Criminal Law Review

CRIMINAL LAW
Q : W H AT I S C R I M I N A L L AW ?
A : C R I M I N A L L AW I S T H AT B R A N C H O F L AW
WHICH DEFINES CRIMES,
T R E A T S O F T H E I R N A T U R E , A N D
PROVIDES FOR THEIR PUNISHMENT.
COVERAGE:
1) R E V I S E D P E N A L CODE A C T. NO.
3815
T O O K E F F E C T: J A N U A RY 1 , 1 9 3 2
BOOK 1 I. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
Q: What are the theories in criminal law?
A:
1. Classical theory – the basis of criminal liability is human free will and the
purpose of
the penalty is retribution.
Note: RPC is generally governed by this theory
2. Positivist theory – the basis of criminal liability is the sum of the social, natural and
economic phenomena to which the actor is exposed. The purposes of
penalty are prevention and correction.
3. Eclectic or Mixed theory – It is a combination of positivist and classical thinking
wherein crimes that are economic and social in nature should be dealt in a positive
manner, thus, the law is more compassionate.
4.Utilitarian or Protective theory‐
the primary purpose of the punishment under criminal law is the
protection of society from actual and potential wrongdoers. Consistent with this theory
is the mala prohibita principle which punishes an
offense regardless of malice or criminal intent.
Q: How are penal laws construed?
A: Liberally construed in favor of

offender and strictly against the state.
Note: In cases of conflict with official

translation, original Spanish text is
controlling.
Q: What are the basic maxims in criminal law?
A: 1.Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege
(There is no crime when there is no law punishing the same) – No matter how
wrongful, evil or bad the act is, if there is no law defining the act,
the same is not considered a crime.
2.Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea
(The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not criminal) – This is true to a felony
characterized by dolo, but not a felony resulting from culpa.
This maxim is not an absolute one because it is not applied to
culpable felonies, or those that result from negligence.
3. Doctrine of Pro Reo – Whenever a penal law is to be construed or applied and the
law admits of two
interpretations, one lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender, that
interpretation which is lenient or favorable to the offender will be adopted.
4.Actus me invito factus non est meus actus
(An act done by me against my will is not my act) –Whenever a person is under a compulsion
of irresistible force or
uncontrollable fear to do an act against his will, in which that act produces a crime or
offense, such person is exempted in any criminal liability arising from the said act.
Q: What is the definition of a crime?
A: A crime is the generic term used to refer to a wrongdoing punished either
under the RPC or under the special law.
Q: What are the various classifications of crimes?
A: 1. AS TO THE COMMISSION
a. Dolo or felonies committed with deliberate intent
b. Culpa or those committed by means of fault
2. AS TO THE STAGE OF EXECUTION
a. Attempted
b. Frustrated
c. Consummated
3. AS TO GRAVITY
a. Grave felonies
b. Less grave felonies
c. Light felonies
Q: What are the various classifications of crimes?
4. AS TO COUNT
a.Composite or special complex
b. Complex, under Art. 48
c. Continuing
5. CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES AS TO
a.Formal felonies -those which are always consummated. (e.g. physical injuries)
b. Material felonies – those which have various stages of execution.
c. Those which do not admit of the frustrated stage. (e.g. rape and theft)
6. AS TO NATURE
a. Mala in se
b. Mala prohibita
Q: What is the difference between crimes mala in se and crimes mala prohibita?
Mala in se Mala prohibita
Acts or omissions which are Acts which are made evil because there is a
inherently evil. law prohibiting it.
Punished under the RPC Violations of special laws
Note: Not all violations of special laws

are mala prohibita. Even if the crime is
punished under a special law, if the
act punished is one which is inherently
wrong, the same is malum in se, and,
therefore, good faith and the lack of
criminal intent is a valid defense;
unless it is the product of criminal
negligence or culpa.
Q: What are violations of special laws which are considered mala in se?
A:
1. Piracy in Philippine waters
2. Brigandage in the highways (both under PD 532)

Note: Likewise, when the special laws require that the punished act be
committed knowingly and willfully, criminal intent is required to be
proved before criminal liability may arise.
Q: If a special law uses the nomenclature of penalties in the RPC,
what is the effect on the
nature of the crime covered by the special law?
A: Even if a special law uses the nomenclature of penalties
under the RPC, that alone will not make
the act or omission a crime mala in se. The special law may
only intend the Code
to apply as a supplementary.
(People v. Simon, G.R. No. 93028, July 29, 1994)
Q: What are the distinctions between crimes punished under the RPC and crimes
punished under special laws?
CRIMES UNDER THE RPC CRIMES UNDER SPECIAL LAW
Involve crimes mala in se Usually crimes mala prohibita
As to moral trait of the offender
It is considered. This is why liability would only arise when It is not considered. It is enough that the prohibited act was
there is dolo or culpa in the commission of the punishable voluntary done.
act
As to use of good faith as defense
It is a valid defense unless the crime is the result of culpa. It is not a defense.
As to the degree of accomplishment of the crime
May admit attempted and/or frustrated stages There are no attempted or frustrated stages, unless the special
law expressly penalizes the mere attempt or frustration of the
crime
As to mitigating and aggravating circumstances
Taken into account in imposing the penalty since the moral Not taken into account in imposing the
trait of the offender is considered penalty. As an exception, when the special law uses the
nomenclature of the penalties under the RPC, the
circumstances can be considered
As to the degree of participation of offender
When there is more than one offender, the degree of It is not considered. All who perpetrated the prohibited act are
participation of each in the commission of the crime is penalized to the same extent. There is no principal, accomplice
taken into account in imposing the penalty; thus, or accessory to consider.
offenders are classified as principal, accomplice and
accessory.
Q: What is the legal basis for punishment?

A: The power to punish violators of criminal law
comes within the police power of the state. It is the
injury inflicted to the public which a criminal action seeks to redress,
and not the injury to the individual.
Q: What are the two scopes of application of the RPC?
A:
1. Intraterritorial – refers to the application
of the RPC within the Philippine territory
2.Extraterritorial – refers to the application of the RPC outside

the Philippine territory.
Q: In what cases does the RPC have an extraterritorial application?
A: Against those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship
2.Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine

Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the
Philippine Islands
3.Should be liable for acts connected with
the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities
mentioned in the preceding number
4.While being public officers or employees,
should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; or
5.Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of
nations. (Art. 2, RPC)
Q: What is a Philippine ship?

A: One that is registered in accordance with

Philippine laws. If the vessel is in the high seas, it is considered as an

extension of the Philippine territory and the Philippines still has
.
jurisdiction. But if the vessel is within the territory of another country,
jurisdiction is
generally with the foreign State because penal laws are primarily
Qterritorial in
: What are application.
the requirements of “an offense committed while on a
Philippine ship or airship?”
A:
1.The ship or airship must be registered
with the Philippine Bureau of Customs.
2.The ship must be in the high seas or the airship must be in
international space.
Note: Under International Law rule, a vessel which is not registered in
accordance with the laws of any
country is considered a private vessel and piracy is a
crime against humanity in general, such that wherever
pirates may go, they can be prosecuted.
Q: What are the two recognized rules on
jurisdiction over merchant vessels?
A: The French rule and the English rule. These rules refer to the jurisdiction
of on country over its merchant vessels situated in another country. These
do not apply to war vessels over which a country always has jurisdiction.
Q: What is the French rule?
A: The French rule recognizes the jurisdiction of the flag country over crimes
committed on board the vessel except if the crime disturbs the peace and
order and security of the host country.
Q: What is the English rule?
A: The English rule recognizes that the host country has jurisdiction over
crimes committed on board the vessel unless they involve the
internal management of the vessel.
Note: The effect on jurisdiction of both rules is almost the same because the
general rule of one is the exception of the other.
Q: What is the rule on foreign merchant vessels in
possession of dangerous drugs?
A:
1. In transit - possession of dangerous drugs
is not punishable, but the use of the same
is punishable.
2. Not in transit – mere possession of
dangerous drugs is punishable.
Q: When is forgery committed?
A: Forgery is committed by giving to a treasury or bank note
or any instrument payable to bearer or to order the
appearance of a true genuine document or by erasing,
substituting, counterfeiting or altering, by any means,
the figures, letters, words or sign contained therein
Note: If forgery was committed abroad, it must refer only to

Philippine coin, currency note, or obligations and securities.
Obligations and securities of the GSIS, SSS, and Landbank
are NOT of the government because they have separate charters.
Those who introduced the counterfeit items are criminally liable even

if they were not the ones who counterfeited the obligations and
securities. On the other hand, those who counterfeited the items are
criminally liable even if they did not introduce the counterfeit items.
Q: When does a public officer or employee commit an
offense in the exercise of their functions?
A: As a general rule, the RPC governs only when the crime
committed pertains to the exercise of the public official’s
functions, those having to do with the discharge of their duties
in a foreign country. The functions contemplated are those,
which are, under the law, to be performed by the public officer
in the Foreign Service of the Philippine government in a
foreign country.
Note: This rule is not absolute. The RPC governs if the crime
was committed within the Philippine Embassy or within the
embassy grounds in a foreign country. This is because
embassy grounds are considered an extension of sovereignty.
Q: What are the crimes included?
A:
1. Direct Bribery (Art. 210)
2. Indirect Bribery (Art. 211)
3. Qualified Bribery (Art. 211‐A)
4. Corruption (Art. 212)
5. Fraud Against Public Treasury and Similar Offenses (Art. 213)
6. Possession of Prohibited Interest (Art. 216)
7. Malversation of Public Funds or Property (Art. 217)
8. Failure to Render Accounts (Art. 218)
9.Failure to Render Accounts Before Leaving the Country (Art. 219)
10. Illegal Use of Public Funds or Property (Art. 220)
11.Failure to Make Delivery of Public Funds or Property (Art. 221)
12. Falsification (Art.171)
Q: What are the characteristics of criminal law?
A: 1. Generality – means that the criminal law of the country governs all persons within the
country regardless of their race, belief, sex, or creed.
Note: The term generality has no reference to territory. It refers to persons that
may be governed by the penal law.
2. Territoriality – means that the penal laws of the country have force and effect only within its

territory.
Note: The territorial application of criminal laws is again subject to certain
exceptions brought about by treaties or international agreements.
Certain exceptions to the territorial application of criminal laws are also
outlined under Art. 2 of the RPC.
3. Prospectivity – means that acts or omissions will only be subject to a penal law if they are

committed after a penal law had already taken effect.
Note: This is also called irretrospectivity.
Q: What are the exceptions to the rule on generality of penal laws?
A: Exceptions brought about by:
1.Treaty stipulations and international agreements. E.g. RP‐US Visiting Forces
Accord.
2.Laws of Preferential Application
Note: RA 75 penalizes acts which would impair the proper observance by
the Republic and its inhabitants of the immunities, rights, and privileges
of duly accredited foreign diplomatic representatives in the Philippines.
3. The principles of public international law
a. Sovereigns and other chiefs of states
b. Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary, ministers resident, and
charges d’ affaires.
Note: Consuls, vice‐consuls, and other commercial representatives of foreign nation
are not diplomatic officers. Consuls are subject to the penal laws of the country
where they are assigned.
Q: What is the exception to the prospective application of penal laws?

A: Whenever a new statute dealing with crime
establishes conditions more lenient or favorable to the accused.
Note: The retroactive effect shall benefit the accused
even if at the time of the publication of the law, a final judgment has
been pronounced and the convict is serving sentence.
Q: What is the exception to the exception?
A: The new law cannot be given retroactive effect:
1.Where the new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending
actions or existing causes of actions.
2.Where the offender is a habitual criminal.

CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON THE POWER OF CONGRESS
TO ENACT PENAL LAWS IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Q: Who has the power to enact penal laws?
A: Only the legislative branch of the government can enact penal laws.
Note: While the President may define and punish an act as a crime,

such exercise of power is not executive but legislative as
he derives such power from the lawmaking body. It is in essence,
an exercise of legislative power by the Chief Executive.

Q: What are the constitutional limitations on the
right of the Legislature
to enact penal laws?
A:
1.No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
(Sec. 22, Art. llI, 1987 Constitution)
Note: An ex post facto law is one wherein if given a retroactive application
will be prejudicial to the accused.
A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishments
without trial. Its essence is the substitution of a legislative
act for a judicial determination of guilt.
2.No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense
without due process of law. (Sec. 14, [1], Art. III, 1987 Constitution)

3.No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without
due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
(Sec. 1, Art. III, 1987 Constitution)
4.Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor
cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. (Sec. 19 [1], Art. III, 1987
Constitution)
Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines
(R.A. 9346)
Q: Is the death penalty already abolished?
A: No. What is prohibited under R.A. 9346 is only the imposition of
death penalty.
Note: However, the corresponding civil liability should be the
civil liability corresponding to death. (People v. Salome)
Q: What penalty would be imposed in lieu of the death penalty?
A: In lieu of the death penalty, the following shall be imposed:
1.Reclusion perpetua‐ when the law violated makes use of the
nomenclature of the penalties of the RPC; or
2.Life imprisonment‐ when the law violated does not make use
of the nomenclature of the penalties of the RPC. (Sec.2)
BOOK 1 I. FELONIES
Q: What are felonies?
A: Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the RPC.
Note: Omission means inaction, the failure to perform
a positive duty which one is bound to do.
Q: How are felonies committed?
A: Felonies are committed not only by means of
deceit (dolo)
but also by means of fault (culpa).

Q: What are the kinds of felonies?
A: 1. Intentional felonies (Dolo)
2. Culpable felonies (Culpa)
BOOK 1 I. FELONIES
Q: What are the distinctions between intentional felony and
culpable felony?
DOLO CULPA
Act is malicious Not malicious

With deliberate intent Injury caused is unintentional
being incident of another act
performed without malice

Has intention to cause injury Wrongful act results from

imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight or
lack of skill
BOOK 1 I. FELONIES
Q: What is an act in contemplation of criminal law?
A: An act refers to any kind of body movement that
produces change in the outside world. The act must
be an external act which has a direct connection
with the felony intended to be committed.
Q: What are the requisites of dolo?
A: 1. Criminal intent – the purpose to use a particular means
to effect such result. Intent to commit an act with malice being
purely a mental process is presumed. A mental state, hence,
its existence is shown by overt acts.
2. Freedom of action – voluntariness on the
part of the person to commit the act
or omission.
3. Intelligence – means the capacity to know and understand
the
consequences of one's act.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the requisites of culpa?
A: 1.Criminal negligence on the part of the offender, that is,
the crime was the result of negligence, reckless imprudence, lack
of foresight or lack of skill.
Note: Negligence indicates deficiency of
perception or failure to pay attention and to use diligence in
foreseeing the injury
or damage impending to be caused. It usually
involves lack of foresight.
Imprudence indicates deficiency of action or
failure to take the necessary precaution to avoid injury to person
or damage to property. It usually involves lack of skill.
2.Freedom of action on the part of the
offender, that is, he was not acting under duress.
3.Intelligence on the part of the offender in
performing the negligent act.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What crimes cannot be committed through culpa
(negligence or imprudence)?
A: 1. Murder
2. Treason
3. Robbery
4.Malicious mischief
Q: What is mens rea?
A: Mens rea is referred to as the gravamen of the offense.
Mens rea of the crime depends upon the elements of the crime.
It can only be determined by knowing the particular crime committed.
Note:
1.In theft, the mens rea is the taking of the property of another with intent to gain.
2.In falsification, the mens rea is the effecting of the forgery with intent to
pervert the truth.
3.In robbery, the mens rea is the taking of the property of another coupled with
the employment of intimidation or violence upon persons or things.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What is intent?
A: Intent refers to the use of a particular means to
effect the desired result. It is a mental state, the
existence of which is demonstrated by the overt
acts of a person.
Q: What is the distinction between intent and
discernment?
INTENT DISCERNMENT
The determination to do a The mental capacity to tell
certain thing, an aim or right from wrong. It
purpose of the mind. It is relates to the moral
the design to resolve or significance that a person
determination by which a ascribes to his act
person acts. And relates to the intelligence
as an element of dolo.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What is motive?
A: It is the moving power or force which impels a person to a
desired result.
Q: Is motive determinant of criminal liability?
A: No. Motive alone will not bring about criminal
liability because the RPC requires that there must be an
overt
act or an omission. When there is motive in the
commission of a crime, it always comes before
the intent.
Note: In a murder case, the intent to kill is demonstrated by
the use of lethal weapon; whereas, the motive may be
vengeance.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the distinctions between motive and intent?
MOTIVE INTENT
It is the moving power It refers to the use of a
which impels a person particular means to
to act for a definite result achieve the desired result

A crime may be It is an ingredient of dolo
committed without or malice and thus, an
motive. It is not element element of deliberate

of the crime felonies

Is essential only when Is essential in intentional
the felonies
identity of perpetrator is
in doubt
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the factors that affect intent?
1.Mistake of fact‐ that which had the facts been true to the
belief of the offender, his act can be justified. It is such mistake
that will negate criminal liability because of the absence of
the element of intent.
Note: Mistake refers to the situation itself, not the identity of the
persons involved. Mistake of fact is only a defense in intentional
felony but never in culpable felony.
2. Aberratio ictus – mistake in the blow
3. Error in personae – mistake in the identity
4.Praeter intentionem - where the consequence exceeded the
intention
5. Proximate cause – the cause of the cause is the cause of the
evil caused
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the classifications of felonies
according to their gravity?
1. Grave – those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or
penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive, in
accordance with Art. 25 of the RPC. (Art. 9, par. 1, RPC)
2. Less grave – those which the law punishes with penalties which
in their
maximum period are correctional, in accordance with Art. 25
of the RPC. (Art. 9, par. 2, RPC)
3. Light – those infractions of law for the commission of which
the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding
200 pesos, or both, is provided. (Art. 9, par. 3, RPC)
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: Who are liable in light felonies?
A: Only the principals and the accomplices are liable in light
felonies. Accessories are not liable for light felonies.
Q: What are the crimes considered as light felonies?
A: 1. Slight physical injuries
2. Theft (when the value of thing stolen is less than 5 pesos
and theft is committed under the circumstances
enumerated under Art. 308 par.3)
3. Alteration of boundary marks
4. Malicious mischief (when the value of the damage
does not exceed 200 or cannot be estimated.)
5. Intriguing against honor
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: How is criminal liability incurred?
A: Criminal liability is incurred by any person:
1. Committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different
from that which he intended.
2. Performing an act which would be an offense against persons
or property, were it not for the inherent possibility of its
accomplishment or on account of the employment of
inadequate or ineffectual means. (Art. 4)
Q: What situations are contemplated under the first paragraph of
Art. 4, "wrongful act done be different from what was intended"?
A: 1. Aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow
2. Error in personae or mistake in identity
3.Praeter intentionem or where the consequence
exceeded the intention
Note: The three enumerated situations are always the result of an intended felony,
and hence, dolo. These situations do not arise out of criminal negligence.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What is aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow?
A: In aberratio ictus, the offender intends the injury on one person but
the harm fell on another. There are three persons present when
the felony is committed: the offender, the intended victim, and
the actual victim.
Q: What is praeter intentionem?
A: In praeter intentionem, the injury is on the intended victim but
the resulting consequence is so grave a wrong than what was
intended.
Note: There must be a notable disparity between the means employed
and the resulting felony. Praeter intentionem is a mitigating
Circumstance particularly covered by paragraph 3 of Article 13
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the distinctions between aberratio
ictus and error in personae?
ABERRATIO ICTUS ERROR IN PERSONAE
A person directed the blow at an The victim actually received the
intended victim, but because of blow, but he was mistaken for
poor aim, that blow landed on another who was not at the scene
somebody else. of the crime.
The offender, the intended victim There are only two

as well as persons present in error
the actual victim are all at in personae ‐ the actual
the scene of the crime. It but intended victim and
generally gives rise to a the offender.
complex crime.
It generally gives rise to the The provisions of Art. 49
complex crime. This being so, the applies in error in
penalty for the more serious crime personae, that is, the
is imposed in the maximum penalty for the lesser crime will
period. be the one imposed.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What is praeter intentionem?
A: In praeter intentionem, the injury is on the
intended victim but the resulting consequence is so
grave a wrong than what was intended.
Note: There must be a notable disparity between the means
employed and the resulting felony. Praeter intentionem
is a mitigating circumstance particularly covered by
paragraph 3 of Article 13.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: A and B went on a drinking spree. While they were
drinking,
they had some argument so A stabbed B several times.
A’s defense is that he had no intention of killing his friend
and that he did not intend to commit so grave a wrong as
that committed. Is praeter intentionem properly invoked?

A: No, because praeter intentionem is mitigating only if
there is a notable disparity between the means
employed and the resulting felony. The fact that several
wounds were inflicted on B is hardly compatible with the
idea that he did not intend to commit so grave a wrong as
that committed.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What is a proximate cause?
A: Proximate cause is that cause which sets into motion other
causes and which, unbroken by any efficient supervening
cause, produces a felony without which such felony could
not have resulted. (He who is the cause of the cause is the cause
of the evil of the cause.) As a rule, the offender is criminally
liable for all the consequences of his felonious act, although
not intended, if the felonious act is the proximate cause of the
felony.
Q: What are the requisites of proximate cause?
A: 1. The direct, natural, and logical cause
2. Produces the injury or damage
3. Unbroken by any sufficient intervening cause
4. Without which the result would not have occurred
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the requisites of proximate cause?
A: 1. The direct, natural, and logical cause
2. Produces the injury or damage
3. Unbroken by any sufficient intervening cause
4. Without which the result would not have occurred
Illustration:
X and Y are crew members of cargo vessel. They had a heated
argument. X with a big knife in hand
threatened to kill Y. The victim Y, believing himself to
be in immediate peril, threw himself into the water. X
died of drowning. Is Y liable of the death of X?
Answer: In this case, Y is liable for homicide for the death of Y.

BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the requisites of an impossible crime?
A: 1. Act performed would be an offense against persons
or property.
Note: Kidnapping is a crime against personal
security and not against person or property
2. Act was done with evil intent
3. Accomplishment is inherently impossible or means
employed is either inadequate or ineffectual
4. Act performed should not constitute a violation of
another provision of RPC
Note: The offender must believe that he can consummate
the intended crime. A man stabbing another who he knew
was already dead cannot be liable for an impossible crime.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What is the essence of an impossible crime?
A: The essence of an impossible crime is the inherent
impossibility of accomplishing the crime or the inherent
impossibility of the means employed to bring about the crime.
Q: What is inherent impossibility?
A: Inherent impossibility means that under any and all
circumstances, the crime could not have materialized.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the two kinds of inherent impossibility?
A: 1. Legal impossibility – which occurs where the intended acts,
even if completed
would not amount to a crime. E.g. killing a dead person.
2. Physical impossibility – where extraneous circumstances
unknown to the accused
prevent the consummation of the intended crime.
E.g. pick pocketing an empty wallet.
Q: What is the reason for penalizing impossible crime?
A: To teach the offender a lesson because of his
criminal perversity.Although objectively, no crime
is committed, but subjectively,
Note: It is a principle of criminal law that the offender
he is a criminal. will only be penalized for an
impossible crime if he cannot be punished under some other provision of the RPC.
An impossible crime is a crime of last resort.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are examples of impossible crimes?
A: 1. In employment of inadequate means – small quantity of
poison which is inadequate to kill a person. 2. In employment of
inefficient means – accused fired a gun, not knowing that it is
empty.
Q: Buddy always resented his classmate, Jun. One day, Buddy
planned to kill Jun by mixing poison in his lunch. Not knowing
where he can get poison, he approached another classmate
Jerry to whom he disclosed his evil plan. Because he
himself harbored resentment towards Jun, Jerry gave
Buddy a poison, which Buddy placed on Jun's food. However, Jun
did not die because, unknown to both Buddy and Jerry,
the poison was actually powdered milk. What crime or crimes,
if any, did Jerry and Buddy commit?
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
A: Jerry and Buddy are liable for the so‐called impossible
crime because, with intent to kill, they tried to poison Jun and
thus perpetrate murder, a crime against persons. Jun was not
poisoned only because the would‐be killers were unaware
that what they mixed with the food of Jun was powdered
milk, not poison. Criminal liability is incurred by them
although no crime resulted, because their act of trying to
poison Jun is criminal.
Q: Is impossible crime a formal crime?
A: Yes. By its very nature, an impossible crime is a formal crime.
It is either consummated or not consummated at all. There is
therefore no attempted or frustrated impossible crime.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the crimes that do not admit of division?
A: Formal crimes which are consummated in one instance,
do not admit of division.
e.g. physical injuries and oral defamation.

STAGES OF EXECUTION (Art. 6)
Q: What are the classifications of felonies
according to the stage of execution?
A: Consummated, frustrated and attempted.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: When is a felony consummated?
A: A felony is consummated when all the acts
necessary for its accomplishment and execution are present.
Q: What are the elements of frustrated felony?
A: 1. The offender performs all the acts of execution.
2. All the acts performed would produce the felony as a
consequence.
3. But the felony is not produced.
4. By the reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What crimes do not admit of frustrated stage?
A: 1. Rape – the gravamen of the offense is carnal knowledge,
hence, the slightest penetration to the female
organ consummates the felony.
2. Arson – the moment the burning property occurs, even if
slight, the offense is consummated.
3. Corruption of public officers – mere
acceptance of the offer consummates the crime.
4. Physical injury – consummated at the
instance the injuries are inflicted.
5. Adultery – the essence of the crime is sexual congress.
6. Theft – the essence of the crime is the possession of the
thing, once the thing has been taken or in the possession
of the person, the crime is consummated.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the elements of attempted felony?
A: 1. The offender commences the commission of the felony
directly by overt acts
Note: Overt acts are external acts which if continued will logically
result in a felony. It is the start of criminal liability because
the offender has commenced the commission of an offense
with an overt act.
2. He does not perform all the acts of execution which
should produce the felony
3. The non‐performance of all acts of execution was due to
a cause or accident other than the offender's own
spontaneous desistance

BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: A person enters the dwelling of another. However, at

the very moment of his entry and before he could
do anything, he is already apprehended by the household
members, can he be charged with attempted robbery?

A: No. He can only be held liable for attempted robbery
when he has already completed all acts performed by
him directly leading to robbery. The act of entering alone is
not yet indicative of robbery although that may be what he
may have planned to commit. However, he may be held
liable for trespassing.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: The accused brought gasoline into a building, with the

intent to burn the building, but was apprehended by
the security guard, did the crime of arson commence?
A: Yes. The accused in this case is liable for attempted
arson because the bringing of the gasoline was
already an overt act while the apprehension was the
reason other than his own spontaneous desistance.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the instances wherein the stages of a crime will
not apply?
A:
1.Offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws, unless otherwise
provided for.
2. Formal crimes (e.g., slander adultery, etc.)
3. Impossible crimes
4. Crimes consummated by mere attempt (e.g., attempt to
flee to an enemy country, treason, corruption of minors)
5. Felonies by omission
6. Crimes committed by mere agreement (e.g., betting in
sports, corruption of public officers)

BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
E. CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL (Art.8)
Q: What is conspiracy?
A: Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide
to commit it.
Q: What are the requisites of conspiracy?
A: 1. There is an agreement
2. The participants acted in concert or simultaneously
which is indicative of a meeting of the minds towards
a common criminal goal or criminal objective
Q: When does proposal exist?
A: Proposal exists when the person who has
decided to commit a felony proposes its execution
to some other person or persons.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: Is proposal and conspiracy to commit felony punishable?
A: GR: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony are
not punishable.
Ratio: Because they are mere preparatory acts.
XPN: They are punishable only in cases in which the law
specifically provides a penalty thereof.
Note: It is fundamental that there exists a unity of purpose and
the unity in the execution of the unlawful objective among
the co‐conspirators. Mere knowledge, acquiescence to,
or approval of the act, without cooperation or at least,
agreement to cooperate, is not enough to constitute a
conspiracy. A conspiracy is possible even when participants
do not know each other.
.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: Is it required that there is an agreement among
the participants
to constitute conspiracy?
A: No. It is enough that the offenders acted simultaneously or in a
synchronized manner to bring about their common intention.
Q: What are the two kinds of conspiracy?
A: 1. Conspiracy as a crime –The mere
conspiracy is the crime itself. This is only true when the law
expressly punishes the mere conspiracy, otherwise, the conspiracy
does not bring about the commission of the crime because
conspiracy is not an overt act but a mere preparatory act.
Note: Treason, rebellion, sedition, and coup d'etat are the only crimes where
the conspiracy and proposal to commit them are punishable.
2. Conspiracy as a basis of incurring criminal
liability – When the conspiracy is only a basis of incurring criminal liabili
ty, there
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What is implied conspiracy?
A: When the conspiracy is just a basis of incurring criminal liability,
it may be deduced or inferred from the acts of several offenders
in carrying out the commission of the crime, i.e. when such acts
disclose or show a common pursuit of the criminal objective.
Q: What are the legal effects of implied conspiracy?
A: 1. Not all those who are present at the scene of the crime
will be considered conspirators
2. Only those who participated by criminal acts in the
commission of the crime will be considered as co‐conspirators
Note: In order to hold someone criminally liable, in addition to mere
presence, there should be overt acts that are closely‐related and
coordinated to establish the presence of common criminal design
and community of purpose in the commission of the crime.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
MULTIPLE OFFENDERS -Different forms of
repetition or habituality of the offender-
1. Recidivism – the offender at the‐time of his trial for one crime shall have been
previously convicted by final judgment of another embraced in the same title of the RPC.
Note: It is important that conviction which came earlier must refer to the crime
committed earlier than the subsequent conviction. A recidivist is entitled to the benefits
of the Indeterminate Sentence Law but is disqualified from availing credit of his
preventive imprisonment.
2. Reiteracion – the offender has been previously punished for an offense which the law

attaches an
equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty.
3. Habitual delinquency —the offender within the period of 10 years from the
date of his release or last
conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft,
estafa or falsification, is found guilty of any of the said crimes a third time or oftener.
4. Quasi‐recidivism — Any person who shall commit a felony after having been

convicted by final judgment
before beginning to serve such sentence or while serving such sentence shall be
punished by the maximum period prescribed by law for the new felony.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
COMPLEX CRIMES vis SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIMES
COMPLEX CRIMES (Art. 48)

Q: What is a complex crime?
A: Complex crime exists when two or more crimes are committed
but they constitute only one crime in the eyes of the law. Here,
there is only one criminal intent hence, only one penalty is imposed
Q: What are the concepts of complex crimes?
A: 1. A single criminal act constituting 2 or more grave or
less grave felonies.
2. Offender has only one criminal intent, hence,
there is only one penalty imposed.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the kinds of complex crimes?
A: 1. Compound crime – when a single act constitutes two or
more grave or less
grave felonies.
Requisites:
a. Only a single act is performed by the offender
b. b. The single act produces:
i. Two or more grave felonies
ii. One or more grave and one or more less grave felonies
iii. Two or more less grave felonies.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
2. Complex crime proper –when an offense
is the necessary means for committing the other.
Requisites:
a. At least two offenses are committed
b. One or some of the offenses must
be necessary to commit the other
c. Both or all the offenses must be
punished under the same statute
Note: The first crime must be a necessary means to commit the other.
There should only be one information charging a complex crime. Only one
penalty is imposed for complex crimes because there is only one criminal act.
3. Special complex crime – known as
composite crime, the component crimes constitute a single
indivisible offense and are thus penalized as one crime
BOOK 1 I. FELONIES
Q: What is a continuing crime?
A: It is a single crime, consisting of a series of acts but arising
from one criminal resolution (e.g. violation of BP 22).
Q: What is a continued crime?
A: Here, the offender is impelled by a single criminal impulse
but committed a series of acts at about the same time in about
the same place and all the overt acts violate one and the
same provision law. e.g. theft of 13 cows belonging to different
owners committed by the accused at the same place and at the
same time.
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What are the distinctions between special
complex crimes and complex crimes under Art. 48?
SPECIAL COMPLEX COMPLEX CRIME
CRIME UNDER ART. 48
Combination of offenses a The combination is not
re fixed or specified by specified, that is, grave
law and/ or less grave; or one
E.g. robbery with offense being necessary
homicide, robbery with means to commit the other
rape

The penalty for the The penalty imposed is the
specified combination penalty for the most
is also specific serious offense in the
maximum
period
BOOK 1 II. FELONIES
Q: What is plurality of crimes?
A: It is the successive execution by the same individual of
different criminal acts upon any of which no conviction has
yet been declared.
Q: What are the kinds of plurality of crimes?
A: 1. Formal or ideal – only one criminal liability
a. Complex crime – defined in Art 48
b. When the law specifically fixes a single penalty
for 2 or more offenses committed
c. Continued crimes
2. Real or material –there are different
crimes in law and in the conscience of
the offender. In such cases, the offender shall be punished
for each and every offense that he committed
BOOK 1 III. CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Q: What are the circumstances affecting criminal liability?
A: JEMAA 1. Justifying circumstances
2. Exempting circumstances
3. Mitigating circumstances
4. Aggravating circumstances
5. Alternative circumstances
Q: What are the other two circumstances found in
the RPC affecting criminal liability?
A: 1. Absolutory cause – has the effect of an exempting
circumstance and it is
predicated on lack of voluntariness such as instigation
2. Extenuating circumstances – the effect of
extenuating circumstances is to mitigate the
criminal liability of the offender
Q: What are examples of absolutory causes?
A: 1. Accessory is a relative of the principal. (Art. 20)
2. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence
of ward by their guardian is not penalized. (Art. 219)
3. When only slight or less serious physical injuries are inflicted by the person
who surprised his/her spouse or daughter in the act of sexual intercourse with
another person. (Art. 247)
4. Crime of theft, swindling or malicious
mischief is committed against a relative. (Art. 332)
5. Marriage of the offender with the offended party when the crime
committed is rape, abduction, seduction, or acts of lasciviousness. (Art. 344)
6. Instigation
7. Trespass to dwelling when the purpose of entering another’s dwelling
against the latter’s will is to prevent some serious harm to himself, the
occupants of the dwelling or a third person, or for the purposes of rendering
some service to humanity or justice, or when entering cafes, taverns, inns
and other public houses, while the same are open. (Art. 280 par. 2)
8.Adultery and concubinage if the offended party shall have consented or pardoned
the offenders. (Art. 344)
Q: Is mistake of fact an absolutory cause?
A: Yes. The offender is acting without criminal intent. So in
mistake of fact, it is necessary that had the facts been true as
the accused believed them to be, the act is justified. If not,
there is criminal liability, because there is no more mistake of
fact anymore. The offender must believe he is performing
a lawful act.
Q: Does instigation absolve the offender from
criminal liability?
A: Yes. In instigation, the offender simply acts as a tool of the law
enforcers and, therefore, he is acting without criminal intent
because without the instigation, he would not have done the
criminal act which he did upon instigation of the law enforcers.
Note: This is based on the rule that a person cannot be
Q: What if the person instigated does not know that the person
instigating him is a law enforcer?
A: If the person instigated does not know that the person
instigating him is a law enforcer or he knows him to be not a
law enforcer, this is not a case of instigation. This is a case of
inducement, both will be criminally liable.

Q: Is entrapment an absolutory cause?
A: No. Entrapment is not an absolutory cause. Entrapment
does not exempt the offender or mitigate his criminal liability.
Q: What are the distinctions between instigation and entrapment?
INSTIGATION ENTRAPMENT
A law enforcement agent A person has planned, or is
induces an innocent person about to commit a crime
to commit a crime and and ways are resorted to
would arrest him upon or by a public officer to trap
after the commission of and catch the criminal.
the crime.
The law enforcement agent Idea to commit the crime
conceives the commission comes from the offender.
of the crime and suggests
it to the accused.
An absolutory cause. Not an absolutory cause.
Q: What are examples of extenuating circumstances?

A: In cases of infanticide and abortion, concealment of dishonor
is an extenuating circumstance insofar as the unwed mother
and the maternal grandparents are concerned.
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES . (Art. 11) .
Q: What are justifying circumstances?
A: They are those acts of a person said to be in
accordance with law, such that a person is deemed
not to have transgressed the law
and is free from both criminal and civil liability.
They are:
1. Self‐defense
2. Defense of relatives
3. Defense of stranger
4. Avoidance of greater evil or injury
5. Fulfillment of duty or exercise of right or office
6. Obedience to an order of a superior
Note: Justifying circumstances are in the nature of defensive
Q: Who has the burden of evidence in criminal case?

A: In criminal cases, the burden of proving guilt is always the
plaintiff/prosecution. But if the accused sets up an
affirmative defense, the burden is on him to prove such by
“clear, affirmative and strong evidence”
The foregoing rests on the maxim:

EL INCOMBIT PROBOTION QUI DECIT NON QUI NEGAT
(He who asserts, not he who denies, must prove)

1. SELF‐DEFENSE .
Q: What rights are included in self‐defense?
A: Self‐defense includes not only the defense of the person or body
of the one assaulted but also that of his rights, the enjoyment of
which is protected by law.
Thus it includes:
1. Defense of the person
2. Defense of rights protected by law
3. The right to honor.
Note: Hence, a slap on the face is considered as unlawful
aggression since the face represents a person and his dignity.
It is a serious, personal attack
(Rugas v. People, G.R. No. 147789, Jan.14, 2004)
4. The defense of property rights can be invoked if there
is an attack upon the property although it is not
Coupled with an attack upon the person of the owner of
the premises. All the elements for justification must
however be present.
(People v. Narvaez, G.R. Nos. L‐33466‐67, Apr. 20, 1983)

5. Self‐defense in libel. Physical assault may be justified
when the libel is aimed at the person’s good name,
and while the libel is in progress, one libel deserves another.
Note: What is important is not the duality of the attack
but whether the means employed is reasonable to
prevent the attack.
Q: What are the requisites of self‐defense?
A: 1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself
Q: What is unlawful aggression?
A: It is an attack or a threatened attack which
produces an imminent danger to the life and limb of the one resorting to self‐
defense.
Q: What are the types of unlawful aggression?
A: 1. Actual – the danger must be present, that is, actually in existence.
2. Imminent – the danger is on the point of happening. It is not required that
the attack has already begun, for it may be too late.
Note: What justifies the killing of a supposed unlawful aggressor is that if
the offender did not kill the aggressor, it will be his own life that will be
lost. No unlawful aggression when there was an agreement to fight and the
challenge to fight has been accepted. But aggression which is ahead of
Q: What are the requisites which must be present
to satisfy the “reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it?”
1. Means were used to prevent or repel
2. Means must be necessary and there is no other way to prevent or repel it
3. Means must be reasonable— depending on the circumstances, but
generally proportionate to
the force of the aggressor
Q: What are the distinctions between self‐defense and retaliation?
A: SELF‐DEFENSE RETALIATION
In self‐defense, the unlawful In retaliation, the inceptual
aggression was still existing unlawful aggression had
when the aggressor was already ceased when the
injured or disabled by the accused attacked him.
person making the defense.

Q: One night, Lina, a young married woman, was sound asleep in
her bedroom when she felt a man
on top of her. Thinking it was her
husband Tito, who came home a day early from his business trip,
Lina let him have sex with her. After the act, the man said, "I hope
you enjoyed it as much as I did." Not recognizing the voice, it
dawned upon Lina that the man was not Tito, her husband.
Furious, Lina took out Tito's gun and shot the man. Charged with
homicide, Lina denies culpability on the ground of defense of
honor. Is her claim tenable?
A: No, Lina's claim that she acted in defense of honor is
not tenable because the unlawful aggression on her honor
had already ceased. Defense of honor as included in self‐defense,
must have been done to prevent or repel an unlawful aggression.
There is no defense to speak of where the unlawful aggression no
2. DEFENSE OF RELATIVES .
Q: What are the requisites of defense of relatives?
A: 1. Unlawful aggression.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it.
3. Relative being defended gave no provocation.
Note: The law gives a leeway on the third requisite, even if the relative being
defended gave the provocation, if the relative making the defense had no part
therein, he can successfully invoke the defense of relative.
Q: Who are the relatives covered?
1. Spouse
2. Ascendants
3. Descendants
4. Legitimate, adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity in the
same degrees.
5. Relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree.
3. DEFENSE OF STRANGERS .
Q: What are the requisites of defense of strangers?
1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it
3. Person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment or other
evil motive
Q: Who is a stranger?
A: Any person not included in the enumeration of
relatives mentioned above.
Anti‐Violence against Women and their Children Act of 2004 (R.A. 9262)
Q: What is a battered woman syndrome (BWS)?
A: Battered Woman Syndrome" refers to a scientifically defined
pattern of psychological and behavioral symptoms found in
women living in battering relationships as a result of
cumulative abuse.
The battered woman syndrome is characterized by the so‐called
cycle of violence, which has 3 phases.
Q. What are the cycles of violence?
A: 1. Tension building phase
2. Acute battering incident
3. Tranquil, loving (or at least non‐violent) phase
Note: One must undergo 3 phases to establish the pattern
of violence. One must pass 2 cycles, each with 3 phases.
Q. Who is a battered woman?
A: She is woman who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical or psychological behavior
by a man in order to coerce her to do something he wants her to do without concern for her rights.
Battered women includes wives or women in any form of intimate relationship with men.
Furthermore, in order to be classified as a battered woman, the couple must go through the
battering cycle at least twice. Any woman may find herself in an abusive relationship with a man
once. If it occurs a second time, and she remains in the situation, she is defined as a battered
woman. (People v. Genosa)
Q. Can BWS be used as a defense?
A: Yes. Victim‐survivors who are found by the courts to be
suffering from battered woman syndrome do not incur any
criminal or civil liability notwithstanding the absence of any of
the elements for justifying circumstances of self‐ defense
under the RPC. In layman’s terms, if an abused woman kills or
inflict physical injuries on her abusive husband or live‐in
partner, once the trial court determines that she is suffering from
the “Battered Woman Syndrome,” the court will declare her not
guilty (People v.Genosa). The law now allows the battered woman
syndrome as a valid defense in the crime if parricide
independent of self defense under the RPC. (Sec. 26)
Note: In the determination of the state of mind of the woman who was suffering
from battered woman syndrome at the time of the commission of the crime, the
courts shall be assisted by expert psychiatrists/ psychologists.
4. AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL OR STATE OF NECESSITY
.
Q: What are the requisites of state of necessity?
A: 1. Evil sought to be avoided actually exists.
2. Injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it.
3.There be no other practical and less harmful means of
preventing it, and
4.There must be no contribution on the part of the accused
what caused the evil to arise.
Note: The state of necessity must not have been

brought about by the negligence or imprudence by the
one invoking the justifying circumstances.

5. FULFILLMENT OF DUTY .
Q: What are the requisites of fulfillment of duty?
A:
1. Accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful
exercise of a right or office.
2. Injury caused or offense committed be the necessary
consequence of the due performance of duty or the
lawful exercise of such right or office.
Note: If the police officer acted with negligence or imprudence
in apprehending violators of the law, the justifying circumstance of
fulfillment of duty cannot be invoked. The shooting by guards of
escaping prisoners is always justified. (People v. Delima)
6. OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR SOME LAWFUL P
URPOSE
Q: What are the requisites of obedience to an
order issued for some lawful purpose?
A: 1. An order has been issued by a superior
2. Such order must be for some lawful purpose
3. Means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is lawful
Note: Both the person who gives the order, and the person who executes it,
must be acting within the limitations prescribed by law.
Q: Is good faith on the part of the subordinate material?
A: Yes. If he obeyed an order in good faith, not being aware of its illegality,
he is not liable. However, the order must not be patently illegal. If
the order is patently illegal, this circumstance cannot be validly invoked.

Note: Even if the order is patently illegal, the subordinate may still be
able to invoke the exempting circumstances of having acted upon the
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES (Art. 12) .
Q: Who are exempted from criminal liability?
A: 1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval.
2. A child fifteen years of age or under is exempt from criminal liability under R.A. 9344
3. A person over fifteen years of age and under eighteen, unless he has acted with
discernment, in which case, such child shall be subject to appropriate
proceedings in accordance with R.A. 9344.
4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an injury by
mere accident without the fault or intention causing it.
5. Any person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force.
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal
or greater injury.
7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some
lawful or insuperable cause.
Q: In case of exempting circumstances, is there a
crime committed? A: Yes. There is a crime committed but no criminal
liability arises from
it because of the complete absence of any of the conditions which
constitute free will or voluntariness of the act.

Q: Who has the burden of proof?
A: Any of the circumstances is a matter of defense and must be
proved by the defendant to the satisfaction of the court.

1. IMBECILITY AND INSANITY .
Q: What are the distinctions between imbecility and insanity?
IMBECILITY INSANITY

An imbecile is one who, Insanity exists when there
while advanced in age, is a complete deprivation
has a mental of intelligence in
development comparable committing the act.
to that of
children between two to
seven years of age.
No lucid interval There is lucid interval
Exempt in criminal liability Not exempt from criminal
in all cases liability if it can be shown
that he acted during lucid
interval
Q: What are the two tests for exemption on

grounds of insanity?
A: 1. Test of cognition –whether the accused acted with complete

deprivation of
intelligence in committing said crime.

2. Test of volition – whether the accused
acted in total deprivation of freedom of will.

Note: In the Philippines, both cognition and volition tests are
applied. There must be complete deprivation of the
intellect or will or freedom.
2. MINORITY .
Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 (R.A. 9344)
Q: What is the meaning of “a child in conflict with the law”?
A: It refers to a child who is alleged as, accused of, or adjudged as,
having committed an offense under Philippine laws.
Note: The child in conflict with the law shall enjoy the presumption
of minority. He/she shall enjoy all the rights of a child in
conflict with the law until he/she is proven to be 18 years old
or older.
Q: What is the minimum age of criminal responsibility?

AGE BRACKET CRIMINAL TREATMENT
LIABILITY
15 years old or below Exempt The child shall be subjected

to an intervention program
Above 15 but Exempt The child shall be subjected
below 18, who to an intervention program
acted without
discernment
Above 15 but Not exempt Such child shall be subjected

below 18, who acted with to the appropriate
discernment proceedings in accordance
with R.A. 9344

Note: The exemption from criminal liability herein established
does not include exemption from civil liability, which shall be
enforced in accordance with existing laws
Q: How can the age be determined?
A: The age of a child may be determined from the child's:
1. Birth certificate
2. Baptismal certificate
3. Any other pertinent documents
Note: In the absence of these documents, age may be based on
information from the child himself/herself, testimonies of
other persons, the physical appearance of the child and
other relevant evidence. In case of doubt as to the age of the child,
It shall be resolved in his/her favor.
3. ACCIDENT WITHOUT FAULT OR INTENTION OF
CAUSING IT .
(DAMNUM ABSQUE INJURIA) .
Q: What are the requisites of damnum absque injuria?
A: 1. A person is performing a lawful act
2. With due care
3. He causes injury to another by mere accident
Note: It is something that happens outside the sway of
our will, and although it comes about through some act
of our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable
consequences.
4. Without fault or intention of causing it
Illustration:
A chauffeur, while driving his automobile on the proper side
of the road at a moderate speed and with due diligence, suddenly
and unexpectedly saw a man in front of his vehicle coming from
the sidewalk and crossing the street without any warning that he
would do so. Because it was not physically possible to avoid hitting
him, the said chauffeur ran over the man with his car. Is the
chauffeur liable?
It was held that he was not criminally liable, it
being a mere accident.
(U.S. v. Tayongtong,)
4. COMPULSION OF IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
Q: What is the basis for this exempting circumstance?
A: The basis is the complete absence of freedom.
Q: What is irresistible force?
A: It is a degree of force which is external or physical force
which reduces the person to a mere instrument and the acts
produced are done without his will and against his will.
Q: What are the requisites of compulsion of irresistible force?
A: 1. Compulsion is by means of physical force
2. Physical force must be irresistible
3. Physical force must come from a third person
Note: It presupposes that a person is compelled by means of extraneous force or
violence to commit a crime. The force must be so irresistible as to reduce the
actor to a mere instrument who acted not only without will but against his will.
Passion or obfuscation cannot amount to irresistible force.
Q: Baculi, who was not a member of the band which
murdered some American school teachers, was in a
plantation gathering bananas. Upon hearing the shooting,
he ran. However, Baculi was seen by the leaders of the band
who called him, and striking him with the butts of their guns,
they compelled him to bury the bodies. Is he liable as
an accessory to the crime of crime?

A: It was held that Baculi was not criminally liable as accessory
for concealing the body of the crime of murder committed by
the band because he acted under the compulsion of an
irresistible force. (U.S. v. Caballeros)
5. UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
Q: What is the basis of this exempting circumstance?
A: The basis is complete absence of freedom.
Q: What are the requisites of uncontrollable fear?
A: 1. Threat, which causes the fear, is of an evil greater than
or at least equal to that which he is required to commit.
2. It promises an evil of such gravity and imminence
that the ordinary man would have succumbed to it.
Q: What are the elements?
A: 1. Existence of an uncontrollable fear
2. Fear must be real and imminent
3. Fear of an injury is greater than or equal to that committed
Q: What is the difference between irresistible force and
uncontrollable fear?
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE UNCONTROLLABLE FE

AR
A person is compelled A person is compelled
by another to commit a by another to commit
crime by means a crime by means
of violence or of intimidation
physical force. or threat.
6. PREVENTED BY SOME LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE.

Q: What is the basis of this exempting circumstance?
A: The basis is absence of intent.

Q: What is insuperable cause?
A: Some motive which has lawfully, morally, or physically
prevented a person to do what the law commands.

Note: Under the law, the person arrested must be delivered to
the nearest judicial authority at most
within 36 hours under
Art 125 of RPC, otherwise, the public officer will be liable for
arbitrary detention.
Q: What are the requisites under this exempting circumstance?
A: 1. An act is required by law to be done.
2. A person fails to perform such act.
3. Failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or insuperable cause.
Q: What are the distinctions between justifying circumstances and exempting circumstances?
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE
The circumstance affect the act, The circumstance affect the actor.
not the actor.
The act complained of is Since the act complained of is
considered to have been done within actually wrongful, there is a crime. But
the bounds of law; hence, it is because the actor acted without
considered lawful, voluntariness there is absence of dolo
there is no crime, and because there or culpa. There is no criminal.
is no crime, there is no criminal.
Since there is no crime or criminal, Since there is a crime committed but
there is no criminal liability as well there is no criminal, there is civil
as civil liability. liability for the wrong done. However
in
paragraphs 4 and 7 of Article 12,
there is neither criminal nor civil liability
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (Art. 13) .
Q: What are mitigating circumstances?
A: Mitigating circumstances are those which if present in
the commission of the crime, do not entirely free the
actor from criminal liability but serve only to reduce the
penalty.
Note: One single fact cannot be made the basis of more than one
mitigating circumstance. Hence, a mitigating circumstance
arising from a single fact absorbs all the other mitigating
circumstances arising from the same fact.
Q: What is the basis of mitigating circumstances?
A: The basis is diminution of either freedom of action,
intelligence, or intent or on the lesser perversity of the
offender.
Q: What are those circumstances which can
mitigate criminal liability?
1. Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstance
2. The offender is under 18 or over 70 years old.
3. No intention to commit so grave a wrong (praeter inentionem)
4. Sufficient threat or provocation
5. Vindication of a grave offense
6. Passion or obfuscation
7. Voluntary surrender
8. Physical defect
9. Illness of the offender
10. Similar and analogous circumstances
Q: What are the classes of mitigating circumstances?
A: 1. Ordinary mitigating
Q: What are the distinctions between ordinary mitigating and
privileged mitigating?
ORDINARY MITIGATING PRIVILEGED MITIGATING
Can be offset by Can never be offset by
aggravating circumstances any aggravating
circumstance
Ordinary mitigating Privileged mitigating
circumstances, if not circumstances operate to
offset, will operate to reduce the penalty by one
reduce the to two degrees,
penalty to the minimum depending upon what
period, the law provides.
provided the penalty is a
divisible one.
1. INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING
CIRCUMSTANCE
Q: What is the concept of incomplete justifying
or exempting circumstance?
A: Incomplete justifying/exempting circumstance means
that not all the requisites to justify the act are present or
not all the requisites to exempt from criminal liability are
present.
Q: What condition is necessary before incomplete self‐
defense, defense of relative, or defense of
stranger may be
invoked?
A: The offended party must be guilty of unlawful aggression.
Without unlawful aggression, there can be no incomplete
2. UNDER 18 OR OVER 70 YEARS OLD .
Q: Who are covered under this
mitigating circumstance?
A: Offenders who are:
1. Over 15 but under 18 years old who acted
with discernment
2. Over 70 years old
Note: It is the age of the accused at the time of the
commission of the crime which should be determined.
His age at the time of the trial is immaterial.
3. NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG .

(PRAETER INTENTIONEM) .
Q: What is the basis of this mitigating circumstance?
A: The basis is diminution of intent.
Q: Should there be a notable and evident disproportion
between the means employed by the offender compared
to that of the resulting felony?
A: Yes. If the resulting felony could be expected from the
means employed, this circumstance does not avail.

Note: This circumstance is not applicable when
offender employed brute force.
Q: Does it apply to felonies by negligence?
A: No, it is not applicable because the offender acts without
intent. The intent in intentional felonies is replaced by
negligence or imprudence. There is no intent on the
part of the offender, which may be considered as
diminished.
Q: What are the factors in order to ascertain the intention?
A: 1. The weapon used
2. The part of the body injured
3. The injury inflicted
4.The manner it is inflicted
Note: This provision addresses the intention of the offender at
the particular moment when the offender executes or commits
the criminal act and not during planning stage.
4. SUFFICIENT THREAT OR PROVOCATION .
A: The basis is loss of reasoning and self‐control,
thereby diminishing the exercise of his will power.
Q: What is provocation?
A: Provocation is any unjust or improper conduct or act of the
offended party, capable of exciting, inciting or irritating
anyone.
Q: What are the requisites of sufficient threat or
provocation as a mitigating circumstance?
A: 1. Provocation must be sufficient.
2. It must originate from the offended party.
3. It must be immediate to the act.
Q: How is sufficient threat or provocation as a
mitigating circumstance
distinguished from threat or provocation as an element of self‐ defense?
A: As an element of self defense it pertains to its absence on the part of
the person defending himself while as a mitigating circumstance, it
pertains to its presence on the part of the offended party. (People v. CA)
Note: Sufficiency depends on:
1. The act constituting the provocation
2. The social standing of the person provoked
3. Time and place provocation took place
Q: Tomas’ mother insulted Petra. Petra kills Tomas
because of the insults. Can Petra avail of the mitigating
circumstance?
A: No. There is no mitigating circumstance because it
5. VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE
A: The basis is loss of reasoning and self‐control, thereby,
diminishing the exercise of his will power.
Note: This has reference to the honor of a person. It concerns the good
names and reputation of the individual (People v. Anpar)
Q: What are the requisites of vindication of a
grave offense as a mitigating circumstance?
A: 1. Grave offense has been done to the one committing the
felony, his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate,
natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by
affinitywithin the same degree.
2. Felony is committed in vindication of such grave offense.
Q: Compare the circumstances of sufficient threat
or provocation and vindication of a grave offense.
SUFFICIENT THREAT OR PROVOCATION VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE
It is made directly only to The grave offense may be committed
the person committing the felony. also against the offender’s relatives
mentioned in the law.
The cause that brought about the The offended party must have done a
provocation need not be a grave grave offense against the offender or
offense. his relatives mentioned in the law.
It is necessary that the provocation or The vindication of the

threat immediately preceded the act. grave offense may be
There must be no interval of time proximate which admits
between the provocation and the of interval of time between the grave
commission of the crime. offense
committed by the offended party and
the commission of the crime of the
accused.
6. PASSION OR OBFUSCATION
A: The basis is loss of reasoning and self‐control, thereby
diminishing the exercise of his will power.
Q: What is passion or obfuscation?
A: Passion and obfuscation refer to emotional feeling which
produces excitement so powerful as to overcome reason and self‐
control. It must come from prior unjust or improper acts. The
passion and obfuscation must emanate from legitimate sentiments.
Q: What are the elements of passion or
obfuscation as a mitigating circumstance?
1. Accused acted upon an impulse
2. Impulse must be so powerful that it naturally produced passion or
obfuscation in him.
Note: The passion or obfuscation should arise from lawful sentiments in order to
Q: What are the requisites of passion or obfuscation?
A:
1. That there is an act, both unlawful and sufficient to
produce such a condition of mind.
2. That the said act which produced the obfuscation
was not far removed from the commission of the
crime by a considerable length of time, during which the
perpetrator might recover his natural equanimity.
Note: This particular mitigating circumstance stands on the
premise that the offender is suffering from a
diminished self‐control because of the passion or
obfuscation.
Q: When is passion or obfuscation not a mitigating
circumstance?
A: If the act is committed in the spirit of:
1. Lawlessness
2. Revenge
Q: What are the distinctions between passion/obfuscation
and provocation?
PASSION/OBFUSCATION PROVOCATION
It is produced by an impulse The provocation comes from the
which may cause provocation injured party
The offense need not be It must immediately precede
immediate. It is only required the commission of the crime.
that the influence thereof lasts
until the moment the crime is
committed
Q: What are the distinctions between passion/obfuscation
and irresistible force?
A: PASSION OBFUSCATION IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
Mitigating circumstance Exempting circumstance
It cannot give rise to It requires physical force.
irresistible force because
passion or obfuscation
has no physical force.
The passion or It must come from a
obfuscation is in the third person.
offender himself
It must arise from lawful It is unlawful.
sentiments.
7. VOLUNTARY SURRENDER AND CONFESSION OF
GUILT
A: The basis is the lesser perversity of the offender.

Q: What are the requisites of voluntary surrender as a
A: 1. Offender had not been actually arrested.
2. Surrender was made to a person in authority or
the latter's agent.
3. Surrender was voluntary.
Q: Who is a person in authority?
A: He is one directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as
an individual or as a member of some court/government/
corporation/board/commission.
Note: Barrio captain/chairman included.
Q: Who is an agent of person in authority?
A: He is a person who by direct provision of law, or by election, or by
appointment by competent authority is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life
and property and any person who comes to the aid of persons in
authority.
Q: What are the requisites of confession of guilt as a
A: 1. Offender voluntarily confessed his guilt.
2. It was made in open court
(that is before the competent court
that is to try the case).
3.It was made prior to the presentation of evidence
for the prosecution.
8. PHYSICAL DEFECT
A: The basis is the diminution of the element of voluntariness.

Q: What is physical defect?
A: A person's physical condition, such as being deaf and
dumb, blind, armless, cripple, or stutterer, whereby his
means of action, defense or communication with others
are restricted or limited. The physical defect that a person
may have must have a relation to the commission of the
crime.
9. ILLNESS OF THE OFFENDER
A: The basis is diminution of intelligence and intent.

Q: What are the requisites of illness of the offender as a
A: 1. Illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of will power.
2.Such illness should not deprive the offender the consciousness of his
acts.
Note: Illness of the mind, not amounting to insanity, may be
mitigating. If the illness not only diminishes the exercise of the
offender’s will power but deprives him of the
consciousness of his acts, it becomes an exempting
circumstance to be classified as insanity or imbecility.
10. SIMILAR AND ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES
Q: What are the examples of analogous circumstances?
A: 1. The act of the offender of leading the law enforcers to the place where
he buried the instrument of the crime has been considered as
equivalent to voluntary surrender.
2. Stealing by a person who is driven to do so out of extreme poverty is
considered as analogous to incomplete state of necessity.
(People v. Macbul) Unless he became impoverished because of his
own way of living his life, i.e. he had so many vices.
3. Defendant who is 60 years old with failing eyesight is similar
to a case of a person over 70 years of age. (People v. Reantillo & Ruiz)
4. Impulse of jealous feeling, similar to passion and obfuscation.
5. Voluntary restitution of property, similar to voluntary surrender.
6. Outraged feeling of the owner of animal taken for ransom is
analogous to vindication of grave offense
7. Esprit de corps is similar to passion and obfuscation
Q: What are the circumstances which are neither
exempting nor mitigating?
1. Mistake in the blow or aberratio ictus
2. Mistake in the identity
3. Entrapment
4. Accused is over 18 years of age
5. Performance of righteous action
Q: Give circumstances which are considered as
specific mitigating circumstances?
1. Illegal detention (voluntary release within 3 days; without
attaining purpose; before criminal action)
2. Adultery (abandonment of spouse)
3. Infanticide/abortion (intent to conceal dishonor of mother)
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES (Art. 14)
Q: What are aggravating circumstances?
A: Those which, if attendant in the commission of the crime:
1. Serve to have the penalty imposed in its maximum period
provided by law for the offense; or
2. Change the nature of the crime.
Q: What is the basis of aggravating circumstances?
A: The basis is the greater perversity of the offender
manifested in the commission of the felony as shown by:
1. Motivating power itself
2. Place of commission
3. Means and ways employed
4. Time
5. Personal circumstances of offender or offended party
Q: What are the kinds of aggravating circumstances?

A: 1. Generic or those that can generally apply to all crime
2. Specific or those that apply only to a particular crime
3. Qualifying or those that change the nature of the crime
4. Inherent or those that must of necessity accompany
the commission of the crime
5. Special or those which arise under special conditions to
increase the penalty of the offense and cannot be offset
by mitigating circumstances

Note: The aggravating circumstances must be established
with moral certainty, with the same degree of proof required
to establish the crime itself.
Q: What are those circumstances which aggravate criminal liability?

A: 1. Advantage taken of public position
2. Contempt or insult to public authorities
3. Disregard of age, sex, or dwelling of the offended party
4. Abuse of confidence and obvious ungratefulness
5. Palace and places of commission of offense
6. Nighttime, uninhabited place or band
7. On occasion of calamity or misfortune
8. Aid of armed men, etc.
9. Recidivist
10. Reiteracion or habituality
11. Price, reward, or promise
12. By means of inundation, fire, etc.
14. Craft, fraud or disguise
15. Superior strength or means to weaken the defense
16. Treachery
17. Ignominy
18. Unlawful Entry
19. Breaking wall
20. Aid of minor or by means of motor vehicle
or other similar means
21. Cruelty
Note: Nos.1‐6, 9‐10, 14, 18, 19 are generic aggravating circumstances
Nos. 3, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15‐17, 20, 21 are specific aggravating
circumstances
No. 16 is a case of qualified aggravating circumstance
Nos. 1, 13, 17, 19 are inherent aggravating circumstances
1. TAKING ADVANTAGE OF PUBLIC POSITION
Q: When is it applicable?
A: Only when the offender is a public officer.
The offender must have abused his public position or
at least, use of the same facilitated the commission
of the offense.
Note: Public officer must have used the influence, prestige

or ascendancy of his office as the means by which he realizes
his purpose.
2. CONTEMPT OR INSULT TO PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
Q: What are the requisites of contempt or insult of public authorities
as an aggravating circumstance?
A: 1. Public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions.
2.Such public authority is not the person against whom the crime is committed.
3. Offender knows him to be a public authority.
4. His presence has not prevented the offender from committing the crime.
Q: Who is a public authority?
A: A public authority, also called a person in authority, is a public
officer who has the power to govern and execute the laws.
e.g. municipal mayor, barangay captain, chief of police.
Note: Teachers, professors, supervisors of public and duly recognized
private schools, colleges and
universities, as well as lawyers are persons in
authority only for purposes of direct assault and simple resistance,
but not for purposes of aggravating circumstances in par. 2, Art. 14.
Q: Who are agents of a person in authority?
A: Agents of a person in authority are any person, who, by direct provision of
law or any election or appointment by competent authority, are charged with
the maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life
and property such as barrio councilman, barrio policeman and barangay
leader, and any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority. (Art. 152, RPC)
Note: Par. 2 of Art. 14 does not apply when the crime
is committed in the presence of an agent only.
Q: Is it necessary that the offender has knowledge that a public authority is present?
A: Knowledge that a public authority is present is essential. Lack of such
knowledge indicates lack of intention to insult the public authority.
Note: If crime committed is against the public authority while in the

performance of his duty, the offender commits direct assault without
this aggravating circumstance.
3. DISREGARD OF RANK, AGE, SEX OR DWELLING
OF OFFENDED PAR
Q: What are the requisites of "disregard of rank, age, sex or
dwelling" as an aggravating circumstance?
A: The act be committed:
1.With insult or in disregard of the respect
due to the offended party on account of his: a. Rank b. Age c. Sex
2.That it be committed in the dwelling of
the offended party, if the latter has not given sufficient provocation.
Note: Applies only to crimes against persons or honor, and not against
property like Robbery with homicide. The four circumstances
enumerated should be considered as one aggravating
circumstance only.
Q: What does “with insult or in disregard” mean?
A: It means that in the commission of the crime, the offender deliberately
intended to offend or insult the rank, sex or age of the offended party.
Q: To what does rank refer?
A: It refers to official, civil or social position or standing. The designation
or title of distinction used to fix the relative position of the offended party in
reference to others. There must be a difference in the social condition of
theoffender and the offended party.
Q: When is age considered as an aggravating circumstance?
A: Age applies in cases where the victim is of tender age or is of old age
Q: What does sex refer?
A: Sex refers to the female sex, not to male sex.
Q: What is dwelling?
A: Dwelling is a building or structure exclusively used for rest or comfort.
It includes temporary dwelling, dependencies, foot of the staircase, and
enclosure of the house.
Q: Should the dwelling be owned by the offended party?
A: No. It is enough that he used the place for his peace of mind, rest, comfort
and privacy.
Note: Dwelling does not mean the permanent
residence or domicile of the offended party or that he must be the owner
thereof. He must, however, be
actually living or dwelling therein even for a temporary duration or
purpose. It is not necessary that the accused should have actually
entered the dwelling of the victim to commit the offense. It is enough that
the victim was attacked inside his own house, although the assailant may
have devised means to perpetrate the assault. i.e. triggerman fired the
shot from outside the house, his victim was inside.
Q: What if one half of the house is used as a store
and the other half is used for dwelling but there is
only one entrance?
A: If the dwelling portion is attacked, dwelling is not aggravating
because whenever a store is open for business, it is a public
place and as such, is not capable of being the subject of trespass.
Note: Where the dwelling portion is attacked and even if the store is
open, there is another separate entrance to the portion used for
dwelling, the circumstance is aggravating. If the wife commits
the crime of adultery the aggravating circumstance of dwelling
can still be appreciated. If the wife killed her husband in the
conjugal house the aggravating circumstance of dwelling cannot
be appreciated. If the employer raped their maid the
aggravating circumstance of dwelling cannot be appreciated.
4. ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS
Q: What are the requisites of abuse of confidence as an aggravating
circumstance?
A: 1. Offended party had trusted the offender.
2. Offender abused such trust by committing a crime against
offended party.
3. Abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the crime.
Note: This is aggravating only when the very offended party is
the one who reposed the confidence.
Q: Must the confidence between the parties be immediate and personal?
A: Yes, as would give the accused the advantage or make it easier for him to
commit the crime. The confidence must be a means of facilitating the
commission of a crime.
Q: In what crimes is abuse of confidence inherent?
A: 1. Malversation
2. Qualified theft
3. Estafa by conversion or misappropriation
4. Qualified seduction
Note: Abuse of confidence is not considered for the purpose of increasing the penalty.
Q: What are the requisites of obvious
ungratefulness as an aggravating circumstance?
A: 1. The offended party had trusted the offender.
2. The offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the
offended party.
3. The act be committed with obvious ungratefulness.
Note: The ungratefulness must be such clear and manifest
ingratitude on the part of the accused. Abuse of confidence
and obvious ungratefulness are treated as separate aggravating
5. PALACE AND PLACES OF .COMMISSION OFFENSE
Q: What are the requisites of palace and places of commission of offense
as an aggravating circumstance?
A: The crime be committed:
1. In the palace of the Chief Executive; or
2. In his presence; or
3. Where public authorities are engaged
in the discharge of their duties; or
4. In a place dedicated to religious worship.
Q: If the crime is in the Malacaňang palace or church,
is it always aggravating?
A: Yes. Regardless of whether or not official duties or religious functions are
being conducted. Chief Executive's presence alone in any place where the
crime is committed is enough to constitute the aggravating circumstance.
Note: The President or Chief Executive need not be in the Palace to aggravate
the liability of the offender. As regards other places where public authorities
are engaged in the discharge of their duties, there must be some
performance of public functions.
Q: Supposing, a crime was committed in the presidential mansion. Can
the aggravating circumstance of palace of the Chief Executive be
appreciated?
A: No. The mansion is not the palace.
Q: Are cemeteries considered as places dedicated to
worship of God?
A: No. Cemeteries, however respectable they may be, are not
considered as place dedicated to the worship of God.
Note: The place must be dedicated to public religious worship.
Private chapels not included. The offender must have the
intention to commit a crime when he entered the place.
Q: Is a polling precinct a public place?
A: A polling precinct is a public place during election day.
Q: What are the distinctions between paragraph 5 and paragraph 2?
WHERE PUBLIC CONTEMPT OR
AUTHORITIES ARE INSULT TO
ENGAGED IN THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
DISCHARGE OF THEIR (PAR. 2)
DUTIES (PAR. 5)
Place where public duty is performed
In their office. Outside of their office
The offended party
May or may not be the Public authority should not be the
public authority offended party.

Note: In both, public authorities are in the performance of their
duties.
6. NIGHTTIME, UNINHABITED PLACE OR BAND
Q: What are the requisites?
A: The crime be committed:
1. In the nighttime; or
2. In an uninhabited place; or
3. By a band.
Q: When is it aggravating?
A: When: 1. It facilitated the commission of the crime
2. It especially sought for by the offender to ensure
the commission of the crime or for the purpose of impunity
Note: “Especially sought” means that the offender sought it in order to realize the crime
with more ease “Impunity” means to prevent his (accused) being recognized or to secure himself
against detection and punishment.
3. The offender took advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity
Note: Took advantage means that the accused availed himself thereof for the
successful consummation of his plans.
Q: What is nighttime?
A: Nighttime or nocturnity is the period of time after
sunset to sunrise, from dusk to dawn.
It is necessary that the commission of the crime was
commenced and completed at nighttime.
Q: What makes this circumstance aggravating?
A: Darkness of the night. Hence when the place of the crime is
illuminated by light, nighttime is not aggravating.
Note: It must be shown that the offender deliberately sought
the cover of darkness and the offender purposely took
advantage of nighttime to facilitate the commission of
the offense.
Q: Supposing, the crime was committed inside a dark movie house

at around 4 p.m. Can the aggravating circumstance
of nighttime be appreciated?
A: No, because what should be especially sought for is the darkness
of night, not the darkness of the movie house when the lights were
only off because it was only 4 in the afternoon.
Q: Supposing, the crime was committed inside a movie house when
the lights were still open and the time then was 9 p.m. Can
the
aggravating circumstance of nighttime be appreciated?
A: No, because even if it was nighttime, the place of the commission
was well‐lighted when the crime was committed.
Q: What is an uninhabited place (despoblado)?
A: It is where there are no houses at all, a place at a
considerable distance from town, or where the
houses are scattered at a great distance from each other.
Note: It is determined not by the distance of the nearest
house to the scene of the crime but whether or not in the
place of the commission of the offense, there was a
reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some help.

Q: When is uninhabited place aggravating?
A: To be aggravating, it is necessary that the offender
took advantage of the place and purposely availed of it as
to make it easier to commit the crime.
Q: What is a band?
A: It means that there are at least four malefactors acting together
in the commission of the offense.
Note: Band is absorbed in the circumstance of abuse of superior strength.
Under Article 306, the mere forming of a band even without the
commission of a crime is already a crime so that band is not
aggravating in brigandage because the band itself is the way to
commit brigandage. However, where brigandage is actually
committed, band becomes aggravating. This aggravating
circumstance is not applicable in crimes against chastity.
Q: If one of the four armed malefactors was a principal by
inducement, would there be an aggravating circumstance of a band?
A: None. But the aggravating circumstance of having acted with the aid
of armed men may be considered against the inducer if the other
two acted as his accomplice.
7. ON OCCASION OF CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE
Q: What is the reason for the aggravation?
A: The debased form of criminality met in one who, in the midst of a
great calamity, instead of lending aid to the afflicted, adds to their
suffering by taking advantage of their misfortune to despoil them.
Q: Under what circumstances is the crime committed under this
paragraph?
A: The crime is committed on the occasion of a conflagration,
shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
Note: Offender must take advantage of the calamity.
Q: To what does other calamity or misfortune refer to?
A: It refers to other conditions of distress similar to the preceding
enumeration.

8. AID OF ARMED MEN
Q: What are the elements?
A: The crime be committed with the aid of:
1. Armed men, or
2. Persons who insure or afford impunity
Q: What are the requisites of aid of armed men as an
aggravating circumstance?
A: 1. Armed men or persons took part in the commission of the
crime, directly or indirectly.
2. Accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them
when the crime was committed.
Note: Arms is not limited to firearms, sticks and stones included
Aid of armed men includes armed women. (People v. Licop )
Q: What aggravating circumstance will be considered if there are

four armed men?
A: If there are four armed men, aid of armed men is absorbed in
employment of a band. If there are three armed men or less,
aid of armed men may be the aggravating circumstance.
Q: What are the distinctions between a crime committed by a
band under paragraph 6 and a crime committed with the aid
of armed men under paragraph 8?
BY A BAND WITH THE AID OF ARMED MEN
Requires more than three. At least two
Requires that more than This circumstance is present even if
three armed malefactors one of the offenders merely relied
shall have acted together in the on their aid is not necessary.
commission of the offense
Band members are all principals . Armed men are mere accomplices.

FORMS OF REPETITION OR HABITUALITY OF THE
OFFENDER
Q: What are the different forms of repetition or habituality of the
offender?
A: 1. Recidivism
2. Reiteracion
3. Habitual delinquency
4.Quasi‐recidivism
9. RECIDIVISM
Q: What are the requisites of recidivism?
A: 1. Offender is on trial for one crime
2. He was previously convicted by final judgment of another crime
3. Both the first and second offenses are embraced in the same
title of the RPC
4. Offender is convicted of the new offense
Q: Does pardon erase recidivism?
A: No, because pardon only excuses the service of the penalty,
but not the conviction. (U.S. v. Sotelo)

Q: In 1980, X committed robbery. While the case was being tried,h
ecommitted theft in 1983. He
was subsequently found guilty andwas convicted
of theft also in 1983. The trial for hisearlier crimewhich was rob
bery ended in 1984 where he wasalso convicted.
Is the accused a recidivist?
A: The accused is not a recidivist. The subsequent conviction
must refer to a felony committed later in order to constitute
recidivism. The reason for this is, at the time the first crime
was committed, there was no other crime of which he was
Q: Supposing, the first offense was acts of

lasciviousness in 1980, then the second offense in
2006 was attempted rape. Can the aggravating
circumstance of recidivism be appreciated?
A: No. Acts of lasciviousness and attempted rape are not

embraced in the same title of the RPC; acts of
lasciviousness is under crimes against chastity while
attempted rape is under crimes against persons.
Q: Supposing, the first offense in 1980 was attempted

rape, then, the second offense in 2006 was acts of
lasciviousness. Can the aggravating circumstance of
recidivism be appreciated?
A: Yes, because attempted rape then in 1980 was embraced
under crimes against chastity, hence, both crimes are
embraced in the same title of the RPC.
Note: If recidivism and reiteracion are both present, only
recidivism should be appreciated, recidivism being easier
to prove. If the same set of facts constitutes recidivism
and reiteracion, the liability of the accused should be
aggravated by recidivism, which can easily be proven.

10. REITERACION
Q: What are the requisites of reiteracion?
A: 1. Accused is on trial for an offense
2. He previously served sentence for
a. Another offense to which the law attaches an
equal or greater penalty; or
b. Two or more crimes to which it attaches a
lighter penalty than that for the new offense.
3. He is convicted of the new offense.
Q: If the penalty attached to the felony subsequently committed is
not equal or higher than the penalty already served, is there
reiteracion?
A: No. Hence, reiteracion is not always aggravating. However, when
there is a third conviction, even if the penalty for the subsequent
crimes committed be lighter than the ones already served, the
Q: What are the distinctions between reiteracion and recidivism?
REITERACION RECIDIVISM
It is necessary that It is enough that the final
offender has served out his judgment has been
sentence for the 1st offense. rendered for the 1st offense
Previous and subsequent Previous and subsequent
offense must not be offense must be included
embraced in the same in the same title of RPC
title of RPC

Not always an aggravating Always taken into
circumstance consideration in fixing the
penalty to be imposed
upon the accused
HABITUAL DELIQUENCY
Q: What is habitual delinquency?
A: A special aggravating circumstance which has the effect of increasing
the penalty and imposing an additional penalty which escalates with the
increase in the number of convictions.
Q: What are the requisites of habitual delinquency?
A: A person is a habitual delinquent if:
1.Within a period of 10 years from the date of his release or last conviction; 2. Of
the crimes of falsification, robbery, estafa, theft, serious or
less serious physical injuries;
3. He is found guilty of said crimes a third time or oftener.
Note: To be a habitual delinquent, the law requires a 3rd conviction. The 2nd
conviction must be committed within 10 years from the 1st conviction or
release from prison, from the 2nd to the 3rd conviction, the period must
not be more than 10 years from the second conviction and so on.
Habitual delinquency, being a special aggravating circumstance cannot
be appreciated unless alleged in the information.
Q: What are the distinctions between habitual
delinquency and recidivism?
HABITUAL DELINQUENCY RECIDIVISM
At least three convictions are required Two convictions are enough
The crimes are specified and limited to: The crimes are not specified. It is
(a) serious physical injuries (b) less enough that they may be embraced
serious physical injuries (c)robbery under the same title of the RPC
(d) theft, (e) estafa or swindling
and (f) falsification
There is a time limit of not more than There is no time limit between the 1st
10 years between every conviction conviction and the subsequent
conviction. Recidivism is
imprescriptible
Habitual delinquency is a special It is a generic aggravating
aggravating circumstance, hence it circumstance which can be offset by
cannot be offset by any an ordinary mitigating circumstance.
mitigating circumstance. If not offset, it would only increase the
penalty prescribed by law for the
crime committed to its maximum period.
The circumstance must be alleged in The circumstance need not be alleged in
the information, otherwise the court the information.
cannot acquire jurisdiction to impose
the penalty.
QUASI‐RECIDIVISM
Q: What is quasi‐recidivism?
A: Quasi‐recidivism is a special aggravating circumstance where
a person, after having been convicted by final judgment, shall
commit a new felony before beginning to serve such sentence, or
while serving the same.
Note: To be appreciated, quasi‐recidivism must be specifically
alleged in the information.
Q: What are the elements of quasi‐recidivism?
A: 1.Offender was already convicted by final judgment of one offense
2.He committed a new felony before beginning to serve such
sentence or while serving the same
11. IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD OR PROMISE
Q: What are the requisites under this paragraph?
A: 1. There are at least two principals
a. Principal by inducement
b. Principal by direct participation
2. The price, reward, or promise should be previous to and
in consideration of the commission of the criminal act.

Note: If without previous promise, it was given voluntarily after
the crime had been committed, it should not be taken into
consideration for the purpose of increasing the penalty.
Q: Does this aggravating circumstance affect the criminal liability
of the one giving the offer?
A: Yes. This aggravating circumstance affects or aggravates not
only the criminal liability of the receiver of the price, reward
or promise but also the criminal liability of the one giving the offer.
Ratio: When there is a promise, reward or price offered or given
as a consideration for the commission of the crime, the person
making the offer is an inducer, a principal by inducement; while
the person receiving the price, reward or promise who would
execute the crime is a principal by direct participation. They are
both principals hence, their penalties are the same.
Note: The price, reward or promise need not consist of or refer to
material things or that the same were actually delivered,
it being sufficient that the offer made by the principal by
inducement be accepted by the principal by direct participation
before the commission of the offense. To consider this
circumstance, the price, reward, or promise must be the
primary reason or the primordial motive for the commission
of the crime.
Thus, if A approached B and told the latter what he thought of X, and
B answered “he is a bad man” to which A retorted, “you see I am
going to kill him this afternoon”. And so, B told him, “if you do that
I’ll give you P5,000.00” and after killing X, A again approached B,
told him he had already killed X, and B in compliance with his promise,
delivered the P5,000.00. In this case, the aggravating circumstance
is not present.
12. BY MEANS OF INUNDATION, FIRE, ETC .
Q: What are the aggravating circumstances under this paragraph?
A: If the crime is committed by means of:
1. Inundation
2. Fire
3. Explosion
4. Stranding of the vessel or intentional damage thereto
5. Derailment of locomotive; or
6. By use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.
Note: Any of these circumstances cannot be considered to
increase the penalty or to change the nature of the offense, unless
used by the offender as means to accomplish a criminal purpose.
When used as a means to kill a person, it qualifies the crime to
murder. Not aggravating when the law in defining the crime
includes them. E.g. Fire is not aggravating in the crime of arson.
Q: What are the rules as to the use of fire?
A: 1. Intent was only to burn but somebody died – simple
arson but with specific penalty.
2. If fire was used as a means to kill – murder.
3. If fire was used to conceal the killing ‐ separate crimes of
arson and murder/homicide.
13. EVIDENT PREMEDITATION
Q: What are the requisites of evident premeditation?
1. Time when offender determined to commit the crime;
2. Act manifestly indicating that he has clung to its determination;
3. Sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution,
to allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act and to
allow his conscience to overcome the resolution of his will.
Note: Premeditation must be clear. It must be based upon external acts and not
presumed from mere lapse of time. It must appear that the offender clung
to his determination to commit the crime.
In People v. Mojica, the lapse of one hour and forty‐five minutes
(4:15 p.m. to 6 p.m.) was considered by the Supreme Court as sufficient.
In People v. Cabodoc, where at 1:00 p.m., the accused opened his balisong and
uttered “I will kill him,” and at 4:30 p.m. of the said date, the accused stabbed the
victim, it was held that the lapse of three and a half hours (3 ½ hours) from the
inception of the plan to the execution of the crime satisfied the last requisite
of evident premeditation.
Q: What is the essence of premeditation?
A: The execution of the criminal act must be preceded by
cool thought and reflection upon the resolution to carry out the
criminal intent during the space of time sufficient to arrive
at a calm judgment.
Q: Can there be evident premeditation when the killing is
accidental?
A: No. In evident premeditation, there must be a clear reflection
on the part of the offender. If the killing was accidental, there
was no evident premeditation.
Q: What if the victim is different from that intended?
A: When the victim is different from that intended, premeditation
is not aggravating although it is not necessary that there is a
plan to kill a particular person for premeditation to exist.
14. CRAFT, FRAUD OR DISGUISE
Q: What must be attendant in order for this circumstance to be
appreciated?
A: To be appreciated, these circumstances must
have facilitated or be taken advantage of by the
offender in the commission of a crime.
Q: What is craft?
A: Craft involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of
the accused in order not to arouse the suspicion of the victim.
E.g.: 1. A person who pretended to be a customer, then, robbed the place
2. A person who pretended to be a Meralco official, then committed a crime
Q: What is fraud?
A: Fraud are deceitful words or machinations used to induce
the victim to act in a manner which enables the offender
to carry out his design.
Q: What is the distinction between fraud and craft?
FRAUD CRAFT
Where there is a direct The act of the accused done in
inducement by insidious order not to arouse suspicion of
words or machinations, the victim constitute craft.
fraud is present.
Note: Craft and fraud may be absorbed in treachery if they have

been deliberately adopted as means, methods or forms for the
treacherous strategy, or they may co‐exist independently where they
are adopted for a different purpose in the commission of the crime.
Q: What is disguise?
A: Disguise means resorting to any device to conceal identity.
Note: 1.The test of disguise is whether the device or contrivance resorted
to by the offender was intended to make identification more difficult
2.The use of an assumed name in the publication of a libel
constitutes disguise
Q: What is the test in order to determine if disguise exist?
A: Whether the device or contrivance resorted to by the offender was
intended to or did make identification more difficult, such as the
use of a mask or false hair or beard. If in spite of the
disguise, the offender was recognized, disguise cannot be
aggravating.
Q: What is the distinction among Craft, Fraud, and Disguise
CRAFT FRAUD DISGUISE

Involves the use of Involves the use Involves the
intellectual trickery of direct use of devise to
and cunning not to inducement by conceal identity
arouse the suspicion insidious words
of the victim or machinations
15. ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH OR MEANS
TO WEAKEN DEFENSE
Q: What is abuse of superior strength?
A: To use purposely excessive force out of proportion with the means of
defense available to the person attacked. There must be evidence of
notorious inequality of forces between the offender and the offended
party in their age, size and strength, and that the offender took advantage
of such superior strength in committing the crime.
Note: Abuse of superior strength is inherent in the crime of parricide
where the husband kills the wife. It is generally accepted that the
husband is physically stronger than the wife.
Q: Is the mere fact that there were two persons who attacked
the victim enough to constitute
abuse of superior strength?
A: No. It must be shown that the offenders have taken advantage of
Q: What is the meaning of “advantage be taken”?
A: It means to deliberately use excessive force that is out of
proportion to the means for self‐defense available to the
person attacked. (People v. Lobrigas)
Q: When does means employed to weaken defense exist?
A: It exists when the offended party's resisting
power is materially weakened.
Q: What are the requisites of means to weaken defense?
A: 1. Means were purposely sought to weaken the defense of the victim
to resist the assault
2. The means used must not totally eliminate possible defense
of the victim, otherwise, it will fall under treachery.
Q: In what cases is it applicable?
A: It is applicable only to crimes against persons, and sometimes to crimes against property, such
as robbery with homicide. Note: Means to weaken the defense is absorbed in treachery.

16. TREACHERY
Q: What is treachery?
A: Treachery (aleviosa) refers to the employment of means, method, or form
in the commission of the crime which tend directly and specially to
insure its execution without risk to himself arising from the defense
which the offended party might make.
Note: Rules regarding treachery:
1. Applicable only to crimes against persons.
2. Means, methods, or forms need not insure accomplishment of crime
3. Mode of attack must be thought of by the offender, and must not
spring from the unexpected turn of events.
Treachery cannot co‐exist with passion or obfuscation (People v. Pansensoy)
Q: What is the test of treachery?
A: The test of treachery is not only the relative position of the parties
but more specifically whether or not the victim was forewarned or
afforded the opportunity to make a defense or to ward off the attack.

Q: What are the requisites of treachery?
A: 1. At the time of the attack, victim was not in the position to defend
himself
2.Offender consciously adopted the particular means, method or
form of attack employed by him.
Note: The location of the wounds does not give rise to
the presumption of the presence of treachery.
Q: What is the essence of treachery?
A: The essence of treachery is that by virtue of the means,
method or form employed by the offender, the offended
party was not able to put up any defense.
Q: What are those instances that may be absorbed by treachery?
A: 1. Abuse of superior strength
2. Aid of armed men
3. By a band
4. Means to weaken the defense
5. Craft
6. Nighttime
Q: Supposing, the victim hid behind a drum where he
could not be seen by the offender. The offender,
knowing
that the victim was hiding behind the drum shot at
the drum. The bullet penetrated the drum and hit
the victim which caused his death. Can the
aggravating circumstance of treachery be appreciated?
A: Yes. The victim was not in a position to defend himself.
17. IGNOMINY
Q: To what does ignominy pertain to?
A: It pertains to the moral order, which adds disgrace to the
Material injury caused by the crime. Ignominy adds insult to injury
or adds shame to the natural effects of the crime. Ignominy
shocks the moral conscience of man.
E.g. 1. A married woman being raped before the eyes of her husband.
2. Raping a woman from behind
3. After having been killed, the body was
thrown into pile or garbage.
4.Accused embraced and kissed the offended party
not out of lust but out of anger in front of many people
5. Victim was raped successively by five men.

Q: What are the requisites for ignominy?
A: 1. Crime must be against
a. Chastity
b. less serious physical injuries
c. light or grave coercion
d. murder
2. The circumstance made the crime more humiliating
and shameful for the victim.
Note: Ignominy is not present where the victim was already dead
when such acts were committed against his body or person
Q: To what crimes is ignominy inherent?
A: 1. Libel
2. Acts of lasciviousness

Q: What is the distinction between ignominy and cruelty?
IGNOMINY CRUELTY
Ignominy refers to the Cruelty pertains to physical
moral effect of a crime and it suffering of the victim so
pertains to the the victim has to be alive.
moral order, whether or
not the victim
is dead or alive.
Note: Ignominy and cruelty are circumstances brought about
which are not necessary in the commission of the crime.
18. UNLAWFUL ENTRY
Q: When is an entry considered unlawful?
A: When an entry is effected by a way not intended for that
purpose. The use of unauthorized entrance must not be for
the purpose of escape.
Note: This circumstance is inherent in the crimes of trespass
to dwelling and robbery with force upon things.
But it is aggravating in the crime of robbery with violence
against or intimidation of persons.
Q: Why is unlawful entry aggravating?
A: One who acts, not respecting the walls erected by men to
guard their property and provided for their personal safety,
shows greater perversity, a greater audacity and hence the
law punishes him with more severity.
Q: Supposing, the owners of the house commonly
use the window as their ordinary means to enter
the house, then the accused entered the door.
Can the aggravating circumstance of unlawful
entry be appreciated?
A: Yes. The aggravating circumstance of unlawful
entry may still be appreciated.
19. BREAKING WALL
Q: What are the requisites for breaking a wall?
A: 1. A wall, roof, window, or door was broken
2. They were broken to effect entrance

Q: Give instances where breaking is lawful.
A: 1. An officer in order to make an arrest may break open door or window
of any building in which the person to be arrested is or is reasonably
believed to be (Sec. 11, Rule 133 of Rules of Court);
2. An officer if refused admittance may break open any door or
window to execute the search warrant or liberate himself
(Sec. 7, Rule 126 of Rules of Court);
3. Replevin (Sec.4, Rule 60 of Rules of Court)
Q: What is the distinction between breaking wall
and unlawful entry?
BREAKING WALL UNLAWFUL ENTRY
It involves the breaking Presupposes that there
of the enumerated is no such breaking as
parts of the house. by entry through the
window.
20. AID OF MINORS OR USE OF MOTOR VEHICLES
OR THER SIMILAR MEANS
AID OF MINORS
Q: Why is this considered an aggravating circumstance?
A: To repress professional criminals to avail themselves of minors,
taking advantage of their irresponsibility and to counteract the great facilities
found by modern criminals to commit the crime and abscond once the
same is committed. The use of a minor in the commission of the crime
shows the greater perversity of the offender because he is educating
the innocent minor in committing a crime.
USE OF MOTOR VEHICLES
Q: Why is this considered as an aggravating circumstance?
A: The use of motor vehicles in the commission of a crime poses difficulties
to the authorities in apprehending the offenders. This circumstance is
aggravating only when used to facilitate the commission of the offense.
Note: If motor vehicle is used only in the escape of the offender,
Q: What does the phrase “other similar means” mean?
A: It means should be understood as referring to motorized
vehicles or other efficient means of transportation
similar to automobile or airplane.
Q: Supposing, the accused robbed a house then found a
car in front of the house which he used for his escape,
can the aggravating circumstance of use of motor
vehicle ne appreciated?
A: No. The crime has already been accomplished.
Note: Even if the motor vehicle used is a public vehicle,
the circumstance may still be appreciated.
21. CRUELTY
Q: When does cruelty exist?
A: When the culprit enjoys and delights in making his victim
suffer slowly and gradually, causing him unnecessary
and prolonged physical pain in the consummation of
the crime.
Q: What are the requisites of cruelty as an aggravating
circumstance?
A: 1.The injury caused be deliberately increased by causing
other wrong.
2.The other wrong be unnecessary for the execution of the
purpose of the offender.
Q: Is cruelty inherent in crimes against persons?
A: No. In order for it to be appreciated, there must be positive
proof that the wounds found on the body of the victim were
inflicted while he was still alive to unnecessarily prolong
physical suffering.
Note: If the victim was already dead when the acts of mutilation were
being performed, this would also qualify the killing to murder due
to outraging of his corpse.
E.g. Cruelty is aggravating in rape where the offender tied the victim to a bed and
burnt her face with a lighted cigarette while raping her laughing all the way.
Q: What are the other aggravating circumstances?
A: 1. Organized or syndicated crime group
2. Under influence of dangerous drugs
3. Use of unlicensed firearm
ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES (Art.15)
Q: What are alternative circumstances?
A: Those which must be taken into consideration as
aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and
effects of the crime and the other conditions
attending its commission.
Q: What are the four alternative circumstances?
A: 1. Relationship
2. Intoxication
3. Degree of instruction
4. Education of the offender
1. RELATIONSHIP
Q: When is relationship taken into consideration?
A: When the offended party is the:
1. Spouse
2. Ascendant
3. Descendant
4. Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister;
5. Relative by affinity in the same degree of the offender
6. Other relatives included by analogy to ascendants and descendants.
e.g. Stepparents -It is their duty to bestow upon their stepchildren
a mother/father’s affection, care and protection.
Note: The relationship of uncle and niece is not
covered by any of the relationship mentioned
Q: When is relationship exempting?
A:
1. In the case of an accessory who is related to the principal
within the relationship prescribed in Article 20.
2. In Art. 247, a spouse will not incur criminal liability for
a crime of less serious physical injuries or serious physical
injuries if this was inflicted after having surprised the
offended spouse or paramour or mistress committing
actual sexual intercourse.
3. Under Art. 332, in the crime of theft, malicious mischief
and swindling or estafa, there is no criminal liability if the
offender is related to the offended party as spouse, ascendant,
or descendant or if the offender is a brother or sister or brother‐
in‐law or sister‐in‐law of the offended party and they are living
together.
Q: When is relationship mitigating?
A: 1.In crimes against property, by analogy to Art. 332
(persons exempt from criminal liability).Thus,
Relationship is mitigating in the crimes of robbery
(Arts. 294‐302), usurpation (Art. 312), fraudulent
insolvency (Art. 314) and arson (Arts 321322, 325‐326)
2. In crimes against persons when it comes to physical
injuries, it is mitigating when the offense committed is
less serious physical injuries or slight physical injuries,
if the offended party is a relative of a lower degree.
(Reyes, p.473)

Q: When is relationship aggravating?
A: 1. In crimes against persons in cases:
a. When the offended party is a relative of a higher degree than the offender;
b. When the offender and the offended party are relatives of the same level,
as killing a brother; (People v. Alisub, 69 Phil. 362)
c. Where the crime is physical injuries:
i. Serious physical injuries – even if the offended
party is a descendant of the offender;
The serious physical injuries must not be inflicted by a parent upon his
child by excessive chastisement
ii. Less serious physical injuries or slight physical injuries –
if the offended party is a relative of a higher degree of the offender;
d. When the crime committed is homicide or murder, relationship is
aggravating even if the victim of the crime is a relative of a lower degree;
e. In rape, relationship is aggravating where a stepfather raped his stepdaughter
(People v. De Leon) or in a case where a father raped his own daughter
(People v. Porras,).
2. In crimes against chastity.
Q: When is relationship neither aggravating nor mitigating?

A: Relationship is neither aggravating nor mitigating when
relationship is an element of the offense.
e.g. parricide, adultery and concubinage.
Note : In the crime of qualified seduction, relationship is a

qualifying aggravating circumstance, where the
offender is a brother or an ascendant of the offended
woman, whether or not the woman is a virgin or
over 18 years of age.

2. INTOXICATION
Q: When is intoxication mitigating?
A: If intoxication is:
1. Not habitual; or
2. Not subsequent to the plan to commit a felony, or
3. At the time of the commission of the crime,
the accused has taken such quantity of alcoholic drinks
as to blur his reason and deprive him of certain degree of control.

Note : To be mitigating, the state of intoxication of the accused must
be proved. Once intoxication is established by satisfactory
evidence, in the absence of proof to the contrary, it is
presumed to be nonhabitual or unintentional.
Q: When is intoxication aggravating?
A: If intoxication is
1. Habitual; or
2. Intentional (subsequent to the plan to commit a felony).
Note: The moment intoxication is shown to be habitual or
intentional to the commission of the crime, the same
will immediately aggravate, regardless of the
crime committed.
Q: Who is a “habitual drunkard?”
A: He is one given to intoxication by excessive use of intoxicating drinks.
Q: What determines whether intoxication is
mitigating or not?
A: The basis is the effect of the alcohol upon the offender, not the
quantity of the alcoholic drink he had taken in.
3. DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION OR EDUCATION OF
THE OFFENDER
Q: Is degree of instruction or education mitigating?
A: GR: Lack or low degree of instruction is mitigating in all crimes.
XPN: Not mitigating in:
1. Crimes against property (e.g. arson, estafa, threat)
2. Crimes against chastity
3. Murder or homicide
4. Rape
5. Treason – because love of country should be a natural feeling of
every
citizen, however unlettered or uncultured he may
be. (People v. Lansanas)Q: Is the degree of instruction and education two
distinct circumstances?
A: Yes. One may not have any degree of instruction but is nevertheless educated.
Note: It is not illiteracy alone but the lack of intelligence of the offender that is
BOOK 1 IV. PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE
Q: Who are criminally liable?
A: The following are criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies:
1. Principals
2. Accomplices
3. Accessories
Q: Who can be the parties in the commission of a crime?
A: 1. Active subject (the criminal)
2. Passive subject (the injured party)
Q: Who can be active subjects of a crime?
A: Only natural person can be the active subject of
crime because of the highly personal nature of the criminal responsibility.
Note: Under the RPC, natural persons act with
personal malice or negligence, artificial persons cannot act with malice or negligence.
Q: Who can be passive subjects of a crime?
A: A corporation and partnership can be passive subjects of a crime.
Note: A juridical person like a corporation cannot commit a crime that requires willful
purpose or malicious intent.
Q: May corpses or animals be passive subjects of a crime?
A: GR: Corpses and animals cannot be passive subjects because they have
no rights that may be impaired.
XPN: Under Art. 253, the crime of defamation may be committed if the
imputation tends to blacken the memory of one who is dead.
PRINCIPALS (Art. 17)
Q: What are the different classifications of criminal responsibility?
A: 1. Individual criminal responsibility – When there is no conspiracy, each
of the offenders is liable only for the act performed by him.
2. Quasi ‐ collective criminal responsibility – Some offenders in the crime
are principals and the others are accomplices.
3. Collective criminal responsibility – Where
there is conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. All conspirators are
liable as coprincipals regardless of the extent and character of their
participation.
Q: What are the kinds of principals?
A: 1. Principal by direct participation
2. Principal by induction/inducement
3. Principal by indispensable cooperation
1. PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION
Q: What are the requisites for principals by direct participation?

A: 1. They participated in the criminal resolution.
2. They carried out the plan and personally took part in its
execution by acts, which directly tended to the same end.
Note: Principals by direct participation are those who
materially
execute the crime. They appear at the crime scene and
Q: What does personally took part in the commission of the crime mean?

A: It means that:
1. The principal by direct participation must
be at the scene of the commission of the crime, personally taking part in its
execution.
2. Under conspiracy, although he was not
present in the scene of the crime, he is equally liable as a principal by
direct participation.
E.g. One serving as guard pursuant to the conspiracy is
a principal by direct participation.
Q: What is the rule in determining criminal liability in case of conspiracy?
A: GR: If there is conspiracy, the criminal liability of all the participants will be
the same, because the act of one is the act of all.
XPN: If the participation of one is so insignificant, such that even
without his cooperation, the crime would be committed just as well,
then notwithstanding the existence of a conspiracy, such offender will
Q: What is the effect of conspiracy if not all the elements of the
crime is present as regards the coconspirator?
A: GR: When there is conspiracy, the fact that the element of
the offense is not present as regards one of the
conspirators is immaterial.
XPN:
1. In parricide – the element of relationship
must be present as regards the
offenders.
2. In murder –where treachery is an
element of the crime, all offenders must have knowledge of
the employment of the treachery at the time of the execution
of the act.
2. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCTION/ INDUCEMENT
Q: What is meant by inducement?
A: The inducement contemplated is one strong
enough that theperson induced could hardly resist.
Inducement is tantamount to an irresistible force compelling the
person induced to carry out the execution of the crime.
Q: Who is a principal by inducement?
A: To be a principal by inducement, the inducer’s
utterances must be such nature and made in such
manner as to become the
determining cause of the crime.
Note: Principals by inducement are liable even if they
do not appear at the scene of the crime.
Q: What are the two ways of directly inducing
another to commit a crime?
A: 1. By directly forcing another to commit a crime by:
a. Using irresistible force – such physical force as would produce an
effect upon the individual that in spite of all resistance, it reduces him
to a mere instrument
b. Causing uncontrollable fear – compulsion by means of intimidation
or threat that promise an evil of such gravity and eminence that the ordinary
man would have succumbed to it.
Note: In these cases, there is no conspiracy. Only the one using force or causing fear
is criminally liable. The material executor is not criminally liable
because of exempting circumstances of irresistible force and uncontrollable fear.
2. By directly inducing another to commit a crime by:
a. Giving price, or offering reward or promise
b. Using word or command.
Q: What are the distinctions between a principal by inducement
and an offender who made a proposal to commit a felony?
PRINCIPAL BY OFFENDER WHO MADE
INDUCEMENT PROPOSAL TO COMMIT
A FELONY
In both, there is inducement to commit a crime
Becomes liable only when the The mere proposal to commit a
crime is committed by the felony is punishable is not
principal by direct participation punishable except in proposal
to commit treason or rebellion.
However, the person to
whom the proposal is
made should not
commit
the crime; otherwise, the proponent
becomes a principal
by inducement.
Involves any crime The proposal to be punishable
must involve only treason or
Q: A asked B to kill C because of grave injustice
done
to A by C. A promised B a reward. B was
willing to kill
C, not so much because of the reward promised to
him but because he also had his own long‐standing
grudge against C, who had wronged
him in the past. If C is killed by B, would A be liable
as a principal by Inducement?
A: No, A would not be liable as principal by

inducement because the reward he promised B
is not the sole impelling reason which made B
3. PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION
Q: Who is a principal by indispensable cooperation?
A: Those who:
1. Participated directly in the criminal resolution; or
2. Cooperated in the commission of the crime by performing
an act, without which it would not have been accomplished.
Q: What does cooperation in the commission of the offense mean?
A: To desire or wish a common thing. But that
common will or purpose does not necessarily mean
previous understanding, for it can be explained or
inferred from the circumstances of each case.
Note: A principal by indispensable cooperation may be a co‐
conspirator under the doctrine of implied conspiracy. He becomes
a
co‐conspirator by indispensable cooperation, although the common
design or purpose was not previously agreed upon.
ACCOMPLICES (Art. 18)
Q: Who is an accomplice?
A: An accomplice is one who:
1. Concurs with the criminal design of the principals
by direct participation;
2. Cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous
or simultaneous acts, with the intention of supplying material
or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious way;
Note: Cooperation of an accomplice is only necessary,
not indispensable. Before there can be an accomplice,
there must be a principal by direct participation. In case of
doubt, the participation of the offender will be considered
that of an accomplice rather than that of a principal.
Q: Distinguish an accomplice from a principal by indispensable
cooperation?
PRINCIPAL BY ACCOMPLICE
INDISPENSABLE
COOPERATION
If the crime could hardly If the cooperation merely
be committed without such facilitated or hastened
cooperation, then such the consummation of the
cooperation would bring crime, this would make
about a principal. the cooperator merely
an accomplice.
Note: In determining whether the offender is a

principal or
accomplice, the basis is the importance of the
cooperation to the consummation of the crime.
Q: What are the distinctions between accomplice
and conspirator?
ACCOMPLICE CONSPIRATOR
In both, they agree with the criminal design
They come to know They come to know the
about it after the criminal intention because
principals have they themselves have
reached the decision, and decided upon such
only then do they agree to course of action.
cooperate in its execution.
They are merely instruments They are the authors of
who perform acts not the crime.
essential to the
perpetration of the offense.
ACCESSORIES (Art. 19)
Q: Who are accessories?
A: Those who do not participate in the criminal design, nor cooperate in the
commission of the felony, but with knowledge of the commission of the
crime, he subsequently takes part in three ways by:
1. Profiting or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime;
2. Concealing or destroying the body of the crime to prevent its discovery;
Note: Where the accused misleads the authorities by giving them false
information, such act is equivalent to concealment and he should be held
as an accessory.
3.Harboring, concealing or assisting in the
escape of the principal of the crime.
Note: One cannot be an accessory unless he knew of the commission of the
crime. An accessory must not have participated in the commission of the
crime. The accessory comes into the picture when the crime is already
consummated, not before the consummation of the crime.
Q: What if the offender has already involved himself as
a principal or accomplice?
A: He cannot be an accessory any further even though he
performs acts pertaining to an accessory.
Q: In what situations are accessories not criminally liable?
A: 1. When the felony committed is a light felony.
2. When the accessory is related to the principal as
spouse, or as an ascendant, or descendant or as brother
or sister whether legitimate, natural or adopted or where
the accessory is a relative by affinity within the same
degree, unless the accessory himself profited from the
effects or proceeds of the crime or assisted the
offender to profit therefrom.
1. PROFITING OR ASSISTING THE OFFENDER TO
PROFIT
BY THE EFFECTS OF THE CRIME
Illustration: If a person having participated as principal or
accomplice in robbery or theft but knowing that the property
being offered to him is the proceeds or subject matter of
the said crime, bought or purchased or dealt in any manner
with which such property, obtaining benefit from said
transaction or helping the thief or robber to profit there from.
Note: The accessory must receive the property from the
principal. He should not take it without the consent
of the principal. If he took it without the consent
of the principal, he is not an accessory but a principal in
the crime of theft.
2. DESTROYING THE CORPUS DELICTI
Q: What is a corpus delicti?
A: The corpus delicti is the body of the crime,
not necessarily the corpse.
It is a compound fact made up of two things:
1. The proof of the occurrence of certain events
2. Some person’s criminal responsibility
Thus, even if the corpse is not recovered, as long as that killing
is established beyond reasonable doubt, criminal liability will
arise and if there is someone who destroys the corpus delicti
to prevent discovery, he becomes an accessory.
(Inovero v. Coronel)
3. HARBORING OR CONCEALING AN OFFENDER
Q: Who may be guilty as an accessory by harboring, concealing or assisting
in the escape of the principal of the crime?
A: 1. Public officers Requisites:
a. Accessory is a public officer
b. He harbors, conceals, or assists in the escape of the principal
c. He acts with abuse of his public functions
d. The crime committed by the principal is any crime,
provided it is not a light felony.
Note: In the case of a public officer, the crime committed by the principal is immaterial. Such
officer becomes an accessory by the mere fact that he helped the principal escape by harboring,
concealing, making use of his public function and thus abusing the same.
2. Private person Requisites:
a. Accessory is a private person
b. He harbors, conceals or assists in the escape of the author of the crime
c. The crime committed by the principal is either:
i. Treason ii. Parricide iii. Murder iv. Attempt against the life of the President
v. That the principal is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.
ACCESSORIES EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY (Art. 20)
Q: What is the criminal liability of an accessory?
A: GR: An accessory is exempt from criminal liability, when the principal is his:
1. Spouse
2. Ascendant
3. Descendant
4. Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother, sister or
relative by affinity within the same degree.
XPN: Not so exempt even if the principal is related to him, if such
accessory: 1. Profited by the effects of the crime; or
2. Assisted the offender to profit from the effects of the crime.
Ratio: Such acts are prompted not by affection but by greed.
Note: The exemption provided for in this article is
based on the ties of blood and the preservation of
one’s name, which compels on to conceal the crimes committed by
relatives so near as those mentioned in this article. Nephew and niece are not included.
Public officer contemplated under par.3 of Art. 19 is exempt by reason of relationship to
the principal, even if such public officer acted with abuse of his public functions.
BOOK 1 V. PENALTIES GENERAL PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 21‐24)
Q: What are penalties?
A: Penalties are the punishment imposed by lawful authority upon a
person who commits a deliberate or negligent act which is against
the law.
PURPOSES
Q: What are the purposes for the imposition of
penalty under the RPC?
A: 1. Retribution or expiation – penalty is commensurate with
the gravity of the offense.
2. Correction or reformation – as shown
by the rules which regulate the execution of the
penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty.
3. Social defense – shown by its inflexible severity to
recidivists and habitual delinquents.
BOOK 1 V. PENALTIES CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES (ARTS. 25‐26)

Q: What are the general classifications of penalties?
A: 1. Principal penalties – those expressly
imposed by the court in the judgment of conviction.
2. Accessory penalties – those that are
deemed included in the imposition of the principal penalties.
Q: What are the principal penalties, according to
their divisibility? A: 1. Indivisible penalties – those which
have no fixed duration, e.g. death and reclusion perpetua
2. Divisible penalties – those that have fixed duration and are
divisible into three periods. e.g. reclusion temporal down to
arresto menor.

BOOK 1 V. PENALTIES CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES (ARTS. 25‐26)
Q: What are the penalties, according to their gravity?

A: 1. Capital
2. Afflictive
3. Correctional
4. Light.
Q: How are fines imposed?
A: Fines may be imposed as an alternative or single penalty.
Q: What are fines according to their gravity? (RA 10951)
A: 1. Afflictive – over P1,200,000
2. Correctional – P40,000 to P1,200,000
3. Light – less than P40000
BOOK 1 V. PENALTIES DURATION AND EFFECT OF PENALTIES (ARTS. 27 – 45)
Q: What is the duration of penalties?
PENALTY DURATION
Reclusion perpetua 20 years and 1 day to 40 years
Reclusion temporal 12 years and 1 day to 20 years
Prision mayor and 6 years and 1 day to 12 years
Temporary disqualification
Prision correcional 6 months and 1 day to 6 years
Suspension and Destierro
Arresto mayor 1 month and 1 day to 6 months
Arresto menor 1 day to 1 month
Bond to keep the peace Discretionary on the Court

Q: What are the distinctions between the penalty of
reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment?
RECLUSION LIFE
PERPETUA IMPRISONMENT
Pertains to the penalty Pertains to the penalty
imposed for violation imposed for violation
of the RPC of special laws
It has fixed duration It has no fixed duration
It carries with it It does not carry with
accessory penalties it accessory penalty
Note: Although reclusion perpetua has been given a fixed

duration, it has remained to be an indivisible penalty.
Indivisible penalties have no durations.

Q: What is the nature of destierro?
A: Destierro is a principal penalty. It is a punishment whereby a convict is
banished to a certain place and is prohibited from entering or coming near
that place designated in the sentence, not less than 25 kilometers but
not to extend beyond 250 kilometers
Note: If the convict should enter the prohibited places, he commits
the crime of evasion of service of sentence under Article 157.
Q: In what crimes is the penalty of destierro imposed?
1.In the crime of grave threat or light threat, when the offender is required to put up a
bond for good behavior but failed or refused to do so under Article 284, such con-
vict shall be sentenced to destierro so that he would not be able to carry out his threat
2.In the crime of concubinage, the penalty prescribed for the concubine is destierro
under Article 334
3.Where the penalty prescribed is arresto Mayor, but the offender is entitled to
privileged mitigating circumstance and lowering the prescribed penalty by one
degree, the penalty one degree lower is destierro. Thus, it shall be the one imposed.

Q: What is civil interdiction?
A: Civil interdiction is an accessory penalty.
Civil Interdiction shall deprive the offender during the time of his sentence:
1.The rights of parental authority, or guardianship either as to the person or
property of any ward;
2. Marital authority;
3. The right to manage his property; and
4.The right to dispose of such property by any act or any conveyance inter vivos.
Q: What are the distinctions between bond to keep peace and bond
for good behavior?
BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR
Failure to post a bond to keep the The legal effect of failure to post a
peace results to bond for good behavior is not
imprisonment either for 6 imprisonment but destierro
months or 30 days, under Article 284
depending on whether the
felony committed is
grave or less grave on one hand,
PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT (Art. 39)
Q: What is preventive imprisonment?
A: Period of detention undergone by an accused where the crime with which he is
charged is nonbailable or, even if bailable, he is unable to post the requisite bail
Q: When will preventive imprisonment apply?
A: It will apply to all sentences regardless of the duration thereof, including the so‐
called perpetual penalties as long as they involve deprivation of
liberty. It will also apply to destierro.
EFFECTS OF PARDON (Art. 36)
Q: What is the effect of pardon by the President on the political rights of the accused?
A: GR: Executive pardon does not restore the right to hold public office or the
right to suffrage
XPN: When such rights are expressly restored
Q: What are the limitations of the pardoning power of the President?
A: 1. Executive pardon can only be exercised after conviction by final judgment
2. Executive pardon does not extend to cases of impeachment
Q: What is the effect of the grant of pardon on the principal and accessory
penalties imposed?
A: GR: Pardon granted in general terms extinguishes only the principal
penalty and does not include the accessory penalty
XPN:
1. When absolute pardon is granted after the term of imprisonment has
expired, it removes all that is left of the consequences of the conviction
2. If pardon expressly provides, accessory penalty is extinguished.
Q: What are the distinctions between executive
pardon and pardon by the offended party?
EXECUTIVE PARDON PARDON BY THE OFFENDED PARTY
Covers any crime, unless otherwise Crimes against chastity under the RPC
provided by the Constitution or the laws
Extinguishes criminal liability Does not extinguish criminal liability
Executive pardon does not include Civil liability can be waived
civil liability
Granted only after conviction by Should be given before the institution
final judgment of the criminal action

COSTS (Art. 37)
Q: What is cost or cost of suit?
A: It is the expenses of litigation allowed by the Rules of Court to be
assessed against or to be recovered by a party in litigation.
Q: What do costs include?
A: 1. Fees
2. Indemnities, in the course of judicial proceedings
Q: To whom are costs chargeable?
A: 1. In case of conviction
– chargeable to the accused
2. In case of acquittal
-costs are de officio, each party bearing his own expenses
Note: Payment of costs is discretionary to the courts
PECUNIARY LIABILITIES (Art. 38)
Q: What do pecuniary liabilities include?
A: In the following order:
1. Reparation of the damage caused
2. Indemnification of the consequential damages
3. Fine
4. Costs of proceedings
Note:
1.The order of payment applies in case the property of the
offender is not sufficient for the payment of his
pecuniary liabilities.
2. The order of payment is mandatory.
SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
Q: When is subsidiary penalty imposed?
A: 1. When there is a principal penalty of imprisonment
or any other principal penalty and it carries with it a fine; or
2. When penalty is only a fine.

Note: A subsidiary penalty is not an accessory penalty.
It must be expressly stated in the sentence and convict
must have been insolvent to pay the fine and not mere
refusal to pay it. The sentence will merely provide that in
case of non‐payment of the fine, the convict shall
be required to save subsidiary penalty There shall be no
subsidiary penalty for the nonpayment of damages to the
offended party
CONFISCATION AND FORFEITURES OF
THE PROCEEDS OR INSTRUMENTS OF THE CRIME (Art. 45)
Q: What are the rules on confiscation and
forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime?
A: 1.Every penalty imposed carries with it the forfeiture of the
proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools used in the
commission of the crime.
2. Confiscation and forfeiture are in favor of the government
3. Property of a 3rd person not liable for the offense is not
subject to confiscation and forfeiture
4.Property not subject of lawful commerce (whether it
belongs to the accused or 3rd person) shall be destroyed
Note: Confiscation and forfeiture are additional penalties. Hence,
once the sentence has become final, the court can no longer modify,
alter, or changeit by ordering confiscation and forfeiture.
Q: What are the cases when confiscation and forfeiture
cannot be effected?
A:
1. The instruments belong to an innocent third party.
2. Such properties have not been placed under the
jurisdiction of the court.
3. When it is legally or physically impossible.
Q: How are penalties applied?
A: GR: Penalty prescribed by law in general terms shall be
imposed upon the principals for the consummated felony
XPN: When the law fixes the penalty for frustrated or
attempted felony

BOOK 1 V. PENALTIES APPLICATION OF PENALTIES (ARTS. 44‐77)
Q: When is the graduated scale followed?
A: The graduated scale is followed when the law prescribes a
penalty lower or higher by one or more degrees than another
given penalty.
Scale 1 Scale 2
1. Death 1. Perpetual or Temporary Absolute Disqualification
2. Reclusion Perpetua 2. Perpetual or Temporary Special Disqualification
3. Reclusion Temporal 3.Suspension from public office, the right to vote
and to be voted for, the profession or calling
4. Prision mayor 4. Public Censure
5. Prision Correccional 5.Fine
6. Arresto Mayor
7. Destierro

8. Arresto Menor
9. Public censure
10. Fine
Q: What is the three‐fold rule?
A: The three‐fold rule provides that the maximum duration of
convict’s sentence shall not be more than 3 times the
length of the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him but
in no case to exceed 40 years. The three‐fold
rule applies only when the convict has to serve at least
4 sentences successively. Subsidiary penalty forms part
of the penalty.
Note: The three‐fold rule must be addressed to the warden and

not to the judge.

ADDITIONAL PENALTIES TO BE IMPOSED UPON
CERTAIN ACCESSORIES (Art. 58)
Q: What are the additional penalties that could be imposed to certain
accessories?
A: Public officers who help the author of the crime by misusing
their office and duties shall suffer the additional penalties of:
1. Absolute perpetual disqualification‐
if the principal offender is guilty of a grave felony;
2. Absolute temporary disqualification‐
if the principal offender is guilty of less grave felony.

PENALTY FOR IMPOSSIBLE CRIME (Art. 59)
Q: What is the penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit
a crime because the means employed or the aims sought are
impossible?
A: The penalty for impossible crime is arresto mayor or fine
ranging from P200‐P500.
Q: What is the basis for the imposition of penalty for impossible crime?
A: 1. The social danger it could cause
2. Degree of criminality shown by the offender.

Indeterminate Sentence Law (R.A. 4103, as amended)
Q: What is an indeterminate sentence?
A: It is a sentence with a minimum term and a maximum term
which the court is mandated to
impose for the benefit of a guilty person who is not disqualified therefore,
when the maximum imprisonment exceeds 1 year.
Q: What is the purpose of the indeterminate sentence law?
A: The purpose of the indeterminate sentence law
is to avoid prolonged imprisonment because it is
proven to be more destructive than constructive to offenders.
Q: When does indeterminate sentence apply?
A: Indeterminate sentence applies mandatorily to
violations of both the RPC and special laws where
imprisonment would exceed one year, and where
the penalty is divisible. (Sec.1)

Q: When is a prisoner qualified for release on parole?
A: Whenever any prisoner shall:
1. Have served the minimum penalty imposed upon him
2. Appear to the board of indeterminate sentence, from the reports
of the prisoner’s work and conduct, and from the study and
investigation made by the board itself that:
a. Fitted by his training for release;
b. Reasonable probability that such
prisoner will live and remain at liberty without
violating the law;
c. Release will not be incompatible with the welfare of society.
Q: When is a prisoner on parole entitled to final release and discharge?
A: If during the period of surveillance such paroled prisoner shall:
1. Show himself to be a law abiding citizen and;
2. Not violate any law,
The Board may issue a final certification in his favor, for his final release
Q: What are the sanctions for the violation of the conditions of parole?
A: When the paroled prisoner shall violate any of the conditions of his parole,
he may be:
1. Rearrested; and
2. Thereafter, he shall serve the remaining unexpired portion of
the maximum sentence for which he was originally
committed to prison.

Q: The penalty provided by law is 6 months to 3 years.
Decide if the following penalties are correct:
1. 2 years;
2. 1 year;
3. 10 months;
4. 6 months to 10 months;
5. 6 months to 2 years.
A:
1. Incorrect, a straight penalty cannot be imposed under the ISLAW.
2.Correct, because if the range of the penalty is one year or less, you
can impose a straight penalty of one year. Here ISLAW is not applicable.
3. Correct, same as (b).
4.Incorrect, if the maximum penalty is one year or less, then it is not
covered by ISLAW. Hence, there is no need to provide for maximum and
minimum periods in imposing a penalty.
5.Correct, if the maximum period of the penalty imposed is more than
one year, the ISLAW applies.
BOOK 1 V. PENALTIES EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES (ARTS. 78‐88)
Q: In what cases is destierro imposed?
A:
1. Death or serious physical injuries is caused or are inflicted
under exceptional circumstances. (Art. 247)
2. Failure to give bond for good behavior in grave and
light threats. (Art. 284)
3. Penalty for the concubine in concubinage (Art. 334)
4. When, after reducing the penalty by one or more degrees,
destierro is the proper penalty.
Probation Law (P.D. 968, as amended)
Q: What is probation?
A: It is a disposition under which a defendant, after conviction
and sentence, is released subject to conditions imposed
by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer.
(Sec. 3 [a])
Note: Probation is only a privilege and its grant rests solely
upon the discretion of the court.
Q: When may probation be availed of?
A: Probation may be availed of before the convict begins serving
sentence by final judgment provided that he/she did not
appeal his/her conviction anymore.
Note: The application for probation must be done within
15 days from the promulgation of judgment.
Q: Who can apply for probation?
A: GR: Only those whose penalty does not exceed six years of
imprisonment are qualified for probation, without regard to
the nature of the crime. Hence, if the penalty is six years
and one day, he is no longer qualified for probation.
XPN:
1. First time minor offenders under Ra 9165
2. Violation of the omnibus election code

BOOK 1 VI. MODIFICATION AND EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Q: How is criminal liability extinguished?
A: Criminal liability may be extinguished either, totally or partially.
Q: What are circumstances which totally extinguish criminal liability?
A: 1. Death of the convict as to personal penalties; and as to pecuniary
penalties, liability thereto is extinguished only when death of the offender
occurs before final judgment
Note: Extinguishment of criminal liability is a ground for motion to
quash. The death of the offended party however does not extinguish
criminal liability of the accused because it is a crime against the State.
2. Service of sentence
3. Amnesty which completely extinguished the penalty and all its effects
4. Absolute pardon
5. Prescription of the crime
6. Prescription of the penalty
7. Marriage of the offended woman as in the crimes of rape,
abduction, seduction and acts of lasciviousness
Q: What are circumstances which totally extinguish criminal liability?

A: 1. Conditional pardon
2. Commutation of sentence
3. For good conduct allowances which the
culprit may earn while he is serving sentence
4. Parole
5. Probation

A. PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES UNDER THE RPC (Art. 90)
Q. What is prescription of crimes?
A: Prescription of crimes is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to
prosecute the offender after the lapse of certain time.
GR: Prescription of the crime begins on the day the crime was committed.
XPN: When the crime was concealed, prescription would only commence
from the time the offended party or the government learns of the
commission.
CRIMES PRESCRIPTION Crimes punishable by
death, Reclusion perpetua, Reclusion temporal 20 years
Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties 15 years
Crimes punishable by other correctional penalties
10 years, except those punishable by arresto mayor wherein the
prescriptive period is 5 years.
PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENSES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SPECIAL LAWS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES
IMPOSABLE PENALTY PRESCRIPTION
Imprisonment of six (6) years or more 12 years
Imprisonment of two years but less than six years 8 years
Offenses under the NIRC 5 years
Imprisonment of over one month but less than two years 4 years
Fine or imprisonment of not over 1 year
one month or both Violations of municipal ordinances 2 months
B. PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTIES
Q: What is prescription of penalties?
A: Prescription of penalties is the loss or forfeiture
of the right of the government to execute the final
sentence after the lapse of certain time.
Q: When will the prescriptive period commence to run? A:
Prescriptive period of penalties will only commence to run

IMPOSABLE PENALTY PRESCRIPTION Death,
reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal 20 years
Other afflictive penalties 15 years Correctional penalties
except arresto mayor 10 years Light penalties 1 year
Q: What are the distinctions between prescription
of crimes and prescription of penalties? A:
PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES PRESCRIPTION OF
PENALTIES Loss or forfeiture of the State to prosecute.
Loss of forfeiture of the State to enforce judgment
Starts counting upon discovery of the commission of the crime
starts counting upon the escape or evasion of
service of sentenceMere absence from the
Philippines interrupts the running of the prescription
Absence from the Philippines interrupts the
period only when he goes to a foreign country
ALLOWANCE FOR GOOD CONDUCT (Art. 97)
IMPRISONMENT DEDUCTION First 2 years
5 days for each month of good behavior 3‐5 years
8 days for each month ofgood behavior
6‐10 years
10 days for each month of good behavior
11 and so on years
15 days for each month of good behavior

Criminal Law Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Law Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Law Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRIMINAL LAW

A: Liberally construed in favor of

Note: In cases of conflict with official

Note: Not all violations of special laws

2.Extraterritorial – refers to the application of the RPC outside

2.Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine

Note: If forgery was committed abroad, it must refer only to

Those who introduced the counterfeit items are criminally liable even

2. Territoriality – means that the penal laws of the country have force and effect only within its

3. Prospectivity – means that acts or omissions will only be subject to a penal law if they are

Note: While the President may define and punish an act as a crime,

Act is malicious Not malicious

Has intention to cause injury Wrongful act results from

The offender, the intended victim There are only two

Answer: In this case, Y is liable for homicide for the death of Y.

Q: A person enters the dwelling of another. However, at

Q: The accused brought gasoline into a building, with the

2. Reiteracion – the offender has been previously punished for an offense which the law

estafa or falsification, is found guilty of any of the said crimes a third time or oftener.

4. Quasi‐recidivism — Any person who shall commit a felony after having been

Q: What are examples of extenuating circumstances?

Q: Who has the burden of evidence in criminal case?

The foregoing rests on the maxim:

Note: The state of necessity must not have been

Q: What are the two tests for exemption on

A: 1. Test of cognition –whether the accused acted with complete

Q: What is the minimum age of criminal responsibility?

15 years old or below Exempt The child shall be subjected

Above 15 but Not exempt Such child shall be subjected

IRRESISTIBLE FORCE UNCONTROLLABLE FE

It is necessary that the provocation or The vindication of the

Q: What are the kinds of aggravating circumstances?

Note: Public officer must have used the influence, prestige

Note: If crime committed is against the public authority while in the

Q: Supposing, the crime was committed inside a dark movie house

Q: What aggravating circumstance will be considered if there are

Q: Supposing, the first offense was acts of

A: No. Acts of lasciviousness and attempted rape are not

Q: Supposing, the first offense in 1980 was attempted

Note: Craft and fraud may be absorbed in treachery if they have

CRAFT FRAUD DISGUISE

as robbery with homicide. Note: Means to weaken the defense is absorbed in treachery.

Note : In the crime of qualified seduction, relationship is a

A: No, A would not be liable as principal by

Note: In determining whether the offender is a

Q: What are the penalties, according to their gravity?

Note: Although reclusion perpetua has been given a fixed

Note: The three‐fold rule must be addressed to the warden and

Q: What are circumstances which totally extinguish criminal liability?

You might also like