial Pisdnsnre
Christmas luncheon. Has Commissioner
Torres committed any impropriety or The two documents shall contain information
irregularity? What laws or decrees did she on the following:
violate? (2006 BAR)
1. Real property, its improvements,
A: YES Commissioner Torres committed an acquisition costs, assessed value and
impropriety. She violated Sec. 7(d) ofR.A. 6713 current fair market value;
otherwise known as the "Code of Condutt and 2. Personal property and acquisition cost;
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and 3. All other assets such as investments, cash
Employees.• Sec. 7(d) mandates that public on hand or in banks, stocks, bonds, and the
officials and employees shall not solicit or like;
accept directly or indirectly any gift. favor, 4. Liabilities; and
entertainment, loan or anything of monetary 5. All business interests and financial
value from any person in the course of her connections. (Sec. 8, R.A. 6713)
official duties or any transaction which may be
affected by the functions of their office. Q: X was charged for violation of Section 8 of
R.A. 6713 for failure to disclose in her SALN
Gift/Grant from Foreig·n Governments for the years 2004 and 2005 certain time
deposits with ABC Credit Corporation. In her
Congress consents to: defense, while X admitted that the imputed
amounts on the subject time deposits were
1. The acceptance and retention by a public not specifically stated in her SALN for the
official or employee of a gift of nominal years 2004 and 2005, she nonetheless
value tendered and received as a souvenir declared the initial capital thereof as an
or mark of courtesy; asset in the SALN. She honestly believed
2. The acceptance by a public official or then that the interest on said deposits may
employee of a gift in the nature of a only be declared when the certificates of
scholarship or fellowship grant or medical time deposit were converted into cash. Is X
treatment; or liable for violating pertinent provisions on
3. The acceptance by a public official or SALN submission?
employee of travel grants or expenses for
travel taking place entirely outside the A: YES. Section 8 ofR.A. 6713 provides that "all
Philippine (such as allowances, other assets such as investments, cash on hand
transportation, food, and lodging) of more or in banks, stocks, bonds, and the like," should
be declared by the public official in his or her 7. All other public officials and employees,
SALN. In this case, however, it was established, defined in R.A. 3019, as amended, with the
through X's admission, that she only declared Civil Service Commission. (Sec. 8, R.A
the original amount of her time deposits in her 6713)
SALN for the years 2004 and 2005, and did not
disclose the interests which had eventually Jdeotificationand diSflosure of relatives
accrued on the same. Accordingly, X fell short of
the legal requirement under Settion 8 of RA It shall be the duty of every public official or
6713 and thus should be held administratively employee to identify and disclose, to the best of
liable for said infraction. (Morquez, eta/. v. his knowledge and information, his relatives in
Ovejera, AM. Na. P-11-2903, February 5, 2014) the Government in the form, manner and
frequency prescribed by the Civil Service
When documents are to be filed: Commission. (Sec. 8, R.A 6713)
2. Laborers and casual or temporary workers. compensation, even nominal from the
(Sec. 8, R.A. 6713) government. (Sec. 2(b), R.A. 3019)
secure or obtain, any Government permit corporations charged with the grant of
or license, in consideration for the help licenses or permits or other concessions.
given or to be given. (Sec. 3 (c), R.A. 3019)
Q: Olympic Mines and Platinum Group
NOTE: This is a special form of bribery. applied and granted by the Provincial
Mining Regulatory Board (the Board) a
4. Accepting or having any member of his small-scale mining permit which allowed
family accept employment in a private them to extract 50,000 dry metric tons of
enterprise which has pending official laterite ore. The DENR also granted Olympic
business with him during the pendenty Mines and Platinum Group with their
thereof or within one year after its separate Environmental Compliance
termination. (Sec. 3 (d), R.A. 3019) Certificate (ECC) which allows them to
extract 50,000 dry metric tons of nickel/ore
Elements: mineral per year.
a. The public officer accepted, or having
any of his family member accept any Platinum Group transported, for itself and
employment in a private enterprise; on behalf of Olympic Mines, a total of
b. Such private enterprise has a pending 203,399.135 dry metric tons of nickel ore.
official business with the public officer; Olympic Mines applied for the renewal of its
and small-scale mining permit before the Board.
c. It was accepted during: The Board recommended to Reyes,
i. The pendency thereof; or provincial governor, to grant the renewal,
ii. Within 1 year after its which he did.
termination.
Subsequently, Olympic Mines and Platinum
5. Causing any undue injury to any party, Group's ECC were cancelled due to over
including the Government, or giving any extraction. Later on, Reyes was charged with
private party any unwarranted benefits, violation of Section 3(e) of R.A 3019 or the
advantage or preference in the discharge of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act when
his official, administrative or judicial he allegedly gave unwarranted benefits,
functions through manifest partiality, preference, and advantage to Olympic Mines
evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable in the renewal of its permit. Is Reyes guilty
negligence. (Sec. 3 (e), RA 3019) (1990, of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019?
1991, 1997, 2005, 2009 BAR)
A: YES. Reyes committed gross inexcusable
Elements: negligence when he approved Olympic Mines'
a. The accused must be a public officer renewal of its small-scale mining permit.
considering that Olympic Mines violated the
discharging administrative, judicial, or
terms and conditions of the permit. From May
official functions; 30, 2005 to April 3, 2006, Platinum Group
b. He must have acted with manifest transported a total of 203,399.135 dry metric
partiality, evident bad faith, or tons of nickel ore under Olympic Mines' and
inexcusable negligence; and Platinum Group's permit. This is clearly beyond
c. That his action caused: the 100,000-dry metric ton threshold of the
i. Any undue injury to any party, combined permits, a fact that Reyes does not
dispute. His act of renewing Olympic Mines'
including the government; or
Small-Scale Mining Permits, despite a blatant
ii. Giving any private party violation of the terms of the permit, was
unwarranted benefits, advantage correctly charac.terized as gross inexcusable
or preference in the discharge of negligence. (Reyes v. People, C.R. No. 237172,
his functions. September 18, 2019, as penned by]. Leonen)
NOTE: Since bad faith is an element, good Q: Abubakar, Baraguir, and Farouk were
faith or lack of malice is a valid defense. public offidals of the DPWH-ARMM at the
time of the commission of the offense. After
NOTE: This provision shall apply to officers the creation of the ARMM, the national
and employees of offices or government government allotted funds for the
implementation of infrastructure projects of
the region, and a portion of the funds were entered by Guiani with Arce Engineering gave
transferred to DPWH-ARMM. the latter the right to secure 30% of the
contract cost as advance payment or
The Office of the President received reports mobilization fee upon the contract's execution.
of irregularities attending the This is clearly contrary to the implementing
implementation of the infrastructure rules and regulations of Presidential Decree No.
projects, Thus, the COA conducted an 1594 on advance payment allowing only 15%
investigation and yielded the following for the payment of advance payment.
findings: (1) Overpayment; (2) Excessive (Abubakar v. People, G.R. No. 202408, June 27,
advance payments; and (3) Improper 2018, as penned by]. Leonen}
conduct of public bidding. The report found
out that DPWH-ARMM officials awarded 6. Neglecting or refusing. after due demand or
several contractors certificate of request, without sufficient justification, to
mobilization a week before the conduct of act within a reasonable time on any matter
the public bidding. The contractors were pending before him for the purpose of
also allowed to mobilize their equipment on obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any
the site. DPWH-ARMM officials also granted person interested in the matter some
and allowed disbursement of 30% advance pecuniary or material benefit or advantage,
pay·ment to one contractor, with amount or for the purpose of favoring his own
was beyond the 15% limit set by law. Based interest or giving undue advantage in favor
on the report, Abubakar, Baraguir, and of or discriminating against any other
Guiani were charged with violation of Sec. interested party. (Sec. 3 (/), R.A. 3019)
3(e), R.A. 3019. Are the DPWH-ARMM
officials guilty of the crime charged? Elements:
a. Offender is a public officer;
A: YES. Abubakar, Baraguir, and Guiani are b. Public officer neglected or refused to
guilty of violating Sec. 3(e), RA. 3019. Baraguir act without sufficient justification
and Guiani gave unwarranted benefits and after due demand or request has been
advantage to several contractors by allowing made on him;
them to deploy their equipment ahead of the c. Reasonable time has elapsed from
scheduled public bidding. The certificates of such demand or request without the
mobilization, which were issued at least one (1) public officer having acted on the
week before the date of public bidding. matter pending before him; and
identified seven (7) entities as contractors. The d. Such failure to act is for the purpose
acts of identifying certain contractors ahead of of.
the scheduled public bidding and of allowing i. Obtaining (directly or indirectly)
the advanced deployment of their equipment from any person interested in the
through the issuance of certificates of matter some pecuniary or
mobilization are glaring irregularities in the material benefit or advantage;
bidding procedure that engender suspicion of ii. Favoring his own interest; or
favoritism and partiality towards the seven (7) iii. Giving undue advantage in favor
contractors. These irregularities create a of; or
reasonable, if not conclusive, presumption that iv. Discriminating against any other
the concerned public officials had no intention interested party. (Coronado v.
of complying with the rules on public bidding Sandiganbayan, G.R. Na. 94955,
and that the results were already August 18, 1993)
predetermined. Baraguir also gave
unwarranted benefits and advantage to the 7. Entering, on behalf of the Government, into
contractors through gross inexcusable any contract or transaction manifestly and
negligence. Admittedly, he failed to check the grossly disadvantageous to the same,
dates on the certificates of mobilization when whether or not the public officer profited
they were presented to him for his signature. or will profit thereby. (Sec. 3 (g), R.A. 3019)
May a private person be charged and NOTE: Intervention must be actual and
convicted of violating the provisions of the in the official capacity of the public
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act? officer.
Q: Accused Dela Cruz contends that he a. Any person not qualified for or not
cannot be held guilty of violation of Section legally entitled to such license, permit,
3 (g) of R.A. 3019 as the law only mentioned privilege or benefit; or
that public officials are offenders of such b. A mere representative or dummy of
provision. Can a private person be held one who is not so qualified or entitled.
guilty under R.A. 3019? (Sec. 3 U), R.A. 3019)
but as a detainee charged with murder. Thus, to any party," has a meaning akin to that of
for purposes of applying the provisions of the civil law concept of actual damage.
Section 3(e), R.A. No. 3019, Adalim was a (Guodines v. Sandiganboyan and People, G.R. No.
private party. (Ambit Jr. v. People, G.R. No. 164891,June 6, 2011)
175457,July 6, 2011)
Q: In violation of Sec. 3(e) ofR.A. No. 3019, is
NOTE: The requirement before a private it n ecessary that the circumstances of: (1)
person may be indicted for violation of Section "causing any undue injury to any party,
3 of R.A. 3019 is that such private person must including the Government"; and (2) •g1vlng
be alleged to have acted in conspiracy with a any private party any unwarranted
public officer. The law, however, does not b enefits," both be present to convict the
require that such person must, in all instances, accused of the said crime?
be indicted together with the public officer. If
circumstances exist where the public officer A: NO. The Supreme Court has clarified that the
may no longer be charged in court, as in the use of the disjunctive word ..or" connotes that
present case where the public officer has either act of (a) ·causing any undue injury to
already died, the private person may be any party, including the Government'' and (b)
indicted alone. (People v. Go, G.R. No. 168539, "giving any private party any unwarranted
March 25, 2014) benefits, advantage or preference," qualifies as
a violation of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, as
Manifest PactiaHtx amended. The use of the disjunctive "oi"
connotes that the two modes need not be
There is a clear, notorious, or plain inclination present at the same time. In other words, the
or predilection to favor one side or person presence of one would suffice for conviction.
rather than another. (Alvizo v. Sandiganbayon, (Alvarez v. People, G.R. No. 192591, June 29,
G.R. Nos. 98494-98692/uly 17, 2003; Webster, 2011)
Third New International Dictionary, p. 1646;
Bouvier's Low Dictionary, Third Edition, p. 2083) Q: Is proof of the extent of damage n ecessary
to prove the crime?
Gross inexcusable oeelieeoce
A: NO. The Supreme Court held in Fonocier v.
Refers to negligence characterized by the want Sandiganboyan, that proof of the extent or
of even the slightest care, acting or omitting to quantum of damage is not essential. It is
act in a situation where there is a duty to act, sufficient that the injury suffered or benefits
not inadvertently but willfully and received can be perceived to be substantial
intentionally, with conscious indifference to enough and not merely negligible. Under the
consequences insofar as other persons may be second mode of the crime defined in Section
affected. (Sistozo v. Desierto, G.R. No. 144784. 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, damage is not
September 3, 2002) required. In order to be found guilty under the
second mode, it suffices that the accused has
Evident bad faith given unjustified favor or benefit to another, in
the exercise of his official, administrative or
It connotes not only bad judgment but also judicial functions. (Alvarez v. People, ibid)
palpably and patently fraudulent and dishonest
purpose to do moraJ obliquity or conscious PROHIBITED ACTS FOR PRIVATE
wrongdoing for some perverse motive or ill will INDIVIDUALS
(Sistoza v. Desierto, ibid). It also contemplates a
state of mind affirmatively operating with 1. For any person having family or close
furtive design or with some motive or self personal relation with any public official to
interest or ill will or for ulterior purposes Air. capitalize or exploit or take advantage of
(Fronce v. Corrascoso, G.R. No. L-21438, such family or personal relation by directly
September 28, 1966) or indirectly requesting or receiving any
present, gift, or material or pecuniary
Undue iniury advantage from any person having some
business, transaction, application, request
The term "undue injury" in the context of Sec. 3 or contract with the government, in which
(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices such public officer has to intervene. (Sec. 4,
Act punishing the act of ·causing undue injury R.A. 3019)
NOTE: Family relations include the spouse conspiracy with any other person or public
or relatives by consanguinity or affinity official to commit any violations of said Act.
within third (3"') civil degree. (Sec. 14, R.A. 3019)
EXCEPTIONS
Cana af camoeteot inrisdictlao aver
offenses punishable under this act
par. (d). (Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. Q: Senator X, with the help of his
148560. November 19, 2001) subordinates, acquired the amount of
Pl00,000,000 through a misappropriation
of public funds in just a single transaction. Is
plunder committed? Senator X, with the
Two (2) or more overt or criminal acts falling help of his subordinates, acquired the
under the same category of enumeration found amount of Pl00,000,000 through a
in Sec. 1, par. (d). (Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, misappropriation of public funds in just a
ibid). single transaction. Is plunder committed?
A: BOTH. Don Gabito violated the Anti-Money Any person who, with malice, or in bad
Laundering Act (Sec. 4, RA 9160) for knowingly faith, reports or files a completely
transacting money. as property which involves unwarranted or false information relative
or relates to the proceeds of an unlawful to money laundering transaction against
activity such as jueteng. In addition, he may be any person
prosecuted for liability as a jueteng operator.
The mayor who allowed the opening of an a. Imprisonment of 6 months to 4 years
account in his name is likewise guilty for b. AND a fine of not less than PhplOO, 000
violation of the AMLA. He, knowing that the but not more than Php500, 000, at the
money instrument or property involves the discretion of the court: Provided, That
proceeds of an unlawful activity, performs or the offender is not entitled to avail the
fails to perform any act which results in the benefits of the Probation Law.
facilitation of money laundering.
Offender is a corporation, assaciation,
PENAL PROVISIONS partnership or any juridical persan
1. Penalties for the Crime of Money The penalty shall be imposed upon the
Laundering responsible officers, as the case may be, who
participated in the commission of the crime
Person who knowingly transacts using or who shall have knowingly permitted or
monetary instrument from ony unlowful failed to prevent its commission. The court
activity may suspend or revoke its license.
further proceedings after serving the Money Laundering Law. Can Rudy move to
penalties herein prescribed. dismiss the case on the ground that he has
no criminal record? (2006 BAR)
Offender is a public official or employee
In addition to the penalties prescribed A: NO. Under the Anti-Money Laundering Law,
herein, suffer perpetual or temporary Rudy would be guilty of a "money laundering
absolute disqualification from office, as the crime'" committed when the proceeds of an
case may be. Any public official or employee "unlawful activity," like jueteng operations, are
who is called upon to testify and refuses to made to appear as having originated from
do the same or purposely fails to testify shall legitimate sources. The money laundering
suffer the same penalties prescribed herein. crime is separate from the unlawful activity of
being a jueteng operator, and requires no
4. Breach of Confidentiality previous convic.tion for the unlawful ac.tivity.
(Sec. 3, R.A. 9160)
a. Imprisonment ranging from 3 to 8 years
b. AND a fine of not less than PhpS00,000 Q: To raise funds for his defense, Rudy sold
but not more than Php 1,000,000. (Sec. the houses and lots to a friend. can Luansing
14, R.A. 9160) Realty, Inc. be compelled to transfer to the
buyer ownership of the houses and lots?
COVERED INSTITUTIONS
A: YES. Luansing Realty, Inc. is a real estate
1. Banks, non-banks, quasi-banks, trust company, hence it is not a covered institution
entities, and all other institutions and their under Section 3 of the Anti-Money Laundering
subsidiaries and affiliates supervised or Act. Only banking institutions, insurance
regulated by the BSP; companies, securities dealers and brokers, pre
2. Insurance companies and all other need companies and other entities
institutions supervised or regulated by the administering or otherwise dealing in currency,
Insurance Commission; commodities or financial derivatives are
3. covered institutions. Hence, Luansing Realty,
a. Securities dealers, brokers, salesmen, Inc. may not use the Anti-Money Laundering
investment houses and other similar Act to refuse to transfer to the buyer ownership
entities of the houses and lots.
b. Mutual funds, closed-end investment
companies, common trust funds, pre Q: Did the bank violate any law in disclosing
need companies and other similar Rudy's bank accounts to the AMLC?
entities
c. Foreign exchange corporations, money A: NO, the bank did not violate any law. The
changers, money payment. remittance, bank being specified as a "covered institution"
and transfer companies and other under the Anti-Money Laundering Law, is
similar entities obliged to report to the AMLC covered and
d. Other entities administering or susp1c1ous transactions, without thereby
otherwise dealing in currency, violating any law. This is one of the exceptions
commodities or financial derivatives. to the Secrecy of Bank Deposit Act.
Q: Rudy is jobless but is reputed to be a Q: Suppose the titles of the houses and lots
jueteng operator. He has never been are in possession of the Luansing Realty,
charged or convicted of any crime. He Inc., is it under the obligation to deliver the
maintains several banks bank accounts and titles to Rudy?
has purchased S houses and lots for his
children from the Luansing Realty, Inc. since A: YES, it has an obligation to deliver titles to
Since he does not have any visible job, the Rudy. As Luansing Realty, Inc. is not a covered
company reported his purchases to the institution under Settion 3 of the Anti-Money
AMLC. Thereafter, AMLC charged him with Laundering Ac.t, it may not invoke this law to
violation of the Anti-Money Laundering Law. refuse delivery of the titles to Rudy.
Upon request of the AMLC, the bank
disclosed to it Rudy's bank deposits COVERED TRANSACTIONS
amounting to PlOO M. Subsequently, he was
charged in court for violation of the Anti·
Authority prescribes a longer period not transactions, and closed accounts for 5 years
exceeding ten (10) working days. from dates they were closed.
3(i) hereof, the Court of rules of examination of the BSP. (Sec. 11, R.A.
Appeals may issue a freeze 9194)
order which shall be effective
immediately, for a period of Iurisdiffion of trial courts
twenty (20) days,
The issuance of a bank inquiry order, the power
Within the twenty (20)-day to determine the existence of probable cause is
period, CA shall conduct a lodged in the trial court. (AMLC v. Bofonte, et of,
summary hearing, with notice C.R. No.186717, April 17, 2017)
to the parties, to determine
whether or not to modify or Not violative of the Right to due process
lift the freeze order, or
extend its effectivity. R.A. 9160 provides safeguards before a bank
The total period of the freeze inquiry order is issued, ensuring adherence to
order issued by the Court of the general state policy of preserving the
Appeals under this provision absolutely confidential nature of Philippine
shall not exceed 6 months. bank accounts. (Subido Pagente Certezo
Mendoza ond Binay law Offices v. CA, C.R. No.
Provided, That if there is no 216914,December 6,2016)
case filed against a person
whose account has been Elements·
frozen within the period
determined by the Court of 1. Ex-porte application by the AMLC;
Appeals, not exceeding 6 2. Determination of probable cause by the CA;
months, the freeze order shall and
be seemed ipso facto lifted: 3. Exception of court order in cases involving
unlawful activities. (Subido Pogente Certezo
Provided, further, That this Mendoza ond Binoy Low Offices v. CA, C.R.
new rule shall not apply to No. 216914, December 6, 2016)
pending cases in the courts. In
any case, the court should act In the case of AMLC v. Bofonte, et of. (C.R. No.
on the petition to freeze 186717, April 17, 2017), the Court held that
within twenty-four (24) there is no such violation because the physical
hours from filing of the seizure of the targeted corporeal property is
petition. {Sec, 10, R.A 109271 not contemplated in any form by the law. The
AMLC may indeed be authorized to apply ex
AUTHORITY TO INQUIRE parte for an inquiry into bank accounts, but
INTO BANK DEPOSITS only in pursuance of its investigative functions
akin to those of the National Bureau of
The AMLC may inquire into or examine any Investigation. As the AMLC does not exercise
particular deposit or investment with any quasi-judicial functions, its inquiry by court
banking institution or non-bank financial order into bank deposits or investments cannot
institution upon order of any competent court be said to violate any person's constitutional
in cases of violation of this Act when it has been right to procedural due process.
established that there is probable cause that the
deposits or investments involved are in any FORFEITURE PROVISIONS
way related to a money laundering offense.
1. Civil Forfeiture
Provided, that this provision shall not apply to
deposits and investments made prior to the When there is a covered transaction report
effectivity of this Att. (Sec. 11, R.A. 9160) made, and the court has, in a petition filed
for the purpose ordered seizure of any
NOTE: Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) may monetary instrument or property, in
inquire into or examine any deposit or whole or in part, directly or indirectly,
investment with any banking institution or related to said report, the Revised Rules of
non-bank financial institution when the Court on civil forfeiture shall apply.
examination is made in the course of a periodic
or special examination, in accordance with the 2. Claim on Forfeited Assets
Where the court has issued an order of the AMLC may execute the request or refuse
forfeiture of the monetary instrument or to execute the same and inform the foreign
property in a criminal prosecution for any State of any valid reason for not executing
money laundering offense, the offender or the request or for delaying the execution
any other person claiming an interest thereof. The principles of mutuality and
therein may apply, by verified petition, for reciprocity shall, for this purpose, be at all
a declaration that the same legitimately times recognized.
belongs to him and for segregation or
exclusion of the monetary instrument or 2. Powers of the AMLC to Act on a Request
property corresponding thereto. for Assistance from a Foreign State
The verified petition shall be filed with the The AMLC may execute a request for
court which rendered the judgment of assistance from a foreign State by:
conviction and order of forfeiture, within a. Tracking down, freezing, restraining
15 days from the date of the order of and seizing assets alleged to be
forfeiture, in default of which the said proceeds of any unlawful activity;
order shall become final and executory. b. Giving information needed by the
foreign State; and
3. Payment in Lieu ofForfeiture c. Applying for an order of forfeiture of
any monetary instrument or property
tostaoces when order of fnrfein,ce in the court.
cannot be enforced
NOTE: The court shall not issue such an
a. Any particular monetary instrument or order unless the application is
property cannot, with due diligence, be accompanied by an authenticated copy of
located; the order of a court in the requesting State
b. It has been substantially altered, ordering the forfeiture of said monetary
destroyed, diminished in value or instrument or property, and a certification
otherwise rendered worthless by any act or an affidavit of a competent officer of the
or omission, directly or indirectly, requesting State stating that the conviction
attributable to the offender; and the order of forfeiture are final.
c. It has been concealed, removed,
converted or otherwise transferred to 3. Obtaining Assistance from Foreign States
prevent the same from being found or to
avoid forfeiture thereof; The AMLC may make a request to any foreign
d. It is located outside the Philippines or State for assistance in:
has been placed or brought outside the
jurisdiction of the court: and a. Tracking down, freezing, restraining and
e. It has been commingled with other seizing assets alleged to be proceeds of
monetary instruments or property any unlawful activity;
belonging to either the offender himself b. Obtaining information that it needs
or a third person or entity, thereby relating to any covered transaction,
rendering the same difficult to identify or money laundering offense or any other
be segregated for purposes of forfeiture. matter directly or indirectly related
thereto;
The Court may instead accordingly order c. To the extent allowed by the law of the
the convitted offender to pay an amount foreign State, applying with the proper
equal to the value of said monetary court therein for an order to enter any
instrument or property. premises belonging to or in the
possession or control of, any or all of the
MUTUAL ASSISTANCE AMONG STATES persons named in said request, and/or
search any or all such persons named
1. Request for Assistance from a Foreign therein and/or remove any document,
State material or object named in said request;
d. Applying for an order of forfeiture of any
Where a foreign State makes a request for monetary instrument or property in the
assistance in the investigation or proper court in the foreign State.
prosecution of a money laundering offense,
or a third person; or for any reason based on vomit and/or blood until the brink of
discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffocation;
suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of 6. Being tied or forced to assume fixed and
or with the consent or acquiescence of a person stressful bodily position;
in authority or agent of a person in authority. 7. Rape and sexual abuse, including the
(Sec. 3 (o), RA 9745) insertion of foreign objects into the sex
organ or rectum, or electrical torture of
NOTE: It does not include pain or suffering the genitals;
arising only from inherent in or incidental to 8. Mutilation or amputation of the essential
lawful sanctions. (Sec. 3 (a), RA 9745) parts of the body such as the genitalia,
ear, tongue, etc.;
Other cruel inhuman and dercadioe 9. Dental torture or the forced extraction of
rcearment or nnnishment the teeth;
10. Pulling out offingernails;
A deliberate and aggravated treatment or 11. Harmful exposure to the elements such
punishment, not enumerated under Section 4 of as sunlight and extreme cold;
this Act, inflicted by a person in authority or 12. The use of plastic bag and other materials
agent of a person in authority against a person placed over the head to the point of
under his/her custody which attains a level of asphyxiation;
severity causing suffering, gross humiliation or 13. The use of psychoactive drugs to change
debasement to the latter. (Sec. 3(b), R.A. 9745) the perception, memory. alertness or will
of a person, such as:
NOTE: The assessment of the level of severity i. The administration or drugs to
shall depend on all the circumstances of the induce confession and/or reduce
case, including the duration of the treatment or mental competency; or
punishment, its physical and mental effects, ii. The use of drugs to induce extreme
and, in some cases, the sex, religion, age, and pain or certain symptoms of a
state of health of the victim. (Sec. 5, R.A. 9745) disease; and
14. Other analogous acts of physical torture.
PUNISHABLE ACTS
B. Mental/psychological torture refers to acts
I Aas oCTortuct calculated to affett or confuse the mind
and/or undermine a person's dignity, and
Torture, as punished under the law, may either morale, such as:
be physical or mental/psychological. 1. Blindfolding;
2. Threatening a person(s) or his/her
A. Physical torture is a form of treatment or relative(s) with bodily harm, execution,
punishment that causes severe pain, or other wrongful acts;
exhaustion, disability, or dysfunction of one 3. Confinement in solitary cells or secret
or more parts of the body, such as: detention places;
4. Prolonged interrogation;
1. Systematic beating, head-banging, 5. Preparing a prisoner for a ..show trial,"
punching, kicking, striking with public display, or public humiliation of a
truncheon or riHe butt or other similar detainee or prisoner;
objects, and jumping on the stomach; 6. Causing unscheduled transfer of a person
2. Food deprivation or forcible feeding with deprived of liberty from one place to
spoiled food, animaJ or human excreta. another creating the belief that he/she
and other stuff or substances not will be summarily executed;
normally eaten; 7. Maltreating a member/s of a person's
3. Electric shock; family;
4. Cigarette burning, burning by electrically 8. Causing the torture sessions to be
heated rods, hot oil or acid, or by the witnessed by the person's family,
rubbing of pepper or other chemical relatives, or any third party;
substances on mucous membranes, or 9. Denial of sleep/rest;
acids or spices directly on the wound; 10. Shame infliction such as stripping the
5. The submersion of the head in water or person naked, parading him/her in
water polluted with excrement, urine, public places, shaving the victim's head
or putting marks on his/her body against
accomplice, takes part subsequent to its family, shall have the right to immediate access
commission: to proper and adequate medical treatment
Secret detention places, solitary confinement. NOTE: A prompt investigation shall mean a
incommunicado, or other similar forms of maximum period of sixty (60) working
detention, where torture may be carried out days from the time a complaint for torture
with impunity are prohibited. (Sec. 7, R.A. 9745) is filed within which an investigation report
and/or resolution shall be completed and
AonHcahilitx ofrbe BPC made available. An appeal, whenever
available, shall be resolved within the same
The provisions of the Revised Penal Code period prescribed herein.
insofar as they are applicable shall be
suppletory to this Act. Moreover, if the 2. To have sufficient government protection
commission of any crime punishable under against all forms of harassment. threat,
Title Eight (Crimes Against Persons) and Title and/or intimidation as a consequence of
Nine (Crimes Against Personal Liberty and the filing of a complaint for torture or the
Security) of the Revised Penal Code is attended presentation of evidence for such
by any of the acts constituting torture and other complaint; and
cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or
punishment as defined herein, the penalty to be NOTE: The protection extends to other
imposed shall be in its maximum period. (Sec. persons involved in the
22, R.A. 9745) investigation/prosecution such as his/her
lav.,yer, witnesses and relatives.
RIGHTS TO PHYSICAL, MEDICAL, AND
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION 3. To be given sufficient protection in the
manner by which he/she testifies and
Before and after interrogation, every person presents evidence in any forum to avoid
arrested, detained, or under custodial further trauma. (Sec. 9, R.A. 9745)
investigation shall have the right to he informed
of his/her right to demand physical Cnmnensatinn rn Yietlms nfiom,ce
examination by an independent and competent
doctor of his/her own choice. Furthermore, any Any person who has suffered torture shall have
person arrested, detained, or under custodial the right to claim for compensation as provided
investigation, including his/her immediate for under R.A. 7309: Provided, that in no case
shall compensation be any lower than Ten information or other formal charge sufficient in
thousand pesos (Pl0,000). form and substance to sustain a conviction and
after the accused had pleaded to the charge, the
NOTE: Victims of torture shall also have the acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the
right to claim for compensation from such other case shall be a bar to another prosecution for
financial relief programs that may be made any offense or felony which is necessarily
available to him/her under existing law and included in the offense charged under this Act.
rules and regulations. (Sec. 18, R.A. 9745) (Sec. 49, R.A. 9372)
PUNISHABLE ACTS
HUMAN SECURITY ACT
R.A. 9372 1. Terrorism (Sec. 3, R.A 9372);
2. Conspiracy to commit terrorism (Sec. 4, R.A.
9372);
PUNISHABLE ACTS 3. Accomplice (Sec. 5, R.A. 9372);
4. Accessory (Sec. 6, R.A. 9372);
5. Unauthorized or malicious interceptions
Any act punishable under any of the following
and/or recording (Sec. 16, R.A. 9372);
provisions of the:
6. Failure to deliver suspect to the proper
judicial authority within three days (Sec.
RPC SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
20, R.A. 9372);
7. Violation of the rights of detainee bya
1. Piracy in 1. Anti-Hijacking Law police officer or his superior if the police
General and 2. Anti-Piracy and
officer is not identified (Sec. 22, R.A. 9372);
Mutiny in the Anti-Highway 8. Threat, intimidation, coercion, or torture in
High Seas or in Robbery Law of the investigation and interrogation of a
the Philippine 1974 (P.O. 532)
detained person (Sec. 25, R.A 9372);
Waters 3. Decree Codifying
9. Unauthorized or malicious examination of a
2. Rebellion or the Laws on Illegal bank or a financial institution (Sec. 36, R.A.
Insurrection and Unlawful
9372);
3. Coup d'etat, Possession,
10. Defiance by the bank office or employee of
including acts Manufacture, court authorization (Sec. 37, R.A. 9372);
committed by Dealing In,
11. False, untruthful statement or
private persons Acquisition or
misrepresentation of material fact in joint
4. Murder Disposition of affidavits (Sec. 38, R.A. 9372);
5. Kidnapping and Firearms,
12. Unjustified refusal to restore or delay in
Serious Illegal Ammunitions or restoring seized, sequestered, and frozen
Detention Explosives bank deposits, placements, trust accounts,
6. Crimes 4. The Law on Arson
assets, and records (Sec. 42, R.A. 9372);
Involving 5. Toxic Substances 13. Loss, misuse, diversion, or dissipation of
Destruc.tion and Hazardous and seized, sequestered, and frozen bank
Nuclear Waste
deposits (Sec. 43, R.A. 9372);
Control Att of 1990 14. Infidelity in the custody of detained
6. Atomic Energy persons (Sec. 44, R.A. 9372);
Regulatory and
15. Unauthorized revelation of classified
Liabili Att of 1968
materials (Sec. 46, R.A. 9372); and
16. Furnishing false evidence, forged
The abovementioned ac.t must: document, or spurious evidence (Sec. 47,
R.A. 9372).
1. Sow and create a condition of widespread
and extraordinary fear and panic among PERSONS LIABLE
the populace;
2. Coerce the government to give in to an As Principal - Any person who commits any of
unlawful demand. (Sec. 3, R.A. 9372) the acts under Sec. 3 and 4.
Absorption Principle in Terrorism As Accomplice - any person who not being a
principal under Art. 17 of the RPC or a
When a person has been prosecuted under a conspirator as defined under Sec. 4 hereof,
provision of this Act. upon a vaJid complaint or
cooperates in the execution of either the crime correspondence shall not be authorized. (Sec. 7,
of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism R.A. 9372)
by previous or simultaneous acts. (Sec. 5, R.A.
9372)
THE TERRORISM FINANCING PREVENTION
As Accessory - AND SUPPRESSION ACT OF 2012
R.A.10168
GR: Any person who, having knowledge of the
commission of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism and without PERSONS LIABLE
having participated therein either as principal
or accomplice under Art. 17 and 18 of the RPC, Terrorist
takes part subsequent to its commission in any
of the following manner: Any natural person who:
twenty-day period shall be tolled upon filing of requesting or granting extradition in respect of
a petition to extend the effectivity of the freeze the offenses set forth under this Act. (Sec. 20,
order. R.A. 10168)
applicant and the witnesses he may produce case dismissed provided that L pays PS,000
and a showing that: and makes a public apology. Ltold Atty. T to
call him up the following day as he would
1. There are reasonable grounds to believe consult his lawyer.
that any of the crimes enumerated
hereinabove exception has been The following day when Atty. T called up t.
committed or is being committed or is the latter requested his lawyer Atty. X, who
about to be committed. Provided, that in was in his (L's) office at that time, to secretly
cases involving the offenses of rebellion, listen to the telephone conversation through
conspiracy and proposal to commit a telephone extension.
rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition,
conspiracy to commit sedition, and When the PS,000 agreed upon on the
inciting to sedition, such authority shall telephone was delivered to Atty. T at the
be granted only upon prior proof that a appointed place and time, he (Atty. T) was
rebellion or acts of sedition, as the case arrested by the police for
may be, have actually been or are being Robbery/Extortion on complaint of L who
committed; was accompanied by his lawyer, Atty. X. Atty.
2. There are reasonable grounds to believe X executed an affidavit stating that he beard
that evidence will be obtained essential Atty. T demanding PS,000 for the
to the conviction of any person for, or to withdrawal of the criminal complaint
the solution of, or to the prevention of, through a telephone extension. On the basis
any of such crimes; and of this affidavit, Atty. T filed a criminal
3. There are no other means readily complaint against Atty. X and L for violation
available for obtaining such evidence. of sec. 1 of RA. No. 4200, otherwise known as
(Sec. 3, par. 1, R.A. 4200) the Anti-Wire Tapping Act. which says:
Period ofAuthorization ofWritten Order "It shall be unlawful for any person not
being authorized by all the parties to any
Effective for the period specified in the Order, private conversation or spoken word to tap
but shall not exceed sixty (60) days from the any wire or cable or b y using any other
date of issuance. (Par. 2, Sec. 3, R.A 4200) device or arrangement, to secretly overhear,
intercept or record such communication or
After the expiration of such period, all spoken word by using a device commonly
recordings made under court authorization known as Dictaphone or dictograph or
shall, within forty-eight (48) hours after the detectaphone, walkie-talkie or tape
expiration of the period fixed in the order, be recorder, or however otherwise described."
deposited with the court in a sealed envelope or If you were the Judge, would you convict or
sealed package. Such package shall not be acquit Land his lawyer, Atty. X? Explain.
opened, or the recordings replayed, or used in
evidence, or their contents revealed. (Sec. 3, par. A: NO. It is a telephone extension and those
3, R.A 4200) enumerated by law means an extension with
permanent recording of which a telephone
XPN: Upon motion, with due notice and extension is not.
opportunity to be heard to the person or
persons whose conversation or An extension telephone cannot be placed in the
communications have been recorded. (Sec. 3, same category as a dictaphone, dictagraph or
par. 3, R.A. 4200) the other devices enumerated in Section 1 of
R.A. 4200 as the use thereof cannot be
The court referred shall be understood to mean considered as "' tapping'" the wire or cable of a
the Regional Trial Court within whose telephone line. The telephone extension in this
territorial jurisdiction the acts for which case was not installed for that purpose.
authority is applied is for are executed. (Sec. 3,
par. 3, R.A. 4200) A person should safely presume that the party
he is calling at the other end of the line
Q: C told his lawyer, Atty. T, to settle the probably has an extension telephone and he
criminal case he filed against t. and so Atty. runs the risk of a third party listening as in the
T called up through telephone L, and case of a party line or a telephone unit which
informed him that C is willing to have the
shares its line with another. (Gaanan v. /Al; G.R 2. That the tape played in the court was the
No. L-69809, October 16, 1986) one he recorded; and
3. That the voices on the tape are those of
Q: From an extension line, Ricardo the persons such are claimed to belong.
overheard a telephone conversation
between Julito and Atty. Hipolito. The latter In the given facts, it is dear that jalbuena was
(Atty. Hipolito) was asking money from able to comply with the aforementioned
Julito in exchange for dropping the extortion requisites. Hence, there is no question that his
charge filed against Julito. Ricardo was voice recording is admissible. (Novarro v. CA
charged of violating the Anti-Wire Tapping ond People, G.R. No. 121087, August 26, 1999)
Act or RA. 4200. Under these facts, was
there a violation as charged? (2013 BAR) NON-ADMISSIBILITY IN EVIDENCE
A: NO, because a telephone extension line is not Any communication or spoken word, or the
the device or arrangement contemplated by the existence, contents, substance, purport. effect.
law and the use of an extension line cannot be or meaning of the same or any part, or any
considered as wire tapping. information therein contained obtained or
secured by any person in violation of the
Q: Lingan and Jalbuena, who were reporters provisions of the Att shall not be admissible in
in a radio station, went to a police station to evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial,
report an offense while they were legislative or administrative hearing or
investigating an entertainment house. The investigation. (Sec. 4, R.A. 4200)
stationed police officers, who were having a
drinking spree, aggressively dismissed Q: In an annulment proceeding, among the
them. exhibits offered by private respondent were
three (3) cassette tapes of alleged telephone
During an altercation, Navarro hit Lingan conversations between petitioner and
with the back of his pistol and thereafter hit unidentified persons. Will the tapes be
the latter's head on concrete. Lingan died admissible as evidence?
from his wounds, thus Navarro was charged
of murder. Jalbuena was able to produce a A: NO. Absent a clear showing that both parties
voice record of the altercation and used it as to the telephone conversations allowed the
part of his testimony. He testified that: he recording of the same, the inadmissibility of the
personally made the voice recording, the subject tapes is mandatory under R.A. 4200.
tape played in the court was the one he (Sa/cedo-Ortanez v. CA, G.R. No. 110662, August
recorded, and the speakers were petitioner 4, 1994)
Navarro and Lingan. Is his voice recording
valid and admissible as evidence under R.A. PERSONS LIABLE
4200?
1. Any person not being authorized by all the
A: YES. The voice recording was made in the parties to any private communication or
police station where policemen were spoken word, be he a participant or not in
discharging their public functions. R.A. 4200 the acts penalized. (Sec. 1, R.A. 4200)
prohibits only the overhearing, intercepting, or
recording of private communications. Since the Q: Will RA. 4200 apply to tapping of a
exchange between Navarro and Lingan was private conversation by one of the parties to
made while the former was in the exercise of a conversation?
his public functions, the communic.ation is
public and hence not prohibited. A: YES. The law makes no distinction as to
whether the party sought to be penalized by the
Furthermore, his voice recording is admissible statute ought to be a party other than or
as evidence since it was duly authenticated. A different from those involved in the private
voice recording is authenticated by the communication. The statute's intent to penalize
testimony of the witness: all persons unauthorized to make such
recording is underscored by the use of the
1. That he personally recorded the qualifier "any". Consequently, "even a (person)
conversations; privy to a communication who records his
private conversation with another without the
respondent's acts result in creating an NOTE: Any person who directs or induces
intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment another to commit any act of sexual harassment
for the employee. (Domingo v. Raya/a, G.R. No. as herein defined or who cooperates in the
155831, February 18, 2008) commission thereof by another without which
it would not have been committed, shall also be
NOTE: The laws are applicable to both sexes. held liable under this Act.
Complaint reporting about the rampant cost P600 as payment for sexual services.
human trafficking in Plaza Morga and Plaza After Ramirez provided the four girls, the
Moriones. Acting on the complaint, the group left and hailed a taxi heading for a
police operatives conducted an entrapment Motel. Ramirez had told the girls to accept
operation, the pimps were eventually caught the money that they would be given.
and arrested. According to AAA, she was
about to buy coffee at Plaza Moriones when While in the taxi, one of the men handed her
Santiago called her, offering to pay her to P2,400. BBB received the money and told
spend a night with a customer. He allegedly her companions to set aside P400 as their
promised to pay AAA P350 out of the PS00 pimp's share. Ramirez denied the
that the customer would pay for the allegations and claimed that it was BBB who
transaction. AAA later confirmed during negotiated with the customers and received
trial that Santiago was the pimp, but said the supposed payment. Is Ramirez guilty of
that sbe only saw Castillo and Legazpi for qualified trafficking of persons?
the first lime upon getting into the van
bound for the police station. RTC and CA A: YES. The elements for crimes prosecuted
convicted Santiago of committing trafficking under RA. No. 9208, as amended by R.A. No
in persons punished under Section 4(a) of 10364 are: (1) The att of "recruitment,
R.A. 9208, or the Anti-Trafficking in Persons obtaining, hiring, providing, offering,
Act. However, Santiago points out that the transportation transfer, maintainlng, harboring,
lack of testimony from the confidential or receipt of persons with or without the
informant, David, raises doubts on whether victim's consent or knowledge, within or across
"petitioner truly offered AAA to him." Is national borders; (2) The means used include
Santiago guilty beyond reasonable doubt for "by means of threat, or use of force, or other
violaling Section 4(a) of the Anti-Trafficking forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception,
in Persons Act, despite the lack of testimony abuse of power or of position, taking advantage
from the confidential informant? of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving
or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve
A: YES. Santiago is guilty beyond reasonable the consent of a person having control over
doubt for violating Section 4(a) of the Anti another person"; and (3) The purpose of
Trafficking in Persons Act, despite the lack of trafficking includes "the exploitation or the
testimony from the confidential informant. The prostitution of others or other forms of sexual
testimony of the confidentiaJ informant is not exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery,
relevant for conviction nor is it indispensable servitude, or the removal or sale of organs."
for a successful prosecution of this case because
his testimony would merely be corroborative In the instant case, the accused-appellant
and cumulative. The testimonies of the cannot use as a valid defense either BBB's and
trafficked person, AAA, clearly narrating what AM's consent to the transaction or that BBB
transpired on the trafficking incident and the received the payment on her behalf. The
police officers regarding the entrapment victim's consent is rendered meaningless due to
operation were sufficient to prove appellant's the coercive, abusive, or deceptive means
guilt of the crime charged. (Santiago v. People, employed by perpetrators of human trafficking.
G.R. No. 213760, July 1, 2019, as penned by/. Even without the use of coercive, abusive, or
Leanen) deceptive means, a minor's consent is not given
out of his or her own free will. Trafficking in
Q: The Regional Anli-Human Trafficking persons may be committed also by means of
Task Force conducted an entrapment taking advantage of the persons' vulnerability
operation in Lapu-Lapu City. At the bar, two as minors. Accused-appellant hired children to
women approached POl Nemenzo and POl engage in prostitution, taking advantage of
Llanes and introduced themselves as AAA their vulnerability as minors. AAA's and BBB's
and BBB, minors. Upon hearing that they acquiescence to the illicit transactions cannot
would need two more girls, another woman be considered as a valid defense. (People v.
approached them and introduced herself as Ramirez, G.R. No. 217978, January 30, 2019, as
Nancy, who was later identified as Ramirez. penned by/. Leonen)
She told the police officers that she could
provide the girls. Then, BBB and Ramirez b. To introduce or match for money,
left, and after a while, returned with two profit, or material, economic or other
more girls. They agreed that each girl would consideration, any person or, as
provided for under Republic Act No. i. To believe that if the person did
6955, any Filipino woman to a foreign not perfonn such labor or
national, for marriage for the purpose services, he or she or another
of acquiring, buying, offering, selling, or person would suffer serious harm
trading him/her to engage in or physical restraint; or
prostitution, pornography. sexual ii. To abuse or threaten the use of
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, law or the legal processes; and
involuntary servitude, or debt
bondage; k. To recruit. transport. harbor, obtain,
c. To offer or contract marriage, reaJ or transfer, maintain, hire, offer, provide,
simulated, for the purpose of acquiring, adopt, or receive a child for purposes
buying, offering, selling, or trading of exploitation or trading them,
them to engage in prostitution, including but not limited to, the act of
pornography, sexual exploitation, baring and/or selling a child for any
forced labor or slavery, involuntary consideration or for barter for
servitude, or debt bondage; purposes of exploitation.
d. To undertake or organize tours and
travel plans consisting of tourism Trafficking for purposes of exploitation
packages or at1:ivities for the purpose of children shall include:
of utilizing and offering persons for
prostitution, pornography, or sexual i. All forms of slavery or practices
exploitation; similar to slavery, involuntary
e. To maintain or hire a person to engage servitude, debt bondage and
in prostitution or pornography; forced labor, including
f. To adopt persons by any form of recruitment of children for use in
consideration for exploitative purposes armed conflict:
or to facilitate the same for purposes of ii. The use, procuring or offering of a
prostitution, pornography. sexual child for prostitution, for the
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, production of pornography, or for
involuntary servitude, or debt pornographic performances;
bondage; iii. The use, procuring, or offering of a
g. To adopt or facilitate the adoption of child for the production and
persons for the purpose of prostitution, trafficking of drugs; and
pornography, sexual exploitation, iv. The use, procuring, or offering of a
forced labor, slavery, involuntary child for illegal at1:ivities or work
servitude, or debt bondage; which, by its nature or the
h. To recruit, hire, adopt. transport. circumstances in which it is
transfer, obtain, harbor, maintain, carried out. is likely to harm their
provide, offer, receive, or abduct a health, safety or morals; and
person, by means of threat. or use of
force, fraud, deceit, violence, coercion, I. To organize or direct other persons to
or intimidation for the purpose of commit the offenses defined as acts of
removal or sale of organs of said trafficking under R.A. 9208. (Sec. 4, R.A
person;
9208, as amended)
i. To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer,
harbor, maintain, offer, hire, provide, 2. Attempted Trafficking
receive, or adopt a child to engage in
armed activities in the Philippines or Where there are acts to initiate the commission
abroad; and
of a trafficking offense but the offender failed to
j. To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor,
or did not execute all the elements of the crime,
obtain, maintain, offer, hire, provide, or by accident or by reason of some cause other
receive a person by means defined in
than voluntary desistance, such overt acts shall
Section 3 of this Act for purposes of
be deemed as an attempt to commit an act of
forced labor, slavery, debt bondage,
trafficking in persons. As such, an attempt to
and involuntary servitude, including a
commit any of the offenses enumerated in
scheme, plan, or pattern intended to
Section 4 shall constitute attempted trafficking
cause the person either:
in persons. (Sec. 4-A, par. 1, R.A 9208)
Aas that constibne auemoted tcaffickine in that are mandated to provide pre
necsnns where thevittimiSacbild departure registration and services for
departing persons for the purpose of
1. Facilitating the travel of a child who travels promoting trafficking in persons;
alone to a foreign country or territory 5. To facilitate, assist, or help in the exit
without valid reason therefor and without and entry of persons from/to the
the required clearance or permit from the country at international and local
Department of Social Welfare and airports, territorial boundaries and
Development, or a written permit or seaports who are in possession of
justification from the child's parent or legal unissued, tampered, or fraudulent
guardian; travel documents for the purpose of
2. Executing. for a consideration, an affidavit promoting trafficking in persons;
of consent or a written consent for 6. To confiscate, conceal, or destroy the
adoption; passport, travel documents, or
3. Recruiting a woman to bear a child for the personal documents or belongings of
purpose of selling the child; trafficked persons in furtherance of
4. Simulating a birth for the purpose of selling trafficking or to prevent them from
the child; and leaving the country or seeking redress
5. Soliciting a child and acquiring the custody from the government or appropriate
thereof through any means from among agencies;
hospitals, clinics, nurseries, daycare 7. To knowingly benefit from, financial or
centers, refugee or evacuation centers, and otherwise, or make use of, the labor or
low-income families, for the purpose of services of a person held to a condition
selling the child. (Sec. 4-A, par. 2, R.A. 9208) of involuntary servitude, forced labor,
or slavery;
Aas that oromote rraffkkioe in oecsons or 8. To tamper with, destroy, or cause the
racilitare rraffiekine in oecsons destruction of evidence, or to influence
or attempt to influence witnesses, in an
1. To knowingly lease or sublease, use, or investigation or prosecution of a case
allow to be used any house, building, or under R.A. 9208;
establishment for the purpose of 9. To destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate
promoting trafficking in persons; or possess, or attempt to destroy,
2. To produce, print and issue, or conceal, remove, confiscate, or possess,
distribute unissued, tampered, or fake any at1:ual or purported passport or
counseling certificates, registration other travel, immigration or working
stickers, overseas employment permit or document, or any other
certificates, or other certificates of any actual or purported government
government agency which issues these identification, of any person in order to
certificates, decals, and such other prevent or restrict, or attempt to
markers as proof of compliance with prevent or restrict, without lawful
government regulatory and pre authority, the person's liberty to move
departure requirements for the or travel in order to maintain the labor
purpose of promoting trafficking in or services of that person; or
persons; 10. To utilize his or her office to impede
3. To advertise, publish, print, broadcast the investigation, prosecution or
or distribute, or cause the execution of lawful orders in a case
advertisement, publication, printing, under R.A. 9208. (Sec. 4, RA 9208, as
broadcasting or distribution by any amended)
means, including the use of
information technology and the 3. Any person who buys or engages the
internet, of any brochure, flyer, or any services of trafficked persons for
propaganda material that promotes prostitution. (Sec. 11, R.A. 9208, as
trafficking in persons; amended)
4. To assist in the conduct of
misrepresentation or fraud for PERSONS LIABLE
purposes of facilitating the acquisition
of clearances and necessary exit Principal
documents from government agencies
1. When the trafficked person is a child; NOTE: Vittims of trafficking for purposes of
2. When the adoption is effected through prostitution as defined under Section 4 of this
Republic Act No. 8043 and said adoption is Act are not covered by Article 202 of the RPC
for the purpose of prostitution, and as such, shall not be prosecuted, fined, or
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced otherwise penalized under the said law. (Sec.
labor, slavery, involuntary servitude, or 17, R.A. 9208 as omended by R.A. 10364)
debt bondage;
3. When the crime is committed by a Q: Ronnie was able to convince Lolita to
syndicate, or in large scale. work as a restaurant entertainer in
Malaysia, When they were already at the
NOTE: Trafficking is deemed committed by restaurant, a Filipina woman working there
a syndicate if carried out by a group of said that the place is a prostitution den and
three (3) or more persons conspiring or the women there are used as prostitutes.
confederating with one another. It is Lolita was forced to work as entertainer.
deemed committed in large scale if
committed against three (3) or more Several customers used Lolita many times,
persons, individually or as a group. (2015 Some even had sexual intercourse with her
BAR) every hour. Ronnie was then sued for
Trafficking in Persons, He claims that he
common child is legitimate or not. (Melgar v. An ac.t, which is sexual in nature, committed
People, GR No. 223477, February 14, 2018) against a woman or her child. It includes, but is
not limited to:
Psychological violence
1. Rape, sexual harassment, acts of
Acts or omissions causing or likely to cause lasciviousness, treating a woman or her
mental or emotional suffering of the victim such child as a sex object, making demeaning
as but not limited to intimidation, harassment, and sexually suggestive remarks, physically
stalking, damage to property, public ridicule or attacking the sexual parts of the victim's
humiliation, repeated verbal abuse, and maritaJ body, forcing her/him to watch obscene
infidelity. It includes causing or allowing the publications and indecent shows or forcing
victim to witness the physical, sexual, or the woman or her child to do indecent at'tS
psychological abuse of a member of the family and/or make films thereof, forcing the wife
to which the victim belongs, or to witness and mistress/lover to live in the conjugal
pornography in any form, or to witness abusive home or sleep together in the same room
injury to pets, or to unlawful or unwanted with the abuser;
deprivation of the right to custody and/or 2. Acts causing or attempting to cause the
visitation of common children. (Sec. 3(a)(C), R.A victim to engage in any sexual activity by
9262) force, threat of force, physical or other
harm or threat of physical or other harm or
Q: AAA had a romantic relationship with coercion.
Melgar, which resulted in the birth of BBB, 3. Prostituting the woman or child. (Sec.
an illegitimate child. Melgar freely 3(a)(B), RA 9262)
acknowledged the paternity of BBB.
However, AAA's relationship with Melgar Protectlnn Order
turned sour as the latter had an affair with a
younger woman. When BBB was just about An order issued for the purpose of preventing
one-year-old, Melgar stopped giving further acts of violence against a woman or her
support, prompting AAA to file a case for child. (Sec. 8, R.A 9262)
support, which was eventually granted. This
notwithstanding. Melgar still refused to give Kinds ofnrntectinn ocdecs
support for her and BBB. As such, AAA was
constrained to file the instant criminal case 1. Barangay Pratectian Orders (BPO)
against Melgar. Is Melgar liable for violation 2. Temporary Protection Orders (TPO)
of Section S(i) ofR.A. 9262? 3. Permanent Protection Orders (PPO)
NOTE: In order to be classified as a battered and EEE. Is the case a proper subject of a
woman, the couple must go through the compromise agreement?
battering cycle at least twice. (People v. Genosa,
G.R. No. 135981,January 15, 2004) A: NO. The instant petition is not a proper
subject of a compromise agreement. The law
3PhasesnfCvde nfVinlenre explicitly prohibits compromise on any act
constituting the crime of violence against
1. Tension-Building Phase - minor battering women. Thus, in Garcia v. Drilon, the Court
occurs - it could be verbal or slight physical declared that: Violence is not a subject for
abuse or another form of hostile behavior. compromise. A process which involves parties
mediating the issue of violence implies that the
2. Acute battering incident - characterized by victim is somehow at fault.
brutality, destructiveness and, sometimes,
death. The battered woman deems this NOTE: While AAA filed her application for a
incident as unpredictable, yet also Temporary Pratettion Order (TPO) and a
inevitable. Permanent Protection Order (PPO) as an
independent action and not as an incidental
3. Tranquil, loving or (at least nonviolent) relief prayed for in a criminal suit, the instant
phase - the couple experience profound petition cannot be taken outside the ambit of
relief. On one hand, the batterer may show a cases falling under the provisions of R.A. 9262.
tender and nurturing behavior towards his Perforce, the prohibition against subjecting the
partner. On the other hand, the battered instant petition to compromise applies. (BBB,•
woman tries to convince herself that the v. AAA� G.R. Na.193225, February 9, 2015)
battery will never happen again. (People v.
Genosa, G.R. No.135981,january 15, 2004)
ANTI-CHILD ABUSE LAW
Battered Woman Sxndcome as a nrooer R.A. 7610, AS AMENDED
defense
Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to Children as understood underBA 761O
be suffering from battered woman syndrome
DO NOT incur any criminal and civil liability Children refer to:
notwithstanding the absence of any of the
elements for justifying circumstances of self 1. Persons below eighteen (18) years of age;
defense under the RPC. (Sec.26, RA 9262) or
2. Those over but are unable to fully take care
Q: BBB and AAA had a relationship when the of themselves or protect themselves from
latter was still raising her first child borne abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, or
CCC from a previous relationship. During the discrimination because of a physical or
relationship with BBB, AAA bore two more mental disability or condition. (Sec. 3(a),
children namely, DOD and EEE. To legalize R.A. 7610)
their relationship, BBB and AAA married in
civil rights and thereafter, the birth Child abuse (2004 BAB)
certificates of the children, including CCC's,
was amended to change their civil status to The maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of
be legitimated by virtue of the said the child which includes any af the following:
marriage. However, there were fights and
arguments which caused them to have 1. Psychological and physical abuse, neglect,
strained relationship that lead them to the cruelty, sexual abuse, and emotional
filing of a case under the VAWC. Pending the maltreatment; (2002, 2005 BAR)
Court's deliberation of the instant case, BBB 2. Any att by deeds or wards which debases,
filed a Manifestation and Motion to Render degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth
Judgment Based on a Memorandum of and dignity of a child as a human being;
Agreement (MOA). BBB alleges that on July 3. Unreasonable deprivation of his basic
29, 2013, he and AAA had entered into a needs for survival, such as food and shelter;
compromise anent the custody, exercise of or
parental authority over, and support of DDD 4. Failure to immediately give medical
treatment to an injured child resulting in
PUNISHABLE ACTS One (1) year and three (3) months after, in
December 2003, AAA, who by then was
1. Child proslitulion and other sexual abuse already 13 years old, again had some drinks
(Sec. S, R.A 7610); at Udang's house. This lime, she was with
2. Attempt to commit child prostitution (Sec. Bienvlnido, Jr. and Udang himself. When
6, R.A 7610); AAA felt sleepy, she went into one (1 ) of the
3. Child trafficking (Sec. 7, R.A. 7610); rooms inside the house. While AAA was
4. Attempt to commit child trafficking (Sec. 8, lying in bed, Udang, who had followed her
R.A.7610); into the room, went on top of her, undressed
5. Obscene publications and indecent shows her, and inserted his penis into her vagina
(Sec. 9, R.A7610); unlil he ejaculated. After having sexual
6. Other acts of neglect, abuse, cruelty or intercourse with AAA, Udang went out to
exploitation and other conditions report for duty as barangay tanod. AAA, too
prejudicial to the child's development tired, remained lying in bed. Bienvinido
(Sec. 10, R.A7610); claims that AAA welcomed his kisses and
7. Establishments or enterprises promoling, touches and consented to have sexual
facilitating, or conducting activities intercourse with him. They engaged in these
conslituting child prostitution and other acts out of mutual love and affeclion.
sexual abuse, child trafficking, obscene (sweetheart theory) Is Bienvinido Udang, Sr.
publications and indecent shows, and y Sevilla liable for Two (2) counts of sexual
other acts of abuse (Sec.11, R.A.7610); abuse under Seclion S(b) of Republic Act No.
8. Employment of children (Sec. 12, 7610 or under Arlicle 266-A (1) of the
R.A.7610); Revised Penal Code?
9. Discrimination of children of indigenous
cultural communities (Sec. 20, R.A. 7610); A: The trial court was wrong in ruling that
and charging Udang with both rape, under under
10. Confidentiality. (Sec. 29, R.A.7610) Article 266-A(l) of the RPC, and sexual abuse
under Sec. S(b), of R.A. 7610, would violate his
Child proslitulion and other sexual abuse right against double jeopardy.
Children, whether male or female, who for The "force, threat or intimidation" or
money, profit, or any other consideration or deprivation of reason or unconsciousness
due to the coercion or influence of any adult. elements under Art. 266-A (1) is not the same
syndicate or group, indulge in sexual as the "coercion or influence" required under
intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed the Sec. 5 (b), R.A. 7610. Consent is immaterial
in the crime of sexual abuse because the mere
act of having sexual intercourse with a child 2. Those who commit the act of sexual
exploited in prostitution or subjected to sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with a
abuse is already punishable by the law. child exploited in prostitution or subjett to
However, consent exonerates an accused from a other sexual abuse; Provided, that when
rape charge. (People v. Udong, G.R. No. 210161, the victim is under twelve (12) years of age,
January 10, 2018, as penned by J. Leonen) the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under
Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and
NOTE: The ruling in the case of People v. Udang Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code, for
as regards the non-application of double rape or lascivious condutt, as the case may
jeopardy overturned the 2009 People v. Abay be; and
ruling wherein the Supreme Court ruled that
charging an accused with both rape, under 3. Those who derive profit or advantage
Article 266-A (1) of the RPC, and sexual abuse therefrom, whether as manager or owner
under Sec. S(b), of R.A. 7610 would constitute a of the establishment where the prostitution
violation of the right of the accused against takes place, or of the sauna, disco, bar,
double jeopardy. resort. place of entertainment or
establishment serving as a cover or which
Nnn-aonlifahilirv of Sweerbeaa Iheocx engages in prostitution in addition to the
attivity for which the license has been
In the case of People v. Udang (ibid.), the issued to said establishment. (Sec. S,
sweetheart theory applies in acts of R.A.7610)
lasciviousness and rape, felonies committed
against or without the consent of the victim. It Q: CCC, AA.A's uncle, filed a complaint for
operates on the theory that the sexual act was malicious mischief against Torres, who
consensual. It requires proof that the accused allegedly caused damage to his
and the victim were lovers and that she multicab. AA.A witnessed the alleged
consented to the sexual relations. For purposes incident and was brought by CCC to
of sexual intercourse and lascivious conduct in testify. At the barangay, CCC, CCC's wife and
child abuse cases under R.A. 7610, the AA.A were waiting for the conciliation
sweetheart defense is unacceptable. A child proceedings to begin when they chanced
exploited in prostitution or subjected to other upon Torres. CCC's wife, persuaded Torres
sexual abuse cannot validly give consent to to attend the proceedings to answer for his
sexual intercourse with another person. liability which he vehemently denied. In the
middle of the brewing argument, AA.A
Persons liable for child prostitution and suddenly interjected that Torres damaged
other sexual abuse CCC's multicab and accused him of stealing
CCC's fish nets. Torres told AA.A not to pry in
1. Those who engage in or promote, facilitate the affairs of adults and warned AA.A that he
or induce child prostitution which include, would whip him if he did not stop. However,
but are not limited to the following: AA.A refused and continued the accusations.
a. Acting as a procurer of a child Infuriated, Torres whipped AA.A on the neck
prostitute; using a wet t-shirt three times causing the
b. Inducing a person to be a client of latter to fall down from the stairs. CCC came
a child prostitute by means of to AA.A's defense and punched Torres. They
written or oral advertisements or engaged in a fistfight until they were
other similar means; separated by Brngy. Captain. Based on the
c. Taking advantage of influence or physical examination, AA.A sustained a
relationship to procure a child as contusion. The RTC and CA convicted Torres
prostitute; guilty of Other Acts of Child Abuse under Sec
d. Threatening or using violence 10, par A ofR.A. 7610. ls Torres liable under
towards a child to engage him as a Other Acts of Child Abuse under Section 10,
prostitute; or paragraph A ofRepublic Act No. 7610?
e. Giving monetary consideration
goods or other pecuniary benefit to A: YES. Torres is liable under Other Acts of
a child with intent to engage such Child Abuse under Section 10, paragraph A of
child in prostitution. RA. 7610. The victim, AAA, was a child when
the incident occurred. Therefore, AAA is
entitled to protection under Republic Act No.
7610 the primary purpose of which has been
whether for occupancy, food, drink or child's parent or guardian, with the express
otherwise, including residential places, agreement of the child concerned, if
who allows any person to take along with possible, and the approval of the
him to such place or places any minor Department of Labor and Employment:
herein described; or Provided, that the following requirements
5. Any person who shaJI use, coerce, force or in all instances are strictly complied with:
intimidate a street child or any other child
to: a. The employer shall ensure the
protection, health, safety and morals of
a. Beg or use begging as a means of living; the child;
b. Att as conduit or middlemen in drug b. The employer shall institute measures
trafficking or pushing; or to prevent the child's exploitation or
c. Conduct any illegal activities. (Sec. 10, discrimination taking into account the
R.A. 7610) system and level of remuneration, and
the duration and arrangement of
Sanctions of Establishments or Enterprises working time; and;
c. The employer shall formulate and
All establishments and enterprises which implement, subject to the approval and
promote or facilitate child prostitution and supervision of competent authorities, a
other sexual abuse, child trafficking, obscene continuing program for training and
publications and indecent shows, and other ac.ts skill acquisition of the child. (Sec. 12,
of abuse shall be immediately closed and their RA 7610J
authority or license to operate cancelled,
without prejudice to the owner or manager NOTE: In the above exceptional cases where
thereof being prosecuted under this Act and/or any such child may be employed, the employer
the Revised Penal Code, as amended, or special shall first secure, before engaging such child, a
laws. (Sec.11, R.A. 7610J work permit from the Department of Labor and
Employment which shall ensure observance of
NOTE: An establishment shall be deemed to the above requirement. (Sec.12, R.A. 7610J
promote or facilitate child prostitution and
other sexual abuse, child trafficking, obscene Prohibition on the Emnlovment of Children
publications and indecent shows, and other ac.ts in Certain Advertisements
of abuse if the acts constituting the same occur
in the premises of said establishment. (Sec. 11, No person shall employ child models in all
R.A. 7610J commercials or advertisements promoting:
iii. Uploading and sharing without b. A conduct of sexual nature and other
the consent of the victim, any form conduct-based on sex affecting the dignity
of media that contains photos, voice, of a person, which is unwelcome,
or video with sexual content; unreasonable, and offensive to the
iv. Any unauthorized recording and recipient. whether done verbally,
sharing of any of the victim's physically or through the use of
photos, videos, or any information technology such as text messaging or
online; electronic mail or through any other forms
v. Impersonating identities of of information and communication
victims online or posting lies about systems; or
victims to harm their reputation; or c. A condutt that is unwelcome and
vi Filing false abuse reports to pervasive and creates an intimidating,
online platforms to silence victims. hostile or humiliating environment for the
(Sec.12, RA 11313) recipient:
report gender -based sexual harassment at The LGU shall disseminate or post in
the first instance; conspicuous places a copy of this Act and the
4. Install in clearly-visible warning S)gns corresponding ordinance. (Sec. 8 (b), R.A.
against gender-based public spaces sexual 11313)
harassment, including the anti-sexual
harassment hotline number in bold letters; 3. Preventive Measures
5. Designate at least 1 Anti-Sexual
Harassment Qfficer to receive gender Provide measures to prevent gender-based
based sexual harassment complaints; sexuaJ harassment in educational institutions,
6. �ecurity guards in these places may be such as information campaigns and anti·
deputized to apprehend perpetrators sexual harassment seminars. (Sec. 8 (c), R.A.
caught in flanronte de/icto and are required 11313)
to immediately coordinate with local
authorities. (Sec.5, RA 11313) 4. Create Anti-Sexual-Hotline (Sec. 8 (e),
R.A.11313)
Breach ofContcacroffarriaee
The MMDA. PNP. and the Women and
In case of Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in Children's Prnrea:inn Desk
PUV's, when the perpetrator is the driver of the
vehicle, the offense shall also constitute a Given the authority to apprehend perpetrators
breach of contract of carriage. and enforce the law: Provided, that they have
undergone prior Gender Sensitivity Training
There is presumption of negligence on the part (GST).
of the owner or operator of the vehicle in the
selection and supervision of employees thus the For gender-based streets and public spaces
owner or operator shall be solidarily liable for sexual harassment, the MMDA and the local
the offense of the employee. (Sec. 6, v 11313) units of the PNP for the provinces shall
deputize its enforcers to be Anti· Sexual
NOTE: The Land Transportation Office (LTO) Harassment Enforcers (ASHE). They shall be
may cancel the license of perpetrators. The deputized to receive complaints on the street
Land Transportation Franchising and and immediately apprehend a perpetrator if
Regulatory Board (LTFRB) may suspend or caught in flagrante delitto. The perpetrator
revoke the franchise of transportation shall be immediately brought to the nearest
operators. (Sec. 6, RA 11313) PNP station to face charges of the offense
committed. (Sec. 10, RA 11313)
Committed bx Minor
GENDER-BASED ONLINE
If the offense is committed by a minor, the SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD) shall take necessary disciplinary Exemntlnos to Acrs Coostlturive as Gender
measures as provided for under R.A. 9344, Based Online Sexual Harassment
otherwise known as the ..Juvenile Justice and
Welfare Act of 2006". (Sec. 7, RA 11313) Exemption to acts constitutive and penalized as
gender-based online sexual harassment are
DUTIES OF THE IMPLEMENTING BODIES authorized written orders of the court for any
peace officer to use online records or any copy
The LGII thereof as evidence in any civil, criminal
investigation or trial of the crime.
1. Passage and Dissemination
NOTE: Any record, photo or video, or copy
The LGU shall pass an ordinance which shall thereof of any person that is in violation of the
localize the applicability of this Act within sections preceding Sec. 14 of this Act shall not
sixty (60) days of its effectivity. (Sec. 8 (a), be admissible in evidence. (Sec.14, RA 11313)
R.A.11313)
QUALIFIED GENDER-BASED STREET, PUBLIC
2. Dissemination SPACES AND ONLINE HARASSMENT
Even if an individual does not want to file c. Set administrative penalties. (Sec.
a complaint or does not request that the 22(d}, RA 11313)
school take any action on behalf of a
student or faculty member and school 2. Preventive measures
authorities have knowledge or
reasonably know about a possible or Provide measures to prevent gender
impending act of gender-based sexual based sexual harassment in educational
harassment or sexual violence, the school institutions, like information campaigns.
should promptly investigate to determine (Section 22(b), RA No.11313)
the veracity of such information or
knowledge and the circumstances under
which the act of gender-based sexual DATA PRIVACY ACT OF 2012
harassment or sexual violence were R.A.10173
committed, and take appropriate steps to
resolve the situation. If a school knows or
reasonably should know about acts of PUNISHABLE ACTS
gender-based sexual harassment or
sexual violence being committed that I. Unauthorized processing of personal
creates a hostile environment, the school information and sensitive personal
must take immediate action to eliminate information. (Sec. 25, R.A. 10173)
the same acts, prevent their recurrence, 2. Accessing personal information and
and address their effects. sensitive personal information due to
negligence. (Sec. 26, R.A. 10173)
Once a perpetrator is found guilty, the 3. Improper disposal of personal information
)educational institution may reserve the and sensitive personal information. (Sec.
right to strip the diploma from the 27, RA 10173)
perpetrator or issue an expulsion order. 4. Processing of personal information and
(Sec. 21, par. 2, R.A. 11313) sensitive personal information for
unauthorized purposes. (Sec. 28, R.A.
3. Committee on Decorum and 10173)
Investigation (CODI) 5. Unauthorized access or intentional breach
- Persons who knowingly and unlawfully,
The CODI of all educational institutions or violating data confidentiality and
shall address gender-based sexual security data systems, breaks in any way
harassment and online sexual into any system where personal and
harassment in accordance with the rules sensitive personal information is stored.
and procedures contained in their CODI (Sec. 29, R.A. 10173)
manual. (Sec. 21, par. 4, RA 11313) 6. Concealment of security breaches
involving sensitive personal information.
Duties of School Heads (Sec. 30, R.A. 10173)
7. Malicious disclosure - Any personal
1. Dissemination/notice information controller or personal
information processor or any of its
Disseminate or post a copy of this Act in a officials employees or agents, who, with
conspicuous place in the educational malice or in bad faith, discloses
institution. (Sec. 22(a}, R.A. 11313) unwarranted or false information relative
to any personal information or personal
Provide and disseminate, in consultation sensitive information obtained by him or
with all persons in the educational her. (Sec. 31, RA 10173)
institution, a code of condutt or school 8. Unauthorized disclosure - Any personal
policy which shall: information controller or personal
information processor or any of its
a. Expressly reiterate the prohibition on officials, employees or agents, who
gender-based sexual harassment; discloses to a third party personal
b. Prescribe the procedures of the information or sensitive personal
internal mechanism created under this information not covered by Section 30
Act; and without the consent of the data subject.
(Sec. 32, R.A. 10173)
1. The data subject has given his or her Personal information controllers may
consent, specific to the purpose prior to the invoke the principle of privileged
processing, or in the case of privileged communication over privileged
information, all parties to the exchange information that they lawfully control or
have given their consent prior to process. Subject to existing laws and
processing; regulations, any evidence gathered on
privileged information is inadmissible. (Sec.
2. The processing of the same is provided for 15, R.A. 10173)
by existing laws and regulations, Provlded
That. SECURITY OF SENSITIVE PERSONAL
INFORMATION IN GOVERNMENT
a. Such regulatory enactments
guarantee the protection of the All sensitive personal information maintained
sensitive personal information and by the government. its agencies and
the privileged information instrumentalities shall be secured, as far as
b. The consent of the data subjects practicable, with the use of the most
are not required by law or appropriate standard recognized by the
regulation permitting the information and communications technology
processing of the sensitive industry, and as recommended by the
personal information or the commission.
privileged information;
The head of each government agenty or
3. The processing is necessary to protect the instrumentality shall be responsible for
life and health of the data subject or complying with the security requirements
another person, and the data subject is not mentioned in Section 23 of this Att while the
legally or physically able to express his or Commission shall monitor the compliance and
her consent prior to the processing; may recommend the necessary action in order
to satisfy the minimum standards. (Sec. 22, R.A.
4. The processing is necessary to achieve the 10173)
lawful and noncommercial objectives of
public organizations and their associations, Bem,icemenrs relarine tnaccess hx aeencx
Provided That: personnel to sensitive personal information
accessed from a location off government Any freely given, specific, informed indication
property. of will, whereby the data subject agrees to the
collection and processing of personal
XPNs: information about and/or relating to him or
her. Consent shall be evidenced by written,
1. Unless otherwise proved in guidelines electronic or recorded means. It may also be
issued by the Commission; given on behalf of the data subjett by an agent
specifically authorized by the data subject to do
2. A request for such transportation or access so. (Sec. 3(b), R.A. 10173)
is submitted and approved by the head of
the agency in accordance with the following RIGHTS OF DATA SUBJECT
guidelines:
1. Be informed whether personal information
a. Deadline for Approval or Disapproval - pertaining to him or her shall be, are being
In the case of any request submitted to or have been processed;
the head of an agency, such head of the 2. Be furnished the infonnation indicated
agency shall approve or disapprove hereunder before the entry of his or her
within two (2) business days after the personal information into the processing
date of submission of the request. In system of the personal information
case there is no action by the head controller, or at the next practical
agency, then such request is opportunity:
considered disapproved;
b. Limitation to One thousand (1,000) a. Description of the personal information
Records - If a request is approved, the to be entered into the system;
head of the agency shall limit the b. Purposes for which they are being or
access to not more than one thousand are to be processed;
(1,000) records at a time; and c. Scope and method of the personal
c. Encryption - Any technology used to information processing;
store, transport or access sensitive d. The recipients or classes of recipients
personal information for purposes of to whom they are or may be disclosed;
o t f ·site access approved under this e. Methods utilized for automated access,
subsection shall be secured by the use if the same is allowed by the data
of the most secure encryption standard subject, and the extent to which such
recognized by the Commission. (Sec. access is authorized;
23(b), R.A. 10173) f. The identity and contact details of the
personal information controller or its
NOTE: In entering into any contract that may representative;
involve accessing or requmng sensitive g. The period for which the information
personal information from one thousand will be stored; and
(1,000) or more individuals, an agenty shall h. The existence of their rights, i.e., to
require a contractor and its employees to access, correction, as well as the right
register their personal information processing to lodge a complaint before the
system with the Commission in accordance Commission.
with this Act and to comply with the other
provisions of this Act including the immediately NOTE: Any information supplied or
preceding section, in the same manner as declaration made to the data subject on
agencies and government employees comply these matters shall not be amended
with such requirements. (Sec. 24, R.A. 10173) without prior notification of data subject:
Provided, That the notification under this
DATA SUBJECT right shall not apply should the personal
information be needed pursuant to a
Dara Suhiecr subpoena or when the collection and
processing are for obvious purposes,
An individual whose personal information is including when it is necessary for the
processed. (Sec. 3(c), R.A. 10173) performance of or in relation to a contract
or service or when necessary or desirable
Consent of the Data Subject in the context of an employer-employee
relationship, between the collector and the
data subject, or when the information is which they were collected. In this case, the
being collected and processed as a result of personal information controller may notify
legal obligation (Sec. 16(b), R.A. 10173). third parties who have previously received
suc:h processed personal information; and
3. Reasonable access to, upon demand, the
following: 6. Be indemnified for any damages sustained
due to suc:h inaccurate, incomplete,
a. Contents of his or her personal outdated, false, unlawfully obtained or
information that were processed; unauthorized use of personal information.
b. Sources from which personal (Section 16, R.A. 10173)
information were obtained;
c. Names and addresses of recipients of IcaosmiSsihilitv nfBiehts ofDara Suhiecr
the personal information;
d. Manner by which such data were The lawful heirs and assigns of the data subject
processed; may invoke the rights of the data subject for,
e. Reasons for the disclosure of the which he or she is an heir or assignee at any
personal information to recipients; time after the death of the data subject or when
f. Information on automated processes the data subject is incapacitated or incapable of
where the data will or likely to be exercising the rights as enumerated herein.
made as the sole basis for any (Section 17, R.A. 10173)
decision significantly affecting or will
affett the data subject; Right to Data Portability
g. Date when his or her personal
information concerning the data The data subject shall have the right, where
subject were last accessed and personal information is processed by electronic
modified; and means and in a structured and commonly used
h. The designation, or name or identity format, to obtain from the personal information
and address of the personal controller a copy of data undergoing processing
information controller. in an electronic or structured format. which is
commonly used and allows for further use by
4. Dispute the inaccuracy or error in the the data subjett. The Commission may specify
personal information and have the the
personal information controller correct it electronic format referred to above, as well as
immediately and accordingly, unless the the technical standards, modalities, and
request is vexatious or otherwise procedures for their transfer. (Sec. 18, R.A.
unreasonable. If the personal information 10173)
have been corrected, the personal
information controller shall ensure the Exception to the applicability of the rights of
accessibility of both the new and the the data suhiecr-
retracted information and the
simultaneous receipt of the new and the Sections 16 to 18 of this Att are not applicable:
retracted information by recipients
thereof: Provided, That the third parties 1. If the processed personal information are
who have previously received such used only for the needs of scientific and
processed personal information shall be statistical research and, on the basis of
informed of its inaccuracy and its such, no activities are carried out and no
rectification upon reasonable request of decisions are taken regarding the data
the data subject; subject. Provided:
or tax liabilities of a data subject. (Sec. 19, with her, but the same was thwarted.
R.A.10173) Frustrated and incensed, Nestor set fire on
both the plastic partition of the room and
Honey's clothes in the cabinet. After
ANTI-ARSON LAW realizing what be did, Nestor attempted to
P.D.1613 p u t out the names, but it was too late. This
resulted in the burning of their home and
the neighboring houses. Nestor was
Simple arson is governed by P.O. 1613, while forthwith convicted of destructive arson.
destructive arson is governed by Article 320 of Was Nestor's conviction for the crime of
the RPC. destructive arson proper?
NOTE: A crime committed while in a Philippine Middle East, the offenders were subdued
registered airship is an exception to the and the aircraft landed. What crime was
principle of territoriality under the RPC. committed?
A: NO. The Anti-Hijacking Law will not apply. Q: In the course of the hi-jack of an aircraft
Under Sec. 1 of R.A. 6235, "it shall be unlawful of Philippine registry in flight, a passenger
for any person to compel a change in the course or complement was shot and killed. What
or destination of an aircraft of Philippine crime or crimes were committed?
registry, or to seize or usurp the control
thereof, while it is in flight." Since the aircraft is A: The crime is a violation of the Anti Hi
not in flight, the Jaw will not apply. Jacking Law. However, the penalty imposable
shall be higher because the crime is
Q: The pilots of the ABC aircraft, which is an accompanied by murder or homicide, a
aircraft of foreign registry, were accosted by qualifying circumstance. (Sec. 2, R.A. 6235)
some armed men and were told to proceed
to the aircraft to Oy it to a foreign Q: The hi-jackers of an aircraft of Philippine
destination. registry threatened to detonate a bomb in
the course of the bi-jack. What crime or
The armed men walked with the pilots and crimes were committed?
went on board the aircraft But before they
could do anything on the aircraft, alert A: The crime is a violation of the Anti Hi
marshals arrested them. What crime was Jacking Law. There is no separate and distinct
committed? crime of grave threat committed. This is
considered as a qualifying circumstance that
A: Violation of Anti-Hijacking Law. The Anti· shall serve to increase the penalty. (Sec. 2, R.A.
Hijacking Law is applicable in this case. The 6235)
requirement that the aircraft be in flight does
not hold true when it comes to an aircraft of
foreign registry. Under the law, simply usurping ANTI-PIRACY AND
or seizing control of the aircraft is enough. ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY
provided that the aircraft is within Philippine P.O. 532 (2001 BAR)
territory. This is because aircraft of foreign
registry are considered in transit while they are
in foreign countries. (Sec. 1, R.A. 6235).
NOTE: The Anti-Hijacking Law is a special Jaw Any vessel or watercraft used for transport of
where the attempted stage is not punishable. passengers and cargo from one place to another
through Philippine waters. It shall include all
Q: While the stewardess of a Philippine Air kinds and types of vessels or boats used in
Lines plane bound for Cebu was waiting for fishing. (Sec. 2 (b), P.D. 532)
the passenger manifest, two of the PAL
passengers seated near the pilot Philiooioe ware rs
surreptitiously entered the pilot cockpit
All bodies of water, such as but not limited to
At gunpoint, they directed the pilot to Oy the seas, gulfs, bays around, between and
aircraft to the Middle EasL However, before connecting each of the Islands of the Philippine
the pilot could Dy the aircraft towards the Archipelago, irrespettive of its depth, breadth,
It shall refer to any road, street, passage, 5. Aiding ar protecting pirates or highway
highway and bridges or other parts thereof, or robbers/brigands in any of the following
railway or railroad within the Philippines used manner shall be considered accomplice of
by persons, or vehicles, or locomotives, or the principal offenders and be punished in
trains for the movement or circulation of accordance with the Rules prescribed by
persons or transportation of goods, articles, or the RPC:
property, or both. (Sec. 2 (c), P.D. 532) a. Giving them information about the
movement of the police or other peace
NOTE: A river is considered part of Philippine officers of the government:
waters. (People v. Dela Pena, G.R. No. 219581, b. Acquiring or receiving property taken
January 31, 2018) by such pirates or brigands or in any
manner derives any benefit therefrom:
PUNISHABLE ACTS or
c. Directly or indirectly abetting the
1. Piracy · Any attack upon or seizure of any comm1ss1on of piracy or highway
vessel, or the taking away of the whole or robbery or brigandage. (Sec. 4, P.D.
part thereof or its cargo, equipment. or the 532)
personal belongings of its complement or
passengers, irrespective of the value NOTE: It shall be presumed that any person
thereof, by means of violence against or who does any of the abovementioned acts has
intimidation of persons or force upon performed them knowingly unless the contrary
things committed by any person, including is proven. (Sec. 4, P.D. 532)
a passenger or member of the complement
of said vessel, in Philippine waters. (Sec. 2 Elements nfhiehwax rnhhecxunderPP 532
(d), P.D. 532)
1. That there is unlawful taking of property of
2. Qualified Piracy- When any of the following another;
crimes is committed as a result or on the 2. That said taking is with intent to gain;
occasion of piracy: 3. That said taking i s done with violence
against or intimidation of persons or force
a. Physical injuries or other crimes; upon things or other unlawful means; and
b. Rape, murder or homicide; 4. That it was committed on any Philippine
c. Offender abandoned the victims highway.
without means of saving themselves; or
d. When the seizure is accompanied by NOTE: To sustain a conviction for highway
firing upon or boarding a vessel (Sec. 3 robbery, the prosecution must prove that the
(a), P.D. 532). accused were organized for the purpose of
committing robbery indiscriminately. If the
3. Highway robbery/brigandage • The seizure purpose is only a particular robbery, the crime
of any person for ransom, extortion or is only robbery, or robbery in band if there are
other unlawful purposes, or the taking at least four armed men. (People v. Mendoza,
away of the property of another by means G.R. No. 104461, February 23, 1996; Filoteo, Jr. v.
of violence against, or intimidation of Sandiganbayan, G.R. Na. 79543, October 16,
persons or force upon things or other 1996)
unlawful means, committed by any person
on any Philippine Highways. (Sec. 2 (e), P.D.
532)
Picacx underPP 532 vis-a-v;s Piracyunder Any t w o -wheeled motor vehicle having one (1)
Art 122 viS-A-visBnhhfrv or two (2) riding saddles. (Sec. 3 (a), R.A. 10666)
PIRACY
PIRACY Pnhlif rnads
Art 122, ROBBERY
p.D. 532
RPC Roads designed by the national government or
Committed by Committed Committed local government units as roads for public use
strangers, or by persons by the such as, but not limited to, national highways,
by the who are not members of provincial roads, city, municipal, and barangay
members of members of the vessel's streets. (Sec. 3 (b), R.A.10666)
the vessel's the vessel's complement
complement. complement, or passengers Font nee
or passengers nor by of the vessel
of the vessel in passengers of in the high Flat form attached to the motorcycles on which
Philippine the vessel, in seas to stand or brace the feet. (Sec. 3 (c), R.A 10666)
waters the high seas
or in .!ll!!.£.!:
Philippine
waters Driver of a motort-ycle. (Sec. 3 (d), R.A. 10666)
medical attention, the prohibition shall not be In case of doubt, the interpretation of any of the
applied. prov1s1ons of this Act, including its
implementing rules and regulations (IRRs),
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE shall be construed liberally in favor of the child
in conflict with the law. (Sec. 3, R.A. 9344)
If, in violation of the prohibition, death shall
have resulted or serious or less serious MINIMUM AGE OF CRIMINAL
injuries shall have been inflicted upon the child RESPONSIBILITY AND TREATMENT OF
or any other person, a penalty of one (1) year CHILD BELOW AGE OF RESPONSIBILITY
imprisonment shall be imposed upon the
motorcycle rider or operator of the motorcycle AGE CRIMINAL
involved. (Sec. 8, R.A. 10666) TREATMENT
BRACKET LIABILITY
15 years old Exempt The child shall be
NOTE: The imposition of the penalty is without or below subjected to an
prejudice to the penalties provided under The intervention
Revised Penal Code, as amended. (Sec. 8, R.A. program.
10666)
Above 15 Exempt The child shall be
AUTHORITY GRANTED TO THE LTO but below subjected to an
18, who intervention
1. To increase or adjust the amounts of fines acted program.
herein imposed, provided, thot: wlthout
discernment
a. The increase or adjustment is
made after public consultation
Above 15 Not Such child shall be
once every three (3) years from
but below exempt subjected to the
the effectivity of this Act and in the 18, who appropriate
amount not exceeding twenty
acted with proceedings in
percent (20%) of the amounts
discernment accordance with
sought to be increased or adjusted; R.A 9344.
b. A thorough study has been
conducted indicating that the
NOTE: The exemption from criminal liability in
existing amounts are no longer an
the cases specified above does not include
effective deterrent;
exemption from civil liability, which shall be
c. Current relevant economic indices,
enforced in accordance with existing laws.
such as the Consumer Price Index
(CPI), have been considered in the
determination of the increase or Neeleaed child
adjustment; and
A child who is above twelve (12) years of age
d. The increases or adjustment shall up to fifteen (15) years of age and who commits
only become effective fifteen (15)
parricide, murder, infanticide, kidnapping, and
days after its publication in two (2)
serious illegal detention where the victim is
newspapers of general circulation.
killed or raped, robbery, with homicide or rape,
(Sec. 7, R.A. 10666)
destructive arson, rape, or carnapping where
2. To deputize members of the Philippine the driver or occupant is killed or raped or
National Police (PNP), the Metropolitan offenses under R.A. 9165 (Comprehensive
Manila Development Authority (MMDA) Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) punishable by
and the LGUs to carry out enforcement more than twelve (12) years of imprisonment.
functions and duties. (Sec. 9, R.A. 10666) shall be deemed a neglected child under
Presidential Decree No. 603, as amended, and
shall be mandatorily placed in a special facility
within the youth care faculty or 'Bahoy Pag-osa'
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT
called the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and
RA. 9344, AS AMENDED BY R.A. 10630
Support Center (IJISC). (Sec. 20-A, R.A.10630)
IN RELATION TO P.D. 603
A child who is above twelve (12) years of age
up to fifteen (15) years of age and who commits
Liberal Construction of the Rules an offense for the second time or
oftener: Provided, That the child was previously The parents shall be liable for damages unless
subjected to a community-based intervention they prove, to the satisfaction of the court, that
program, shall be deemed a neglected child they were exercising reasonable supervision
under Presidential Decree No. 603, as amended, over the child at the time the child committed
and shall undergo an intensive intervention the offense and exerted reasonable effort and
program supervised by the local social welfare utmost diligence to prevent or discourage the
and development officer: Provided, further, that, child from committing another offense. (Sec. 20·
if the best interest of the child requires that D, R.A 10630)
he/she be placed in a youth care facility or
'Bahay Pag-asa', the child's parents or Diversion Program
guardians shall execute a written authorization
for the voluntary commitment of the The program that the child in conHict with the
child: Provided, finolly, that if the child has no law is required to undergo after he/she is found
parents or guardians or if they refuse or fail to responsible for an offense without resorting to
execute the written authorization for voluntary formal court proceedings (Sec. 4(j), R.A 9344).
commitment. the proper petition for It is subject to the following conditions:
involuntary commitment shall be immediately
filed by the DSWD or the LSWDO pursuant to 1. Where the imposable penalty for the crime
P.O. 603, as amended. (Sec. 20-8, R.A 10630) committed is not more than six (6) years of
imprisonment. the law enforcement officer
EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN FOR or Punong Barangay with the assistance of
COMMISSION OF CRIMES the local social welfare and development
officer or other members of the LCPC shall
Any person who, in the commission of a crime. conduct mediation, family conferencing,
makes use, takes advantage of, or profits from and conciliation;
the use of children, including any person who 2. In victimless crimes where the imposable
abuses his/her authority over the child or who, penalty is not more than six (6) years of
with abuse of confidence, takes advantage of imprisonment, the locaJ social welfare and
the vulnerabilities of the child and shall induce, development officer shall meet with the
threaten, or instigate the commission of the child and his/her parents or guardians for
crime, shall be imposed the penalty prescribed the development of the appropriate
by law for the crime committed in its maximum diversion and rehabilitation program; and
period. (Sec. 20-C, R.A 10630) 3. Where the imposable penalty for the crime
committed exceeds six (6) years of
JOINT PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY imprisonment, diversion measures may be
resorted to only by the court.
The court may require the parents of a child in
conflict with the law to undergo counseling or I ntervention
any other intervention that. in the opinion of
the court, would advance the welfare and best A series of activities which are designed to
interest of the child based on the address issues that caused the child to commit
recommendation of the multi-disciplinary team an offense. It may take the form of an
of the IJISC, the LSWDO or the DSWD. A court individualized treatment program which may
exercising jurisdiction over a child in conflict include counseling, skills training, education,
with the law may require the attendance of one and other activities that will enhance his/ her
or both parents of the child at the place where psychological, emotional, and psycho-social
the proceedings are to be conducted. (Sec. 20-D, well-being. (Sec. 4(Q, R.A. 9344)
R.A. 10630)
NOTE: An intervention program covering at
NOTE: "Parents" shall mean any of the least a 3-year period shall be instituted in LGUs
following: from the barangay to the provincial level.
found guilty of the offense charged, the court Nevertheless, the accused may be made to
shall determine and ascertain any civil liability serve his sentence, in lieu of confinement in a
which may have resulted from the offense regular penal institution, in an agricultural
committed. However, instead of pronouncing camp and other training facilities that may be
the judgment of conviction, the court shall place established, maintained, supervised, and
the child in conflict with the law under controlled by the BUCOR, in coordination with
suspended sentence, without need of the OSWD as provided by Sec. 51. (People v.
application: Prov;ded, however, that suspension Montolobo, G.R. No. 186227, July 20, 2011
of sentence shall still be applied even if the reiterating People v. Sorcia)
juvenile is already eighteen years (18) of age or
more at the time of the pronouncement of RIGHTS OF CHILDREN IN
his/her guilt. (Sec. 38, R.A. 9344) CONFLICT WITH THE LAW
Aoolifatlnn nfSusnensinn ofSentence Every child in conflict with the law shall have
the following rights, including but not limited
The benefits of the suspended sentence shall to:
not apply to a child in conflict with the law who
has once enjoyed suspension of sentence, but 1. The right not to be subjected to torture or
shall nonetheless apply to one who is convicted other cruel, inhuman, or degrading
of an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua treatment or punishment:
or life imprisonment pursuant to the provisions 2. The right not to be imposed a sentence of
of Rep. Act No. 9346 prohibiting the imposition capital punishment or life imprisonment,
of the death penalty and in lieu thereof, without the possibility of release;
reclusion perpetua, and after application of the 3. The right not to be deprived, unlawfully
privileged mitigating circumstance of minority. or arbitrarily, of his/her liberty; detention
(A.M. No. 02·1-lB·SC, November 24, 2009) or imprisonment being a disposition of
last resort, and which shall be for the
NOTE: If the child in conflict with the law shortest appropriate period of time;
reaches eighteen (18) years of age while under 4. The right to be treated with humanity and
suspended sentence, the court shall determine respett, for the inherent dignity of the
whether to discharge the child in accordance person, and in a manner which takes into
with the provisions of R.A. 9344, or to extend account the needs of a person of his/her
the suspended sentence for a maximum period age. In particular, a child deprived of
of up to the time the child reaches twenty-one liberty shall be separated from adult
(21) years of age, or to order service of offenders at all times. No child shall be
sentence. (A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC, November 24, detained together with adult offenders.
2009) He/She shall be conveyed separately to or
from court. He/She shall await hearing of
No susoension of sentence when the aca,sed his/her own case in a separate holding
wasa minor durine the commission of the area. A child in conflict with the law shall
crime and is already beyond the age of 21 have the right to maintain contact with
xeacs aid at the time of ornnmrncement of his/her family through correspondence
his enilt and visits, save in exceptional
circumstances;
While Sec. 38 of R.A. No. 9344 provides that 5. The right to prompt access to legal and
suspension of sentence can still be applied even other appropriate assistance, as well as
if the child in conflict with the law is already the right to challenge the legality of the
eighteen (18) years of age or more at the time deprivation of his/her liberty before a
of the pronouncement of his/her guilt, Section court or other competent, independent,
40 o f the same law limits the said suspension of and impartial authority, and to a prompt
sentence until the child reaches the maximum decision on such action;
age of 21. Hence, the accused, who is now 6. The right to bail and recognizance, in
beyond the age of twenty-one (21) years can no appropriate cases;
longer avail of the provisions of Sections 38 and 7. The right to testify as a witness in his/her
40 of R.A. 9344 as to his suspension of own behalf under the rule on examination
sentence, because such is already moot and of a child witness;
academic.
8. The right to have his/her privacy 1. Status offenses- Any conduct not
respetted fully at all stages of the considered an offense or not penalized if
proceedings; committed by an adult shall not be
9. The right to diversion if he/she is considered an offense and shall not be
qualified and voluntarily avails of the punished if committed by a child. (Sec. 57,
same; R.A. 9344)
10. The right to be imposed a judgment in
proportion to the gravity of the offense Example: Curfews for minors
where his/her best interest, the rights of
the victim and the needs of society are all 2. Offenses not applicable to children-Persons
taken into consideration by the court, below eighteen (18) years of age shall be
under the principle of restorative justice; exempt from prosecution for the crime of:
11. The right to have restrictions on his/her
personal liberty limited to the minimum, a. Vagrancy and prostitution under Sec.
and where discretion is given by law to 202 ofRPC
the judge to determine whether to impose
fine or imprisonment, the imposition of NOTE: Under R.A. 10158, Vagrancy has
fine being preferred as the more been decriminalized but prostitution is
appropriate penalty; still a crime. It was excluded from
12. In general, the right to automatic decriminalization underR.A. 10158.
suspension of sentence;
13. The right to probation as an alternative to b. Sniffing of rugby under P.O. 1619
imprisonment. if qualified under the c. Mendicancy (P.O. 1536; Sec. 58, R.A.
Probation Law; 9344)
14. The right to be free from liability for
perjury. concealment, or 3. Exemption from the application of death
misrepresentation; and penalty (Sec. 59, R.A. 9344)
15. Other rights as provided for under
existing laws, rules and regulations. (Sec. NOTE: R.A 9346 prohibits the imposition
5, R.A 9344) of the death penalty in the Philippines.
NOTE: The child in conHict with the law shall The following and any other similar acts shall
enjoy the presumption of minority. be considered prejudicial and detrimental to
the psychological, emotional, social, spiritual,
HowaeeiSderewined moral, and physical health and well-being of the
child in conflict with the law and therefore
1. Birth certificate; prohibited:
2. Baptismal certificate; and
3. Any other pertinent documents. 1. Employment of threats of whatever kind
and nature;
NOTE: In the absence of these documents, age 2. Employment of abusive, coercive, and
may be based on information from the child punitive measures such as cursing. beating,
himself/herself, testimonies of other persons, stripping. and solitary confinement;
the physical appearance of the child, and other 3. Employment of degrading, inhuman, and
relevant evidence. cruel fonns of punishment such as shaving
the heads, pouring irritating, corrosive, or
In case of doubt as to the age of the child, it harmful substances over the body of the
shall be resolved in his/her favor. child in conflitt with the law, or forcing
him/her to walk around the community
EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY: wearing signs which embarrass, humiliate,
STATUS OFFENSES AND OFFENSES NOT and degrade his/her personality and
APPLICABLE TO CHILDREN dignity; and
4. Compelling the child to perform
Exemntine nrovisioosunder thisacr involuntary servitude in any and all forms
under any and all instances. (Sec. 61, R.A
9344)
Prohibited actS of competent authorities title to the goods on which the lien is to be
uoderBA 9344 constituted, and not having possession over the
same since possession thereof remains in the
In the conduct of the proceedings beginning borrower, lends him money to the borrower on
from the initial contatt with the child, the security of the goods which borrowe is
competent authorities must: privileged to sell, clear of the lien, and with an
agreement to pay all or part of the sale
1. Refrain from branding or labeling children proceeds to the lender. (Metropolitan Bonk v.
as young criminals, juvenile delinquents, Go, C.R. No. 1S5647, November 23, 2007)
prostitutes, or attaching to them in any
manner any other derogatory names; and Uahilitv nfenrn,sree in case oflnss
2. Make no discriminatory remarks
particularly with respect to the child's class The risk of loss shall be borne by the entrustee.
or ethnic origin. (Sec. 60, R.A. 9344) Loss of goods, documents, or instruments
which are the subject of a trust receipt. pending
their disposition, irrespective of whether or not
TRUST RECEIPTS LAW it was due to the fault or negligence of the
P.D.115 entrustee, shall not extinguish his obligation to
the entruster for the value thereof. (Sec. 10, P.O.
llS)
In,st Beceiat CIBl transarnon ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA IN TRUST RECEIPT
It is any transaction between the entruster and
entrustee: In order that the entrustee may be validly
prosecuted for estafa under Art. 315, paragraph
1. Whereby the entruster who owns or holds l(b) of the RPC, in relation with Sec. 13 of P.D.
title or security interests over certain 115, the following elements must be
specified goods, documents, or instrument established
(GDI), releases the same to the possession (R-MAD):
of entrustee upon the latter's execution and
delivery of a TR. 1. The entrustee .Received the subject goods
2. In the TR, the entrustee binds himself to in trust or under the obligation to sell the
hold the GD/ in trust for the entruster and, same and to remit the proceeds thereof to
in case of default: the entruster, or to return the goods if not
sold;
a. To sell or otherwise dispose such GD/ 2. The entrustee ,Misappropriated or
with the obligation to turn over to the converted the goods and/or the proceeds
entruster the proceeds to the extent of of the sale;
the amount owing to it; or 3. The entrustee performed such acts with
b. To turn over the GD/ itself if not sold or 4,buse of confidence to the damage and
otherwise disposed of in accordance prejudice of the entruster; and
with the terms and conditions specified 4. A .D,emand was made on the entrustee by
in the TR. the entruster for the remittance of the
proceeds or the return of the unsold goods.
In,stBereiat CTBl (Land Bank of the Philippines v. Perez, GR
No.166884,June 13, 2012)
A TR is a commercial document whereby the
bank releases the goods in the possession of the NOTE: If proof as regards the delivery of GDI to
entrustee but retains ownership thereof while the accused (entrustee) is insufficient. estafo
the entrustee shall sell the goods and apply the cannot lie. (Romos v. CA, C.R. No. L-39922-25,
proceeds for the full payment of his liability August 21, 1987)
with the bank. It is a security arragement to
which a bank acquires ownership of the Compliance with the obligation under the
imported personal property. (Garcia v. CA, C.R. Trust Receipt ag·reement vis-3-vis criminal
No. 119845, July S, 1996) liahilitv
2. If compliance occurred after the charge involved sales. (Ng v. People, C.R. No. 173905,
even before conviction, the criminal action April 23, 2010)
will not be extinguished.
In another case, it was held that when both
P.O. 115 does not violate the prohibition in parties enter into an agreement knowing that
the Constih1tlon aeainst imorisonment for the return of the goods subject of the trust
non-oaxment ofa debt receipt is not possible even without any fault on
the part of the entrustee, it is not a trust receipt
What is being punished is the dishonesty and transaction penalized under Section 13 of P.D.
abuse of confidence in the handling of money or 115; the only obligation actually agreed upon
goods to the prejudice of another regardless of by the parties would be the return of the
whether the latter is the owner or not. It does proceeds of the sale transaction. The
not seek to enforce payment of the loan. Thus, transaction becomes a mere loan, where the
there can be no violation of a right against borrower is obligated to pay the bank the
imprisonment for non-payment of a debt. amount spent for the purchase of the goods.
(People v. Hon. Nita/on, C.R. No. 81559, April 6, (LBP v. Perez, C.R. No. 166884,June 13, 2012)
1992)
PENAL SANCTION WHEN THE OFFENDER IS
Q: Is lack of intent to defraud a bar to the A CORPORATION
prosecution of these acts or omissions?
(BAR 2006) Though the entrustee is a corporation,
nevertheless, the Jaw specifically makes the
A: NO. The mere failure to account or return officers, employees or other officers, or persons
gives rise to the crime which is ma/um responsible for the offense, without prejudice
prohib;tum. There is no requirement to prove to the civil liabilities of such corporation and/or
intent to defraud. (Ching v. Secretary ofJustice, board of direc.tors, officers, or other officials or
C.R. No. 164317, February 6, 2006) employees responsible for the offense.
Penal sanrnon iS not available if the roods If the crime is committed by a corporation or
ace not intended fnr sale or resale other juridical entity. the directors, officers,
employees or other officers thereof responsible
To be a TR transaction, the goods must be for the offense shall be charged and penalized
intended for sale or resale. The Supreme Court, for the crime, precisely because of the nature of
in one case, held that the trial court erred in the crime and the penalty therefor. A
ruling that the agreement in the case was a TR corporation cannot be arrested and
transaction because the goods involved were imprisoned; hence, cannot be penalized for a
intended to be used in the fabrication of steel crime punishable by imprisonment. (Chin_q v.
communication towers. Secretory ofJustice, C.R. No. 164317, February 6,
2006)
The Court further ruled that, "the true nature of
a trust receipt transaction can be found in the Rationale behind the accountability of the
'whereas' clause of P.D. 115 which states that a officers of the corporation
trust receipt is to be utilized 'as a convenient
business device to assist importers and Such officers or employees are vested with the
merchants solve their financing authority and responsibility to devise means
problems.' Obviously, the State, in enacting the necessary to ensure compliance with the law
law, sought to find a way to assist importers and, if they fail to do so, are held criminally
and merchants in their financing in order to accountable; thus, they have a responsible
encourage commerce in the Philippines." share in the violations of the Jaw.
The principle is, of course, not limited in its NOTE: An officer of a corporation who signed a
application to financing importations, since the TR cannot hide behind the cloak of the separate
principle is equally applicable to domestic corporate personality of the corporation, where
transactions. Regardless of whether the "he is the actual, present, and efficient actor."
transaction is foreign or domestic. it is Corporate officers or employees, through
important to note that the transactions whose ac.t, default, or omission the corporation
discussed in relation to trust receipts mainly commits a crime, are individually guilty of the
crime. The principle applies whether or not the
GR: No person shall use any name different a. Represent himself in any public or
from the one with which he was registered at private transaction; or
birth in the office of the local civil registry, or b. Sign or execute any public or private
with which he was baptized for the first time, document without stating or affixing
or, in case of an alien, with which he was his real or original name and all names
registered in the bureau of immigration upon or aliases or pseudonym he is or may
entry. or such substitute name as may have have been authorized to use (Sec. 3, C.A.
been authorized by a competent court. 142 as amended by R.A. 6085).
NOTE: The name shall comprise the 4. All persons who have used any name
patronymic name and one or two surnames. and/or names and alias or aliases different
from those authorized in Sec. 1 and duly
XPN: A pseudonym solely for literary, cinema, recorded in the local civil registry, shall be
television, radio, or other entertainment prohibited to use such other name or
purposes and in athletic events where the use names and/or alias or aliases. (Sec. 4, C.A.
of pseudonym is a normally accepted practice. 142 os amended by R.A. 6085)
(Sec. 1, C.A 142 as amended by R.A. 6085)
PROCESS
PROHIBITIONS
1. No person shall be allowed to secure such
judicial authority for more than one alias
(Sec. 2, C.A. 142 os omended by R.A. 6085).
2. No person shall use any name or names
other than his original or real name unless
the same is or are duly recorded in the
proper local civil registry. (Sec. 2, C.A. 142
as omended by R.A. 6085)