This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
vs. Misa That the accused claim that his allegiance as a Filipino citizen was suspended and that there was a change of sovereignty over the Phil Islands: • A citizen or subject owes, not a qualified and temporary, but an absolute and permanent allegiance, which consists in the obligation of fidelity and obedience to his government of sovereign. The absolute and permanent allegiance of the inhabitants of a territory occupied by the enemy to their legitimate government or sovereign is not abrogated or severed by the enemy occupation, because the sovereignty of the government or sovereign de jure is not transferred thereby the occupier. • Just as treason may be committed against the Federal as well as against the State Govt, in the same way treason may have been committed during the Japanese occupation against the sovereignty of the US as weel as against the sovereignty of the Phil Commonwealth; and that the change of our gorm of govt from commonwealth to republic does not affect the prosecution of those charged with the crime of treason committed during the commonwealth, bec it is an offense against the same govt and the same sovereign people. People vs. Perez That the women were brought by the accused to the Japanese soldiers for sexual purposes: • Commandeering of women to satisfy the lust of Japanese officers or men or to enliven the entertainments held in their honor was not reason even though the women and the entertainments helpted to make life more pleasant for the enemies and boost their spirit.
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 1
• The law of treason does not prescribe all kinds of social, business and political intercourse bet the belligerent occupants of the invaded country and it inhabitants. • • • Adherence, unlike overt act, need not be proved by the oaths of two witnesses. Makapili as an overt act: the membership must be established by the deposition of two witnesses. It is necessary to produce two direct witnesses to the whole overt act. It may be possible to piece bits together of the overt act, but if so, each bit must have the support of two oaths.
People vs. Prieto That the accused help in torturing guerillas with Japanese soldiers: • • two-witness rule: It is necessary that the two witnesses corroborate each other not only on the whole overt act but on any part of it. Torture and atrocities as aggravating circumstances –the use hereof instead of the usual and less painful method of execution will be taken into account to increase the penalty under art. 14(21). Plea of guilty to some counts: considered mitigating circumstance.
ESPIONAGE CA 616 PIRACY People vs.Lol-lo and Saraw That the accused are claiming that they do not belong to the Phil territory: • Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas, without lawful authority and done animo furandi (with intent to steal) and in the spirit and intention of universal hostility. Piracy is a crime not against any particular State byt against all mankind. It may be punished in the competent tribunal or any country where the offender may be found or into which he may be carried. The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes had not territorial limits.
People vs. Manayao That the accused with a band, massacred a barangay and two 10-year old girls witnessed the crime: • • Makapili is not part of the Japanese Army but just an org of Filipino traitors, pure and simple. Defense of State: constitutional duty of citizen cannot be cast off in time of war. The citizen has a constitutional duty to defend the State and cannot be cast off when his country is at war by the siple expedient of subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution or laws of a foreign country, and an enemy country at that, or be accepting a commission in the military, naval or air service of such country or by desserting from the Phil Army, Navy or Air Corp.
People vs. Rodriguez • PD 532 (Anti-Piracy Law) amended 134 and its effect was to create the crime of qualified piracy where rape, murder or homicide is committed. No mitigating circumstance shall be appreciated regardless of plea of guilt. Recall: crew members of the vessel committed crime
People vs. Adriano That the accused is a member of the Makapili and wore uniforms and that the two witnesses refer to different acts on different days: • Makapili direct evidence of adherence and giving aid and comfort to enemy. Unless forced upon one against his will, membership in the makapili org imports treasonable intent, considering the purpose for which the organization was created, the members would shed blood and sacrifice their lives. •
People vs. Siyoh That the accused committed with triple murder and frustrated murder in piracy: • Recall: There was a lone survivor Antonio De Guzman who was shot in the waters but was not killed.
Number of persons killed on the occasion of piracy, not material; Piracy, a special complex crime punishable by death—but the number of persons killed on the occasion of piracy is not material. PD 532 considers qualified piracy as a special complex crime punishable by death. (not anymore-RP)
HIJACKING RA 6235 Crime Against the Fundamental Laws of the State ARBITRARY DETENTION Rule 112, sec 6 Rule 113, sec 5 Umil vs. Ramos • • Case of 8 habeas corpus. Arrest without a warrant is justified when the person arrested is caught in flagranti delicto. An arrest without a warrant of arrest under sec. 5 par a and b of Rule 113 of the Rules of Court, as amended, is justified when the person arrested is caught in flagranti delicto, viz in the act of committing an offensel or when an offense has just been committed and the person making the arrest has personal knowledge of the facts indicating that the person arrested has committed it. Habeas Corpus; Subversion; The crimes of rebellion, subversion, conspiracy or proposal to commit such crimes and offenses committed in furtherance thereof of in connection therewith constitute direct assaults against the State are in the nature continuing crimes. Rolando Dural was arrested for being a member of the NPA, an outlawed subversive organization. Subversion being a continuing offense, the arrest of Rolando Dural without warrant is justified as it can be said that he was committing an offense when arrested. The crimes, and crimes or offenses committed in furtherance thereof or in connection therewith constitute direct assaults against the State and are in the nature of continuing crimes. •
The case where the firearm was left to be buried to the ground and the wife pointed where the firearm was. Warrant of arrest; personal knowledge required of an officer arresting a person who has just committed is committing or is about to commit an offense-udner sec6(a) of Rule 113, the officer arresting a person who has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense must have personal knowledge of that fact. The offense must also be committed in his presence. For arrests without warrant to be lawful, it is required that a crime must in fact or actually have been committed first. In arrests without warrant under Sec 6(b) it is not enough that there is reasonable ground to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a crime. A crime must in fact or actually have been committed first. That a crime has actually been committed is an essential precondition. It is not enough to suspect that a crime may have been committee. The fact of the commission of the offense must be undisputed. The test of reasonable ground applies only to the identity of the perpetrator.
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 2
Stonehill vs. Diokno • • Several judges issued 42 search warrants to seize all docs and papers showing all business transactions of petitioners. Requisites for issuing search warrantsConstitution provides that no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause, to be determined by the judge, and that the warrant shall particularly describe the things to be seized. Search warrants authorizing the seizure of books of accounts and records showing all the business transactions of certain person, regardless of whether the transactions were legal or illegal, contravene the explicit command of the Bill of Rights that the things to be seized should be particularly described and defeat its major objective of eliminating general warrants.
Burgos vs. Chief of Staff • • 2 search warrants against Metropolitan Mail and We Forum newspapers premises. Probable cause for search: as such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed and that the objects sought in connection with the offense are in the place sought to be searched. A search warrant against a publisher must particularize the alleged criminal or subversive material to be seized. The application and/or its supporting affidavits must contain a specification, stating with particularity the alleged subversive material he has published or intending to publish.
Milo vs. Salanga • • The barrio captain who detained a person for 11 hours. His contention was that he is not a public officer. Arbitrary detention is committed by a public officer who, without legal grounds, detains a person. The officer liable for Arbitrary detention must be vested with authority to detain or order the detention of persons accused of a crime. PD 299 was signed into law, barrio captains or barangay captain were recognized as persons in authority.
DELAY IN DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSON EO 272 Rule 112, sec 7 RA 7438
OFFENDING RELIGIOUS FEELINGS People vs. Mandoriao • • The case where the microphone was allegedly grabbed (but there was no sound when the accused spoke). A religious meeting is an assemblage of people met for the purpose of performing acts of adoration to the Supreme Being or to perform religious services in recognition of God as an object or worship, love and
People vs Burgos
SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED
Gutierrez Jr Concurring: Rebellion consists of many acts. . dangerous. not murder with direct assault upon a person in authority. • People vs. Gutierrez \ Page 3 Enrile was charged with rebellion complexed with murder and a violation under PD 1829 Sec. So whether punishable by RPC or a special law. Mere grabbing of mic might be punishable as public disturbance under 153. • People vs Dasig • • • Case where the accused shot a police during a gun battle with other traffic enforcers. Crime of rebellion is penalized by prison mayor and fine not exceeding 20K. The accused is only guilty of unjust vexation penalized by 287 (2). The act of performing burial rites inside a Roman Cathoilic Cemetery. The killing of civilians during a rebel attack on military facilities furthers the rebellion and is part of the rebellion. Mere saying of prayers and singing of hymns would render such place as place devoted to religious worship. either as a means necessary to its commission or as an unintended effect of an activity that constitutes rebellion. Appellant is liable for the crime of rebellion. All crimes whether punishable under a special law or general law which are mere components or ingredients or committed in furtherance thereof. In this case. (But this is now changed by RA 6968 as shown in 135). Lovedioro • • A policeman was walking and he was killed by the accused.must be direct against a dogma or ritual or upon an object of veneration. In deciding if the crime committed is rebellion not murder. Ramos. Amin • Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof.• • obedience. Notoriously offensive. For an act to be notoriously offensive to religious feelings it must be directed against a religious practice or dogma or tiutal ofr the purpose of ridicule. the crime of rebellion consists of many acts. Neither did he cause such serious disturbance as to interrupt or disturb the services of the congregation. The sparrow unit is the liquidation squad of the NPA with the objective of overthrowing the duly constituted govt. The decisive factor is the intent or motive. not murder. in accordance with the rules of practices of the sect Christ is the Answer by reading passages from the bible. provided there was no intent to mock. Hernandez doctrine prohibits complexing of rebellion with any other offense. supra • As a continuing crime. appellant not only confessed voluntarily his membership with the sparrow unit but his killing of the officer. Baes • • The case where the funeral passed thru the Catholic churchyard. 1(c) obstruction of justice bec he gave food and comfort to Honasan. Rebellion is committed by taking up arms against the government. for it is possible that certain acts may offend the feelings of those who profess a certain religion. the Hernandez case still is the ruling that these common crimes are absorbed in rebellion. Laurel Dissenting: Offense to religious feelings should not be made to depend upon the more or less broad or narrow conception of any given particular religion but should be gauged having in view the nature of the acts committed and after scrutiny of all the facts and circumstances which should be viewed through the mirror of an unbiased judicial criterion. The dropping of one bomb cannot be isolated as a separate crime. People vs. which is that Hernandez remains binding doctrine operating to prohibit the complexing of rebellion with any other offense committed on the occasion thereof. Tengson • • Burial rights performed inside a Roman Catholic Cemetery. It was motivated by the single intent or resolution to commit the crime of rebellion. while not otherwise offensive to the feelings of those professing another faith. He did not perform acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful. • • People vs. it becomes imperative for the courts to ascertain won the act was done in furtherance of a political end. of rebellion. The court held that WON the act complained of is offensive to the religious feelings of the Catholics. the gravity of leniency of the offense would hinge in the subjective characterization of the act from the point of view of a given religious denomination or sect and in such a case. is a question of fact which must be judged only according to the feelings of the Catholics and not those of other faithful ones. scoff at or to desecrate any religious act or object venerated by people of a particular religion. COUP D’ETAT RA 6968 Enrile vs. especially in a country said to once the scene of religious intolerance and prosecution. among other means. INSURRECTION. • Crimes Against Public Order REBELLION. it matters not the faith with respect to the Deity entertained by the persons so assembled. The ISLAW is not applicable to persons convicted of rebellion. Otherwise. etc is not • People vs. Salazar • • Honasan charged with rebellion with murder and multiple frustrated murder. Enrile vs. petitioner’s alleged act of harboring or concealing was fo no other purpose but in furtherance of the crime of rebellion thus constituting a component thereof. Being in conspiracy with Honasan. notoriously offensive to the feelings of religious persons. withal. the application of the law would be partial and arbitrary. Neither should the dropping of one hundred bombs or the firing of thousands of machine gun bullets be broken up into a hundred or thousands of separate offenses. Nanoy • • Drunk got inside a Church and grab the song leader. The rejection of both options shapes and determines the primary ruling of the Court. The political Umil vs. become absorbed in the crime of rebellion and cannot be isolated and charged as separate crimes in themselves.
It is not enough that the overt acts of rebellion are duly proven. The Phil Law on the subject makes all persons guilty of sedition who rise publicly and tumultously in order to obtain by force or outside of legal methods any one of five objects. it must be reasoned or tempered and not a contemptuous condemnation of the entire govt set up. as the case may be. felony.e. pro tanto. c. and mere membership in an organization dedicated to the furtherance of rebellion would not. It is not necessary that the offender should be a private citizen and the offended party a public functionary. • ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS RA 8294 People vs. If no political motive is established and proved. Quijada • • • Case where a dance was held in a basketball court and Quijada kept on pestering Iroy’s sister and Quijada killed the brother. d. Gutierrez \ Page 4 • • a. • VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY Martinez vs. including that of inflicting any act of hate or revenge upon the person or property of any official or agent of the Insular Govt or of a provincial or municipal govt. or ciculating of scurrilous libels against the govt. With either of these elements wanting. He was convicted of two separate offenses of murder and illegal use of firearm aggravated with illegal use of firearm. the members of the legislature are privileged from arrest on civil process during the session of that body. The only purpose of the provision is to increase the penalty prescribed in 1st par of sec 1—reclusion temporal in its max to reclusion perpetua to death. Art VI of the Constitution makes it clear that parliamentary immunity from arrest does not cover any prosecution for treason. drinks and cigs at 2 public meetings INCITING TO SEDITION US vs Tolentino • . the accused should be convicted of the common crime and not of rebellion. dictators and which reveals a tendency to produce dissatisfaction or a feeling incompatible with the disposition to remain loyal to the govt is a scurrilous libel against the govt. as crimes mala in se under the RPC is obliterated as such and reduced as a mere aggravating circumstance in illegal possession of firearm whenever the unlicensed firearm is used in killing a person. would only serve to aggravate the offense of illegal possession of firearm and would not anymore be separately punished. it is plainly obvous that it is not enough that the overt acts of rebellion are duly proven. Sedition in its more general sense is the raising of commotions or disturbances in the State. • • • • Umil vs. f. Morfe • Martinez and Bautista were members of the Constitutional Convention. safety and order of the govt knowlingly concealing such evil practices • Sec 15. either of these crimes. Theatrical work which was alleged to be seditious. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. conditions and circumstances which vary according to the purposes to be accomplished. suffice. and breach of the peace. However such criticicim should be specific and therefore constructive specifying particular objectionable actuations of the govt. Its clear language yields no intention of the lawmaker to repeal or modify. publishing or circulating of scurrilous libels which tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful officer in executing his office or which tend to instigate others to cabal or meet together for unlawful purposes which suggest or incite rebellious consipiracies which tend to stir up people against lawful authorires or to disturb the peace of the community. of PD 1866 is to respect and preserve homicide or murder as a distinct offense penalized under the RPC and to increasae the penalty for illegal possession of firearm where such a firearm is used in killing a person. IF it be proved that the defendants pursued by their acts the same object. and for a reasonable time before and after. From the foregoing. one performing one part and another part of the same so as to complete it with a view to the attainment of that same object one will be justified in the conclusion that they were engaged in a conspiracy to effect that object. SEDITION People. Criticism of govt how it may legally be doneany citizen may criticize his govt and govt officials and submit his criticism to the free trade of ideas. supra • Sedition as a continuing act. Articles 248 and 249 of the RPC in such a way that if an unlicensed fiream is used in the commission of homicide or murder. People • • Suicide note that he was not pleased with Roxas administration. A prosecution for a criminal offense is thus excluded from this grant of community. Cabrera • • • Phil Constabulary vs. by and of itself. Conspiracies are generally proved by a number of indefinite acts. g. writing.• • motive of the act should be conclusively demonstrated. They were arrested for falsification of docs-birthday and distribution of free food. A published writing which calls our govt one of corroks and dishonest persons infested with Nazis and Fascists i. The words of the subject provision are palpably clear to exclude any suggestion that either of the crimes of homicide and murder. Ramos. motive relates to the act. The unequivocal intent of the second par of section 1. the Manila police where the PC vowed revenge. Both purpose and overt acts are essential components of the crime. American law: Bu common parliamentary law. e. the crime of rebellion legally does not exist. publishing. In cases of rebellion. to enable them to go to and return from the same. Espuelas vs. b. 7 modes of committing the offense: uttering seditious words or speeches writing.
They were performing their Crimes Against Public Interest COUNTERFEITING People vs. The accused are quasi-recidivists. and prohibited from entering the City of Manila. With the amendments introduced by RA 8294 to PD 1866. enters said city within the period of his sentence is guilty of evasion of sentence under article 157. There was a volley of gunfire and a policeman was killed. Captain was giving a speech. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. The maximum penalty prescrived by law for the new felony (murder) is death. Vs. • QUASI-RECIDIVISM People vs. it is considered as an aggravating circumstance. Shooting at the mayor and a policeman on duty is attempted murder with assault. In order to be guilty under 223 (connivance) and 224 (negligence). gave retroactive application to RA No. 8294 considering that under the new law. VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON Torres vs. He was charged 20 counts of estafa but he was not yet convicted of final judgment. If the public officer charged with the duty of guarding him does not connive with the fugitive. having committed the crime charged while serving sentence for a prior offense.People vs. Under RA 8294. • EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE Tanega vs. Dollantes • • The case where the accused brandished a knife challenging anyone to fight with him when the brgy. Batang Mindanao case. reclusion perpetua is imposed. A convict granted conditional pardon who is recommitted must of course be convicted by final judgment of a court of the subsequent crime or crimes with which he was charged before the criminal penalty for such subsequent offense can be imposed upon. Barangay captain was killed while in the performance of his duties. The parolee or convict who is regarded as having violated the provisions thereof must be charged. Masakayan • • Accused was convicted with slander but she didn’t serve her sentence.—As to proof that appellants had no license or permit to possess the firearm in question. Kong Leon • The Spanish Penal Code from which the law punishing the fabrication and uttering of counterfeit coins is evidently derived. the use of unlicensed firearm in killing the victim is no longer considered as a separate offense. sentenced to destierro by virtue of final judgment. In the recent case of People vs. the • People vs. we have held that the second element of illegal possession of firearms can be proven by the testitmony or the certification of a representative of the PNP Firearm and Explosives Unit that the accused was not a licensee of the firearm in question. the escape of a prisoner on the part of the person in charge is an essential condition in the commission of the crime of faithfulness in the custody of the prisoner. Feloteo • • Accused played with an armalite and shot Sotto who was playing with friends after their drink. instead. • People. RPC. he is serving the sentence of deprivation of liberty and he evades the service of sentence by escaping during the term of his sentence. prosecuted and convicted by final judgment before he can be made to suffer the penalty under 159. DIRECT ASSAULT People vs. The elements are that the offender is a convict by final judgment. Dionisio • • The Happy Go Lucky gang vs. Abilong . People vs. Molino. De la Cruz • • Case where the accused was summoned at the house of the governor to fix the fence. The trial court convicted the accused illegal use of firearm in its aggravated form. the offenses of murder and illegal use or possession of firearm are integrated into a single offense. The prescription commence from date when culprit should evade the service of his sentence. regardless of the presence or absence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance or the complete absence thereof. The records showed that the barangay captain was in the act of trying to pacify the accused who was making trouble in the dance hall when he was stabbed to death. or connived in. But for lack of requisite votes. and goats. it is necessary that the public officer had consented to. • DELIVERY OF PRISONERS FROM JAIL Alberto vs. the offeses of murder and illegal use or possession of firearm are integrated into a single offense. The second element of illegal possession of firearms can be proven by the testimony or the certification of a representative of the PNP Firearms and Explosives Unit that the accused was not a license of the firearm in question. Narvasa • There was a report of missing carabaos. Police chanced upon the gang of appellants. Beltran • • • Battle in the Puzon’s compound. Negligence in the custody of a prisoner under 224 of the RPC punishable if it is definitely and deliberately committed. then he has not violated the law and is not guilty of the crime. pigs. The Maypr was a person in authority and Tolentino was a policeman who at the time was in uniform. Liable for murder and the use of firearm is only an aggravating circumstance. Gonzales • The accused was convicted of estafa but then he was granted a conditional pardon provided he would not violate any penal laws. Gutierrez \ Page 5 • • The accused was sentenced with destierro (100M from Manila) One who. official duties to maintain peace and order in the community.
People • Case of lost treasury bills and that on the Securities Delivery Receipt. While it is true that a time record is an official document. • a. It is a settled doctrine that in falsification byu an employee under par no 4 of Art 171 which reads by making untruthful statements in the narration of facts. Beradio vs. words or signs contained” in which had been erased and/or altered. counterfeiting or altering by any means the figures. but also to situations • People cs. Romualdez • • Case of Bar Exam where the scores of a certain Mabunay were changed. letters. the appearance of a true and genuine document).• fabrication of a local coin withdrawn from circulation is punishable. the ff elements must concur: offender makes in a doc untruthful satatments in a narration of facts that he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false that the perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful intent of injuring a third person In the absence of a legal obligation to disclose or reveal the truth. false or fake document or instrument is given the appearance of a true and genuine document. even if withdrawn from circulation in the foreign country of its origin. Where non-faithful statement of daily hours of work in time record has not caused damages to the Govt. word. There is no falsification if the correction was made to speak the truth. Absence of damage an element to be considered to determine presence of criminal intent. counterfeited or altered. letters. People vs. but the danger that a counterfeiter produces by his stay in the country. or sign contained in Exhibit A has been erased. he crossed out with a red ink the said doc and notated “for adjustment”. and with the intent to use such notes in enticing another to advance funds for the avowed purpose of financing the manufacture of counterfeit treasury notes of the Philippines. Cabigas vs. The vouchers were encashed at Sandaydiego’s office and not at the Cashier’s. with knowledge of such erasure and alteration. and the possibility that he may later apply his trade to making of coins in actually circulation. Galano • • • Balut case and the Victory note payment The forgery here committed comes under the first paragraph of Article 169 or the Code (By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order mentioned therein. The case under consideration could not come within the second paragraph of the aforesaid article (By erasing. The alterations made in such papers. words or signs contained therein) because no figure. but that the absence of damage is an element to be considered to determine whether or not there is criminal intent. CA • • Case where the wife signed the payroll warrant after her husband died. This provision does not only contemplate situations where a spurious. The law of the US on its currency became a part of the general law which our courts of justice are bound to apply and enforce. is punishable. because the reason for punishing the fabrication of a local coin withdrawn from circulation is not alone the harm caused to the public by the fact that it may go into circulation. accused cannot be convicted of falsification. FALSIFICATION Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. no crime of falsification can accrue. constitute the crime of falsification of public documents. under the circumstances proven in this case. involving originally true and genuine documents which have been withdrawn or demonetized. . it stands to reason that the counterfeiting of foreign coin. The practice was for his own convenience and also for reference purposes. Govt did not sustain financial loss due to encashment of checks by the wife. (Damage is not necessary in falsification but is intent necessary?) • MUTILATION OF COINS PD 247 FORGERY Del Rosario vs. The contention that the papers which defendant ER altered were not public or official documents is untenable because the examination of candidates for admission to the bar is a judicial function. Office of Election registrar who was accused as having falsified her daily time record. substituted. of the grades given to them by the correctors. CA • • The accused was the Chief of Office. or have outlived their usefulness. Gutierrez \ Page 6 Luague vs. substituting . should also be punishable. People vs. People • Erasure and alteration of figures in genuine treasury notes-The possession of genuine treasury notes of the Philippines any of the “figures. Absence of criminal intent by petitioner wife when she signed her husband’s name as payee. d. it is not criminally falsified if it does not pervert its avowed purpose as when it does not cause damage to the government. c. letter. Sandaydiego • Case where Samson made vouchers for the alleged construction of a bridge but there wasn’t really any construction. b. While it is not meant to imply that if there is no damage there can be no falsification. The forgery consists in the addition of a word in an effort to give to the present document the appearance of the true and genuine certificate that it used to have before it was withdrawn or has outlived its usefulness. It may be different in the case of a public document with continuing interest affecting the public welfare which is naturally damaged if that document is falsified where the truth is necessary for the safeguard and protection of that general interest.
performs any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the Phil Govt or any forein govt or any agency thereof. The existence of a wrongful intent to injure a third person is not necessary when the falsified document is a public document.• • A person in possession of falsified document and made us of it is presumed to be material author of falsification. not by falsification of the document. Driver’s license a public document. It is settled that if the falsification was resorted to for the purpose of hiding the malversation. • b. People • • Mayor appointed one woman as clerk but there were no funds available and no special ordinance creating said position. He should have been charged of usurpation of official functions and not of usurpation of authority. The six misappropriations evidenced by the six vouchers constitute six distinct offenses. ( As compared to Villalon. IAC • Case where a woman used the name Corazon Reyes instead of Corazon Legamia y Rivera bec she has been living with Emilio Reyes for 20 years but not married. • People vs. thus. the crime of falsification has already been consummated. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. The damage to another is caused by the commission of estafa. The falsification was the means employed by the defendant to perpetrate the crime of usurpation. In falsification of public or official documents. As defined. Gutierrez \ Page 7 • lawfully entitled to do so. the prescriptive period commences from the time the offended party had constructive notice of the alleged forgery Gigantoni vs. proof of the fourth element of damage caused to another person or at least an intent to cause such damage has become immaterial. Usurpation of authority and usurpation of official functions. official or commercial documents. People • Case where accused claimed that he was an agent of CIS of the Phil Constabulary and went to Pal to conduct verification of same travel by the Black Mountain officials and presented an ID. She applied for benefits upon his death not for herself but for their son. Dava • • • Case where Dava acquired a falsified driver’s license after his previous license was confiscated due to a felony he committed. the principal thing being punished is the violation of the public faith and the destruction of the truth proclaimed therein. perjury is the willful and corrupt assertion of falsehood under oath of • • a. official or commercial document is only a necessary means to commit the estafa. the falsication and maversation are separate offenses. Villalon • Case where a document of mortgage was falsified by the accused alleging that he has obtained the signatures of the De Guzman brothers. The falsification of six vouchers constitutes six separate or distinct offenses and each misappropriation as evidenced by a provincial voucher constitutes a separate offense. • .Art 177 of the RPC on usurpation of authority or official functionsany person: who knowingly and falsely represent himself to be an officer. (Usurpation of official functions) Accused was previously a member of the said organization however it was not proven by the prosecution that he was dismissed from the org and that he no longer possesses such authority. Syquian vs. damage or intent to cause damage not being an element of the crime of falsification of public. • USING FICITITIOUS NAME CA 142 Legamia vs. (“You may have your own Corazon” statement of the Court). Dava and Cortez case?) after the document was registered with the Register of Deeds. In the crime of falsification of a public document. USURPATION People vs. the falsification of the public. not complex crimes. However the SOLGEN argued that in makes no difference whether the accused was suspended or dismissed from the service for both imply the absence of power to represent oneself as vested with authority to perform acts pertaining to an office to which he knowingly was deprived of. Cortez • • Case where the accused pretended to be a BIR agent and that he presented an ID card with other BIR papers. The falsification of a public document may be a means of committing estafa because before the falsified document is actually utilized to defraud another. She assumed the role as his wife and used his name without any sinister purpose or personal material gain in mind. If falsification was resorted to hide malversation. People • Case where the accused made it appear that he was a 4th yr student with Bachelor of Arts at the Cosmopolitan and Harvardian Colleges and this was a requirement for his reappointment as School Administrative Asst. without being ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS OR INSIGNIA RA 75 RA 493 PERJURY Diaz vs. he was acquitted. USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS People vs. agent and representative of any department or agency of the Phil Goct or of any foreign govt (Usurpation of authority) under pretense of official position. Each falsification of a voucher constitutes one crime and falsification of each voucher constitutes one offense. hence. falsification and malversation are separate offenses. The driver’s license being a public document. The crime was usurpation of authority thru falsification of a public document by a private person.
People vs. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. the aesthetic and the pulchritude in the nude body of a living woman may readily be transformed into an indecent and obscene object. CA • • Case where auction was manipulated. can have no redeeming features. decency or delicacy. and chastity of society extending to the family? was indecent or immoral.• a. These acts constitute a crime where Ouano and Eschavez had promised to share in the property in question as a consideration for Ouano’s refraining from taking part in the public auction. purity. Sandiganbayan • Case where the deputy sheriff said that he can remedy the withdrawal of the garnished . Causing another bidder to stay away from the auction in order to cause reduction of the price of the property auctioned. during the performance of the dance by the appellant should the gauge in the determination whether appellant’s danicing or exhibition • Crimes Relative to Opium and Other Prohibited Drugs RA 9165 Crimes Against Public Morals GAMBLING PD 1602 LOI 816 IMMORAL DOCTRINES. Mere nudity in painting and sculpture is not obscenity as they may be considered pieces of art. by postures and movements of such body which produce perceptible and discernable reaction in the public or audience witnessing the same. The reaction of the public. Padan • • The Toro case. The test in the Kottinger applies. (Attacking the social status of the person). The word obscene and the term obscenity may be defined as meaning something offensibve to chastity. inspiring and causing as it does. preceded by acts of lasciviousness. Another test of obscenity is that which shocks the ordinary and common sense of men as an indecency. authorized to receive and administer oath That in that statement or affidavit. affirmation administered by authority of law on a material matter. Gutierrez \ Page 8 People vs. is whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscene is to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication or tother article charged as being obscene may fall. But the artistic. indecency and an offense to public morals. MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS Ouano vs. c. There cannot be malice by mere loitering or tramping or wandering about without visible means of support because the only person affected thereby or prejudiced or injured by such circumstances would be the person himself and not other third parties. nothing but lust and lewdness and exerting a corrupting influence exp on the youth of the land. Property forfeited in favor of the govt. Poverty cannot be a criminal act. the accused made a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood That the sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required by law or made for legal purpose. Aparici • Case where the woman danced wearing furry white girdle with a middle piece punctuating attend on the things she was supposed to hide. as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. There is nothing to protect society from these acts and it is this precisely which is repugnant because it impinges on the individual’s right of freedom of expression and freedom of locomotion. • • VAGRANCY PD 1563 Perez vs. One can see nothing in it but clear and unmitigated obscenity. Kottinger • • • • WON the pictures portraying the inhabitants of the bountry in native dress are obscene/indecent. In it there is no room for art. All elements present: that the accused made a statement under oath or executed an affidavit upon a material matter. Lack of visible means of support should be punishable unless it affects other persons or prejudices them. Indecency is an act against good behaviour and a just delicacy. and they had attempted to cause and in fact succeeded in causing another bidder to stay away from the auction in order to cause reduction of the price of the property auctioned. But an actual exhibition of the sexual act. therefore. Test of Obscenity: It may be conceded that nudity itself is not inherently indecent obscene. People vs. b. Test of Obscenity: The test ordinarily followed by the courts in determining whether ea particular publication or other thing is obscene within the meaning of the statutes. That the statement or affidavit was made before a competent officer. OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS PD 960 as amended by PD 969 • • • RA 9208 Crimes Committed by Public Officers BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS Manipon vs. The object of the law is to protect the morals of the public. Navarro-Domingo • • Vagrancy law declared unconstitutional by the MTC. d. Test: What is the judgment of the aggregate sense of the community reached by the publication or other matter? What is the probably reasonable effect on the sense of decency.
(expanded meaning of official duties) • • Jaravata vs. Sandiganbayan • Case where the Mayor has signed vouchers where he has granted the bidding to Trigen where he is also the President and a major stockholder. Far from exercising any power. thus elements for direct bribery were not all met. The proceeding in Anti-Graft Law is not a criminal proceeding bec it does not terminate in the imposition of a penalty but merely in the forfeiture of the properties illegally acquired in favor of the State and bec the procedure outlined therein leading to forfeiture is that provided in a civil action. or to refrain from doing something which it is his official duty to do and that the crime or act relates to the exercise of his functions as public officer The promise of a public officer to perform an act or to refrain from doing it may be express or implied.s Perez.• 1) 2) 3) 4) • amount so that they can have something for New Year. and undeniable. no infringement of clear. to declare a law unconstitutional. offer or promise that such gift. • • Republic vs. such constitutional violation must be clear and categorical. • PD 46 PD 749 GRAFT AND CORRUPTION RA 1379 Almeda vs. In his official capacity as assistant principal. Accordingly. Sandiganbayan • • • The settlement of tax liability which reduced the tax of the Revilla Interiors. Sandiganbayan • • Case where the teacher received payments from other teachers for the release of their salary differentials. • Cabal vs. where the act or omission for which the forfeiture is imposed is not also a misdemeanor. Direct bribery: The crime of direct bribery as defined in 210 in RPC consists of the ff elements: that the accused is a public officer that he received directly or through another some gift or present. Kapunan • Case where the AFP chief of staff was charged with graft and corruption and his defense was his rights against selfincrimination. that the property was unlawfully acquired. the petitioner plated the humble role of a supplicant whose mission was to expedite payment of the salary differentials. present or promise has been given ion consideration of his commission of some crime. the infringement of constitutional rights must be clear. the statue allows. This presumption is juris tantum. CA Case where the Staff Engr of the Reg Office of the Bureau of Public Highways in Cebu was charged with graft and corruption but was later able to justify the acquired properties and wealth. wherein an amendment in the information was allowed bec it is only civil in nature however this doctrine refers to the purely procedural aspect of the said proceeding and has no bearing on the substantial rights of the respondents therein particularly their constitutional right against self-incrimination. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. (“in his pofficial capacity has to intervene under the law”). he cannot be said to have violated the law aforecited although he exerted efforts to facilitate the payment of the salary differentials. There is no law which invests the petitioner with the power to intervene in the payment of the salary differentials of the complainants or anyone for that matter. and undeniable. and liabilities filed by the resp. categorical. The statute affords the resp every opportunity to explain to the satisfaction of the court how he had acquired the property in question. It may be rebutted by the public officer or employee by showing to the satisfaction of the court that his acquisition of the property was lawful. To declare a law unconstitutional. Law creates a presumption against the public officer or employee who acquires property grossly disproportionate to his income i. categorical. the exemption of defendants in criminal cases from the obligation to be witness against themselves are applicable thereto. Test to determine whether a proceeding is cibvil or criminal: forfeiture proceedings may either be civil or criminal in nature and may be in rem or in personam. In determining whether of not there is unexplained wealth under RA 1379 the courts are not bound by the statements of assets • Trieste vs. Sec 3 (b) of RA 3019 refers to a public officer whose official intervention is required by law in a contract or transaction. RA 3019 Morfe vs Mutuc • • Case where the constitutionality of RA 3019 was challenged bec it infringes liberty. Gutierrez \ Page 9 • If the proceeding does not involve the conviction of the wrongdoer for the offense charged the proceeding is of a civil nature and under the statutes which specifically so provide. he surely knows his way around. Distinguished from Almeda v. Pulling out assessment papers and the like was not part of his official duties.e. he is not required by law to intervene in the payment of the salary differentials. While in the attainment of public good. Besides the promised act was not impossible to carry out given his 29 years in service. What the Anti-Graft Law prohibits is the actual interevention by a public official in the • • • . Proceedings for forfeiture of peoperty are deemed criminal or penal and hence. or any act not constitutiong a crime. In other words. Perez • Case where the accused is an NBI director and was charged with violation of the AntiGraft Law bec his salary was out of prop with his present acquisition of cash and properties. such forfeiture may be sued for and recovered in a civil action. that what the Constitution condemns. Dacumas vs.
Consideration of ART. It was improper for pet to allow pris to have lunch with family when he was supposed to bring the pris back to jail which is 1K away from the sala of the judge. Azarcon and Ancla. can be convicted of murder only qualified by abuse of superior strength. the relationships of father-in-law and brotherin-law aggravate the crime. Under 217 there is prima facie evidence of malverdation where the accountable public officer fails to have duly forthcoming any public funds with which he is chargeable upon demand by duly authorized officer. Sandiganbayan • MALVERSATION Labatagos vs. The last sentence of the par (e) is intended to make clear the inclusion of officers and employees of offices or govt corp which under the ordinary concept of public officers may not come within the term. Sandiganbayan • • Paymaster case. Nowhere in the said provision is it expressed or implied that a private indiv be deemed a public officer. Sandiganbayan Azarcon vs. Sandiganbayan • Case of the Engr who has negotiated with the house and lot owners for the construction of a road and the complainants alleged that they were divested of a large proportion of their claims and receiving payment in an amount even lower that the actual damage they incurred. like the others. Although sec 206 of the NIRC authorizes the BIR to effect a constructive distraint by requiring any person to preserve distrained prop there is no provision in the NIRC • . relationship is an aggravating circumstance aand should be assigned against appellants. Crimes Against Persons PARRICIDE People vs. In crime of malversation. Sandiganbayan • • Vales case. Penalty for murder with aggravating circ is death but PLUNDER RA 7080 Estrada vs. Jumawan • Presentacion should have been accused of parricide but her relationship with deceased is not alleged in the information. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. It is his duty to take necessary precautions to assure the absence of any means of escape. the fact the immediate superiors of the accused have acquiesced to the practice of giving out case advances for convenience did not legalize the disbursements. An accountable officer may be convicted for malversation even if there is not direct evidence of personal misappropriation where he has not been able to explain satisfactorily the absence of the funds involved. atuhoroty and power. As to the others. Malversation consists not inly in misappropriation or converting public funds or property to one’s personal use but also knowingly allowing others to make use or of misappropriate them. • • Mejorada vs. SC ruled that a private indiv who has in his charge any of the public funds or prop enumerated and commits any of the acts defined should likewise be penelized with the same penalty meted to erring public officers.• transaction in which he has a financial interest. constituting such person a public officer by reason of such requirement. The fact that petitioner did not personally use the missing funds is not a valid defense and will not exculpate him from his criminal liability. Gutierrez \ Page 10 • Case of the pregnant cashier and collecting officer who filed for an LOA but still went to the office to collect tuition fees and other fees for the uniform of the basketball team of the school. A failure to undertake these precautions will make his act one of definite laxity of negligence amounting to deliberate non-performance of duty. are both private indivs. Although not alleged in the information. 222 private indiv as public officer. And as aptly found by respondent Sandiganbayan. Section 3 cited above enumerates in eleven subsections the corrupot practices of any public officer declared unlawful. The BIR’s power authorizing a private indiv to act as depositary cannot be stretched to include the power to appoint him as a public officer. Sandiganbayan • • Case where the police allowed the woman to go to the CR without inspecting first if there was a way for her to escape. chattels or other props of Ancla bec a delinquent taxpayer. all that is necessary for conviction is proof that accountable officer had received the public funds and that he did not have them in his possession when demand therefore was made and he could not satisfactorily explain his failure so to account. his co-accused. Sandiganbayan • Case where Azarcon was requested by the Director of the BIR to distraint the goods. It is a strained construction of the provision to read it as applying exclusively to public officers charged with the duty of granting licenses and permits or other concessions. Estepa vs. What is contemplated in section 3(h) of the law is the actual intervention in the transaction in which one has financial or pecuniary interest in order that liability may attach. she. • • • Ilogon vs. For the law iams to prevent dominant use of influecen. INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF PRISONERS Rodillas vs. The official need not dispose his shares in the corporation as long as he dons not do anything for the firm in its contract with the office. Its reference to any public officer is without distinction or qualification and it specifies the acts declared unlawful. Relationship is inherent in parricide but she stands convicted of murder.
Treachery-deliberate attack and employing means to insure its execution removing any form of defense from the offended party. Thus. In Statutory rape. Appellant alleges that. criminal liability shall be incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from what is intended. There is an absence of intent to kill and that his act was just part of their fun-making that evening. assuming he indeed killed his wife. without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction.there is a lack of the necessary votes therefore. Abarca • Elements of Art. there is no evidence to show that he had the intention to cause an abortion. that he kills any or both of them in the act or immediately after. the lesser penalty. Perfect penetration is not essential for the consummation of rape—clearly in the crime of rape. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender because he has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime. It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the • • . the felony is consummated. As the commission of the act was attended by mitigating circ with no aggrav. They only want to make fun of the deceased. Carnal knowledge with a woman below 12 years of age is statutory rape. from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim he actually attains his purpose and from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. It has not been established that there was intent to cause abortion. Al. reclusion perpetua. the shooting must be understtod to be the continuation of the pursuit of the victim by the accused. Necessarily. But the killing should have been actually motivated by the same blind impulse and must not have been influenced by external factors. SC held that the fact that appellant intended to maltreat the victim only or inflict physical injuries does not exempt him from liability for the resulting more serious crime. People vs. 247: a. 4. Where several assailants inflicted wounds on a victim but it cannot be determined who inflicted which wound. People vs. Grade I pupil. Gutierrez \ Page 11 Abortion. Orita • • 16-year old nirape sa boarding house. 49 not apply to cases where more serious consequences not intended by the offender result from his felonious act bec under art. MURDER AND HOMICIDE People vs. Full penetration is not required. appellant is correct.: Art 246 of the RPC punishes parricide with the penalty of reclusion perptua to death. Binigyan ng P2. In this contention. Pugay was convicted of Homicide thru reckless imprudence and Samson was convicted of Homicide. Uniform has been set that for the consummation of rape.00. Mangalino • • 6-year old. all the assailants are liable for victim’s death. legally married surprises spouse in the act of sex with another person b. Although an hour has passed bet the sex act and the shooting of Koh. Alburquerque: Art 49 applies only to cases where the crime committed is different from that intended and where the felony committed befalls a different person. The offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. Laureano et. • • • • DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES People vs. Babae tumakas nang nakahubo. at best. Pugay • There is nothing in the records that shows that there was a precious conspiracy or unity of criminal purpose and intention bet the two accused immediately before the crime. Buensuceso • • Case where the policeman was trying to get the knife from Tayag and eventually led to a chase and killed Tayag. nirape ni Lolo. • • • • UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION People vs. Tomotorgo • Art. perfect penetration is not essential. ART 4. Salufrania • Parricide with unintentional abortion. He should not be held guilty of the complex crime of Parricide with Intentional Abortion but of the complex crime of Parricide with Unintentioanl People vs. No evidence to show that accused had the intention to cause an abortion. proof of intimidation or force used on the victim or lack of it is immaterial. rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ bec not all acts of execution was performed. mitigating. People vs. His act however doesn’t relieve him of crim resp. Burning the clothes of victim would cause at the very least some kind of physical injury. which is rec perpetua should be imposed. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ. par 1 of the same Code. These elements present in the case. he is liable for all the direct and natural consequences of his unlawful act. HAZING RA 8049 RAPE RA 8353 • • People vs. There was no animosity and their meeting at the scene of the crime was accidental. People vs. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Art only requires that the death caused be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the basest act of infidelity. which are two indivisible penalties. His lact of intention to commit so grave a wrong is.
Absence of injury on victim and absence of torn dresses and underwear does not negate truth of rape complaint and credibility of victim’s testimony. aslight brush or scrape of the penis on the external layer of the victim’s vagina. in effect. Gallo • • Accused wanted to apply retroactivity of doctrine in subsequent cases to make his penalty reclusion perpetua instead of death. Affinity is defined as the rlation which one spouse bec of marriage has to blood relatives of the other.female organ. People vs. Atento • • Rape with a 17-year old retardate who claims that sex was “masarap”. Berana • • Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. “This is even so even if the circumstances of force and intidmidation or of the victim being deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious are absent. Entry. Even granting for the sake of argument that. as asserted by the appellant. or that the penis of the accused touched the middle part of her vagina. the conclusion that touching the labia majora or the labia minors of the pudendum constitutes consummated rape. are by their natural situs or location beneath the mons pubis or the vaginal surface. Description of a typical Filipina. Diana 6 years old. Where the accused failed to achieve an erection. Accused-appellant’s relationship to the victim although proven but not alleged in the information. accordingly. People vs. The connection existing. • RA 9262 People vs. the Court nonetheless held that rape was consummated on the basis of the vicitm’s testimony that the accused repeatedly tried but in vain to insert his penis into her vagina and in all likelihood reached the labia of her pudendum as the victim felt his organ on the lips of her vulva. Proof of external injuries inflicted on the complainant is not indispensable in a prosecution for rape committed with force or violence. attacker’s penis merely touched the external portions of the female genitalia were made in the context of the presence or existence of an erect penis capable of full penetration. or the mons pubis—there must be sufficient and convincing proof that the penis indeed touched the labias or slid into the female organ and not merely stroked the external surface thereof. Slightest penetration enough to consummate the crime. To effectively prosecute accused-aplealng for the crim of rape committed by a relative by affinity within the third civil degree. there was created a simple loan contract bet appellants and Mr. Touching when applied to rape cases does not simply mean mere epidermal contact. there is still kidnapping for ransom. to touch them with the penis is to attain some degree of penetration beneath the surface. The additional attendant circumstances introduced by RA 7659 should be considered as special qualifying circumstances distinctly aaplicable to the crime of rape and if not pleaded as such could only be appreciated as generic aggravating circumstances. of the labia or lips of the female organ is sufficient. Mercado • • People vs. People vs. Garcia ratiocinated that the additiona lattnedant circumstances introduced by RA 7659 should be considered as special qualifying circumstances distinctly applicable to the crime of rape and if not pleaded as such could only be appreciated as generic aggravating circumstances. the it should follow that carnal knowledge with a 17-year old whose mental capacity is that of a 7-year old would constitute rape. PART II Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security KIDNAPPING AND ILLEGAL DETENTION People vs. for an accused to be convicted of consummated rape. cannot be considered to be qualifying circumstance—the bove indictment has not specifically alleged that the accusedappellant is the victim’s father. the deprivation of the former’s liberty until the amount shall have been fully “paid” to them. And the labias. Gutierrez \ Page 12 Brother-in-law raped the 14-year old sister of his wife with consent of the young child. Campuhan • • Nahuli ni nanay si houseboy na pinagtangkaang rape-in ang 4-year old na anak. since if that were indeed the purpose. it must be established that a) he is legally married to the complainant’s sister and b) complainant and accused-appellant’s wife are full or half blood siblings. accused-appellant’s relationship to the victim although proven during the trial cannot be considered to be a qualifying circumstance. Nagao. Balbuena • • Tomboy na nirape. The Court in the case of People vs. Intellect of a 9-12 year-old kid. in consequence of marriage bet each othe married persons and the kindred of the other. Castro • • Si Kuya pinatayo si Diana sa inodoro at doon minolestiya. which are required to be touched by the penis. Akiran-If the kidnapping were to compel the victim to fulfill his promise defraying the hospital expenses of a brother of one of the accused. Guy claims he was seduced. De la Pena we clarified that the decisions finding a case for rape even if the • • . to the least extent. hence. Tomio Japanese guy was tricked by his countrymen. • • People vs. stroking or grazing of organs. People vs. is still kidnapping or illegal detention for ransom. That a Filipina could not easily decide to come out in the open and be subjected to public contempt and ridicule. In People vs. had a limp or flaccid penis or an oversized penis which could not fit into the victim’s vagina. In People vs. If sexual intercourse with a victim under twelve years of age is rape. the accused need not kidnap the victim.
such demand for ransom did not convert the crime into kidnapping since no detention or deprivation of liberty was involved. Ramos • • Si Ninang kinidnap at hiningan ng pera pambayad dahil asawa manganganak. before the killing but for the purposes thereof. hence the crime of kidnapping does not exist and cannot be considered as a component felony to produce a complex crime of kidnapping with murder. however. even as the intention of this person is to keep and raise the child as his own. it is only the abductor or kidnapper who is prosecuted. The essential element of the crime is that the offender is entrusted with the custody of the • People vs. For kidnapping to exist. physically restrained of her liberty or unable to communicate with anyone. and from the acts of the accused it cannot be inferred that the latter’s purpose was actually to detain or deprive the victims of their liberty. RA 7610 ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S VICTIM Lamera vs. although the accused had planned to kidnap the victim for ransom but they first killed him and it was only later that they demanded and obtained the money. Yet the person to whom the kidnapped child is given and who may have wittingly or unwittingly given the motivation for the abduction. must not only be deliberate but must also be persistent as to oblige the parents or the guardians of the child to seek the aid of the courts in order to obtain custody. it is not necessary that the offended party be kept within an enclosure to restrict her freedom of locomotion. Oftentimes. Lim • • There is no kidnapping when the fact of detention which is an essential element of the crime charged. and this is true even if. goes scot-free. In Masilang case. Said failure or refusal. People vs.to cut down on the illicit traffic of children. People vs. the commonlaw wife of the accused. The key word therefore of this element is deliberate. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof.• • • Sister of the “wife” was dragged and kept in a store until she tells the accused where her sister is. Purpose of taking the victim was to kill him. For the constitutional plea of double jeopardy to be available. as the title of the article seems to indicate. CA • Accused was charged with reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property with multiple physical injuries and abandonment of one’s victim. Gutierrez \ Page 13 minor but what is actually punishable is not the kidnapping of the minor but rather the deliberate failure or refusal of the custodian of the minor to restore the latter to his parents or guardians. The term “actual deprivation of liberty” consists not only of placing a person in an enclosure but also of detaining a person or depriving him in any manner of his liberty. The two minors voluntarily entered the appellant’s residence. where the evident purpose of taking the victims was to kill them. In 365. There was no showing that there was actual confinement or restriction of the person of the offended party. hence he crime committed was only murder. the subsequent killing of the victims constitutes the crime of murder. Obiter: The court here commented. The fact of detention which is an essential element in the crime charged was not clearly established. failure to lend help to one’s victim is neither an offense by itself nor an element of the offense therein penalized. There was no indication that Aida was locked up. There is no kidnapping in this case. Gave her to a physician in Rizal. Mitigating circ of obfuscation must arise from lawful sentiments. she was in any manner deprived of her liberty. was not clearly established. People vs. –the essential element herein is that the offender is entrusted with the custody of the minor but what is actually punishable is not the kidnapping of the minor. unable to move—and get out— as she pleased. no all the technical elements constituting the first offense need be present in the technical definition of the second offense. Quasi-offense under 365 are committed by means of culpa. the Court urges the prosecution of persons to whom children are sold or given away for a valuable consideration. The identity of offenses that must be shown need not be absolute identity: the first and second offenses may be regarded as the same offense where the second offense necessarily includes the first offense or is necessarily included in such first offense or where the second offense is an attempt to commit the first or a frustration thereof. Ty • Kidnapping and failure to return a Minor. Thus. It is not enough that. By keeping the child. the victim was taken from one place to anther. The essence of the crime of kidnapping as defined and penalized is actual deprivation of the victim’s liberty coupled with an indubitable proof of intent on the part of the malefactor to effect such restraint on the offended party’s liberty. the crime is only murder. Crimes against Security are committed by means of dolo. • • • • KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR People vs. but rather the deliberate failure or refusal of the custodian of minor to restore the latter to his parents or guardians. Where the victim was actually restrained or deprived of her freedom by the accused to force her to produce her sister. He files against double jeopardy. not kidnapping for ransom with murder. Where the taking of the victim was incidental to the basic . Del Socorro • • Accused allegedly found a girl and claimd that the little girl voluntary went with her. Padica • Crime committed was murder. the rim is not grave coercion but illegal detention. as in the instant case. under these circumstances. is he not guilty of serious illegal detention? purpose to kill. The articles 365 and 275 are two different and distinct offenses.
though committed in a inhabited house. 282 elements: that the offender threatened another person with the infliction upon his person of a wrong that such wrong amounted to a crime that the threat was not subject to a condition The demonstration led by petitioner against the complainant in front of the main gate with placards with threatening statements with the deliberate purpose of creating in the mind of the person threatened with the belief that the threat would be carried into effect. Considering the religious atmosphere prevailing at the time the accused kissed and embraced the offended girl and the presence of many people it would be error in the absece of clear proof as to the motive. People vs. The aggravating circ of craft and dwelling are present in the commission. Timbol • • The husband was asked by the accused if he can be alone with the accused’s wife and there he molested the wife. it must be a dangerous force threatened “in praesenti”. Unjust vexation if no lustful designs present. The accused should be declared guilty of unjust vexation. There is nothing unlawful on the threat to sue. Grave coercion is committed when a person who without authority of law. Reyes vs. Where the expression putang ina mo is not considered slanderous—the is a common expression in the dialect that is often employed not really to slander but rather to express anger or displeasure. That where robbery. The threats that were not made by the accused to the offended party but to his wife while said accused was abusing her. taken in its literal sense by the hearer. with the aggravating circumstance of having committed it in a place dedicated to religious worship. or compelled to do something against his will. This is on the theory that robbery which is characterized by violence or intimidation against the person is evidently graver than ordinary robbery committed by force upon • • GRAVE COERCION Timoner vs. There is nothing unlawful on the threat to sue. People • • a. shall by means of iolence. The force which is claimed to have compelled criminal conduct against the will of the actor must be immediate and continuous and threaten grave danger to his person during allof the time the act is being committed. that is a reflection on the virtue of a mother. That the prevention or compulsion be effected by violence. Acts of lasciviousness: pardon which was not given by the offended party herself. Crimes Against Property ROBBERY Napolis vs. putang ina mo” case. prevent another from doing something not prohibited by law or compel to do something against his will either it be right or wrong. Anonuevo • • The accused grabbed the breasts of the complainant from behind while a religious ceremony was being held inside the church. or. Gutierrez \ Page 14 • Accused fenced a land which they alleged belong to them since the Church which stood on the land they have donated was destroyed (11 pm while pabasa was being held). either by material force or such display of it as would produce intimidation and control the will of the offended party That the person who restrained the will and liberty of another had no right to do so. this factor supplies the controlling qualification so that the law to apply is article 294 and not art 299 of the RPC. CA • • Store vs.GRAVE THREATS People vs. Elements: that any person be prevented by another from doing something not prohibited by law. It is seldom. • “Agustin. no matter how religious a turn of mind they might be. UNJUST VEXATION People vs. The accused here were just convicted of unjust vexation. c. Art 699 authorizes the abatement of a public nuisance without judicial proceedings. in other words. Mayor fenced public nuisance. municipal mayor not criminally liable when he acted in good faith in authorizing the fencing of a barbershop for being a public nuisance bec it occupied a portion of the sidewalk. even though irritating and vexatious under the circumstances to those present is not such an act as can be designated as notiously offensive to the faithful as normally such an act would be a matter of complete indifference to those not present. is characterized by intimidation. The construction of a fence. It must be a force threatening great bodily harm that remains constant in controlling the will of the unwilling participant while the act is being performed and from which he cannot withdraw in safety. cannot be considered separate and independent from the crime of abuse of chastity to constitute another crime of threats. which form part of the element of intimidation that the accused employed to succeed in his lewd designs. That is. be it right or wrong. CA • • Check which was forged by the complainant. b. House case—robbery thru the store to the house. She charged the bank manager of grave coercion. to ascribe the conduct of the appellant to lustful designs or purposes. Petitioner’s demand that the private resp return the proceeds of the check accompanied by a threat to file criminal charges was not improper. that the restraint was not made under authority of law or in the exercise of a lawful right. if ever. People . Reyes • Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. b. Lee vs. Abatement of public nuisance without judicial proceedings. but by her husband and that the same was granted by the latter after the filing of the complain cannot extinguish the criminal resp of the accused for even a pardon givben after the presentation of the complaint will not operate in favor of the accused and exonerate him. c. • • • • • • a.
the imposable penalty under par 5 shall be much lighter. Tapales • • Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Mangulabnan • Case where the father hid himself inside the ceiling. People vs. adhered to in previous decisions. or persons intervening in the commission of the crime that has to be taken into consideration.—In order to determine the existence of the crime of robbery with homicide. Crime is a complex one under Art. it sis enough that a homicide would result by reason or on the occasion of the robbery and it is immaterial that the death would supervene by mere accident provided that the homicide be produced by reason or on occasion of the robbery inasmuch as it only the result obtained. There is conspiracy and all of the persons who perpetuated the robbery are liable of the crime of robbery with homicide. by breaking a wall. without violence against or intimidation upon persons is punishable under 299 RPC with reclusion temporal. One penalty. whenever a homicide has been committed as a consequence of or on the occasion of a robbery. if. the robbery. an inhabited house and steals therefrom valuable effects. In this special complex crime. Indeed. without reference or distinction as to the circumstances.• • things. Calixto • • Robbed the bank and one of the robbers was accidentally hit and eventually died. • • Crime of robbery with homicide when may exist. The evidence shows that the accused gained entry into the house of Kalitas by breaking the door with an axe and not but burning the same. This defies logic and reason accdg to the court. without committing any of the crimes or inflicting any of the injuries mentioned in subparagraphs 1 to 4 of Art 294 of the same Code. the legal definition of the crime is robbery with homicide punishable under par 1. it is the rape itself that aggravates. Members of a group of robbers can be held criminally liable for robbery in band with homicide where in course of robbery they shot and killed one of their own group. People vs. even if the killing is by mere accident. modes or persons intervening in the commission of the crime. under the conditions set forth in ART 299 of the RPC. modes. Art. No suspect as to who caused the death. People vs. aside from performing said acts. Robbery with homicide-where the crime charged is robbery with homicide and rape. The burning of the house of George Kalitas was not the means in committing the robbery. the number of persons killed is immaterial and does not increase the penalty in Art 294. they asked him if he recognizes them. causes. The reason is that there is no crime robbery with multiple homicide under the RPC. They then burned a house also in the same neighborhood after they got the gun and some properties from the previous house and then to another. Actual Participation in the Homicide is not necessary unless it clearly appeared that the accused endeavored to prevent the homicide —As long as the homicide resulted during or because of. the thief lays hand upon any person. Doctrines of prev cases were abandoned. Pecato • • The relatives of the victim were the ones who killed him and before they did so. 294 applies only where robbery with violence against or intimidation of person takes place without entering an inhabited house. Reclusion perpetua even when multiple killings were present. Patola • Accused were drinking beer in front of the store and when it was closing time already. Pursuant to the above view. enters. Biruar • Accused pretended to be relatives and when they were allowed to come up the house. • • • ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE People vs. ROBBERY WITH RAPE People vs. Further. Quinones • • Robbed a car by putting sacks on the road and committed multiple murder. It is the uniform jurisprudence of the Supreme Court that where the crime charged is robbery with homicide and rape. with Rape being considered an aggravating circumstance. Instead of ignominy. Accused were charged with 3 separate crimes of robbery in Band. the legal definition of the crime is robbery with homicide with rape considered as an aggravating circumstance. that has to be taken into consideration. causes. all those who took part as principals in the commission of the crime are also guilty as principals in the special complex crime of robbery with homicide although they did not actually take part in the homicide unless it clearly appeared that they endeavored to prevent the homicide. Violence or intimidation against the person is evidently grabber than ordinary robbery committed by force upon things. Herein accused performed different acts with distinct purposes which resulted in juridically independent crimes. it is only the result obtained. because where violence or intimidation against the person is present there is greater disturbance of the order of society and the security of the indivual. People vs. they robbed the house. without reference or distinction as to the circumstances. Special complex crime-there is no crime of robbery with multiple homicide under the RPC the number of persons killed is immaterial and does not increase the penalty under 294 of the said Code—The Court finds that the accused were incorrectly sentenced by the trial court. with a deadly weapon. The charge should have been for robbery with homicide only regardless of the fact that three persons were killed in the commission of the robbery. therefore. . robbery with homicide is committed. Gutierrez \ Page 15 Hinoldup yung mag-boyfriend sa taxi tapos nirape yung babae at pinatay yung lalaki. raped the 2 salesgirls. 48. • People vs. The Court has consistently held that the legal definition of the crime committed herein is Robbery with Homicide. Art 294 of the RPC and the rape committed on the occasion of that the crime is considered an aggravating circumstance. one who.
294 (2) or under 335 which imposes a penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. One who did not take part in rape but only in robbery is guilty only of robbery. If the foregoing classes of robbery which are described in 294 1 and 2 are perpetrated by a band. 294(2) or 335. 295.• Robbery with rape with the use of a deadly weapon. There used to be a controversy as to whether robbery with qualified rape should be penalized under Art. who took no part in the rape is guilty of robbery only under 294 (5) of the RPC but as to the accused who raped the maid guilty of the special complex crime of robbery with rape under 294 (2) of ROBBERY IN BAND People vs. would be appreciated as ordinary aggravating circ. 295. The taking of the watch by the accused was more of an afterthought. Consequently. One essential requisite of robbery with force upon things under 299 and 302 is that the malefactor should enter the building or dependency where the object to be taken is found. impotency or blindness. The trial court applied in this case Art. rape. they would not be punishable under 295 but then cuadrilla would be a generic aggravating circ under art. The phrase “necessary means” merely signifies that one crime is committed to facilitate and insure the commission of the other. • • • . They only executed affidavits. If the intention of the accused was to commit robbery but rape was also committed even before the robbery. Dinola • • Case where a 34 laborer raped a 17-year old girl then robbed her watch after raping her. Gutierrez \ Page 16 • 295 provies that when the offenses dexcribed in subdivisions 3. the crime of robbery with rape is committed. even if the culprit had no opportunity to dispose of the same. as stated above. That controversy was set at rest where it was held that robbery with qualified rape should be punished under Art. the RPC. nighttime and use of vehicle aggravating n rape. Since 295 does not apply to subdivisions 1 and 2 of 294 (the accused is charged under 294(1). but with robbery with rape. 335. If the culprit did not enter the building. even accidental. The term “necessary means” does not connote indispensable means for if did then the offense as a “necessary means” to commit another would be an indispensable element of the latter and would be an ingredient thereof. The circumstances of band is therefore qualifying ony in robbery punished by sub 3. then the special aggravating factor in question which is solely applicable to robbery in band under 295 cannot be considered in fixing the penalty even when the crime was committed by a band and the use of unlicensed firearm. From the moment the offender gained possession of the thing. in order for this to be appreciated as special aggravating circ to justify the imposition of the max period of the proper penalty. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Dwelling. • People vs. It was supposed to be the young girl but she was spared. 4. 335. 14. and lesions graves resulting in insanity. if the original design was to commit rape but the accused after committing rape also committed robbery bec the opportunity presented itself. People vs. However. It is no defense either that appellant and his coaccused had no opportunity to dispose of the personal things taken. It regarded article 294(2) as having been amended by Art. a crime against property. the criminal acts should be viewed as two distinct offenses. 294 (2). There is no crime as robbery with homicide under 294(1) but the element of band. the unlawful taking is complete. Jaranilla • • Taking of six roosters. • ROBBERY BY THE USE OF FORCE UPON THINGS People vs. Art 299 and 302 clearly contemplate that the malefactor should enter the building. 5 or 294. People vs. the thing taken by him from its owner. 5 of 295 are committed by a band. Penalty for robbery with qualified rape under Art. a complex crime arises “when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other”. intentional mutilation. 296 of the RPC. That fact does not affect the nature of the crime. Balacanao • • • A house was robbed and the wife was raped by the robbers. nocturnity and the use of a motor vehicle. All the conspirators-participants are liable as principals of the crime of robbery with rape. But there are aggravating circ which have to be considered such as dwelling. the proper penalties must be imposed in the maximum. Salvilla • Robbery. a complex crime. there would be no robbery with force upon things. Building-any structure not mentioned in 299 used for storage and safekeeping of personal property. the unlawful taking is complete. The crime of serious illegal detention was such a necessary means as it was selected by appellant and his co-accused to facilitate and carry out their evil design to stage a robbery. ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES People vs. Every complaint or information should state not only the qualifying but also the aggravating circumstances. With regard to their use of unlicensed firearm. That is why it imposed the death penalty. Accused Juan Moreno. from the moment the offender gained possession of the thing. It should be stressed that in this case the accused were not charged with qualified rape alone. Under Art 48. Apduhan • Robbery with homicide-interrelation among art 294. art 295 is inapplicable with homicide. the criminal acts should be viewed as two distinct offenses. more or less far away. If the original design was to commit rape but the accused after committing rape also committed robbery bec the opportunity presented itself. a crime against chastity. It is not an indispensable element of theft that the thief carry. it is a condition sine qua non that the offense charged be robbery committed by a band within the contemplation of Art. Moreno • • The house was robbed and the maids were raped but the maids didn’t testify as witness. 4. imbecility. even if the culprit had no opportunity to dispose of the same.
People • Vehicles which use streets with or without the required license comes withing the protection of the law. Ransom is the money price or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons. if robbery is committed by a band. Mere approval of an act without cooperation does not constitute conspiracy. At most the facts establish Taer’s knowledge of the crime. with intent to gain. There is no such proof in this case. There is a graduation of penalty for carnapping alone.It includes the killing of large cattle. On the other hand. A person who took care of stolen carabaos. Ex. Test runs of vehicles before being bought. is not enough to constitute one a part to a conspiracy absent the intentional participation in the transaction with a view to the furtherance of the common design and purpose. of any of the abovementioned animals whether or not for profit or gain. not exclusively for private use. of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the latter’s consent. he took part subsequent to the commission of the act of taking by profiting himself by its effects. Tricycle is not included in the exceptions and is deemed to be that kind of motor vehicle defined. but may and generally must be proved by a number of indefinite acts. or taking its meat or hide without the consent of the owner/raiser. the crime is only robbery. • Ordonio vs. The main objective of the Brigandage Law is to prevent the formation of a band by more than three armed persons for the purposes indicated in 306. CA • • Yung kalabaw na pinaalaga kay Taer. for he did not participate in the taking of the carabaos. People vs. PD 532 punishes as highway robbery or brigandage only acts of robbery perpetrated by outlaws indiscriminately against any person or persons on Phil highways as defined therein and not acts of robbery committed against only a predetermined or particular victim. Their liability was proven by the physical evidence on record. indiscriminate highway robbery. If the purpose is only a particular robbery. The existence of conspiracy may be inferred from acts tending to show a community of design or purpose. carnapping with intimidation of persons and force upon things and carnapping with homicide. • • • • • Izon vs. Carnapping with homicide-carnapping defined as the taking.CARNAPPING RA 6539 PD 532 Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. • People vs. there must be indubitable proof that the actual intent of the malefactors was to deprive the offended party of her luberty and not where such restraint of her freedom of action was merly an incident in the commission of another offense primarirly intended by the offenders. Dela Cruz • Conspiracy need not be established by direct evidence of the acts charged. Mere knowledge. or by means of violence against or intimidation of persons. Neither proof of indiscriminate robbery. Castle rustling as defined in Sec 2(C) of PD 533 is taking away by any means. Tricycle considered as motor vehicle. cash and checks given at gunpoint voluntarily. Even if the sworn statements of appellants Beloso and Salvador are declared inadmissible for having been given without the presence of counsel. free for the use of every person. or whether committed with or without violence against or intimidation of any person or force upon things . Highways are always public. A conviction for highway robbery requires proof that the accused were organized for the purpose of committing robbery indiscriminately. or approval of the act. As manifest in its preamble. acquiescence to. PD 532 is not a modification of ART 267 of the RPC on kidnapping and serious illegal detention but of 306 and 307 on brigandage. CA • • Case where the calf went to its mom. or robbery in band if there are at least four armed participants. People vs. At yet without having participated either as principal or as an accomplice. their culpability is borne out by evidence independent of the same. inter alia. CATTLE RUSTLING PD 533 • • Taer vs. condition and circumstances which vary according to the purpose to be accomplished. Puno • For kidnapping to exist. without cooperation or agreement to cooperate. a mere accessory. a payment that releases from captivity vs. whose members were not primarily organized for the purpose of committing robbery or kidnapping etc the crime would not be brigandage but only robbery. There is nothing in the law that requires a license to use a public highway to make the vehicle a “motor vehicle” within the definition given the anticarnapping law. The purpose of brigandage is. Gutierrez \ Page 17 travel from one place to another thereby disturbing the peace and tranquility of the nation and stunting the economic and social progress of the people. methods or schemes. Any vehicle which is motorized using the streets which are public. or by using force upon things. without the consent of the owner/raiser. comes within the concept of motor vehicle. Pulusan • A conviction for highway robbery requires proof that he accused were organized for the purpose of committing robbery indiscriminately. the object of the decree is to deter and punish lawless elements who commit acts of depredation upon persons or properties of innocent and defenseless inhabitants who HIGHWAY ROBBERY THEFT .
Inc. RA 8041 ILLEGAL LOGGING PD 330 PD 705. Elements of estafa: that personal property os received in trust. if the accused was only entrusted with de facto possession of the thing. takes or gathers or causes to be caught. taking of ring of victim was merely an afterthought and the force employed in the killing has no bearing on the taking of the ring. his conversion of the same constitutes embezzlement or estafa. 68 ILLEGAL FISHING RA 8550 sec. IAC • How qualified and simple theft of coconuts committed: Art 310 states that the crime of theft shall be punished by the next higher degree if the property stolen consists of coconut taken from the premises of a palantation. d. He was not convicted criminally but only liable civilly. Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking of the car. ILLEGAL WATER. Equally essential before the offense of estafa under 315(b) of the RPC can be considered committed. • . or otherwise dispose of lumber and the Secretary or Environment and Natural Resources or his authorized representative has the authority to seize the lumber. this Court rules that such possession is penalized in the said section bec lumber is included in the term timber. but if he has the juridical possession of the things. sec. Illegal Logging. Theft distinguished from estafa. When the coconuts are stolen in any other place. like motor vehicles. It is rooted on the recognition that a vessel and an aircraft. Revised Forestry Code of the Phil. The principal distinction bet the two crimes is that in theft the thing is taken while in estafa the accused receives the property and converts it to his own use or benefit. THROUGH UNFAITHFULNESS OF ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE QUALIFIED THEFT Empelis vs. If he was entrusted only with the material or physical (natural) or de facto possession of the thing. where a lumber-dealer’s license or permit has been suspended. even though the obligation is guaranteed by a bond that there is conversion or diversion of such property by the person who has so recived it or a denial on his part that he received it that such conversion. jurisdiction in which the search warrant must be sought and secured. Gulinao • Theft was committed. fishery or aquatic products in Phil waters with the use of explosives. People • • Case where the car was brought to a repair shop but it wasn’t repaired and wasn’t returned. and thus possession thereof without the legal documents is not a crime. b. in turn. electricity. his misappropriation of the same constitutes theft. Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. c. for administration or under any other cic involving the duty to make delivery of or to return the same. There is a presumption that the operator or the fishermen are engaged in illegal fishing under these circ. Although a contract of lease is not fiduciary in nature. sell. 86 et seq. not robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of person. ELECTRIC OR TELEPHONE CONNECTIONS PD 401. RA 7832. Gutierrez \ Page 18 On the contrary. The law creates a presumption that illegal fishing has been committed when: explosives. obnoxious or poisonous substances or equipment or device for electric fishing are found in a fishing boat or in the possiosion of a fisherman when fist caught or killed with the use of explosives. Stealing of coconuts when they are still in the tree of deposited on the ground within the premises is qualified theft. Santos vs. it is simple theft. But it was shown that accused did exert all efforts to recover and retrieve the dump truck from Gorospe. be construed as an affirmance of the respondent Judge’s conclusion that lumber is excluded from the coverage of Sec 68 of PD 705 as amended. predicated on misappropriation or conversion by the accused of the subject of the obligation. • FENCING PD 1612 ESTAFA A. he has absolutely no right to possess.People vs. diversion or denial is to the injury of another that there be a demand for the return of the property. CA • Search and seizure without search warrant of vessles and aircrafts for violations of customs laws have been the traditional exceptions to the constitutional requirement of a search warrant. b. obnoxious or poisonous substances. • • a. CA • The foregoing disquisitions should not. CA • a. on commission. still the clause “any other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of or return” personal properry is borad enough to include a “civil obligation”. Manahan vs. taken or gathered fish. his misappropriation of the same constitutes theft. The offense of illegal fishing is committed when a person catches. • THEFT OF ELECTRICITY. Hizon vs. There be theft even if the accused has possesstion of the property. is that the refusal or failure to deliver or return is. etc are found in a fishing boat. can be quickly moved out of the locality or • Mustang Lumber. vs. in any manner.
use and enjoyment. • People vs. • RA 4885 has eliminated the requirement under the old provision for the drawer to inform the payee that he had no funds in the bank of the funds deposited by him were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check. Art 315. Dacuycuy People vs. the law being alert in all cases to prevent fraud on the part of either party to the transaction. by false or misleading allegations. Grospe BP 22 Circular Que vs. he nevertheless unwittingly contributed to their eventual consummation by recklessly entrusting his passbook to Balo and by signing the withdrawal slips—Banco Filipino suffered damages. one of the two essential requisites of the crime of estafa—basically the two essential requisites of fraud or deceit and damage or injury must be established by sufficient and competent evidence in order that the crime of estafa may be established. People People vs. Conversion is an unauthorized assumption and exercise of the right of ownership over goods or personal chattels belonging to another. Allied Banking Corp vs. PD 115 was not applied in the Cuevo and Sia cases bec the questioned acts were committed before its effectivity. . Ordonez • In trust receipts. CA • • Pinaniwalang may dwende at may kayamanan. To misappropriate to one’s own use includes. deceit and damage are essential elements of the offense and have to be established with satisfactory proof to warrant conviction. there is an obligation to repay the entruster. BOUNCING CHECKS BP 22 Nierras vs. 13. CA Idos vs. resp court correctly convicted appellant of attempted estafa. or return the goods if unsold or not otherwise disposed of. property. or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed) which deceives or is intended to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury. CA • The words convert or misappropriate connote an act of using or disposing of another’s property as if it were one’s onw. Sandiganbayan SWINDLING BY SYNDICATE Koh Tieck Heng vs. qualifications. agency. It takes place when a person actually appropriates the property of another to his own benefit. CA Veloso vs. or by means of other similar deceits. or falsely pretending to possess power. Although petitioner was unaware of the criminal workings in the mind of Balo. in the absence of proof thereof the Lee vs. by abuse of confidence or b. resulting in the alteration of their condition or the exclusion of the owner’s rights. but also every attempt to dispose of the property of another without right. not by reason of his own spontaneous desistance but bec of his apprehension by the authorities before he could obtain the amount. Although Abejuela was unaware of the criminal workings in the mind of Balo. business or imaginary trasactions. Violation of a trust receipt agreement constitutes the crime of estafa. credit. Their terms are to be interpreted in accordance with the general riles on contracts. PD 115.Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. by means of deceit (2) that damage of prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third person. THROUGH FALSE PRETENSES. • In this case. Deceit is the false representation of a matter of fact (whether by words or conduct. People • The use of the spurious checks by itself fraud or deceit. he nevertheless unwittingly contributed to their eventual consummation by recklessly entrusting his passbook to Balo and by signing the withdrawal slips. offender would at least be guilty of attempted estafa. In crime of estafa by postdating or issuing a bad check. not only conversion to one’s personal advantage. Since only the intent to cause damage and not the damage itself has been shown. CA OTHER DECEITS Villaflor vs. (1) that the accused defrauded another a. People • Estafa thru falsification of commercial documents. the prosecution failed to prove that accused-appellant had such knowledge with respect to the subject checks that he indorsed. Gutierrez \ Page 19 Saddul vs. or of devoting it to a purpose or use different from that agreed upon. influence. 2(a)—Any person who shall defraud another by any of the means mentioned herinbelow shall be punished by: xxx2. Nitafan Lim Lao vs. FRAUDULENT ACTS OR MEANS • B. Although one of the essential elements of estafa is damage or prejudice to the offended party. By means of any of the ff false pretenses of fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud: (a) By using a fictitious name. The entrustee binds himself to sell or otherwise dispose of the entrusted goods with the obligation to turn over to the entruster the proceeds if sold. Ong • Elements of estafa in general are: Abejuela vs. in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the trust receipt. A violation of this undertaking constitutes estafa under sec. Abuejuela failed to exercise prudence and care. Rodil • • Trust receipts Law. Appellant commenced the commission of the crime of estafa but he failed to perform all the acts of execution of execution which would produce the crime. TRUST RECEIPTS PD 115 Celino vs.
Sunpongco Jose Alburo Godines OF PRIVATE OFFENSES CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE People vs. Gutierrez \ Page 20 MALICIOUS MISCHIEF Caballes vs. Fontanilla Babanto vs. Sangalang BIGAMY People vs. People Buerano vs. Zosa Perez vs. DAR PD 1728 Crimes Against Chastity ACTS OF LASCIVIUOUSNESS People vs. CA SLANDER SLANDER BY DEED INCRIMINATING AN INNOCENT PERSON WIRETAPPING RA 4200 Quasi-Offenses QUALIFIED SEDUCTION People vs. CFI Agbayani vs. IAC Lacsa vs. CA Sazon vs. sec. FORCIBLE ABDUCTION WITH RAPE People People People People vs. IAC Bulletin Publishing Corp vs. vs. 5 and 6 Malit vs.PD 1689 Crimes Against Honor LIBEL Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. IAC Soriano vs. CA Carillo vs. Cano Ibabao vs. Noel Santos vs. People PROSECTION Pilapil vs. CA Vasquez vs. CA Gan vs. People Mercado vs. Aragon . CA ABDUCTION. vs. Famularcano CHILD PROSTITUTION RA 7610. vs. Sayo Newsweek vs. Ibay-Somera Crimes Against the Civil Status of Person SIMULATION OF BIRTHS People vs.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.