This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances Article 248. Murder. Article 249. Homicide Article 250. Penalty for frustrated parricide, murder or homicide Article. 251. Death caused in a tumultuous affray. Article. 252. Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray Article 253. Giving assistance to suicide Article 254. Discharge of firearms Article 255. Infanticide Article 256. Intentional abortion. Article 257. Unintentional abortion Article 258. Abortion practiced by the woman herself of by her parents. Article 259. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and dispensing of abortives Art. 260. Responsibility of participants in a duel. Art. 261. Challenging to a duel Chapter Two – Physical Injuries Article 262. Mutilation Article 263. Serious physical injuries Article 264. Administering injurious substances or beverages Article 265. Less serious physical injuries Article 266. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment + RA 8049 (Hazing Law) RA 8353 Article 266-A. Rape; When And How Committed Article 266-B. Penalties Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon Article 266-D. Presumptions + RA 9262 (Anti VAWC) Chapter One Destruction Of Life Section One. — Parricide, murder, homicide Article 246. Parricide. — Any person who shall kill his father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or
descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. ELEMENTS: 1. person is killed 2. deceased killed by the accused 3. deceased is the: a. father b. mother Whether legitimate/illegitimate c. child should not be less than 3 days old because if so, guilty of infanticide d. Legitimate other ascendant e. Legitimate other descendant f. Legitimate spouse best proof: marriage certificate or testimony of the accused that he is married to the deceased Essential element: relationship of the offender with the victim; only relatives by blood and in direct line, except spouse—thus, adopted NOT included! Note: According to sir, an adopted child is considered a legitimate child so pwede. However, the parents of the adopter is not included since according to family law, the relationship is exclusive between the adopter and adopted.
relationship MUST be ALLEGED! If not, then, cannot be convicted of
parricide but only of murder and relationship will be considered only as an aggravating circumstance. there is parricide through reckless imprudence if accused had no intent to kill anyone. parricide by mistake when accused not know the relationship of the person he killed. Y? law does not require knowledge of relationship between them liability of stranger who cooperates: guilty of homicide/murder
Cases: People vs. Jumawan 116 SCRA 739 (September 23, 1982) Facts: Presentacion wanted to secure the signature of Rodolfo on a document agreeing to a separation from his wife so that they can both remarry. Rodolfo did not sign. At 9:30 pm, a witness saw the accused stabbing the victim in a slaughterhouse. At 11pm, another witness saw the victim being dragged by the accused. When Rodolfo did not return home, mother (Trinidad) looked for him and found him dead near the water. Ruling:
Presentacion should have been accused of parricide but as it is; her relationship of the deceased is not alleged in the information. She like the others can be convicted of murder only qualified by abuse of superior strength. Although not alleged in the information, relationship as an aggravating circumstance should be assigned against the appellants. Doctrine: Relationship should be alleged in the information for the accused to be convicted of parricide. People vs. Tomotorgo 136 SCRA 238 (April 30, 1985) Facts: Jaime got mad because his wife, Magdalena tried to leave him, so he picked up a piece of wood and started hitting his wife until she fell to the ground complaining of severe pain on her chest. She died. Jaime then dresses his wife and reported the incident to Barangay Captain and surrendered and he brought the piece of wood which he used in beating his wife. Jaime was then charged with the crime of Parricide. Ruling: Reliance of Art. 263 prescribing graduated penalties for the corresponding physical injuries committed is entirely misplaced and irrelevant considering that in this case, the victim died very soon after she was assaulted. The fact that Jaime only intended to maltreat Magdalena does not exempt him from liability for resulting and more serious crime committed. Doctrine: It is not physical injuries when the victim dies immediately afterwards. Article 247. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances. — Any legally married person who having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person, shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro. If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of any other kind, he shall be exempt from punishment. These rules shall be applicable, under the same circumstances, to parents with respect to their daughters under eighteen years of age, and their seducer, while the daughters are living with their parents. Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of his wife or daughter, or shall otherwise have consented to the infidelity of the other spouse shall not be entitled to the benefits of this article. REQUISITES FOR APPLICATION: 1. that accused is: a. legally married person
b. parent (may be legit/illegit) of under 18 yr. old single
daughter living with him
who surprises his spouse (in flagrant adultery) /daughter in the act
of committing sexual intercourse with another person “surprise”-to come upon suddenly and unexpectedly does not apply if accused did not see the act of committing sexual intercourse, thus, NOT applicable if saw only sleeping together or after the act. BUT it is enough that the circumstances show reasonably that the carnal act is being committed or has just been committed. there must be sexual intercourse and so it does NOT include preparatory acts. DISSENT: (Justice Laurel) no need for actual sexual intercourse.
2. accused: a. kills any or both or
b. Inflicts any serious physical injuries In the act or immediately thereafter necessary that killed or inflicted the wounds while they were in the act of sexual intercourse or if able to run away, immediately after surprising them in the act of sexual intercourse. discovery, escape, pursuit and the killing must all form part of one continuous act
3. accused did not promote or facilitate the prostitution of his
wife/daughter or not consented to the infidelity of the other spouse Note: Apparently this article is not based on any moral consideration but more of the concept of ownership. As in, you own your spouse/daughter, therefore no one else can “use” them without your permission.
this article does not define or penalize a felony! Thus, the requisites must be established by the evidence of the defense
so as be to punished only of destierro accused cannot enter into a conditional plea of guilty and be sentenced with destierro since accused will be charged with paricide/homicide or serious physical injuries.
killing must be the direct by-product of the accused’s rage; actually
motivated by blind impulse and not be influences by some external factor. reason of the killing must be: for having surprised her in the act of sexual intercourse with another person
Note: passion and obfuscation is only a mitigating circumstance unlike in the US where temporary insanity is absolutory. NO CRIMINAL LIABILITY IF: only inflicted less serious or slight physical injuries or when inflicted to a 3rd person caught in the crossfire because accused was not committing murder but inflicting death under exceptional circumstances. Banishment not intended as penalty but to protect the killer spouse from the acts of reprisals by relatives of the deceased. WHEN PARRICIDE NOT PUNISHED WITH RECLUSION PERPETUA TO DEATH: 1. Parricide committed through negligence 2. committed by mistake 3. committed under exceptional circumstances Case: People vs. Abarca 153 SCRA 735 (September 14, 1987) Facts: Francisco Abarca caught his wife, Jenny, having sex with Khingsley Koh. He stole an M16 from a PC soldier and opened fire at a mahjjong session after warning others not involved to get out, killing Koh and injuring two others. Ruling: Though one hour had passed between the time of the sexual intercourse and shooting, the shooting must be understood to be a continuation of the pursuit of the victim. RPC only requires that the death be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the basest act of infidelity. The killing must be the direct by-product of the accused’s rage. Doctrine: RPC does not say he should commit the killing instantly after witnessing the infidelity, it only requires that the killing be the direct result of the outrage suffered by the cuckolded husband. Article 248. Murder. — Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246 shall kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death, if committed with any of the following attendant circumstances: 1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity. 2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise. 3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other means involving great waste and ruin.
Note: may be absorbed depending on the circumstances (e.g. bomb in car) 4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or other public calamity. Note: not absorbed; this violates the moral expectation to lend assistance and therefore makes the act more evil. 5. With evident premeditation. 6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse. ELEMENTS: 1. person was killed victim must be killed to consummate the crime. If not then only attempted or frustrated murder 2. accused killed him 3. killing was attended by ANY of the qualifying circumstances when more than one of the circumstances mentioned, others considered as generic aggravating qualifying circumstance must still be ALLEGED in the information! If not, then only homicide 4. killing is not parricide or infanticide
when attendant circumstance is #3 murder committed by means of
fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck and etc, there must be INTENT to kill to be liable for murder. however, no intent to kill needed in the other attendant circumstances.
TREACHERY- attack is sudden and unexpected to the point of incapacitating the victim to repel or escape it. -sudden and unexpected and the victims were not in a position to defend themselves -means, methods or forms of attack must be consciously adopted by the offender [example: killing of a child of tender years] Note: can be absorbed in abuse of superior strength TAKING ADVANTAGE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH- superior strength must be taken advantage of. [example: sex and weapon giving superiority] WITH AID OF ARMED MEN- accused had companions who were armed when he committed the crime; accused must avail himself of their aid or rely upon them when the crime is committed
EMPLOYING MEANS OR PERSONS TO INSURE OR AFFORD IMPUNITYprevent his being recognized or to secure himself against detection and punishment -[example: covering of face with handkerchief] IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD OR PROMISE- person who received the price or reward or who accepted a promise of price or reward would not have killed the victim were it not for that price, reward, or promise. Note: cannot be absorbed because it relates to motive. treachery and evident premeditation are INHERENT in murder by means of POISON BUT in a case, SC held that it is NOT correct to say that the use of poison is inherent in murder. It becomes inherent only when the offender has the intent to kill the victim and he uses the poison as a means to kill him. WITH EVIDENT PREMEDITATION-present when the prosecution proves the time when the offender determined to kill his victim; act of the offender manifestly indicating that he clung to his determination to kill his victim; a sufficient lapse of time between the determination and the execution of the killing. Note: not absorbed; it relates to preparatory acts. WITH CRUELTY- other injuries or wounds are inflicted which are not necessary for the killing of the victim. Case: People vs. Buensuceso 132 SCRA 143 (September 28, 1984) Facts: Policemen apparently shot Pariseo Tayag because he refused to surrender his fan knife. Ruling: Where the victim died as a result of wounds received from several persons acting independently of each other, but it has not been shown which wound was inflicted by each assailant, all of the assailants are liable for the death of the victim. Note: There was no direct tie between the guns of the police and the wounds of the deceased. If there is doubt as to who inflicted the fatal shot, the degree of participation is considered. Article 249. Homicide. — Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in the next preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion temporal. HOMICIDE- unlawful killing of any person, which is neither parricide, murder nor infanticide ELEMENTS:
1. person was killed person must be killed to consummate the crime. If victim not killed, only attempted or frustrated homicide there must be satisfactory evidence of the fact of death and the identity of the victim 2. accused killed him without any justifying circumstance 3. accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed 4. killings was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances of murder, or by that of parricide or infanticide
intent to kill- presumed when death resulted! Thus, when death
resulted, even if there is no intent to kill, the crime is homicide - needed only for attempted/frustrated stages because if intent not proven beyond reasonable doubt then only liable for physical injuries! - Thus, no offense for frustrated homicide through imprudence. Element of intent to kill in frustrated homicide is incompatible with negligence or imprudence. - Sometimes shown by the kind of weapon; parts of the victim’s body at which the weapon was aimed. killing must NOT be justified in the absence of clear proof of any circumstances that would qualify as murder the killing of the deceased, the guilty person should be sentenced only for homicide.
wounds that caused death were inflicted by 2 different persons,
even if they were not in conspiracy, each one of them is guilty of homicide. BUT if can be shown that the wound inflicted by him did not cause the death of the victim, then, he will not be punished for homicide this is applicable only when there is NO conspiracy between or among the accused! ACCIDENTAL HOMICIDE- death of a person brought about by a lawful act performed with proper care and skill, and without homicidal intent—NO LIABILTY CORPUS DELICTI (means the actual commission of the crime charged)crime was actually perpetrated and does not refer to the body of the murdered person Case: People vs. Pugay 167 SCRA 439 (November 17, 1988) Facts: Fernando Pugay poured gasoline on Bayana Miranda, a mentally disabled, and Benjamin Samson set fire to him, intending to make fun of the
victim. Bayani died. Ruling: The accused Pugay is guilty of homicide through reckless imprudence since he failed to exercise all the diligence necessary to avoid the consequences of the act. The accused Samson is guilty of homicide. Although they did not intend to kill the victim, they are still criminally responsible for committing a felony (causing injuries by setting fire to a person) although the wrongful act done be different from the one intended (Art 4). Note: The intent to kill must be intentional for the use of fire to be appreciated as a qualifying circumstance. Article 250. Penalty for frustrated parricide, murder or homicide. — The courts, in view of the facts of the case, may impose upon the person guilty of the frustrated crime of parricide, murder or homicide, defined and penalized in the preceding articles, a penalty lower by one degree than that which should be imposed under the provision of Article 50. The courts, considering the facts of the case, may likewise reduce by one degree the penalty which under Article 51 should be imposed for an attempt to commit any of such crimes. courts may impose a penalty 2 degrees lower for FRUSTRATED parricide, murder or homicide courts may impose a penalty 3 degrees lower for ATTEMPTED parricide, murder or homicide
2. they did not compose groups organized for the common
purpose of assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally when 2 identified groups, no tumultuous affray 3. several persons quarreled and assaulted one another in a confused and tumultuous manner exists when at least 4 persons took part (?must they be armed???) 4. someone was killed in the course of the affray need not be one of the participants of the affray 5. it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased If known who inflicted the fatal wound, crime is homicide 6. that the person or persons who inflicted serious physical injuries or who used violence can be identified WHO ARE LIABLE: 1. person/s who inflicted the serious physical injuries are liable 2. if it is not known who inflicted the serious physical injuries on deceased, all the persons who used violence upon the person of victim are liable, but with lesser liability only if it cannot determined who inflicted the serious physical injuries on deceased!
the the be the
PD 1110-A- an attempt on or conspiracy against the life of the Chief Executive, member of his family, any member of his cabinet or members of latter’s family is punishable by death Article. 251. Death caused in a tumultuous affray. — When, while several persons, not composing groups organized for the common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally, quarrel and assault each other in a confused and tumultuous manner, and in the course of the affray someone is killed, and it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased, but the person or persons who inflicted serious physical injuries can be identified, such person or persons shall be punished by prision mayor. If it cannot be determined who inflicted the serious physical injuries on the deceased, the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon all those who shall have used violence upon the person of the victim. ELEMENTS: 1. there be several persons
Article. 252. Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray. — When in a tumultuous affray as referred to in the preceding article, only serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the participants thereof and the person responsible thereof cannot be identified, all those who appear to have used violence upon the person of the offended party shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that provided for the physical injuries so inflicted. When the physical injuries inflicted are of a less serious nature and the person responsible therefor cannot be identified, all those who appear to have used any violence upon the person of the offended party shall be punished by arresto mayor from five to fifteen days. ELEMENTS: 1. there is a tumultuous affray 2. participant or some participants suffered: a. serious physical injuries b. Physical injuries of a less serious nature i. Not include slight physical injuries. Only less serious injuries thus, unlike 251, victim must be a participant 3. person responsible cannot be identified
if identified, will be liable for physical injuries actually committed 4. all those who appear to have used violence upon the person of the offended party are known
Article 253. Giving assistance to suicide. — Any person who shall assist another to commit suicide shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor; if such person leads his assistance to another to the extent of doing the killing himself, he shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal. However, if the suicide is not consummated, the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods, shall be imposed. ACTS PUNISHABLE: 1. assisting another to commit suicide, whether consummated or not furnishing the person with the means to commit suicide 2. lending his assistance to another to commit suicide to the extent of doing the killing himself penalty the same for the giving assistance to suicide if offender is father, mother, child or spouse. person who attempts to commit suicide is not criminally liable Article 254. Discharge of firearms. — Any person who shall shoot at another with any firearm shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, unless the facts of the case are such that the act can be held to constitute frustrated or attempted parricide, murder, homicide or any other crime for which a higher penalty is prescribed by any of the articles of this Code. ELEMENTS: 1. offender discharges a firearm against or at another person if firearm not discharged, no crime of discharge of firearm discharge towards the house of victim is not illegal discharge of firearm ESSENTIAL prosecution must prove that the discharge of the firearm was directed precisely against the offended party 2. offender has no intention to kill that person if there is intent, then, it may be classified as frustrated or attempted parricide, murder or homicide and not merely illegal discharge of firearm
purpose in discharging is only to intimidate or frighten the offended party when distance is 200 meters, there is NO intent to kill there is a complex crime of illegal discharge of firearm with serious or less serious physical injuries[example: in the illegal discharge of firearm, the offended party is hit and wounded] no complex crime if only slight physical injuries are inflicted because this is only a light felony. the crime is discharge of firearm, even of the gun was not pointed at the offended party when it was fired, as long as it was initially aimed by the accused at or against the offended party. Note: does not include firing in the air. Section Two. — Infanticide and abortion. Article 255. Infanticide. — The penalty provided for parricide in Article 246 and for murder in Article 248 shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill any child less than three days of age. If the crime penalized in this article be committed by the mother of the child for the purpose of concealing her dishonor, she shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, and if said crime be committed for the same purpose by the maternal grandparents or either of them, the penalty shall be prision mayor. INFANTICIDE- killing of any child less than 3 days of age ELEMENTS: 1. child was killed child must be born alive and fully developed and that it can sustain an independent life. child must NOT be dead or although born alive, it could not sustain an independent life when it was killed 2. deceased child was less than 3 days of age 3. accused killed the said child when father, mother or legitimate other ascendant kills the child, they shall suffer the penalty of parricide any other person who kills—suffer penalty of murder MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE: concealing of dishonor by mother or maternal grandparents who committed the crime. - only mothers entitled to this must be of good reputation and good morals, thus, prostitutes not entitled to mitigating circumstance. stranger cooperating with the mother in killing the child- guilty of murder!
Article 256. Intentional abortion. — Any person who shall intentionally cause an abortion shall suffer: 1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if he shall use any violence upon the person of the pregnant woman. 2. The penalty of prision mayor if, without using violence, he shall act without the consent of the woman. 3. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the woman shall have consented. ABORTION- willful killing of the fetus in the uterus, or the violent expulsion of the fetus from the maternal womb which results in the death of the fetus ELEMENTS: 1. pregnant woman 2. violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages administered, or accused acts upon such pregnant woman 3. fetus dies, either in womb or after having been expelled 4. abortion is intended WAYS OF COMMITTING INTENTIONAL ABORTION: 1. using violence upon the person of the pregnant woman 2. acting, without violence, without the consent of he woman (administering drugs or beverages upon such pregnant woman without her consent) 3. acting with the consent of the pregnant woman ABORTION vs. INFANTICIDE ABORTION INFANTICIDE Fetus could not sustain independent Fetus could sustain an independent life. life after separation from the mother’s No legal viability. womb Article 257. Unintentional abortion. — The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium period shall be imposed upon any person who shall cause an abortion by violence, but unintentionally. ELEMENTS: 1. there is a pregnant woman 2. violence is used upon such pregnant woman without intending an abortion 3. violence is intentionally exerted
4. result of the violence- fetus dies, either in the womb or expelled therefrom committed only be violence – actual physical force! must be intentionally exerted! Conflicting views on WON accused guilty even if not know that victim is pregnant…. there is a complex crime of homicide with unintentional abortion! People vs. Salufrania 159 SCRA 401 (March 30, 1988) Facts: A son testified that his he saw his parents in a quarrel and he saw his father box his pregnant mother in the stomach and once fallen on the floor, his father strangled her to death. Accused was charged with of parricide with intentional abortion. Accused alleges that, assuming that he indeed killed his wife, there is no evidence to show that he had the intention to cause an abortion. Ruling: Accused intent to cause abortion has not been sufficiently established. Mere boxing of the stomach taken together with the immediate strangling of the victim in a fight, is not sufficient proof to show an intent to cause abortion. The accused must have merely intended to kill the victim but not necessarily to cause the abortion. The accused is liable for the complex crime of parricide with unintentional abortion. Doctrine: There must be intent to cause the abortion to be guilty of intentional abortion; it cannot be merely incidental to a killing. Note: He knew his wife was pregnant. Boxing her stomach was bound to have an effect. However, the Court focused more on the primary intention to kill. Article 258. Abortion practiced by the woman herself of by her parents. — The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon a woman who shall practice abortion upon herself or shall consent that any other person should do so. Any woman who shall commit this offense to conceal her dishonor, shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods. If this crime be committed by the parents of the pregnant woman or either of them, and they act with the consent of said woman for the purpose of concealing her dishonor, the offenders shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods. ELEMENTS: 1. there is a pregnant woman who suffered an abortion
2. abortion is intended 3. abortion caused by: a. pregnant woman b. any other person with her consent c. parents with her consent for the purpose of concealing her dishonor WHO ARE LIABLE? Only woman or her parents- to conceal dishonor!--> if purpose of parents not to conceal her dishonor, crime of intentional abortion. Article 259. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and dispensing of abortives. — The penalties provided in Article 256 shall be imposed in its maximum period, respectively, upon any physician or midwife who, taking advantage of their scientific knowledge or skill, shall cause an abortion or assist in causing the same. Any pharmacist who, without the proper prescription from a physician, shall dispense any abortive shall suffer arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos. ELEMENTS: 1. There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an abortion 2. abortion is intended 3. offender must be: a. physician b. midwife 4. takes advantage of his or her scientific knowledge or skill c. pharmacist i. no proper prescription ii. dispenses with an abortive punishes a pharmacist who merely dispenses with an abortive without the proper prescription of a physician. If pharmacist knew that the abortive would be used for abortion, he would be liable as an accomplice in the crime of abortion
Section Three. — Duel
In any other case, the combatants shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor, although no physical injuries have been inflicted. The seconds shall in all events be punished as accomplices. Duel – formal or regular combat previously concerted between two parties in the presence of two or more seconds of lawful age on each side, who make the selection of arms and fix all the other conditions of the fight. ACTS PUNISHABLE: 1. By killing one’s adversary in a duel. 2. By inflicting upon such adversary physical injuries. 3. By making a combat although no physical injuries have been inflicted. WHO ARE LIABLE? 1. the person who killed or inflicted physical injuries upon his adversary, or both combatants, as principals 2. the seconds, as accomplices the penalty for duel is the same as homicide, if death resulted. GENERAL PRINCIPLE: when there is intent to kill, the inflicting of physical injuries is either attempted or frustrated homicide. Where there is an agreement to fight to the death, then there is intent to kill on both parties. However, the Code disregards the intent to kill if only physical injuries resulted.
Art. 261. Challenging to a duel. — The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall challenge another, or incite another to give or accept a challenge to a duel, or shall scoff at or decry another publicly for having refused to accept a challenge to fight a duel. ACTS PUNISHABLE: 1. By challenging another to a duel. 2. By inciting another to give or accept a challenge to a duel. 3. BY scoffing at or decrying another publicly for having refused to accept a challenge to fight a duel. PERSONS RESPONSIBLE: 1. challenger 2. instigators Chapter Two
Art. 260. Responsibility of participants in a duel. — The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill his adversary in a duel. If he shall inflict upon the latter physical injuries only, he shall suffer the penalty provided therefor, according to their nature.
Physical Injuries WHAT ARE THE CRIMES OF PHYSICAL INJURIES? 1. Mutilation 2. serious physical injuries 3. administering injurious substance or beverages 4. less serious physical injuries 5. slight physical injuries and maltreatment Article 262. Mutilation. — The penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who shall intentionally mutilate another by depriving him, either totally or partially, or some essential organ of reproduction. Any other intentional mutilation shall be punished by prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods. MUTILATION: lopping or the clipping off of some part of the body 2 KINDS OF MUTILATION: 1. intentionally mutilating another by depriving him, either totally or partially, of some essential organ for reproduction ELEMENTS: a. there be castration mutilation of organs necessary for generation [example: penis or ovarium] b. caused purposely and deliberately to deprive the offended of that part. There must be intent to castrate the offended party. That the end is to castrate the person and not another purpose. 2. Intentionally making other mutilation other than some essential organ for reproduction and to deprive him of that part of the body. aka mayhem. involves another part of the body with a deliberate purpose of depriving him of that part of his body offender must have the intention to deprive the offended party of that part of his body cause if not, it shall be considered as physical injuries RA 7610 when offended party is under 12 yo, penalty shall be 1 degree higher than that imposed by law Note: Mutilation is always intentional.
Article 263. Serious physical injuries. — Any person who shall wound, beat, or assault another, shall be guilty of the crime of serious physical injuries and shall suffer: 1. The penalty of prision mayor, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the injured person shall become insane, imbecile, impotent, or blind; 2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such member, or shall have become incapacitated for the work in which he was therefor habitually engaged; 3. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have become deformed, or shall have lost any other part of his body, or shall have lost the use thereof, or shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in which he as habitually engaged for a period of more than ninety days; 4. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, if the physical injuries inflicted shall have caused the illness or incapacity for labor of the injured person for more than thirty days. If the offense shall have been committed against any of the persons enumerated in Article 246, or with attendance of any of the circumstances mentioned in Article 248, the case covered by subdivision number 1 of this Article shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum periods; the case covered by subdivision number 2 by prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period; the case covered by subdivision number 3 by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods; and the case covered by subdivision number 4 by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods. The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not be applicable to a parent who shall inflict physical injuries upon his child by excessive chastisement. How is the crime committed? 1. wounding 2. beating 3. assaulting 4. administering injurious substance may be committed by reckless imprudence or by simple imprudence or negligence [example: lack of precaution]
there must be NO intent to kill! If there’s intent to kill, it will be attempted/frustrated murder, parricide/infanticide… where the category of the offense of serious physical injuries depends on the period of illness or incapacity for labor, there must be EVIDENCE of the length of that period; otherwise, the offense is only slight physical injuries there is NO INCAPACITY if the injured party could still engage in his work although less effectively than before PHYSICAL INJURIES vs. MUTILATION PHYSICAL INJURIES MUTILATION NO special intention to clip off some There is a special intention to clip off part of the body so as to deprive the some part of the body so as to offended party of such part deprive the offended party of such part PHYSICAL INJURIES vs. ATTEMPTED/FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE
No intent to kill
ATTEMPTED/FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE Offender inflicts physical injuries Attempted: no need for physical injuries With intent to kill
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE: 1. committed against persons defined in the crime of parricide 2. attendance of circumstances mentioned for murder SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES BY EXCESSIVE CHASTISEMENT BY PARENTS NOT QUALIFIED! Notes: Insanity is 1. loss of reason/will 2. failure to determine right from wrong 3. failure to perceive things as they are Penalty when committed against father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse OR when attended by qualifying circumstances of murder Reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum period Prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period Prision correccional in its medium and maximum period
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES Consequence of the physical injuries inflicted on offended party Penalty of offender 1. wounding 2. beating 3. assaulting Becomes insane, imbecile, impotent (include inability to copulate AND sterility) or blind (2 eyes) 1. loses the use of speech (mute) or the power to hear (deaf) [2 ears] or to smell or loses an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg 2. loses the use of any such member (must be permanent!) 3. becomes incapacitated for the work in which he was habitually engaged in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted 1. becomes deformed b. physical ugliness, c. permanent and definite abnormality d. conspicuous and visible injury cannot be repaired by the action of nature. [Exception to the rule involving teeth- children and old man] 2. loses any other member of his body (not those mentioned in par.2) [ex: loss of 1 ear, fingers but if loss of the use of fingers resulted to loss of the hand, then par. 2] 3. loses its use Prision mayor RA7610- one degree higher than that imposed by law if victim under 12yo Prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods Prision correccional in its minimum and medium period
4. becomes ill (wound did not heal within that period) or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he was habitually engaged for more than 90 days because of the physical injuries inflictedcomplete incapacity injured party must have an avocation or work at the time of the injury Offended party becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days but not more than 90 days as a result of the injuries inflicted. incapacity is for ANY kind of labor(physical in nature)
Arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period
Prision correccional in its minimum and medium period
LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES Offended party incapacitated for labor for 10 days or more but not more than 30 Arresto mayor days or needs medical assistance (must be actual medical attendance and it is required) for the same period medical certificate usually indicates the no. of days even if no incapacity, if there was medical treatment for more than 10 days, then, less serious physical injuries
*qualifying circumstance:[+fine]: 1. there is manifest intent to insult or offend the injured 2. there are circumstances adding ignominy to the offense [higher penalty] 1. victim is either: a. offender’s parents b. ascendants c. guardians d. curators e. teachers 2. person of rank or person in authority provided that the offense does not amount to direct assault
SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES Physical injuries incapacitate the offended party for labor from 1-9 days OR require Arresto menor medical attendance Physical injuries do not prevent the offended party from engaging in his habitual work Arresto menor OR a fine not or require medical attendance. exceeding P200 and censure [example: black eye] Offended ill-treats another by deed WITHOUT causing any injuryno perceptible Arresto menor in its minimum period OR a fine not injury exceeding P50 [example: slapping of the face without causing dishonor]
Article 264. Administering injurious substances or beverages. — The penalties established by the next preceding article shall be applicable in the respective case to any person who, without intent to kill, shall inflict upon another any serious physical injury, by knowingly administering to him any injurious substance or beverages or by taking advantage of his weakness of mind or credulity. ELEMENTS: 1. offender inflicted serious physical injuries thus not apply if the injuries inflicted are only less serious or slight 2. done by knowingly administering to him: a. any injurious substance/ beverages administering injurious substance means introducing into the body the substance and not just by throwing chemicals on face or body b. by taking advantage of his weakness of mind or credulity may take place in the case of witchcraft, philters, magnetism 3. no intent to kill with intent, frustrated murder not know injurious substance: not liable Article 265. Less serious physical injuries. — Any person who shall inflict upon another physical injuries not described in the preceding articles, but which shall incapacitate the offended party for labor for ten days or more, or shall require medical assistance for the same period, shall be guilty of less serious physical injuries and shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor. Whenever less serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted with the manifest intent to kill or offend the injured person, or under circumstances adding ignominy to the offense in addition to the penalty of arresto mayor, a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed. Any less serious physical injuries inflicted upon the offender's parents, ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers, or persons of rank, or persons in authority, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, provided that, in the case of persons in authority, the deed does not constitute the crime of assault upon such person. Article 266. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment. — The crime of slight physical injuries shall be punished: 1. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted physical injuries which shall incapacitate the offended party for labor from one to nine days, or shall require medical attendance during the same period.
2. By arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 20 pesos and censure when the offender has caused physical injuries which do not prevent the offended party from engaging in his habitual work nor require medical assistance. 3. By arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not exceeding 50 pesos when the offender shall ill-treat another by deed without causing any injury. supervening event converting the crime into serious physical injuries after the filing of the information for slight physical injuries can still be subject of a new charge
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8049 (Hazing Law) AN ACT REGULATING HAZING AND OTHER FORMS OF INITIATION RITES IN FRATERNITIES, SORORITIES, AND ORGANIZATIONS AND PROVIDING PENALTIES THEREFOR What is hazing? An initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority or organization by placing the recruit neophyte or applicant in some embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing him to do menial, silly, foolish and similar tasks or activities or otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological suffering or injury. When will hazing be allowed? When there is prior written notice to the school authorities or head of organization seven (7) days before the conduct of such initiation. The written notice shall indicate the period of the initiation activities which shall not exceed three (3) days, shall include the names of those to be subjected to such activities, and shall further contain an undertaking that no physical violence be employed by anybody during such initiation rites. The head of the school or organization or their representatives must assign at least two (2) representatives of the school or organization as the case may be, to be present during the initiation. It is the duty of such representative to see to it that no physical harm of any kind shall be inflicted upon a recruit, neophyte or applicant. When will the acts be punishable? a) if death, rape, sodomy or mutilation results therefrom b) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall become insane, imbecile, impotent or blind. c) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such
member shall have become incapacitated for the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged. d) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall become deformed or shall have lost any other part of his body, or shall have lost the use thereof or shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged for a period of more than ninety (90) days. e) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance on the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged for more than thirty (30) days. f) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged for ten (10) days or more, or that the injury sustained shall require medical attendance for the same period. g) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged from one (1) to nine (9) days, or that the injury sustained shall require medical attendance for the same period. h) if in consequence of the hazing the victim sustained physical injuries which do not prevent him from engaging in his habitual activity or work nor require medical attendance. The maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed in any of the following instances: a) when the recruitment is accompanied by force, violence, threat, intimidation or deceit on the person of the recruit who refuses to join; b) when the recruit, neophyte or applicant initially consents to join but upon learning that hazing will be committed on his person, is prevented from quitting. c) when the recruit neophyte or applicant having undergone hazing is prevented from reporting the unlawful act to his parents or guardians, to the proper school authorities, or to the police authorities through force, violence , threat or intimidation; d) when the hazing is committed outside of the school or institution; e) when the victim is below twelve (12) years of age at the time of the hazing. Who are liable? 1. the officer and members of the fraternity, sorority or organization who actually participated in the infliction of physical harm shall be liable as principals 2. owner of the place where hazing is conducted shall be liable as an accomplice, when he has actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring
3. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers or members of
the fraternity, group, or organization, the parents shall be held liable as principals when they have actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring school authorities including faculty members who consent to the hazing or who have actual knowledge thereof but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring shall be punished as accomplices for the acts of hazing committed by the perpetrators officers, former officers, or alumni of the organization, group, fraternity, or sorority who actually planned the hazing although not present when the acts constituting the hazing were committed shall be liable as principals Officers or members of an organization, group, fraternity, or sorority who knowingly cooperated in carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim to be present thereat shall be liable as principals fraternity or sorority's adviser who is present when the acts constituting the hazing were committed and failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring shall be liable as principal
RAPE (RA 8353) Article 266-A. Rape; When And How Committed. — Rape is Committed — 1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: a) Through force, threat, or intimidation; b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present. 2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person. Article 266-B. Penalties. — Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua. Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death. The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances: 1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim; 2) When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement or penal institution: 3) When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse, parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third civil degree of consanguinity; 4) When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling and is personally known to be such by the offender before or at the time of the commission of the crime; 5) When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old; 6) When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Human ImmunoDeficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim; 7) When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or para-military units thereof or the Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency or penal institution, when the offender took advantage of his position to facilitate the commission of the crime; 8) When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability; 9) When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime; and 10) When the offender knew of the mental disability emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime. Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding article shall be punished by prision mayor. Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be prision mayor to reclusion temporal. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal. When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua. Reclusion temporal shall also be imposed if the rape is committed with any of the ten aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in this article. ELEMENTS OF RAPE IN PAR.1 1. offender is a man 2. offender had carnal knowledge of a woman there must be sexual intercourse penetration, even partial is necessary slightest penetration is enough if no sexual intercourse and only acts of lewdness are performed, the crime may be acts of lasciviousness 3. act is accomplished through: a. force or intimidation there must be physical struggle, taxing her powers to the utmost; it must be manifest and tenacious if the woman had contributed is some way to the realization of the act, may constitute an offense different from rape. force need not be so great, it is enough that the force used is sufficient to consummate the offender’s purpose of having sex with a woman. depends on age, size and strength of the parties intimidation- includes the moral kind such as fear caused by threatening the girl with a knife or pistol b. woman is deprived of reason or is unconscious victim has no will sex with a deaf-mute is not rape in the absence of proof that she is imbecile UNCONCIOUS:-asleep; lethargy because of sickness; knocked unconscious; narcotic administered to the woman; potion given to a woman HOWEVER, if liquor or drugs induced her consent to incite her passion and not deprive her of her will power, NOT rape! c. by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority d. woman is under 12 years or demented rape committed even if girl consented. even if prostitute, rape still committed! ANY of these circumstances is sufficient
ELEMENTS OF RAPE IN PAR.2 1. offender commits an act of sexual assault 2. act of sexual assault committed by: a. inserting penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice b. inserting any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person 3. act of sexual assault is accomplished under ff. circumstances: a. using force or intimidation b. woman is deprived of reason or is unconscious c. by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority d. woman is under 12 yo. or demented. Who can commit rape? Male or female RAPE may be PROVED by the uncorroborated testimony of the offended woman BUT the testimony must be conclusive, logical and probable
There must be intent on the part of the accused to have carnal knowledge of the woman against her will. resignation to consummated act is NOT consent Character of woman is immaterial in rape
3 principles in reviewing evidence for rape: 1. an accusation for rape can be made with facility, is difficult to prove, but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove. 2. only 2 persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution 3. evidence for the prosecution must stand and fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. CONSUMMATED RAPE: it is not essential that there be a complete penetration of the female organ; neither is it essential to rupture the hymen. It is enough that the labia of the female organ was penetrated. NO FRUSTRATED RAPE: from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge with the victim, he actually attains his purpose and from then on, all the requisites for the offense has been accomplished. Frustrated rape can never be committed because by doing all the acts necessary to produce the crime, already consummated because there is nothing else to prevent! ATTEMPTED RAPE: there is no penetration of the female organ because not all the acts of execution was performed. Offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts.
WHEN PUNISHED BY DEATH: 1. by reason or occasion of rape, homicide is committed (SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME) When homicide is committed NOT be reason or on the occasion of rape, not special complex crime but may be aggravating the crime of murder with ignominy/cruelty 2. victim under 18 AND offender is a. parent b. ascendant c. stepparent d. guardian e. relative by consanguinity or affinity within the 3rd civil degree f. common-law spouse of the parent of the victim 3. victim under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement or penal institution 4. rape committed in full view of: a. husband b. parent c. any of the children d. other relatives within the 3rd civil degree of consanguinity 5. victim is a religious engaged in the legitimate religious vocation or calling AND is personally known to be such by the offender before or at the time of rape 6. victim below 7 yrs old 7. offender knows he is afflicted by: a. HIV b. AIDS c. Other sexually transmissible disease AND virus/disease is transmitted 8. offender is: a. any member of AFP/paramilitary units b. PNP c. Any law enforcement agency d. Penal institution
9. 10. 11.
And took advantage of his position to facilitate the commission of the crime by reason or on the occasion of rape, the victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability offender knew that victim was pregnant at the time of the commission of the offense offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime
INDEMNITY IN RAPE: P50,000- mandatory after the finding of the fact of rape P75,000- if death penalty P100,000- rape with homicide DAMAGES IN RAPE: P50,000- automatically rewarded for moral damages without proof of mental or physical suffereing Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon. — The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed. In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty: Provided, That the crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio. EFFECT OF MARRIAGE: extinguishes not only the penal action but also the penalty that may be imposed However, it does not extinguish liability of accomplices and accessories and also to the other principals Article 266-D. Presumptions. — Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act of rape in any degree from the offended party, or where the offended party is so situated as to render her/him incapable of giving valid consent, may be accepted as evidence in the prosecution of the acts punished under Article 266-A." EVIDENCE WHICH MAY BE ACCEPTED IN THE PROSECUTION OF RAPE: 1. any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act of rape in any degree from the offended party 2. where the offended party is so situated as to render him/her incapable of giving consent.
Note: Rape used to be a crime against chastity. Now it is a crime against persons. The advantage: State can now prosecute in behalf of the victim since this is no longer a private crime. It might encourage more rape victims to press charges. The disadvantage: When it was still a crime against chastity, a victim can actually kill the perpetrator in self-defense since honor = life. In rape cases now, a victim cannot invoke self-defense when he/she kills the rapist absent a clear showing of a threat on his/her life. In other words, if you are not in danger of dying while being raped, you cannot take the life of your rapist in self defense. People vs. Orita 184 SCRA 105 (April 3, 1990) Facts: Cristina, 19 yr old student arrived in her boarding house and Cielito Orita held her and poked a knife at her neck. 1st position: Lito ordered Cristina to lie down on the floor and he mounted her and made her hold his penis and to insert it in her vagina. She followed him but he cannot fully penetrate her and so only a portion entered because Cristina kept moving. 2nd position: Cristina was to mount him. Again, only a small part was penetrated. Physical exam: hymen intact, no lacerations. RTC: guilty of FRUSTRATED RAPE because there is no conclusive proof of penetration of the genital organ of the victim. Ruling: There is no crime of frustrated rape. Dr. Zamora did not rule out penetration of the genital organ of the victim. He merely testified that there was uncertainty WON there was penetration. Cristina also said in her testimony that there was penetration even only partially. In consummation of rape, perfect penetration is NOT essential. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia of the female organ without the rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction. Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ because not all the acts of execution were performed. The offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. Crime of rape is consummated from the time 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. Doctrine: There is no such thing as frustrated rape. There is just a frustrated rapist. People vs. Mangalino 182 SCRA 329 (February 15, 1990) Facts: Semion Mangalino inserted his finger and later on forcibly introduced his sexual organ into Marichelle’s, six yr old, undeveloped genitalia. Physical exam in NBI concluded that bruises on Marichelle’s vagina: caused by a hard object like an erected penis and an indication of an unsuccessful penetration.
They discounted the probability of an accident since there was no contusion on the labia. Semion denied the charges and argued that bruises may be self-inflicted. She was constantly running and might have bumped her pelvis against a chair which explained the absence of contusions on the labia. Ruling: He is guilty of statutory rape. For rape to be committed, full penetration is not required. It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the female organ. Even the slightest penetration is sufficient to consummate the crime of rape. According to the NBI report, rape could have been perpetrated. Dr. Garcia certified the existence of indications of recent genital trauma. Vestibular mucosa was dark red and normally, it was supposed to be pinkish. The forcible attempt of an erected penis caused the 3.5 cm contusion prior to the hymen. The penilevaginal contact without penetration was due to 1 cm diameter opening of Marichelle’s hymen. The victim being young, the penetration could only go as deep as the labia. Offender and victim being neighbors explain the absence of visible signs of physical injuries. The reason why Marichelle did not cry was that she did not feel any pain during the attempted sexual intercourse. Doctrine: The victim being young, the penetration could only go as deep as the labia. For rape to be committed, full penetration is not required. It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or the pudendum of the female organ. People vs. Balbuena 129 SCRA 10 (April 27, 1984) Facts: Elvira Polintan accepted an invitation to join the drinking party in Abelardo Balbuena’s apartment with long time friend, Juanito Torres. After Elvira consumed half a glass of gin, she felt dizzy and took a rest on a bench. Then, Abelardo undressed her and removed her pants and briefs and spread her legs. Abelardo went on top of the billiard table and succeeded in having sex with her. He then went down the billiard table and Juanito took his turn. Around two months later, she told her mother about what happened and the following day, they went to the police and reported the incident. She was examined by Dr. Reyes of NBI and there was no sign of extragenital physical injury and that she could have had sex with a man on or about the date alleged. Ruling: The delay in reporting the incident was reasonable. It is not easy for a Filipina to easily decide whether to come out in the open where public contempt and ridicule would result in the prosecution of the case. The innate modesty of Filipinas and their inherent reluctance to be exposed to the rigors of a trial scandalizing the family name. She was also fearful because of the threats made by Abelardo that they would kill her family especially so that she resides near the houses of Juanito and Abelardo. Absence of injury can be explained because it was a month after the incident that she was examined. There was also no torn dress or underwear because she was wearing pants and briefs. Elvira is a tomboy and so she is sexually attracted to females than to males. She would not willingly submit herself to sex with a
male. Evidence also clear that accused employed force in consummating the offense. From the bench she was lying down, she was pulled to the billiard table and bodily raised on top of the table where she was forced to lie down. Abad-Santos Dissent: Filipino women are modest and shy so that she will not publicly complain of having been raped and thereby expose herself to shame and ridicule unless she was in fact raped but Elvira is not a typical woman because not yet 21, she was already a guzzler of strong spirits. Doctrine: The testimony of the victim is most often the only one available to prove directly its commission. The very fact that she came forward in this case is in itself a silent but persuasive evidence of an outrage done upon her honor. Note: 1. Tomboys can be raped. They are naturally attracted to females and therefore will not willingly have sex with a man. 2. Ugly girls cannot get raped. But since the perpetrators were in a state of intoxication, her physical appearance was not a bar to the commission of the offense. 3. Gin guzzlers cannot be raped. They are not typical Filipinas. People vs. Castro 196 SCRA 679 (May 16, 1991) Facts: 6 year old Diana Rose was made to stand on the toilet bowl so Kuya Delfin inserted his penis into her causing her pain. NBI: contused or bruised area inside the genital organ, purplish or dark red and it was subject to some amount of force or it could have come in contact with a hard object done with a certain amount of force. The hymen was intact. Ruling: The victim being of tender age, the penetration could only go as deep as the labia. In any case, for rape to be committed, full penetration is not required. It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the female organ. Even the slightest penetration is sufficient to consummate the crime of rape. Perfect penetration, rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina are not essential for the offense of consummated rape. Entry to the labia or lips of the female organ is sufficient. Diana’s remaining a virgin does not negate rape. Doctrine: Diana’s remaining a virgin does not negate rape. The victim being of tender age, the penetration of the male organ could only go as deep as the labia. Also, Adamson students have to substantiate their scholastic achievements. People vs. Atento 196 SCRA 357 (April 26, 1991) Facts: Glenda Aringo, a 16 yr old developmentally-challenged person, claims that Cesar Atento, her neighbor, raped her 5x. from April 1986. She said she was raped 4 more times. It was at this time that she felt tickled and described
the act as “masarap”. She could not anymore conceal her condition because she was already 5 months pregnant. Ruling: Glenda has the intellectual capacity of a 9 and 12 yr old and is within a mentally defective level. Her judgment unsound and her capacity for higher perceptual processes is unsatisfactory. Although it is not clear the Cesar employed force, he is still guilty under Paragraph 2 (when the woman is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious) because Glenda is deprived of reason by being mentally deficient. He is also liable under par. 3 (when the victim is under 12) because she has the mentality of a girl less than 12 yrs old at the time she was raped. The absence of will determines the existence of the rape. Such lack of will may exist not only when the victim is unconscious or totally deprived of reason, but also when she is suffering some mental deficiency impairing her reason or free will. The deprivation of reason need not be complete. Mental deficiency or abnormality is sufficient. Doctrine: Paragraph 3 does not only refer to chronological age but also to mental age. Note: SC might have been confused. Par 2 refers to a situation wherein the woman is drugged or drunk, etc. People vs. Campuhan 329 SCRA 270 (March 30, 2000) Facts: Corazon Pamintuan heard her 4 yr old daughter, Crysthel, cry and she rushed to the bedroom where she saw Primo Campuhan kneeling before Crysthel whose jogging pants were already removed while his short pants were already down to his knees. According to Corazon, Primo was forcing his penis into Crysthel’s vagina. According to the physical exam, there was no evident sign of extra-genital physical injury. Her hymen was intact and her orifice was only .05 in diameter. Ruling: Mere touching of the external genitalia by the penis is sufficient to constitute carnal knowledge. But the act of touching should be understood as inherently part of the entry of the penis into the labias and not the mere touching alone of the mons pubis or the pudendum. 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, for the accused to be convicted of consummated rape. Absent any showing of the slightest penetration of the female organ, it can only be attempted rape, if not acts of lasciviousness. Primo’s kneeling position rendered an unbridled observation impossible. Prosecution was not able to prove that any inter-genital contact was achieved. All the elements for attempted rape are present; hence, the accused should be punished only for it. Doctrine: Mere touching does not mean stroking. There must be intent to penetrate.
People vs. Gallo 315 SCRA 461 (September 29, 1999) Facts: In 1998, an RTC decision found Romeo Gallo guilty of the crime of qualified rape with the penalty of death. In 1999- Gallo filed a Motion to ReOpen the Case seeking modification of the death sentence to reclusion perpetua in line with the new court rulings on the attendant circumstances in Sec 11 of RA 7659. According to People vs. Garcia: the additional attendant circumstances introduced in 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 information filed against Gallo does not allege his relationship with the victim Marites Gallo (his daughter), thus it CANNOT be considered as a qualifying circumstance. Ruling: Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the law or the constitution form part of the legal system of the land and so the doctrine forms part of the penal statutes and therefore may be applied retroactively being favorable to the accused who is not a habitual criminal, notwithstanding that final sentence has already been pronounced against him. The doctrine of People vs. Garcia may be retroactively applied as it is favorable to him. The case is reopened and the judgment is modified from death to reclusion perpetua. Doctrine: Special qualifying circumstances have to be alleged in the information for it to be appreciated. People vs. Berana 311 SCRA 664 (July 29, 1999) Facts: Early morning, 14 yr old Maria Elena Jarcia was awakened by her bro-in-law, Raul Berana. He pointed a “buntot page” (long with some protruding parts and with long and pointed tip) at her neck and warned her not to make any noise or else she will be killed. She was made to lie down and Berana raised her duster and removed her shorts and underwear. He mashed her breasts and laid on top of her. He inserted his penis to her vagina and she felt much pain. He kissed her and made several push and pull movements and then, Maria Elena felt something liquid in her organ. After this, Berana sat down and told Maria Elena not to tell anyone. He then did it again. Accused claims he was seduced by Elena. Ruling: Physical resistance need not be established in rape cases when intimidation is exercised upon her and she submits herself against her will to the rapist’s lust because of fear for life and personal safety. Relationship qualifies the crime from reclusion perpetua to death under RA 7659. To effectively prosecute Berana for the crime of rape committed by a relative by affinity within the 3rd civil degree, it must be established that: 1. he is legally married to Elena’s sister 2. Elena and Berana’s wife are full or half-blood siblings Prosecution established relationship by the testimonies of Elena (saying that he knows Berana because he is the husband of my sister) and her mother (saying that he knows Berana because he is the husband of her
daughter, Rosa Jarcia). It based its conviction on Berana’s letter addressing Elena’s parents as “mama at papa” and his use of the phrase “any inyong manugang, Raul”. Since relationship qualifies the crime of rape, there must be clearer proof of relationship and in this case, it was not adequately substantiated. Evidence presented is not sufficient to dispel doubts about the true relationship. Although he claims that Elena initiated the act, he never mentioned this on his letters and instead, unceasingly asks for forgiveness, admitting categorically the offense charged. Doctrine: Relationship must be proven for it to be appreciated as a special qualifying circumstance. Notes: The letters may show remorse for a completely different thing (like “I’m sorry I gave in to the seduction”) and not an apology for rape. REPUBLIC ACT No. 9262 (Anti VAWC) AN ACT DEFINING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN, PROVIDING FOR PROTECTIVE MEASURES FOR VICTIMS, PRESCRIBING PENALTIES THEREFORE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES What constitutes violence against women and children?
6. inflicting or threatening to inflict physical harm on oneself for the
purposes of controlling the woman
7. causing or attempting to cause them to engage in any sexual
activity which does not constitute rape, by force or threat of force, physical harm, or through intimidation directed at them or her/his immediate family engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless conduct, personally or through another, that alarms or causes substantial emotional or psychological distress to the woman or child. This includes: a. stalking them in public or private places b. peering in the window or lingering outside the residence c. entering or remaining in their dwelling or on their property against her/his will d. destroying the property and personal belongings or inflicting harm to animals or pets of the woman or her child e. engaging in any form of harassment or violence causing mental or emotional anguish, public ridicule or humiliation to them, including repeated verbal abuse and emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or custody of minor children of access to the woman’s child/children
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
causing physical harm threatening to cause physical harm attempting to cause physical harm placing them in fear of imminent physical harm attempting to compel or compelling them to engage in conduct which they have a right to desist from or desist from conduct which they have a right to engage in or attempting to restrict or restricting their freedom of movement or conduct by force or threat of force or other harm or threat of physical or other harm or intimidation directed against the woman or child which includes: a. threatening to deprive or actually depriving them of custody to his/her family b. depriving or threatening to deprive them of financial support or deliberately providing insufficient financial support c. depriving or threatening to deprive them of a legal right d. preventing the woman in engaging in any legitimate profession, etc or controlling the victim’s own money or properties, or solely controlling the conjugal or common money or properties
What relationships are included? 1. married relationship 2. dating relationship – the parties live as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage OR are romantically involved over time and on a continuing basis during the course of the relationship. A casual acquaintance or ordinary socialization between two individuals in a business or social context is NOT a dating relationship 3. sexual relations – single sexual act which may or may not result in the bearing of a common child What is a protection order? It is an order issued for the purpose of preventing further acts of violence against a woman or her child and granting other necessary relief. The relief granted under a protection order serve the purpose of safeguarding the victim from further harm, minimizing any disruption in the victim’s daily life, and facilitating the opportunity and ability of the victim to independently regain control of her life. Who can file a petition for a protection order?
1. the offended party 2. parents or guardian of the offended party 3. ascendants, descendants or collateral relatives within the 4th
civil degree of consanguinity or affinity
8. at least 2 concerned responsible citizens of the city or
municipality who has personal knowledge of the offense committed Where can you file for a protection order? RTC, MTC, MCTC with territorial jurisdiction or in a family court if available in the area. Note: The protection order takes the shape of a penalty and violates the constitutional right of presumption of innocence. It presumes the perpetrator is guilty even before he is heard.
4. officers or social workers of the DSWD or social workers of LGUs 5. police officers, preferably those in charge of women and children’s
desks 6. Punong Barangay or Barangay Kagawad 7. lawyer, counselor, therapist or healthcare provider of the petitioner