1|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

I. No, Sisa’s contention is not tenable. In the instant case, the first stab
wound completed the elements of execution when doing in such act. Hence,
Frustrated Parricide was committed in this offense because the Child did not
die for a cause independent of the offending mother’s will. If the mother did
not throw the knife, that could have started another process of parricide,
different from the initial frustrated offense. Whereof, Sisa’s contention is not
tenable, and she was liable for the crime committed under Art. 6 of the RPC.
2|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

II. Yes, under RA 7610 Sec. 5 (b) or the Anti-child Abuse Law punishes a
person who, through coercion, intimidation, or influence, engages in sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct not only with the child exploited in
prostitution but also with a child subjected to other sexual abuse. In the
instant case, the former beauty queen who was then 16 years old was clearly
influenced into having sexual intercourse with her ex-boyfriend when the
latter misled her into doing what he wanted. She was likewise coerced by
her ex-boyfriend to have sex with him even after she repeatedly say no. The
crime committed by the ex-boyfriend is Sexual Abuse under RA 7610 Sec. 5
(b). Also, the ex-boyfriend is liable for the crime of Rape under Art. 266-A,
paragraph 1 (a), that is, the offender had carnal knowledge of her through
force and intimidation. At the tender age of 16, the victim was no match for
her ex-boyfriend. The latter’s sheer force and strength would have easily
overcome any resistance that the victim could have put up.
3|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

III. Yes. Any private individual who kidnaps or illegally detains a woman, or
in any member deprives her of her liberty, is liable for the crime of Kidnapping
and Serious Illegal Detention under Art. 267 of the RPC. In the instant case,
the act of the accused in forcibly snatching the daughter of a judge and
keeping her in an undisclosed location resulted in the deprivation of her
liberty, an essential element or act which makes the offense of kidnapping.
The purpose of the kidnapping is immaterial when any of the circumstances
in the first (1) paragraph of Art. 267 is present, i.e that the person kidnapped
is a female (woman). Therefore, the accused committed the crime of
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention.
4|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

IV. No, the security guard cannot be convicted as a principal of the crime of
Homicide. There was a neither express nor an implied conspiracy. There is
no express conspiracy because the facts do not show that the high-ranking
public official and likewise no implied conspiracy because the security guard
was neither present nor did he participate in the killing of the caddy. The
security guard also cannot be liable as a principal by indispensable
cooperation because his “cooperation” came only after the crime had been
committed. Also, the security guard, however, can be convicted as an
accessory. Having knowledge of the crime, he took part after its commission
by dumping the cadaver in a nearby lake to prevent its discovery.
5|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

V. a. In the instant case, Mr. U may charge the crime of Usurpation of

Authority or Official Function. Under Art. 177 of the RPC, Usurpation of
Authority may be committed by performing any act pertaining to any person
in authority or public officer of the Philippine Government r of a foreign
government or any agency thereof, under the pretense of official position,
and without being lawfully entitled to do so. Here in this case, despite his lack
of authority, Mr. U already know the solemnized a marriage pertaining to
Mayor Z.

b. In the instant case, Mayor Z may be charged with the Falsification

under Art. 171(2) of the RPC because all the elements of the crime are
presents. Hence, Mayor Z signed the marriage of X and Y when in fact, he
did not participate in its solemnization. Therefor, he is liable for the crime of
Falsification of all its elements of Art. 171 paragraph 2: (1) that the offender
is a public officer; (2) that the takes advantage of his official position; and (3)
that he falsifies a document by causing it to appear that persons have
participated in any act of proceeding when they did not in fact so participate.
6|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

VI. a. In the instant case, Mr. X committed the crime of Attempted Corruption of
a public Official. Hence, he offered to give the Labor Arbiter a luxury car in
exchange for a favorable ruling on a pending illegal dismissal case. The act of
making such an offer, Mr. X already commenced the performance of material acts
of execution in corrupting the Labor Arbiter. He was not able to perform all material
acts of execution only because the Labor Arbiter refused to accept his offer. But
on the other side Mr. X may not have committed a crime because there is no
acceptance of his offer. When this is the case there is no crime, and therefore, no
penalty should be imposed under Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege. It means
that there is no crime where there is no law punishing it.

b. If the Labor Arbiter accepted the offer, it may be held liable for Direct
bribery. Under Art. 210 of the RPC, a public officer commits direct bribery by
accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of an act which does not constitute
a crime, in connection with performance of his official duties. If the instant case is
by accepting Mr. X’s offer with the performance of a luxury car, the labor Arbiter
agreed to render a ruling in Mr. X’s favor. In addition, the Labor Arbiter may also
be held liable for violation of R.A 3019, or Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Under Sec. 3(e). Under this act, it is considered a corrupt practice of any public
officer to cause any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or give
any private party unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference in the discharge
of his official, administrative, or judicial functions through manifest partially when
evident bad faith, or gross in exclusive negligence. If there is manifest partially
when there is a clear, notorious, or plain inclination or predilection to favor one side
or person rather than another. Therefore, the Labor Arbiter may be committed
manifest partially in favor of Mr. X.
7|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

VII. In the instant case, Mayor T committed the crime Technical

Malversation under Art. 220 of the RPC. In this crime, public officer fund or
property is considered appropriate if it had been earmarked by law or
ordinance for a specific expenditure. Therefore, if the crime is Technical
Malversation, the law punishes the act of diverting of a particular public
purpose to another public purpose.
8|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

VIII. Yes. Judge Rossano violated Section 3 (e) of RA No. 3019. In this case
there is a Violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019 is committed by a public
officer, who causes any undue injury to any party, including the Government,
or gives any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage, or
preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions
through manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable
negligence. Hence, Judge Rossano displayed evident bad faith and manifest
partiality by his arrogant refusal to recognize and obey the CA decision
causing undue injury to the complainant and giving unwarranted benefits to
private individuals in violation of Section 3e of RA No. 3019. Therefore,
Judge Rossano may be convicted of a crime under R.A No. 3019, Sec. 3(e).
9|Page

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

IX. a. In the instant case, A public officer is any person who, by direct
provision of the law, popular election, or appointment by competent authority,
shall take part in the performance of public functions in the Government of
the Philippine Islands, or shall perform in said Government or in any of its
branch’s public duties as an employee, agent, or subordinate official, of any
rank or class.

b. In the instant case, although Mr. Gulang is a private person, he may

be charged with malversation and failure of accountable officer to render
accounts because he was in made in charge of public funds. Malversation
and failure to render accounts shall also apply to private individuals who, in
any capacity whatever, have charge of any national, provincial, or municipal
funds, revenues or property. In addition to this, Mr. Gulang may not be held
liable for RA No. 3019 because it was not shown that he conspired with a
public officer in committing the crime. As a rule, under the law, a private
individual can be held liable for violation if he conspired with a public officer
in committing this crime.
10 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

X. In the instant case, Volvik committed five frustrated murders for the
unwounded victims and five frustrated murders for the wounded victims. The
intent to kill can be seen in the nature of the weapon used and extent of the
wounds sustained by the five victims. Treachery also qualified the crime to
murder since the sudden attack rendered the victims defenseless. However,
he is immune from criminal prosecution since the position of Volvik as
charges de affaires are vested with blanket diplomatic immunity from criminal
suit.
11 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XI. a. In the instant case, Procopio committed a crime of parricide for killing
his wife. This case does not fall under death by exceptional circumstance
under Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code because Bionci was caught
having homosexual intercourse, which is not “sexual intercourse” under the
law. The crime was attended by the circumstance of passion arising from a
lawful sentiment because of having caught his wife in the act of infidelity with
another woman.

b. If the case is Procopio and Bionci were common-law spouses the

crime committed is Homicide. Because parricide contemplates killing by a
spouse who is legally married to the victim.
12 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XII. a. In the instant case, Honesto is liable for murder qualified by the
circumstance of treachery for killing Melba due to error in personae or
mistake of identity, and slight physical injuries for the wound sustained by
the passerby due to aberratio ictus or mistake of blow. This is because
although his intention was to commit parricide, the murder and slight physical
injuries are the direct, natural, and logical consequence of the act he
committed.

b. No, if the passerby was hit in the left eye causing blindness, the
crime committed by Honesto is Murder with Serious Physical Injuries.
Serious physical injuries may be made a component of a complex crime
under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. Thus, since a single act of
shooting the victim constitutes murder, and serious physical injuries, Article
48 may be applied.
13 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XIII. a. In the instant case, Higino may be committed two counts of parricide
for the death of his wife and his child. Article 246 of Revised Penal Code is
committed because of the qualifying circumstance of relationship. This is a
complex crime because the single act of punching the victim constitutes two
grave felonies under Article 48 of the RPC.

b. Yes, if the child died inside the womb of Aika, who was only six
months, the crime committed is complex crime of parricide with unintentional
abortion. Killing the unborn child because of the violence employed against
the mother without intent to abort is unintentional abortion. Because the
same violence that killed the mother also caused unintentional abortion, the
crime committed is a complex crime.
14 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XIV. In the instant case, Loko is liable for violating the provision of R.A No.
9208. Because he recruited, offered, and hired Ganda by means of fraud or
deception for the purpose of exploitation or prostitution. By means of deceit,
i.e., in the guise of making her a commercial model, Loko recruited Ganda
for the purpose of prostitution. Under Sec. 6 of R.A 9208, when the trafficked
person is a child, the crime committed is Qualified Trafficking in Persons,
penalized by life imprisonment. Thus, Ganda’s minority is a qualifying
circumstance.
15 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XV. In the instant case, the crime committed by Ritchie is homicide defined
and penalized under Art. 249 of the RPC, as amended. Because he disposed
to credit in his favor the ordinary mitigating circumstance of no intention to
commit so grave a wrong as that committed as there is evidence of a fact
from which such conclusion can be drawn.
16 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XVI. In the instant case, Amelia may be committed for the crime of Immoral
doctrines, obscene publication and exhibitions, and indecent shows under
Art. 201 of the RPC, because her act of swimming naked is akin to an
indecent live show. But on the other view of this case, she may not have
committed a crime because the swimming was in her private home, and she
was not aware that other residents were watching her.
17 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XVII. In the instant case, the private officer may commit a crime of
malversation. If this is the case, it is settled that a public officer is liable for
malversation even if he does not use public property or funds under his
custody for his personal benefit, if he allows another to take the funds, or
through abandonment or negligence, allow such taking.
18 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XVIII. In the instant case, the ecclesiastical minister is not criminally liable
because the insertion of the name of C in the baptismal certificate will not
affect the civil status of A. But on the other hand, the ecclesiastical minister
may be held liable for falsification of baptismal certificate by causing it to
appear that C participated in the baptismal ceremony when he did not in fact
participation.
19 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XIX. No, the charge of death caused in a tumultuous affray will not prosper
because the persons involved in this case composed groups organized for
the common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally.
Hence, the killer of A, a member of SFC Fraternity could not be any other
but member of the rival fraternity. In the instant case, conspiracy is therefore
present among the attackers from the rival fraternity and thus rules out the
idea of an affray. Therefore, the liability of the attackers should be collective
for the crime of homicide or murder.
20 | P a g e

PANES, MARY ROSE R.

20101158967
Criminal Law 2 – FINAL EXAM – MAY 27, 2023

XX. In the instant case, Francis is liable for assisting in the suicide of Joan,
under Art. 253 of the RPC this the evidence by their written pact of their
agreement. Art. 253 an acts punishable as giving assistance to suicide by
means of: (1) by assisting another to commit suicide, whether the suicide is
consummated or not; and (2) by leading his assistance to another to commit
suicide to the extend of doing the killing himself. Therefore, Francis is liable
by means of assisting the wrongdoing of Joan.