am+dg Dear fellow student, hello.

This reviewer is sourced from Boado’s book, some stuff from Reyes, Glenn Tuazon’s notes, Justice Callejo’s lectures and recitations, and case doctrines. Enjoy. And no stamping please!

• • •

Fundamental Principles Criminal law is that branch of public law which defines criminal offenses and prescribes specific punishments for them. o Penal law: acts of the legislature which prohibit certain acts and establish penalties for their violations; or those that define crimes, treat of their nature and provide for their punishment All felonies in the RPC are public wrongs, as distinguished from private wrongs, the latter is just a breach of duty or contract of 2 private parties. o While the State has the power to prosecute persons for private crimes, the law gives the victim the privilege of not instituting actions for private crimes (adultery, seduction, abduction,etc) to protect the latter from shame and humiliation. There must be a complaint initiated by the offended party.  Rape no longer a private crime. It’s a crime against persons. Ex post facto law is a penal law which is given retroactive application to the prejudice of the accused. o Makes an act or omission criminal which when committed was not yet so Bill of attainder: law/act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial Characteristics of penal law o Generality  Refers to the persons covered  Binding on all person who reside or sojourn in the Philippines, whether citizens or not • Ex: those who are covered by treaties and laws of preferential application (example: Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, see discussion on immunities) o Territoriality  Refers to the situs of the act or the place where the penal law is applicable  Applicable to all crimes committed within the limits of the Philippine territory • Ex: treaties, laws of preferential application, and Article 2 o Prospectivity  Penal laws have prospective application unless they are favorable to the offender who is not a habitual delinquent  Covers also penal circulars Immunities from criminal prosecution by certain individuals By international comity/law/relations o Heads of diplomatic missions (Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations):  Ambassadors or nuncios  Envoys, ministers or internuncios  Charges d’ affairs o Staff of the mission are comprised of:  Diplomatic  Administrative, technical, and administrative staff o Important: Immunity is granted only to the “diplomatic agents” which are made up of the heads of the diplomatic missions and the diplomatic staff. (Minucher v CA – test: does he perform duties of a diplomatic nature?) o Not subject to local penal laws. Immune from arrest and prosecution for local laws.  But they may be temporarily restrained if they do stuff that threaten public order. o Varying degrees of immunity depending on the status of the person (based on the enlightened discussion of the esteemed Justice Puno in Liang v People):  Diplomatic agent: inviolable, not liable to any form of arrest or detention; blanket immunity  Consular officials: immune for acts performed in the exercise of consular functions; not liable to arrest or detention pending trial, except in the case of a grave crime  Officials of specialized agencies/international officials: immune only for acts performed by them in their official capacity (functional immunities) • Compared to diplomats, international officials are granted less immunity. Why? Because the privileges and immunities of diplomats and those of international officials rest upon different legal foundations.

Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

1

am+dg

• Diplomatic agents: based on customary international law • International agents: based on treaties, legislation, or both o In Minucher v CA, Scalzo, the DEA agent, was not considered a diplomatic agent. But, he was still immune because he was acting within the directive of the United States which placed him under state immunity from suit, following the doctrine of State Immunity from Suit.  A foreign agent, operating within a territory, can be cloaked with immunity from suit but only as long as it can be established that he is acting within the directives of the sending state. o The DFA initially determines immunity, but the final determination is still with the Courts. (although in the WHO case, the Court said it was bound.) o In the VFA, before the American accused is convicted, he is under the custody of the Americans. However, once convicted, he will be detained by the Philippine authorities, with the Americans having visitation rights. Hence, detention in the US embassy after conviction was held violative of the VFA. (Nicolas v Romulo) By local legislation o Transactional immunity (Tanchangco v Sandiganbayan) o Omnibus Election Code: one who reports to the Comelec any incident of vote buying/selling and testifies is immune, even if he took part in the crime o PD 749: immunity granted to those furnishing information regarding bribery, indirect bribery, corruption o Parliamentary/Presidential immunity Is there any law which does not care for immunity? Is there any law which is immune from immunity statutes? o Yes. RA 9851, or The Law against Crimes against Humanity/Genocide. o It says that the law applies equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity.  It, however, makes exceptions.1 What about members of the AFP, who has jurisdiction over them? o Who are the members and officers of the AFP  Members of the AFP  Those subject to military law  Members of the CAFGU o GR: Civilian courts have jurisdiction over crimes (RPC, SPL, ordinances) committed by members of the AFP  EXCEPT: when it comes to service-connected offenses (like conduct unbecoming an officer, disrespect towards superior officer, etc), courts martial have jurisdiction over them • EXCEPTION to the EXCEPTION (when can a service oriented crime be tried by the civilan court?): the president, before arraignment, in the interest of justice, may refer the crime to a civilian court as long as it is covered by the RPC or any other SPL2 (Gonzales v Abaya, Navales v Abaya) o Justice Callejo: Service-oriented offenses are not absorbed by rebellion or coup d’etat because the former are disciplinary in nature. Hence, erring military men can be tried separately and independently under the RPC for the same act.  Justice Tinga does not agree with this. o Justice Tinga: The civilian court is required to make a determination, independent of that of the court-martial, that the acts charged constitute a service-oriented offense.  Why? The general purpose of RA 7055 is to deprive the court-martial of jurisdiction to try cases which are properly cognizable before the civilian courts.

1

Section 9. Irrelevance of Official Capacity. - This Act shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a head of state or government, a member of a government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Act, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. However: (a) Immunities or special procedural rules that may be attached to the official capacity of a person under Philippine law other than the established constitutional immunity from suit of the Philippine President during his/her tenure, shall not bar the court from exercising jurisdiction over such a person; and (b) Immunities that may be attached to the official capacity of a person under international law may limit the application of this Act, nut only within the bounds established under international law. 2 xxx provided, that the President of the Philippines may, in the interest of justice, order or direct at any time before arraignment that any such crimes or offenses be tried by the proper civil courts. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

2

am+dg

• •

• • •

How about members of the PNP, which entity of the government has jurisdiction over them? o The civilian courts since PNP is civilian in character. (And because of RA 6975 3) Four schools of thought/philosophies: o Classical/juristic  Basis of criminal liability: human free will – man has the capacity to choose good and evil  Purpose of penalty: retribution  Determination of penalty: specific and predetermined  Emphasis of the law: on the offense and not on the offender o Positivist/realistic  Basis of criminal liability: man inherently good, but offender is socially sick; influenced by society  Purpose of penalty: reformation  Determination of penalty: arrived after an examination of the offender  Emphasis of the law: on the offender and not on the offense • Samples of the influence of the positivist theory to our criminal laws: o ISL Modifying Circumstances Probation o Habitual delinquency law Extenuating/Absolutory Circumstances o 3-fold rule 40-year max limit for penalty Pardon Impossible crimes o Eclectic – combines both o Utilitarian – primary function of punishment in criminal law is to protect society from potential and actual wrongdoers Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege – there is no crime when there is no law that defines and punishes it. o We follow this here, so we don’t have common law crimes. All laws must be interpreted liberally in favor of the accused and strictly against the state. Equipoise rule: if the inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other consistent with his guilt, then no conviction. Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea – the act cannot be criminal unless the mind is criminal. o Applies only to intentional felonies. Not to culpable felonies or mala prohibita where good faith or lack of intent are immaterial. Sources of criminal law (Perez v NPG Refillers): o RPC o SPL o Municipal ordinances o Admin regulations/IRRs  Violation of admin regulation must be made a crime by the delegating statute  Penalty for violation must be provided by the statute itself  Regulation must be published o What about decisions of the SC interpreting criminal statutes? Not penal laws per se, merely interpretative. What happened in Bayan Muna v Romulo (Feb 1, 2011)? o Bayan Muna was assailing the RP-US Non-Surrender Agreement. The Agreement basically said that persons found in the territory of the other will not be surrendered to any international tribunal without the consent of the other State. Bayan Muna claim that the Agreement violated the Rome Statute which created the International Criminal Court which had jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern. o Issue 1: Was the President GADLEJ for signing it, even if the Rome Statute has not yet been ratified by the Senate? No. o Issue 2: Is the Agreement void for being immoral and against recognized principles of IL? No. o Issue 3: Was the Agreement valid even without concurrence of Senate? Yes. It’s not a treaty. o The Agreement is but a form of affirmance and confirmance 4 of the Philippines’ national criminal jurisdiction. National criminal jurisdiction being primary, it is always the responsibility and within the prerogative of the RP either to prosecute criminal offenses equally covered by the Rome Statute or to accede to the jurisdiction of the ICC. Thus, the Philippines may decide to try "persons" of the US, as the term is understood in the Agreement, under our national criminal

3

Section 46. Jurisdiction in Criminal Cases. – Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding, criminal cases involving PNP members shall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the regular courts… xxx 4 Should be “affirmation and conformation” Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

3

the Rome Statute itself rejects the concept of universal jurisdiction over the crimes enumerated therein as evidenced by it requiring State consent. and (6) to individual persons who. the following acts can be prosecuted in the country. 2. commit any of the said crimes on board Philippine ship or Philippine airship. With respect to RA 9851 (Crimes against Humanity). Art. As to "persons" of the US whom the Philippines refuses to prosecute. where their citizenship or ethnicity was a factor in the commission of the crime.am+dg o o justice system. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands. (2) to individual persons who. including its atmosphere. but also outside of its jurisdiction. against those who: 1. 4. o The Human Security Act (RA 9372) says that even if committed abroad. In the same breath. (3) to individual persons who. How about terrorism? What does the law say about that? o Terrorism is the commission of the enumerated acts in the law which sow and create a condition of widespread and extradordinary fear and panic among the people. consulate. interior waters. commit said crimes against Philippine citizens or persons of Philippines descent. (4) to individual persons who commit any of said crimes within any embassy. commit. conspires or pots to commit terrorism inside the Philippines  Commit said crimes against Philippine citizens or persons of Philippine descent. • • • This article gives the exceptions to the territoriality principle of criminal law. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations. accord discretion to the US to exercise either its national criminal jurisdiction over the "person" concerned or to give its consent to the referral of the matter to the ICC for trial. conspire or plot to commit any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act inside the territorial limits of the Philippines. the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago. While being public officers or employees. even if done abroad: o Offenses committed while on a Philippine ship or airship o Forgery or counterfeit of any coin or currency note of the Philippines or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippines o Connection with the introduction into the country of the obligations and securities mentioned o Offenses committed by public employees or officers in the exercise of their functions o Crimes of national security and the law of nations defined in Title One of Book 2 Can there be crimes committed here but can not be prosecuted? o Yes. maritime zone. the country would. although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines. its interior waters and maritime zone. 5 SEC. — Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application. although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines. Article 1. or diplomatic premises belonging to or occupied by the Philippine government in an official capacity. nineteen hundred and thirty-two. o See immunity discussion above. . Time when Act takes effect. although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines. in effect. Or it may opt not to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over its erring citizens or over US "persons" committing high crimes in the country and defer to the secondary criminal jurisdiction of the ICC over them. in order to coerce the government to give in to a lawful demand. Application of its provisions . prosecution under the Human Security Act is a bar to another prosecution under the RPC or any SPLs o The provisions of Book 1 of the RPC is also applicable to the Human Security Act. should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions. the provisions of this Act shall apply: (1) to individual persons who commit any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act within the terrestrial domain. 3.Subject to the provision of an existing treaty of which the Philippines is a signatory and to any contrary provision of any law of preferential application. Extra-Territorial Application of this Act. the individual can still be prosecuted here if:  He commits. — This Code shall take effect on the first day of January. where their citizenship or ethnicity was a factor to the commission of the crime  Commit crimes directly against the Philippine government5 o Also. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship 2. those provided in treaties and laws of preferential application. and airspace of the Philippines. although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines. defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code. the jurisdiction of the ICC is clearly and unmistakably complementary to the national jurisdiction of the signatory states. (5) to individual persons who. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding number. or 5. 58. the US must extend the same privilege to the Philippines with respect to "persons" of the RP committing high crimes within US territorial jurisdiction. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 4 . commit said crimes directly against the Philippine government. Hence. Further.

its First Protocol and its 1999 Second Protocol. sanitary laws English rule: territorial State has jurisdiction. Began in Taiwan. Contiguous zone: 24 nm. o What if he did not smoke the opium or sell it. regardless of citizenship or residence. atmosphere. already served their sentence. genocide? o In RA 9851. o Hence. the State may enforce laws which relate to customs. so we had jurisidiction) Register your ship in the Philippine Maritime Authority. when the accused was caught smoking opium in a English vessel in Philippine waters. (h) Other relevant international treaties and conventions ratified or acceded to by the Republic of the Philippines. or to another State pursuant to the applicable extradition laws and treaties. any one of the following conditions is met: (a) The accused is a Filipino citizen. (US v Bull. the relevant Philippine authorities may dispense with the investigation or prosecution of a crime punishable under this Act if another court or international tribunal is already conducting the investigation or undertaking the prosecution of such crime. the general rule under UNCLOS is that the ship cannot be boarded. (Sec 15 – Justice Callejo asked this in recit. He was not prosecuted in Vietnam.  In a CA case (P v Toboto). In the interest of justice. mere attempt to transport marijuana is a crime. their 1977 Additional Protocols I and II and their 2005 Additional Protocol III. 7 Section 15. interior waters. (g) Relevant and applicable international human rights instruments. (me: either way. High seas. and ended here) o Does the Philippines have ability to legislate on crimes applying to the high seas? 6 Section 17. regardless of citizenship and residence. regardless of where the crime is committed. immigration. if mere passing through the territorial sea can lead to boarding and prosecution. or  The accused ahs committed the said crime against a Filipino citizen. (except be a pirate) o Is it possible that a crime be committed beyond the territorial sea. maritime zone o Territorial sea: 12 nm. the Courts have jurisdiction over him. taxes. whether military or civilian.In the application and interpretation of this Act. it was on a Philippine ship. (b) The accused. (c) The 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. except when it merely concerns internal management of the vessel (ET – English-territory) French rule: flag of registry has jurisdiction. the Philippine courts can be guided by the judicial decisions of international courts and tribunals. the authorities may surrender or extradite suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the appropriate international court. if it is a continuing crime. or (c) The accused has committed the said crime against a Filipino citizen. No criminal proceedings shall be initiated against foreign nationals suspected or accused of having committed the crimes defined and penalized in this Act if they have been tried by a competent court outside the Philippines in respect of the same offense and acquitted. Instead. kalabaws weren’t secured properly. as long as it does not disturb the peace of the country (French-flag) We follow the English rule. (f) The judicial decisions of international courts and tribunals. The criminal law of a State may not be enforced on board the vessel to prosecute indidivuals except if measures are necessary to suppress illegal traffic of drugs.The State shall exercise jurisdiction over persons. among others. I think. If a commercial vessel passes by the territorial sea.) 7 Territory of the Philippines: within Philippine archipelago. (e) The rules and principles of customary international law. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 5 .. (b) The 1949 Genava Conventions I-IV. is present in the Philippines. Hence.. If it began in the high seas and continued here. a person in a Philippine ship in Vietnamese waters got drunk and shot three people. and (i) Teachings of the most highly qualified publicists and authoritative commentaries on the foregoing sources as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law. or having been convicted. CA: There is nothing preventing the Philippines from deviating from English rule. Drugs disturb the peace of the country. if any. the law provides for extra-territorial jurisdiction in the following cases:  Where the accused is a Filipino  The accused. what more if the ship is docked? o But the Courts can disregard the rule if they want. (d) The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child and its 2000 Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict. EEZ: 200 nm o In the contiguous zone. Philippine courts shall be guided by the following sources: (a) The 1948 Genocide Convention. free for all.am+dg • • • • • • • How about crimes against humanity. 6 o It also says that the RPC have a suppletory application to the Act and that in interpreting the act. Jurisdiction. is present in the Philippines. Do what you want. provided. suspected or accused of a crime defined and penalized in this Act. but prosecuted here?  Yes. does it still disturb the peace?  Suggested answer from Glenn’s reviewer: In the DDA. o See footnote for the options of the Philippine government. Applicability of International Law.

There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence. to find out what crime to peg the guy with  It’ll be the difference between attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness. It is a free. one acts with intelligence if he can distinguish right from wrong. moral from not. • • • • Felonies are committed by dolo or culpa. Definitions. The SC affirmed him and added that either way. (P v Delim) o Motive is the moving power of force which impels a person to commit acts. (I’m not sure about this generalization because there are some cases where the victim died yet the Court said no intent to kill. that’s why only Art 365 was applied.)  In specific intent felonies (where intent is essential). In both cases.  GR: Immaterial in incurring criminal liability. negligence. to the perpetrators wherever they may be found. Deceit when act is performed by deliberate intent. The purpose of penal laws involving national security is to protect the domestic order and economic security of the Philippines. licit fro not o For felonies by dolo. (Dillars v US) o Title One FELONIES AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY Chapter One FELONIES Art. specific intent becomes general intent. voluntary and intentional act. the prosecution must allege in the information and prove beyond a reasonable doubt the specific intent. lack of skill • In a felony by dolo. It is manifested by the overt acts of a person. 3. PD 532 on piracy.am+dg •  Yes. lack of foresight or lack of skill. not an essential element of crime Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 6 . piracy is an exception to the territoriality in criminal law. hence the court had jurisdiction. it should extend beyond the territory of the Philippines.  GR: criminal intent is presumed (general intent) • EX: if intent an element of the crime (specific criminal intent: intent to kill. there must be a confluence of the act/omission punishable by law and the mens rea (physical act + act of the mind) o A felony by dolo is a voluntary act. Dolo Freedom of action Intelligence Intent Culpa Freedom of action Intelligence Negligence. In People v Tulin. imprudence. said the attack was committed here in our waters. Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa). Fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence. intent cannot be presumed and must be established o Specific intent is important for the attempted and frustrated stages. When the thief has possession of the stolen material. negligence. Hence. — Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos). when someone dies ( even when the wound inflicted is not a mortal wound). lack of foresight. the pirates boarded a ship within the Philippines and brought the ship to Singapore waters.  Justice Callejo actually said that the intent to kill is conclusively presumed. he is presumed to have intent to gain. which is now presumed. it is necessary that there is voluntariness. o But when the crime has been done. o Same was applied in People v Lol-lo where the piracy was committed outside the Philippines. Justice Callejo. or lack of skill. Hence. who was still a young and dashing RTC judge. the accused is presumed to have intent to kill. intent to gain). one is not criminally liable if there is no criminal intent o Intent refers to the use of a particular means to bring about the desired result. lack of foresight.

It was an unlawful act willfully done. It is sufficient that the offender has the intent to perpetrate the act prohibited by the special law. Such intent to possess is. o In Art 365 (Reckless Imprudence). intent to commit the crime is not necessary. it must still be shown that there was animus possidendi or an intent to possess on the part of the accused.) Malum in se. the Court used the following questions:  Is the crime inherently immoral and wrong?  Are the predicate crimes/felonies mala in se?  Do the penalties imposed follow the nomenclature of the RPC? (Boado doesn’t agree with this one because of the old DDA which applied RPC penalties to drugs which are malum prohibitum) • Court answered yes to all 3 questions and thus categorized plunder (under Art 9372) as mala in se. or mala prohibitum. o Can more than one person be liable for killing the same person. Fajardo v People (2011). o In answering whether plunder was malum in se or prohibitum. o Cant here be conspiracy resulting from negligence?  No. o How about possession of unlicensed firearms?  Prohibitum. frustrated homicide requires intent to kill. the intent considered here is the intent to possess the firearm (intent to perpetrate the act versus intent to commit a crime). This is incompatible with recklessness. Criminal intent here refers to the intention of the accused to commit an offense with the use of an unlicensed firearm. In the present case. no. so intent to kill presumed. a distinction should be made between criminal intent and intent to possess.  Interestingly. Kalokohan yan. o For evidentiary issues In a felony by culpa. without ascertaining first if it was the escapee they were looking for. Remember P v Pugay. or malum prohibitum. (P v Oanis – policeman shot a man sleeping. where common crimes are absorbed by the political crime if it were done in pursuance of the political motive o when the husband catches the wife making love with a paramour.am+dg • EX: o • • in cases of political crimes. is sufficient to convict a person for illegal possession of a firearm. without criminal intent. by the very nature of things.”  “Homicide” does not refer to Art 249. Mala in se or prohibitum?  In se. Conspiracy is the product of intent. but Court said no intent to kill. B liable for homicide (victim died. Ay talaga naman. even if the crime is defined by SPL. Mistake in identity is not culpa. the killing was deliberate. The crime is properly denominated as “reckless imprudence resulting to homicide. o It is the mental attitude which is benig penalized. but he did intend to commit an act. culpa is a mode of committing a crime. SC: A liable for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide (he should’ve foreseen that someone will light the guy up). Not criminally liable for homicide if motive was to avenge his dishonor. 8 8 When the crime is punished by a special law. Intent to commit the crime and intent to perpetrate the act must be distinguished. A poured gasoline on mental retardate. liable. negligence or imprudence. culpa is itself the crime punished. In the first (intent to commit the crime). one by dolo and one by culpa?  Yezzir. and that act is. o Can there be a crime of reckless imprudence resulting into frustrated homicide?  Uh. But if he killed the wife for some other motive. the crime itself. without regard to any other criminal or felonious intent which the accused may have harbored in possessing the firearm. so just reckless imprudence resulting to homicide. there must be criminal intent. A person may not have consciously intended to commit a crime. Boy died. how can we tell? o Is lack of criminal intent a defense on SPL? Depends if mala in se. While mere possession. o Is genocide malum in se?  Yes. It is inherently immoral and wrong to tamper with election results. where the faith healers tried to cure a boy by beating him up and other folksy stuff. but he was given a MC here) o What about mistake in the identity of the victim. as a rule. however. does this constitute reckless imprudence?  No. B lit him up with a match. but merely indicates that the victim died. Dolo. This is not Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 7 . o A member of the BEI tampers with election results. There is no intent to kill. in the second (intent to perpetrate the act) it is enough that the prohibited act is done freely and consciously. It is inherently wrong and immoral.  This was applied in P v Carmen.

transient/temporary possession of an illegal firearm is not a violation of the law. it was a legal act. it hit his wife. 1866. Concomitantly. such as Presidential Decree No. o Accused was attacked by assailant with a bolo. • • • • • Who are liable for felonies? o Those who commit a felony. his act of wrestling the bolo away was not a felony. In Tigoy v People.  The all-knowing Justice does not agree. He managed to wrestle the bolo away from the assailant but as he yanked it away. a temporary. Criminal liability. or harmless possession or control of a firearm cannot be considered a violation of a statute prohibiting the possession of this kind of weapon. BP22 and Estafa. Anti-carnapping Law. — Criminal liability shall be incurred: 1. it is sufficient that the accused had no authority or license to possess a firearm. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property. (Loney v People. Art 8 states that conspiracy must be to commit a felony which is RPC crimes. 2. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 8 . were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. Trust Receipts Law? Prohibitum. But what about illegal firearms?) Can there be a conspiracy to commit malum prohibitum?  Yes. incidental. Follow Justice Callejo.am+dg o o o o o o  Hence. 1866. the accused were charged with violation of a malum prohibitum (Forestry Code) because they cut some timber and transported it. if the offender kills the driver or occupant to take the car. Accused not liable. BP 22? Prohibitum. 4. Can one be liable for a crime defined by SPL and a felony under a special complex crime?  Yes. In se Moral trait Taken into account Taken into account Taken into account Generally involve moral turpitude Generally in the RPC Prohibitum Offender’s voluntariness Not considered Not considered Only when consummated Generally no moral turpitude Generally in SPL Basis of liability Modifying circumstances Degree of participation Stage of accomplishme nt Moral turp? Where can we find them? Art. By any person committing a felony ( delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. (P v Bindoy) A person is liable for the natural and logical consequences of his criminal act o Natural – occurrence in ordinary course of things o Logical – there must be a reasonable connection between the act done and the consequence In other words. it’s his test. A felony by dolo or cupla cannot absorb a malum prohibitum crime. the act must be the proximate cause of the effect. Hence. although the wrongful act done is different from that intended o Those commit impossible crimes First paragraph Boado says applies to both dolo and culpa (since “felony” is used) But the brilliant Justice Callejo says it applies to only dolo (since “intended” is used). important in convicting a person under Presidential Decree No. and that he intended to possess the same. casual. Court applied conspiracy. Illegal recruitment and estafa. Can one be liable for both a felony and a SPL for one delictual act? Yes. guilty of special complex crime of carnapping with murder. even if such possession was made in good faith and without criminal intent. in order that one may be found guilty of a violation of the decree. May a felony by dolo or culpa absorb a crime which is malum prohibitum?  No.

Cause and effect between act of the accused and the resulting injury is not altered by: o Pre-existing conditions of the victim (pathological) o Predispositions of victim  If victim likes drinking and its part of his culture. and in so doing he injuries himself. because reckless imprudence is a felony under Art 3 and Art 48 talks about felonies as component crimes. Offender is liable for whatever damage or injury caused by him. Sec 5c) o "If a man creates in another man's mind an immediate sense of danger which causes such person to try to escape. (Rule 131. Accused liable. o But in some cases the doctor’s acts are exculpatory for the accused. the person who creates such a state of mind is responsible for the injuries which result. (US v Valdez)9 o Accused wanted to rape the victim.  Like when doctor is so drunk that he gave the victim poison. Old lady died. instead of medicine. produces the injury and without which the result would not have occurred Accused is deemed to know the consequences of his criminal act. (US v Bayutas) o Physical condition of the victim  Punching Steve Rogers before he becomes Captain America. Victim got scared and jumped off. A person is presumed to contemplate the ordinary consequences of his acts. o Can there be reckless imprudence resulting to double homicide if two people died? May reckless imprudence result into a complex crime under Art 48?  Yes. o Incompetence of the doctor o Refusal of the victim to get medical help o Infection of the wound  But the infection should not be due to the malicious act of the offended party (US v delos Santos) Hence. active force must be foreign to the act of the perpetrator o Resulting injury or damage is the intentional act of the victim o Fault of the doctor (not sure. what applies for culpa? o Art 365. he is liable for that resulting act. Sir just mentioned it) So. They were in a boat. (P v Buyco. act is not the proximate cause if: o There is an active force that intervened between the felony committed and the death of the victim. which in its natural and continuous sequence. considered complex crime of sexual assault with homicide under RA 8353) o Accused threw a grenade at person. It killed target and the accused’s wife and SPI 3 childern. Accused guilty even fro r the death. unbroken by any efficient intervening cause.am+dg • • • • • • • 9 Proximate cause – the cause. so she jumped out of the window and died.  Praeter intentionem – so grave a wrong caused that that intended  Aberratio ictus – mistake in the blow o Examples: o Inserting vibrator in anal orifice of victim and victim died because it was rusty. Rape with homicide. (P v Castromero) o Accused stabbed the victim so doctor put a drainage on the wound. so long as the accused inflicted mortal wounds on the victim. Victim died. (P v Ofero. but still he drinks. robbery with homicide) o Accused threatened victim with a knife. Victim was in pain and because of his state of nervousness removed the drainage. and then after being stabbed. complex crime of murder and parricide) o Accused robbed a store and shoved a pandesal into old lady’s mouth to keep her quiet. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 9 . Accused guilty since he created a sense of fear in the mind of the victim. His scrawniness can not be taken against him. He drowned. (P v Magalone. (P v Moldes) o Neglect of the wound or its unskillful and improper treatment are deemed to have been among those which were in contemplation of the guilty party. the doctor told him not to drink anymore. (P v Quianzon) Even if the doctor is negligent. the negligence of the doctor is not an active intervening force that exculpates the accused. the stabber is liable. And then he dies. Even if the resulting wrongful act was different from the offender’s intention.

his act would have been justifie d. r. (two persons involved – actual Effect on liability No criminal liability Increas es criminal liability which may result to a comple x crime Extenua ting if the resultin g crime is greater than intende d (parrici de when what was Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 10 . d result the He falls on identity instead another of the kills C. He d result the instead falls on blow. anothe and r accused) Treachery can be appreciat ed. hits C another offende who was person. be in the (three addition injury persons to the on one present – injury person. r standing or may intends by B. Mistak A wants Intende e in to kill B. Mistak e in the situatio n Mistak A shoots Intende e in B. due to victim who was error in his father the and who identity he of the thought victim was B. intende harm intended d victim fell on victim. actual on the but the victim. criminal facts Accused intent been must not true to be the negligent belief in of the ascertaini offende ng facts.am+dg Mistak e of Fact Aberr atio Ictus Error in perso nae Factors which affect the intent and criminal liability of the offenders Definiti Notes Effect on on intent Had Ah No the Chong.

need for a great disparit y betwee n the intende d felony and actual felony commit ted Cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused A punched B. no effect if the resultin g crime is the same as that intende d Mitigati ng under Art 13 Results in crime althoug h was not intende d Results in criminal liability whether acting with intent (Art 4) or neglige nce (Art 365) Impossible crimes 2. B died. it would have been a crime Elements: o Offender performed an act which would be an offense against persons or property o Act done with criminal intent Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 11 . Actual crime is greater than intende d intende d was homicid e).am+dg & unintende d victim and accused) Praete r intenti onem Proxi mate cause So grave a wrong that what was intende d. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property. were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. • • • Impossible crimes won’t apply if another crime had been committed by the acts of the offender Not a crime.

sipping margaritas in a beach with his homies (Intod v CA). through the Department of Justice. Justice Regalado: Under Art 59. taking into consideration the degree of malice and the injury caused by the offense. • • • • If no law punishing act. If I saw a person on a bed. remedy is executive clemency. I would’ve been sentenced to arresto menor. Is art 6 applicable to impossible crimes? No. it’s not Pnoy. stealing something that it is yours pala o Factual or physical impossibility of accomplishing the intended act  The factual condition must be unknown to the offender  An extraneous circumstance prevented the consummation of the crime  Example: offender bribes someone who he thinks is Pnoy. in relation to AC 12-2000. thought he was my bitter rival and I punched him. the imposable penalty for impossible crime is arresto mayor. but actually no crime committed Impossibility may be: o Legal impossibility  Elements: • motive. But Paras dissented and said that the falisification was so bad that it was inherently inadequate in the means employed. and in cases of excessive penalties. (P v Veneracion) Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 12 . the court shall submit to the Chief Executive. 5. and not downward. my penalty would be arresto mayor because of the impossible crime. (Brillante v CA) If the penalty is too excessive.am+dg • • • • • • Accomplishment of the act is  Inherently impossible  Means employed were inadequate or ineffectual (Intod v CA) There is intent. and shall report to the Chief Executive. • stealing a check which was subsequently dishonored because of lack of funds (Jacinto v P – although sir does not agree with this since intent to gain (with momentary possession) will suffice in theft/robbery) • compare with P v Balmores where the accused made a really really really bad falsification of a sweepstakes ticket. pointed a gun to victim. o How odd! Just like how salmon swim up the current. through the Department of Justice. the SC prefers fine over imprisonment. No one in their right mind would have thought it was a real sweepstakes ticket. as clarified by AC 13-2001:  SC noticed that people are using the courts as collection agencies and are clogging up the dockets  So the SC issued a circular dissuading people from filing BP 22 and for judges to just impose fines For libel. just a look-alike. (Sabaw man. but the victim was out of town. the reasons which induce the court to believe that said act should be made the subject of legislation. desire and expectation was to violate the law • intention to perform the act • actual performance of the act • Consequence resulting from the intended act does not amount to a crime  Example: killing a dead person. even if imposable penalty is imprisonment or fine. In the same way. and because of my weak arms. SC convicted him of falsification. Rape can now be an impossible crime since crime against persons. it shall render the proper decision. Duty of the court in connection with acts which should be repressed but which are not covered by the law. — Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which it may deem proper to repress and which is not punishable by law. but empty pala. when a strict enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result in the imposition of a clearly excessive penalty. But judge should still impose the penalty. court should dismiss the case (because of Art 21 and 22) Art 5 does not apply to crimes defined by SPL because of the use of the words “degree of malice” o This brings to mind BP 22. such statement as may be deemed proper. • accused fired guns into the empty bedroom of the intended victim. o But if he turns out that he was already dead. he only sustained slight PI. Is conspiracy applicable to impossible crimes? No.) o Art. without suspending the execution of the sentence.

He is still in the lot when the owner catches him with the three cows in tow. Scott feels bad and gives Jean the antidote. the touching must be in relation with the intent to have carnal knowledge of the woman and there must have been penetration. crime is not frustrated. Jean drinks it. (mere strafing of the citadel of passion doctrine)  Arson  Corruption of public officers  Adultery  Theft/Robbery • One is liable for consummated robbery if one takes possession of the personal property of the other. • • • • • Applies only to dolo. There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly or over acts. however slight. however brief it may be. but consummated physical injuries.am+dg Art. o Reached the objective stage of the offense because no further action is required on his part.  BUT the felony was not produced by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator • If the cause of the frustration is due to the will of the offender. do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. and not merely stroked the external surface thereof. and o Does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. • Dude goes into lot of the owner. Consummated. frustrated. but could be another crime o Example: Scott gives Jean poison. and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which. However. Hence. (bombardment of the drawbridge doctrine) o Penis must be erect (P v Brioso) • But touching not enough. A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present. o Still in subjective phase o Elements: 10 Touching when applied to rape cases does not simply mean epidermal contact. — Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated and attempted. 6. since intent is essential for this article Consummated o All acts necessary for the felony’s accomplishment and execution are present o Formal crimes are always consummated because the offender cannot perform all the acts necessary to consummate the offense without consummating it  Physical injuries. nevertheless. 10 (P v Campuhan) o If just in the mons pubis – merely attempted. 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 does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than this own spontaneous desistance.  Felonies by omission (no attempted and frustrated)  Falsification of public document (no attempted and frustrated) unless falsification is so imperfect Attempted o Offender commences the commission of an offense directly by overt acts. Consummated theft. are punishable. and steals three cows. and attempted felonies. grazing and mere stroking not enough. Not frustrated murder. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 13 . a slight brush or a scrape of the penis on the external layer of the victim’s vagina. before Jean dies. slander Stages: o Subjective – accused still has control of his acts o Objective – all the acts of execution are already there Frustrated o Offender performs all the acts which would produce the felony as a consequence. stroking or grazing of organs. already consummated. o Crimes with no frustrated stage:  Rape • As long as the penis enters/penetrates the labia majoria. for an accused to be convicted of consummated rape.

o BUT: you can be liable for any other felony already committed. surveillance of a store which you will rob “Offender did not perform all the acts of execution”  Still at the subjective phase of the commission of the crime. His body was halfway inside the house.”  Desistance has legal effect only in the attempted stage. As long as you desist voluntarily. o Example: Emma aimed gun at Johnny and fired. he had commenced the execution of rape. not punishable unless the act itself is a crime o Example of a preparatory act: buying poison. penned by the good justice Callejo himself) “Directly by overt acts”  Elements: • There must be external acts • Such external acts have direct connection with the crime intended to be committed  There should be an immediate and necessary connection between the overt acts and the crime intended to be committed. the accused was caught by the brother of the victim without his shirt on. but not liable for the second act of aiming. buying a gun.am+dg o o o o Offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts Does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony Offender’s act not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance Non-performance of all acts of execution was due to cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance (P v Lizada. Emma aimed again but Johnny pleaded for his life. so Emma felt sorry for him and desisted from firing. a person is criminally liable for a crime defined and penalized therin if he/she attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step. Guilty of attempted trespass to dwelling.  Still has full control of acts. as long as you desist while still in the subjective phase.  Overt acts are different from preparatory acts. no liability for the attempted crime. By the series of acts committed by the accused. if for the arrival of the brother. • The desistance can be for whatever reason (fear. Take note that in RA 9851. SC: Wrong.  It can be the first of a series of acts that would produce the intended crime. • In P v Lizada. His act of making a hole in the wall was not reasonably connected to robbery.  If the person desists on his own. The victim was naked. • In P v Campuhan. (Sec 8)     Frustrated All acts have been performed Cause independent of the will of the perpetrator Attempted Not all acts had been done Cause or accident other than offender’s spontaneous desistance Acts of execution Cause of nonaccomplis Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 14 . held her hands and was mashing her breasts and touching her vajayjay. • In P v Lamahang. Only attempted. and has not completed the needed acts yet. missed. “Due to cause or accident other than spontaneous desistance. he is not guilty of the attempted crime. Charged with attempted robbery. but the crime does not occur because of circumstances lindependept of the person’s intention. The accused was on top of the victim. he could’ve raped or murdered someone. would have produced the rape. hunger. needed to go poop). as long as the intended crime is established or known. You can’t really tell what he was going to do inside the house. conscience. • Hence. the citadel was merely strafed. • Overt acts: external acts which if continued will logically result in a felony • Preparatory acts: acts which still require another act so that a felony will result. you are not liable for the crime. Emma liable for first shot. Acts of lasciviousness or attempted rape? SC: Attempted rape. which. the police caught a man entering a house through a hole in the wall.

a concert of action and a community of interest. frustrated. A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. o Why isn’t the subjective/objective phase used? Because even if the accused had lost control of all his acts (bumaril na siya eh!). — Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor. the determination is still with the nature of the wound. during and after the commission of the crime. but he thought he dealt the blow and then ran away Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 15 . all o which point to or indicate a joint purpose. When light felonies are punishable. Conspiracy does not apply to crimes defined in SPL o Unless the SPL provides that conspiracy to commit a crime under that law is a crime in itself. even if the accused believed that he inflicted a mortal wound. fatal? • If there was intent to kill and wound inflicted was fatal: frustrated • If there was intent to kill and wound inflicted was not mortal/fatal: attempted o A non-fatal/slight wound can’t possibly produce death. Because rape is now a crime against persons and the “nature of the wound” test does not apply to rape. 7. (Rivera v People) o There were old rulings before (P v Eduave. but he did not. • • • • • • There is conspiracy where two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. and o Unity in the execution of the unlawful objective (P v Pagalasan) There must be criminal intent. not frustrated. The august Justice Callejo suggests a different test:  First: Was there intent to kill?  Second: Was the wound serious. o Justice Callejo warns not to be in a hurry in categorizing if mortal/fatal wound or not.am+dg hment Phase Included? Intent Homicide/ murder • Objective Subjective Necessarily included in the frustrated stage Inherent Wound not fatal Wound fatal Does the subjective and objective phase apply to crimes against persons (specifically. wait for the results. May be inferred from the acts of the accused before. dude stabbed the chair where his victim was sitting. o But no need for direct proof. with the exception of those committed against person or property • • • Light felonies – penalty not exceeding arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.  No longer the rule. Art. No conspiracy to commit an unintentional act. homicide/murder)?11 o No. He ended up stabbing the back of the chair. The SC only considered it attempted homicide. or both GR: Punishable only when consummated o EX: crimes against persons or property (all stages) Only principals and accomplices are liable Art. Must proven beyond reasonable doubt. Now. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. He said this in critique of a case wherein a doctor removed the feeding tube of the victim. No such thing as conspiracy as a product of negligence. Art 8 does not define a penalty! Requirements for conspiracy: o Singularity of intent.— Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated. less serious. not the belief of the person. The nature of the wound controls. it is merely attempted. 11 12 Test should be limited to homicide/murder. P v Borinaga 12) where the test was the belief of the offender. 8. If he believed that the wound was mortal. There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or persons.

SC held that 2 or more persons who conspire to commit a crime of BP 22 are liable for such crime. (c) Maintenance of a den.  So. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 16 . each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as in the case of the doing of the act. distribution and transportation of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical. which follow incidentally in the execution of the common design. even if it is not in the scene of the crime per se (Justice Callejo – like the driver of a get-away car who planned the crime as well. yes. and (e) Cultivation or culture of plants which are sources of dangerous drugs. distribution of drugs 13  Access Devise Regulations (RA 8484) – conspiracy to commit access devise fraud 14  Anti-terrorism Law (RA 9372)15 o What if no provision in SPL? Can Art 8 still be a mode to commit a crime (not a crime in itself)?  In Andan v People. 4. (b) Sale. the accomplishment of which is the object of such conspiracy. 15 SEC. There are two concepts of conspiracy: o Conspiracy as a crime by itself (conspiracy statutes)  Conspiracy to commit treason. Attempt or Conspiracy. Each conspirator is responsible for everything fone by his confederates. prior agreement on how to commit the crime o GR: as long as he appeared in the scene of the crime. (Remember this!) o Conspiracy as a mode of committing a crime or mode of incurring criminal liability  Pre-arranged conspiracy (there was actual planning). trading. or the man who pressed the button of a remote control bomb and the bomb exploded a few streets away) o Unless he is the mastermind. he is liable as co-conspirator  EXCEPT: • if he is a mastermind. applying Art 8 of the RPC. or  Implied conspiracy (implied from the concerted acts of the offenders) Pre-arranged conspiracy o The conspiracy that we are all familiar with . – Any attempt or conspiracy to commit the following unlawful acts shall be penalized by the same penalty prescribed for the commission of the same as provided under this Act: (a) Importation of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical. Conspiracy to commit access device fraud.am+dg • •  DDA – conspiracy to commit acts like sale.  Conspirators are held to have intended the consequences of their act by engaging in conspiracy. apparently.  Conspirators are necessarily liable for the acts of another conspirator unless such act differs radically and substantively from that which they intended to commit. he doesn’t have to be in the scene of the crime to be a coconspirator (Boado) • if he performs an overt act in performance of the conspiracy.  In Tigoy v CA. Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism. administration. the conspirator must have committed or performed some over act as a direct or indirect contribution in the execution of the crime planned to be committed. conspiracy loses its juridical personality and it becomes a mere mode to commit a crime. 14 Section 11. dispensation. There is conspiracy when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of the crime of terrorism as defined in Section 3 hereof and decide to commit the same. delivery.there was planning. (P v Bisda) 13 Section 26. or  By exerting moral ascendancy over the other co-conspirators (Mayor lording over his minions while they chop the head off of some poor fellow) o Is Art 4. as one of its probable and natural consequences even though not intended as part of the original design. one the traitors/rebels actually commit treason/rebellion. SC applied Art 8 to the accused. importation. – Persons who conspire to commit the crime of terrorism shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment. (d) Manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical. The overt act may be: (not exclusive list)  Active participation in the actual commission of the crime itself (held the hands of a guy who was shot). dive or resort where any dangerous drug is used in any form. paragraph 1 applicable to conspiracy? (Justice Callejo)  Yes. conspiracy to commit rebellion (and the SPLs above) • In these two conspiracy crimes.  Moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at the commission of the crime (cheering them on). – If two (2) or more persons conspire to commit any of the offenses listed in Section 9 and one or more of such persons does any act to effect the object of the conspiracy. it can be applied as a mode to commit a crime. accused were guilty of violating the Forestry Code.

the resistance of the victim is expected. they abandon the conspiracy or the conspirators are arrested. all the conspirators are liable therefor. although there was a crime committed which is not part of the plan or prior agreement. saw a car and carnapped it. he must. (Same will apply with robbery with rape) • Why? Well. o Example: Scott and Emma agreed to kidnap Magneto. One conspirator stabbed the victim and ran. (P v Mapalit) • Agreed to rob victim. after they all escaped. then one of the robbers went back to rape the maid) Who should be liable for a second unplanned crime committed by one or some of the perpetrators? (Boado)  Only the actual perpetrator. He suffered a heart attack and died. o But the conspirators are not liable for the acts of the other conspirators which are products of afterthought or extraneous to the conspiracy. • Example: trying to prevent the crime. before the crime occurs: • Disassociate by an overt act. one of the conspirators went back to the house to rape the maid. It’s a necessary consequence of the crime they agreed upon.  For a conspirator to escape liability from the planned crime. It is a continuing event. SC held that the mere failure or refusal to flee after the commission of the crime does not amount to a disavowal of the conspiracy. unless in the meantime. so Kitty shot and killed her. for a conspirator to disclaim liability. • Example: agreement to commit robbery.am+dg o o o It extends to collateral acts incident to and growing out of the conspiracy. or • Try to prevent the crime.  GR: conspirators’ liability only for the crime agreed upon. (P v Angeles) Conspiracy continues until the object of the conspiracy is attained. even if unsuccessful. The accused did not run and was caught. • Remember: Conspirators are necessarily liable for the acts of another conspirator unless such act differs radically and substantively from that which they intended to commit. then he is only liable for robbery. and not robbery with rape/homicide. There must be an overt act to disassociate himself from the liability. They pointed a rubber gun at him. Only he was liable for carnapping. (Even if they only agreed to kidnpap Magneto) o Example: Kitty and Logan agreed to rob Jean. After the robbery. (P v de Jesus) • One of the conspirators who committed robbery. an unplanned crime committed will be the liability only of the one who committed it. not the other conspirators. Scott and Emma are both liable for kidnapping with homicide. Kitty and Logan both guilty of robbery with homicide. In other cases. • EXCEPT: o Other crime was committed in their presence and they did not prevent its commission indicating their approval thereof o When the other crime is the natural consequence of the crime planned (Art 4)  homicide resulting from physical injuries inflicted o Resulting crime was a composite crime because a composite crime or special complex crime is indivisible  Robbery with homicide. robbery with rape • In these 3 exceptions. He claimed he was not guilty since he desisted when did not run. he must perform an overt act to disassociate himself before the crime is actually committed. (robbery was finished.  In other words. Jean resisted. (P v Bisda)  Examples: • If one of the robbers prevented the others from committing the extra act of homicide or rape. Not necessary for the co-conspirators to perform equally each and every part of the acts constituting the offense. Only the rapist is liable for the rape. • Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 17 . It does not matter if he succeeds in preventing them or not.

2001) was malabo. involves racketeering Is evident premeditation automatic in conspiracy? o No. absent any proof showing how and when the plan to kill the victim was hatched or the time that elapsed when it was carried out. the alleged conspirators should be individually responsible for their respective acts. Consequently the act of one is the act of all.17 (Arias v Sandiganbayan.am+dg • • • • • As long as the parts played by each of the principals in the conspiracy contribute to the realization of the common design. mere knowledge. The mere act of conspiring is not by itself punishable. etc o Enterprise conspiracy – usually seen in organized crime. the same evidence on price established conspiracy between the appellants. Arias was acquitted. There are hundreds of document . the infraction consists in the reliance in good faith. pursuant to the common design and purpose. they are all liable equally.  Mere fact that he knew of the criminal design does not ipso facto make him a coconspirator (unless mastermind nga). o A co-conspirator may be acquitted while others are convicted. o When. his liability shall be thru culpa but that of his subordinates thru dolo.)  16 17 As to the circumstance of price or reward.  If pre-arranged conspiracy. There has to be some added reason why he should examine each voucher in such detail. o Chain conspiracy – involving the distribution of drugs in a way that there is successive communication and cooperation in the same way as with legit businesses conduct their business with suppliers. he can’t be expected to go through all the paperwork. acquiescence or agreement to cooperate is not enough to constitute one as a conspirator (unless mastermind). o There has to be some added reason why the head must be compelled to examine each voucher/paper that comes his way. May 24. it can be appreciated. absent a clear case of conspiracy. generally. and the rim that enclosed the spokes was the common goal in the overall conspiracy (the amassing of wealth). There are so much to sign and go over. Planned eh.  Conspiracy is only a means by which a crime is committed. they acted in concert during the commission of the crime o The agreement to pursue a common design and united purpose was instantaneous o GR: accused must have participated in the commission of the crime to be considered a coconspirator  Mere presence or approval of the crime without more will not make the alleged conspirator liable because there would be no basis for deducing conspiracy as to him as there is absent criminis particeps (criminal participation) Three kinds of conspiracy according to Estrada v Sandiganbayan: o Wheel conspiracy – one person is the hub and his underlings are the spokes  This was used against Jinggoy. without such act of negligence the crime could not have been accomplished.  If the prosecution fails to prove conspiracy.  Remember. Implied conspiracy o Deduced from the acts of the offenders o No planning. if there is no conspiracy. it cannot be appreciated. albeit misplace by a head of office on a subordinate upon whom the primary responsibility rests.16 Boado and the Arias doctrine o The head of office may be found liable for the acts of his subordinates either due to conspiracy or by an act of reckless impurdence which allowed the commission of estafa thru falsification or malversation through falsification. it can only be appreciated against appellant Tiguman since it was he who committed the felonious act for money. Any executive head of even small government agencies or commissions can attest to the volume of papers that must be signed. Original case of P v Tiguman (GR 130144. the head of office must be exculpated.  The acquittal of a conspirator does not absolve the other co-conspirators from criminal liability. See footnote for decision. SC said that the hub was Erap while the spokes are all the accused.  If implied conspiracy. How about price or reward? o Not sure. Jinggoy was a spoke.  The act of one becomes the act of all. it depends on what kind of conspiracy. absent any active participation in the commission of the crime. But since negligence cannot co-exist with conspiracy. however. letters and supporting paper that routinely pass Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 18 .

med. the penalty for acts punishable by life imprisonment to death provided herein shall be reclusion perpetua to death. suspension. in accordance with Art. and those constituting slight physical injuries shall be punished by arresto mayor. max is within the afflictive penalty. it shall be punishable in accordance with the Revised Penal Code. less grave since max period of the penalty is within the penalty of Amayor Light felonies o Amenor or fine not exceeding P200  Compare with Art 26 where a fine of P200 is correctional. penalty shall be RP • VAWC – follow RPC in certain cases18  EX to EX: when it specially provides that the RPC will not be supplementary to the SPL. requires grave or less grave felonies) o Duration of the subsidiary penalty to be imposed (Art 39. 25 of this Code. those constituting less serious physical injuries shall be punished by prision correccional. o EX: when it uses the nomenclature of the RPC • Like in Child Abuse Act (RA 7610) – when victim is 12 years old. PC  Example: penalty imposed by law is AMenor Max to AMayor Min. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code. unless the latter should specially provide the contrary. Acts falling under Section 5(b) shall be punished by imprisonment of two degrees lower than the prescribed penalty for the consummated crime as specified in the preceding paragraph but shall in no case be lower than arresto mayor. • Examples: o DDA – RPC shall not apply to violations of DDA. those constituting serious physical injuries shall have the penalty of prison mayor. See Art 26 for reconciliation Use this article to determine: o Whether a complex crime was committed (Art 48. 9. 19 Section 98. dq. Grave felonies..am+dg Art. the provisions of the Revised Penal Code (Act No. except in case of minors19 o Anti-hazing law – mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong not applicable o Anti-terrorism – conviction under this law is a bar to prosecution of that through his hands. AMayor. — Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable under special laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code. If these acts resulted in mutilation. Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which a penalty of arrest menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both. 3814). (Riodica v CA) Offenses not subject to the provisions of the Code Art. grave!)  PM. Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum period are correctional. in accordance with the above-mentioned Art. – Notwithstanding any law. frustrated or consummated parricide or murder or homicide shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the Revised Penal Code. Limited Applicability of the Revised Penal Code. rule or regulation to the contrary. Where the offender is a minor. — Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive. is provided. RT and RP Less grave o Maximum period is correctional. as amended. • GR: SPLs are not subject to the provisions of the RPC. 10. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 19 . This Code shall be supplementary to such laws. • • • • Grave felonies o Capital punishment or afflictive penalties in any of its periods (as long as min. 2) where the subsidiary penalty is based on the severity of the penalty o Duration of the detention in case of failure to post the bond to keep the peace (Art 35) o Whether the crime has prescribed (Art 90) o Whether the person in authority or his agents have committed delay in the delivery of detained persons (Art 125) o The proper penalty for quasi-offenses (Art 365)  How do you categorize reckless imprudence resulting into slight PI? • Light felony since only punishable by public censure. shall not apply to the provisions of this Act. 18 (a) Acts falling under Section 5(a) constituting attempted. except in the case of minor offenders. less grave felonies and light felonies. the max period of the penalty must be correctional o Destierro.

o If there is an agreement to fight. weapons  Hence. Hence.” (US v Domen) Requisites: o Unlawful aggression o Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it o Lack of sufficient provocation on part of person defending himself Unlawful aggression must always be there. (P v Decena) • Here. no more necessity for self-defense. (P v Sabio) o When the aggression has ceased to exist. o Actual and real peril. o Slapping held to be unlawful aggression. when a big. Nor should it be a mere threatening or intimidating attitude. in Ladonga v P) Justifying Circumstances • Acts of the actor are in accordance with law and hence. accused can no longer run after him and kill him and then invoke self-defense. no unlawful aggression. and ends when necessity ends. Second. nothing to prevent or repel. Justifying circumstances. not material commensurability  Look at sex. hence no self-defense. The one who attacked ahead of time: unlawful aggression. Prosecution Under This Act Shall Be a Bar to Another Prosecution Under the Revised Penal Code or Any Special Penal Laws.  Retaliation is not self-defense.  Unless one attacked ahead of time. (US v Paras) 20 SEC. size. It is limited by that necessity. – When a person has been prosecuted under a provision of this Act. he incurs no criminal liability • No civil liability on the actor either Art. Against honor since the face of a person is akin to his dignity and honor. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. provided that the following circumstances concur: First. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights. • • • • Rule now: Stand ground when in the right. strong.am+dg • When o o o person under the RPC or another SPL for the predicate crime 20 supplementary. circumstances. The aggression must continue up to the point where the aggressor is killed. or at least an imminent threat to one’s:  Life  Limbs  Honor/Chastity  Property  Liberty o Can’t be simply imagined. upon a valid complaint or information or other formal charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction and after the accused had pleaded to the charge. Without it. Unlawful aggression. — The following do not incur any criminal liability: 1. unlawful aggression has ceased. No unlawful aggression? No self-defense. (Gusto v CA) Reasonable necessity of the means employed o Depends upon the circumstances surrounding the aggression. and powerful American negro attacked a Filipino. 49. (P v Adlawan)  Like when the aggressor ran away after the attack. the following shall apply: ISL Art 11 to 15 Conspiracy (at least for BP 22.  The right to self-defense begins where the necessity exists. 11. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 20 . Third. the acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another prosecution for any offense or felony which is necessarily included in the offense charged under this Act. the retaliation becomes the unlawful aggression. the original aggressor can invoke self-defense (at least partial since there will be sufficient provocation on his part for initially attacking)  When the attacker was already disarmed. and the Filipino shot him 4 times. No longer “retreat to the wall. the state of mind of the aggressor and the available weapon at the defender’s disposal o Law requires rational equivalence. the SC stated that the Filipino employed reasonable means.

(P v Hiong. but no penetration. husband stabbed the wife. if adequate. or shall otherwise have consented to the infidelity of the other spouse shall not be entitled to the benefits of this article.  Art 11 should be applied. In defense. What else can you deduce when you see your wife putting on her panties and her paramour is right there? o Accused saw his wife making lust with someone else. the person libel may hit back with another libel which.  Dissent (follow this): it’s asking too much to actually catch them in the act of actual sexual congress. o If the brother-in-law catches his sister-in-law. while the daughters are living with their parents. Burden of proof never shifts. (P v Narvaez) Can there be self-defense in libel? o Apparently. invoke 11 over 247. Relate with VAWC. He stabbed his wife. This does not seem to involve the taking of human life. Art 247 won’t apply. o Can mistake of fact be invoked under Art 247? (Misled by movement of buttocks. yes. o For instance. capable of exciting. He told her to leave.am+dg • • • • • • • • • 21 Self-preservation is the paramount consideration sufficient provocation There can be provocation on the part of the accused. Not sure about 247. merely that he killed the victim. The paramour and the wife ran away. to parents with respect to their daughters under eighteen years of age. or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury. If self-defense is invoked. so he can invoke Art 11. shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter. no civil liability under 11. Art 247? Can you invoke both at the same time? (Justice Calljejo likes asking this raw)  Husband has the right to invoke his honor and defend it. If the accused pleads self-defense. and not just the property for self-defense to be invoked. the dissent said that there must be an attack on the person in possession of property as well. — Any legally married person who having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person. Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of his wife or daughter. and it’s more for the protection of the accused more than it is a punishment. He does not penal liability. Mistake of fact available in self-defense. 247. the accused arrived and saw his wife in the act of sexual intercourse. SC: Can’t invoke 247 because at that time. but it should not be suffient Sufficient provocation is unjust or improper conduct/act of the offended party. will be justified) Defense of honor/chastity o Girl stabbed man who embraced her in a dark alley. Battered Woman Syndrome o Lack of o o Art. • 247 will get you banished. 11 will bring you home scot-free. Self-defense! (P v dela Cruz) o Girl stabbed man who touched her thigh in a well-lit church. It must be adequate enough to excite a person to commit a wrong. (State v Green) o Fencing of a person’s land which will cut him off to the highway is unlawful aggression. not Art 247. Defense of property rights o In P v Ignacio. o So when should you invoke Art 11. the burden of evidence shifts to the accused. No self-defense. These rules shall be applicable. Follow this. and their seducer. Accused went out.  He can also invoke 247 if he discovers his wife and some dude making love. • Moreover. the wife was already putting on her panties. under the same circumstances. o The person may use such force as reasonably necessary to prevent or repel the unlawful physical invasion of his property. (P v Jaurige) Relate with Art 24721 o Art 247 is an absolutory circumstance. He heard rustling of leaves and saw his wife putting on her panties. But in a rage she rushed and attacked the husband with a knife.  If you were the husband. The penalty imposed is only destierro. o The preservation of human life and limb is of more importance to society than the protection of property. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 21 . it is not a judicial confession. or woman/spouse forced by another)  Yes. Apply Ah Chong by analogy. inciting or irritating anyone. he shall be exempt from punishment. shall suffer the penalty of destierro. If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of any other kind. merely a judicial admission.

Third. now. or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those consanguinity within the fourth civil degree. are present and that the person defending be not induced by revenge. or legitimate. • Elements o Evil sought to be avoided actually exists o Injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it o No other practical and less harmful means of preventing it 22 SECTION 26. even men can avail of it. women who suffer from BWS are not criminally or civilly liable even if the elements are not present. Battered Woman Syndrome as a Defense. but simply adds a new element/defense Defense of Relatives 2. Hence. in case the revocation was given by the person attacked. the person defending had no part therein Relatives included: o Spouse o Ascendants/descendants o Legit. In the determination of the state of mind of the woman who was suffering from battered woman syndrome at the time of the commission of the crime. She was granted passion/obfuscation and diminished will power. Defense of Strangers 3. or other evil motive. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse. resentment or other evil motives State of necessity 4. • Elements o Unlawful aggression o Reasonable necessity of the means employed o Person defending is not induced by revenge. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 22 . natural or adopted brothers or sisters.  In the US. First. ascendants. provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of this Art. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger. still a defense even if no imminent unlawful aggression. provided that the following requisites are present. in order to avoid an evil or injury. loving. the courts shall be assisted by expert psychiatrists/ psychologists. and the further requisite. Applies only to women. Second. it’s called “battering and its effects” Does not amend Art 11.22 Cycle of violence in BWS  Tension-building phase  Acute battering incident  Tranquil. provided that the first and second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are present. However. • • • Elements: o Unlawful aggression o Reasonable necessity of the means employed o In case the provocation was given by the person attacked.am+dg o o o o o o In Genosa. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists. relationship by affinity between surviving spouse and kindred of deceased continues regardless if there is offspring or not. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it. Any person who. does not act which causes damage to another. natural or adopted bros or sisters. descendants. that the one making defense had no part therein. the BWS was not considered justifying because the elements of self-defense were not present. – Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be suffering from battered woman syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding the absence of any of the elements for justifying circumstances of self-defense under the Revised Penal Code. resentment. will SD still be applicable to your inlaws? o Yes. or relatives by affinity in the same degrees o Consanguinity within 4th civil degree What if your spouse has died. nonviolent phase Women suffering from BWS are under the mental impression that their lives are at risk of harm. VAWC was not yet enacted then.

you drive recklessly. and unloads a bullet on the man’s forehead. Invoked in a BP 22 case wherein the accused said that she was forced to issue bouncing checks to save her mother from the harsh treatment of the hospital she was confined in. deprived of rason. You are still liable for Art 365. (P v Pule) Police can use force to prevent the escape of the victim who snatched their armalite. Tabuena disbursed money of Marcos) (But aren’t we all presumed to know the law?) Exempting Circumstances • While crime is still criminal. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability . An imbecile or an insane person. the court shall order his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established for persons thus afflicted. Lawful exercise of right or duty 5. the subordinate is not liable. The state of necessity must not be brought about by the intentional provocation of the party invoking the same. (Cabanlig v Sandiganbayan) o If the victim pointed the gun at the policeman. When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act which the law defines as a felony (delito). In the absence of clear legal provisions. Justifying Act legal No crime. total deprivation of freedom of will o Exempt. you swerve to avoid a child. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office. unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval. — the following are exempt from criminal liability: 1. 12. Exempting Act criminal There’s a crime and a criminal Civil liability Emphasis of the law is on the actor • Insanity: complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act. SC said the predicament was brought about by her own failure to pay the hospital bills. When the victim was a deranged man who was already subdued as he was lying on the ground. causing his brains to splatter all over the wet pavement and on the policeman’s shoe. but end up killing someone else. unless acted during a lucid interval Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 23 . see Art 69. 6. (Tabuena v Sandiganbayan. (P v Retubado) The evil should not have been created by the accused or his own negligence. • • • • Elements: o Acted out of duty or office o Injury caused is consequence of that duty or right Judgment and discretion of public officers in the performance of duties must be exercised neither capriciously nor oppressively but within reasonable limits. the law exempts the actor from liability. which he shall not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the permission of the same court. no criminal No civil liability Emphasis of the law is on the act Insanity/Imbecility Art. the policeman can invoke both self-defense and lawful exercise of duty. and the policeman walks up to him. o But not from CIVIL LIABILITY. There was no need for such. there is no lawful exercise. they must act in conformity with exercise of sound discretion. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose. o For example. • • Elements: o Order issued by superior o Order is for a legal purpose o Means used to carry out such order is lawful If the order is illegal but is apparently legal and the subordinate is not aware of its illegality.am+dg • • • • • Civil liability on the person who benefited (Art 101) If incomplete.  Except in accident and insuperable cause which strictly are not criminal.

can the sentence be suspended? o Yes. be made to serve his/her sentence. in coordination with the DSWD. so long as he/she committed the crime when he/she was still a child. where accused killed people (but didn’t harm others) in a room. Once law was passed. in an agricultural camp and other training facilities that may be established. 24 SEC. • If the minor is convicted. Even if the minor is above 18 he is convicted. supervised and controlled by the BUCOR. accused was a minor who. RA 9344 • 15 and under: exempt o they’ll be subject to intervention • over 15 – under 18: exempt unless acted with discernment o those who acted with discernment are entitled to privileged mitigating circumstance of minority  they will undergo diversion programs • Exemption does not include exemption from civil liability. minors convicted at that time were ordered released or their cases were dismissed or they were brought to diversion programs o 13-year old accused raped 6-year old girl before the law was passed.  But the maximum age to suspend the sentence is only until 21 years old. There.23 The promotion of the welfare of a child in conflict with the law should extend even to one who has exceeded the age limit of twenty-one (21) years. (Ortega v people) • Applies even to heinous crimes. instead of pronouncing the judgment of conviction. in lieu of confinement in a regular penal institution. 24 23 Sec. 2011. with discernment. however. 2006). raped a 5-year old child.” o o Minority • Amended by Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act. the court shall place the child in conflict with the law under suspended sentence. The age of the child in conflict with the law at the time of the promulgation of the judgment of conviction is not material. Confinement of Convicted Children in Agricultural Camps and Other Training Facilities. without need of application: Provided. he can still be criminally liable o Distinguish between lack of reason (insanity) and failure to use good judgment due to anger (passion) o Burden of proof: accused (because of presumption of sanity)  But if already known that he was insane at that time: prosecution must prove he was sane at time of commission o Quantum of proof to overthrow presumption of sanity: beyond reasonable doubt Imbecile: mental development to that of children between 2-7 years of age o Always exempt Two tests to determine complete deprivation of intelligence in the commission of the act: o Cognition test – deprivation of intelligence in committing the criminal act (awareness of right or wrong)  Usually applied here o Volition test – deprivation of the freedom of will (control over acts) Not appreciated in P v Valledor. 51. What matters is that the offender committed the offense when he/she was still of tender age. 38. . but insane during trial. They sent him to an agricultural camp.Once the child who is under eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the offense is found guilty of the offense charged. after conviction and upon order of the court. However. and after said. rehabilitation and reintegration. Hence. • What if the act was done while still a minor but the promulgation of the sentence was after he reached 21? o He will be sent to an agricultural camp. That suspension of sentence shall still be applied even if the juvenile is already eighteen years (18) of age or more at the time of the pronouncement of his/her guilt. He was convicted and sentenced to an agricultural camp for a period of reclusion perpetua. maintained. he was ordered released and referred to the local DSWD unit. the court shall determine and ascertain any civil liability which may have resulted from the offense committed. – A child in conflict with the law may. • Applied retroactively (May 20. Automatic Suspension of Sentence. Sir likes this case) o Same ruling was applied in the earlier case of Sarcia. “I’ve had my revenge. (P v Jacinto. the accused was 31 when the SC decision came out.am+dg • • • Mere abnormality of the mental faculties will not exclude imputability Must relate to period immediately before or at the precise moment of doing the act which is the subject of the inquiry  If sane when act was done. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 24 . since the law did not make a distinction. • Reckoning point is the age of the child when the offense was allegedly committed. The offender shall be entitled to the right to restoration.

Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force. the court shall impose the appropriate disposition measures as provided in the Supreme Court Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law. Tsk tsk to the smarties!) o Intelligence. Accident 4. lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable consequences Elements: o Performance of a lawful act with due care o Injury to another was by accident o Without intent or negligence/no fault or no intent Appreciated in Pomoy v People. or to extend the suspended sentence for a certain specified period or until the child reaches the maximum age of twenty-one (21) years. come from an outside force and accust must act not only without a will but even against his will o Actor reduced to a mere instrument. on the other hand. or if the child in conflict with the law has willfully failed to comply with the conditions of his/her disposition or rehabilitation program. while performing a lawful act with due care. (Jarco Marketing v CA) o With RA 9344. it’s now 15 What is discernment? o The mental capacity to understand the difference between right and wrong. o Prove by evidence of physical appearance. (Tamboong v People) No civil liability Irresistible Force 5. see also P v Doquena where the minor was the brightest of his class.am+dg • • • • • 2 presumptions under RA 9344: o presumption of minority o presumption of no discernment (if 15-18)  applies even in: • conspiracy with adults (P v Estefano) • reckless imprudence (say. . where the minor was deemed with discernment because he was an honor student and made sure that his rape of another minor was in a secluded area. to order execution of sentence. The surrounding circumstances must demonstrate that the minor knew what he was doing and that it was wrong. etc. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court. the child in conflict with the law shall be brought before the court for execution of judgment. Offenses not applicable to children: o Vagrancy and prostitution o Mendicancy o Sniffing of rugby Read codal na lang for stuff on diversion. SEC. imminent and impending. is the power necessary to determine the morality of human acts to distinguish a licit from an illicit act. attitude or deportment not only before and during the commission of the act. (Llave v P. The accident must not be foreseeable or else there will be fault or criminal negligence Accident and negligence are mutually exclusive o Negligence presupposes some degree of fault or foreseeableness in the fault of the person No such thing as accidental self-defense. a 15 ½ year old boy drives a car and hits someone) A child under 9 is conclusively presumed to have no discernment. • Elements: o Force must be physical. Any person who.If the court finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon the child in conflict with the law have not been fulfilled. 40. and of such a nature as to induce a well-grounded fear of death or serious bodily injury Upon suspension of sentence and after considering the various chcumstances of the child. but also after and during the trial. fear or intimidation must be present. NO SUCH THING. no more freedom o Duress. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 25 . the court shall determine whether to discharge the child in accordance with this Act. Gun accidentally went off during the struggle. o Such circumstance includes the gruesome nature of the crime and the minor’s cunning and shrewdness. force. causes an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it. If said child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years of age while under suspended sentence. • • • • • • • Accident: happens outside the sway of our will. Pomoy was a policeman who struggled with the victim who was under investigation.

am+dg

Accused must have had no opportunity to leave or escape or self-defense Uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury

6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.

• • • •

Elements o Fear of an evil greater than or at least equal to that which the accused was required to commit o Evil was os such gravity and imminence that the ordinary man would have succumbed to it Founded on duress or lack of voluntairness on the part of the actor Same rule with irresistible force, if accused had chance to run away or escape, this EC won’t be appreciated (P v Morales, where the accused, in a kidnapping case, were a good kilometer from where the co-accused were. They could’ve just ran away) Not appreciated when one of two rapists claimed he was under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear from the other, but yet he raped the victim while the other was no longer there. (P v Tami) Civil liability on the principal Insuperable cause

7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some lawful insuperable cause.

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Applies in felonies by omission (like Art 125 and then holidays pala!) No civil liability

Anymore? Yes. Relatives in theft, swindling, malicious mischief. 25 Spontaneous desistance in the attempted stage (unless overt act was a crime in itself) Attempted/frustrated light felonies (except those against persons or property) Accessories in light felonies Relatives who are accessories under Art 20 Physical injuries under Art 247 (nahuli yung misis!) Somnambulism (sleep walkers) Mistake of fact Repeal of a penal law Zombies Also, those victims of instigation. They are exempt from liability. Entrapment Instigation Mens rea originated from accused who was merely Evil idea originated from peace officer who induced trapped by police in flagrante delicto the accused to commit the act Not absolutory Absolutory Consistent with public policy Contrary to public policy Trap for unwary criminals Trap for unwary innocent Peace officer not liable Peace officer is principal by inducement Mitigating Circumstances • Show the lesser perversity of the offender and thus considered to lower the penalty prescribed for the offense • Matters of defense which do not have to be alleged in the information • Analogous circumstances are allowed under Art 13 • There are other circumstances which also reduce the penalty but are not under Art 13 o These are the extenuating circumstances like concealment of dishonor on the part of the mother in infanticide • Classifications of mitigating circumstances
25

Art. 332. Persons exempt from criminal liability. — No criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from the commission of the crime of theft, swindling or malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by the following persons: 1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line. 2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property which belonged to the deceased spouse before the same shall have passed into the possession of another; and 3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if living together. The exemption established by this article shall not be applicable to strangers participating in the commission of the crime. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

26

am+dg

• •

Ordinary  Lowering penalty to the minimum period o Privileged  Effect of lowering the imposable penalty (divisible or indivisible) by one or more degrees  Can’t be offset o Specific  Applies to a specific felony like concealment of dishonor in case of abortion by the preggy woman herself Not applicable to Art 365 since it’s culpa, no intent. Application of MCs and ACs to SPLs will depend on the SPL. o If it uses the nomenclature of penalties of the RPC, then they will apply.  Unless, they specifically state that they won’t apply. o Privileged Can’t be offset Penalty lowered by one or two degrees Always considered no matter the penalty imposed

Ordinary Can be offset by a generic AC Lowered to minimum period (except if 2 or more MCs and no AC, then lower degree by one) Not considered in single indivisible penalties Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstances

Art. 13. Mitigating circumstances. — The following are mitigating circumstances: 1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the requisites necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective cases are not attendant.

Incomplete justification of defense o Must always have unlawful aggression  Without unlawful aggression, no complete nor incomplete defense o Becomes a privileged mitigating circumstance if unlawful aggression is present with another element of self-defense  Only unlawful aggression: ordinary  Unlawful aggression + another element: privileged (see Art 69) Accident o Due care and lack of fault are indispensable without which negligence will be present giving rise to culpable felony o If lawful act and lack of intention of causing the injury are absent, an intentional act results taking the case out of the benefit of this mitigating circumstance

Minority/Oldies
2. That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over seventy years. In the case of the minor, he shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80.

• • • • •

RA 9344 did not repeal Art 68. It merely amended it. If the minor is between 15-18 and acted with discernment, he is still entitled to the privileged mitigating circumstance under Art 68 (2). Minority is always a privileged MC. Personal to the an accused and can’t be extended to other co-accused. o 16-year old and 30-year old killed someone. Minority only appreciated to 16-year old. What about old age? o Accused was charged with rape. He was 83 years old. Convicted but old age considered as MC. Praeter Intentionem

3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed.

• • • •

Lack of intention to commit so grave as tthat committed Disparity between intent and consequences Appreciated when accused had no intent to kill but only to inflict injuries, but the victim died. Not appreciated: o when acts are sufficient to bring the result intended, o when the means employed would naturally result to the felony committed,  like when the accused hit the victim in the eyebrow with a LEAD PIPE. SC did not apply

Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

27

am+dg

this MC because of the brute force used and the part of the body where the blow was struck. (Oriente v P) o hazing incidents26 under the Anti-Hazing Law (RA 8049), or o culpa or to crimes not involving intent. Intentionem nga eh. Usually applied to physical acts o Accused poured gasoline on a mental retardate, and latter burned to death. (P v Pugay, accused only meant to burn the clothes of the guy, not the guy himself) o Husband punched wife. Wife broke her ribs and died. (P v Ulep) But has been applied in malversation. o Petitioner was a municipal treasurer and the audit team discovered he was short P72k in funds. After a few months, he returned the money he “borrowed.” SC gave him two MCs: voluntary surrender and lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. Intent is determined at the time of the commission of the crime. o Intent determined by weapons, words, conduct before, during, and after (immediately?) the incident. What if 2 persons conspired to commit a felony, and one intended to commit the grave wrong, but the other did not, what happens? o Conspirator who did not indeed to commit so grave a wrong as that committed CAN NOT invoke the MC. (Act of one, act of all!)  But if both of them did not intend to commit so grave a wrong, they both can invoke the MC. Can both treachery and praeter intentionem coexist? Can they hold hands and skip? o Yes. They may coexist. reachery refers to the manner or method used to kill the victim. Lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong as that committed refers to the state of mind of the person. (P v Flores) Sufficient Provocation

4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party immediately preceded the act.

• • •

Provocation must: o Be sufficient o Be immediate to the commission of the crime (no interval of time elapsed between provocation and commission of the crime) o Originate from the offended party Sufficient provocation is unjust or improper conduct/act of the offended party, capable of exciting, inciting or irritating anyone. It must be adequate enough to excite a person to commit a wrong. (Licayo v P, Oriente v P) Offended shouted and told the accused to leave. Accused killed him. No MC. Even if the act of the victim may not constitute unlawful aggression to invoke SD, the same act may still be invoked by the offended as sufficient provocation on the part of the victim. (Gotis v P) o Deceased struck accused then ran away like a scared dog. Accused caught up with him and killed him. Accused actually could have two MCs in his favor: sufficient provocation and passion/obfuscation. But he can’t be entitled to both, since both are based from the same facts. o Same rule applies when same facts give rise to vindication of grave offense and sufficient provocation. Only entitled to one MC. Provocation need not be in words, but can also be in action. When the victim entered the accused person’s property and started gathering crops, this constituted sufficient provocation. (P v Arquiza)

Immediate vindication of grave offense
5. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.

“Immediate” in this case means proximate and allows for a lapse of time o As long as the offender is still suffereing from the mental agony brought about by the “offense” to him “Grave offense” is not the grave offense in Art 9. Here, it might not even be a felony at all. It can be an assault to one’s honor.
Any person charged under this provision shall not be entitled to the mitigating circumstance that there was no intention to commit so grave a wrong.

26

Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

28

Even without benefit of wedlock. the accused loses his reason and selfcontrol.am+dg • • • • • • o Includes insult – “You’re just living out of the pockets of your wife!” Committed against spouse. When father found the daughter. pumatay!  Both were appreciated together because based on different facts. will this MC still be applicable to your inlaws? o Yes. In the latter.” o Exercise of a lawful right by the offended party cannot be a proper source of passion/obfuscation. (P v Ignas)  Lesson? All depends on the facts. relationship by affinity between surviving spouse and kindred of deceased continues regardless if there is offspring or not. or adopted brothers or sisters. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority or his agents. legitimate. and his rage at her rejection of the proposal. or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution. Passion and Obfuscation 6. but the fact that some families are still conservative should not be discounted so easily. o Passion/obfuscation – because Chinaman didn’t mind him. She also refused to stay with Bello because she wanted to continue her work of dancing scantily clad in front of drunk people. (P v Lopez) Act which produced the passion/obfuscation must not be far removed from the commission of the crime by a considerable length of time during which the accused might have regained his normal equanimity o Lapse of 1 week? No. must only appreciate one of them. the Chinaman didn’t mind him and went up the stairs to his house. immediate vindication. “We can not see how the accused's insistence that she live with him again. Daughter eloped with a Chinaman. Unless arising from different factual bases. Voluntary Surrender. Plea of Guilty 7. same reason. (P v Caber. she refused. (Bacabac v P) Interesting case of P v Diokno. descendants. SC held that passion/obfuscation present. (P v Tubadeza. saying. a monogamous liaison appears morally of a higher level than gainful promiscuity. • Elements: o Surrendered to a person in authority or his agent Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 29 . o Still applicable today? Probably not. (P v Ventura where he found out that his wife had an affair with her amo) o 3 days? No. o 30 mins? Pwede pa. What if your spouse has died. passion/obfuscation cannot be credited separately. He told her to stop her job. Diokno stabbed the Chinaman. (P v Palabrica) o Hours? Pwede pa. Sufficient provocation. offended allegedly raped wife of accused 3 days before the stabbing) Appreciated in case where the husband killed a witch who cast a spell on the accused’s wife. o 1 day lapse? No na. natural. It’s inconsistent with treachery. or relatives by affinity within the same degrees Test if the assault is grave depends on: o Social standing of parties o Time and place and occasion when offense committed Can not be appreciated if sufficient time had lapsed for the accused to recover his serenity. • • • • • Must arise from lawful sentiments o Must not be based on an illegitimate relationship (P v Hicks and P v Salazar)  EXCEPTION in case of P v Bello (1964)  Accused had a common law wife who worked as a hostess/GRO. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion or obfuscation. o Immediate vindication – elopement deemed continuous. ascendants. Longbottom v Lestrange) Treachery cannot exist with passion and obfuscation. Not appreciated when offended party hit the accused with a bamboo stick and the accused killed him. nabastos. o As when the offended party came to regain his land. can be properly qualified as arising from immoral and unworthy passions. accused was already expected to recover his equanimity.

Neither exempting nor mitigating. but stabbed the victim. voluntary surrender not appreciated. Plea of Guilt • Must be: o In open court o Spontaneously and unconditionally o Prior to the presentation of the evidence of the prosecution • Accepted plea to a lesser offense counted as MC (no need to amend information) • Voluntary plea of guilty and voluntary surrender can be both appreciated in one case Physical defects 8.am+dg • • • • o Surrendered before arrest is effected o Surrendered must be voluntary (spontaneous and unconditional) GR: doesn’t matter whether there was an arrest warrant or not. Neither exempting nor mitigating. (P v Luces) o Merely to escape the wrath of relatives who wanted to extract revenge (P v Basite. any other circumstances of a similar nature and analogous to those above mentioned. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 30 . • • • • Defect must relate to the offense committed Illness or defect must have moved him to commit the offnse Not automatic that he should be credited with this MC. (P v Diva. Error in personae MC? No. No analogous circumstances. where deaths occurred after a basketball game) o No surrender but merely reported that a crime occurred (P v Rogales) Appreciated when before being charged of malversation. • • If illness deprives the offender of his consciousness of his acts. Abberatio ictus MC? No. o Except if the arrest is imminent. Illness 9. He was deemed to have voluntarily surrendered. wherein a girl was hit by an arrow) Aggravating Circumstances • Unlike mitigating circumstances. or communications with fellow beings. or communications with his fellow beings. the list in Article 14 is exclusive. Must show that it restricts his means of action. he will be exempt from liability. (Perez v P) o Compare to Davalos v P. Accused had one hand. Illnesses considered: o Psychosis (P v Antonio) o Schizophrenia Analogous circumstances 10. No MC. Not necessary to surrender to authorities where the incident happened. (P v Genoya. The return of the money must be spontaneous. where the MC was not appreciated because the return of the money was 7 years later. And. (P v Abella. defense. MC will be appreciated. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-power of the offender without however depriving him of the consciousness of his acts. That the offender is deaf and dumb. but surrendered in nearby barrio) Not appreciated when: o Surrender was to disclaim liability. Neither exempting nor mitigating. finally. the accused returned the amount before he was even charged. defense. blind or otherwise suffering some physical defect which thus restricts his means of action. As long as he voluntarily surrenders. If that’s the case. crime happened in place A. but see Boado p 140) o Surrender was to clear their names. • • • • • • Restitution of malversed funds considered analogous Voluntary return of a stolen cow Mere membership in a cultural minority not considered analogous Mistake in identity MC? No.

am+dg • • • • • • • • Must be alleged in the information. etc). o Using one’s service firearm in shooting someone does not fall under this AC. o Hence. Accused must have used his influence or prestige of his office to commit the crime. kidnapping for ransom. so estafa. If the public officer could have committed the crime without the use of public position. accused used a gun officially issued to him by virtue of office. the others will be deemed as generic. but some are qualifying and even special No law providing that additional rapes/homicides are considered as aggravating because list is exclusive Where of the aggravating circumstances has been used as a qualifying circumstance. Different kinds of aggravating circumstances (AC) o Generic  Apply generally to all crimes  Can be offset by an ordinary mitigating  Increase the penalty to the MAX period  Must be alleged in the information o Qualifying  Cannot be offset  Changes the nature of the crime and the designation of the offense  Must be alleged in the information  Must be proved beyond reasonable doubt  The penalty does not per se increase. Evident premeditation becomes a generic circumstance na lang.  In P v Villamor. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position. it is not aggravating. Conspiracy is not an aggravating circumstance.) o Special or specific aggravating  Apply to particular felonies  Found elsewhere than art 14  Do not change the character of the offense charged but guides the court in imposing the proper penalty  Can’t be offset either o Inherent circumstance  Element of the felony committed thus no longer considered against the offender in the determination of the penalty (Art 62) • “abuse of public position” inherent in crime of falsification of document by public authority.t. from homicide (r. The offender’s being a public officer does not ipso facto make it aggravating. no intent. He could have prevented the others from robbing Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 31 . RA 7659 added a new aggravating circumstance of “organized/syndicated group” in Art 62 (1a). o It’s a special aggravating circumstance because Art 14 (which are generally generic) was not correspondingly amended. 14. Aggravating circumstances. and also in malversation (and other crimes committed by public officers). and ascendancy which his office gives him in realizing his purpose. prestige. There must be an intimate connection between the offense and office of the accused. o An organized/syndicated crime group means a group of 2 or more persons collaborating.) it becomes murder (r. — The following are aggravating circumstances: 1. • • • • • Test: did the accused abuse his office in order to commit the crime? Public official must use the influence. but the nature of the crime is changed (along with the corresponding penalty) • Hence. the quiet policeman is guilty of abuse of public position. confederating or mutually helping one another for purposes of gain in the commission of any crime (not exclusive to robbery – as long as there is profit. treachery qualifies homicide into murder. Abuse of official position Art.p. Court said he could have shot him even without a gun from the police. The ones in Article 14 are generally generic. When a policeman keeps quiet while his other police officers were robbing a polio guy and his sister. Not applicable to Art 365 since it’s culpa.

Barangay captain is a person-in-authority. De Mesa) If crime committed in the presence of an agent of a person in authority. SEX. judge. general. security or honor. etc) o Mere fact that victim is woman does not give rise to the AC of sex. but Boado says the opposite) If in the presence of a policeman. than AC can be appreciated) o Accused was conversing with the barangays captain and then suddenly killed him. (P v. such as a barangays captain does not necessarily 27 1(a). not agents of persons in authority and other public officers o One vested with jurisdiction or authority to maintain peace and order Elements: o Public authority is engaged in the discharge of his duties o Not the person against whom the crime is committed o Offender knows that he is a public authority If public authority is the victim. • • • • • • • • Covers only persons in authority. killing of spinster case) Can NOT co-exist with passion or obfuscation where the offended lost his control or reason. or that is be committed in the dwelling of the offended party. What if you’re confined in the National Penitentiary. then accused shot him. Sec 23.) Does not apply if inherent in crime. age. RANK: considered in crimes against persons. contempt of public authority) Age. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 32 . (If charge only murder. 27 See Art 62 of RPC. Not merely because the victim is a female or has a rank. (P v Magbueno) What if crime committed in the presence of a professor while the latter was teaching? o Not aggravated. (Fortuna v People. rank. AC? No. Reyes. Insult to public authorities? No. Must be some specific insult or disrespect shown to her womanhood. Barangay captain was the victim. etc o Charge should not include rank as an inherent element thereof  So if charge is complex crime of murder with assault against an agent of a person in authority. AC can’t be appreciated. (P v. Talaga naman! (P v Mendoza. advantage was taken by the offender of his public position.  If you smoke weed in the presence of a professor. consul. Siojo. not applicable to complex crime of robbery with homicide (P v. When in the commission of the crime. or sex. then crime is direct assault (AC deemed absorbed). A teacher or professor is only a person in authority for purposes of Art 148 (direct assault) and Art 151 (resistance and disobedience). That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public authorities. His silence made him liable. He was playing cards. mere fact that victim was a person with a rank. the provision doesn’t apply. if the latter has not given provocation. Cabiles) Sex: not considered in crimes where being a woman is an element (rape. rank. and he was not performing his duty at that time time. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect due the offended party on account of his rank. Considered special aggravating because of RA 7659. a beautiful case. not aggravating because the policeman is only an agent of a person in authority. Rank: high social position/standing o Teacher. but NOT in crimes against property o Hence.am+dg • • the victim. He was playing tong-its. Yes. A teacher of professor is a person in authority for the purpose of the enforcement of the DDA. sex. and you kill each someone? Aggravating. the penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances. (P v.  EXCEPT under the Dangerous Drugs Act. dwelling 3. • • • • • • • Common factor: disrespect to the offended Rationale: need for respect Need for proof that offender deliberately intended to offend or insult the offended o There must be deliberate intent to insult or show manifest disregard for the age. the professor is a person in a authority. AGE. sex. but he didn’t. o Example: Falsification by a public officer of a public document. Can’t be offset! Insult to Public Authorities 2.

• Requisites: o Offended had trusted the offender Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 33 . staircase. Sapinoso. Malolot. destructive arson) • Does dwelling apply in robbery? o Depends. refers to relationship. (P v. sex. Basta separate and distinct places. Punzalan where the house and the servants’ quarters were separate but within the same compound. his teacher in grade 1. (P v. a combination of video store and dwelling is not a “dwelling” for purposes of this AC (P v. • Inherent also in destructive arson  Offended has given provocation Can’t be absorbed by treachery. and the bad spouse did the deed in the conjugal dwelling (P v. Nerio) Age: includes tender age Dwelling: includes dependencies. hence part of the dwelling of the offended party. SC considered treachery and age of victim separately. (P v. (Sir doesn’t agree with this. compare with P v. rank. Ibanez) • See case of P. The victim was already retired when the dude raped her.)  Inherent in the crime (trespass. Rios)  Victim was stepping on the first rung of the stairs connected to his house • But if he has yet to step. But if robbery with force upon things. If robbery with homicide or robbery with intimidation of persons. Villanueva) o Not appreciated when:  Both the offended and the offender live in the dwelling • EXCEPT in ADULTERY. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness. SC held that the fact that the offended party was already retired did not diminish the respect due her rank as his former teacher in grade 1. dwelling is inherent. dapat separate dwellings. no AC.  Home is that which the law seeks to protect or uphold whether the dweller is a lessee. a boarder or a bed spacer  Held to include: • room in a boarding house (P v Daniel) • room of stay-in laundrywoman in house of amo (P v. Treachery pertains to manner of commission. (P v. Punzalan. yes. Enough that the victim was attacked inside his own house. (P v Samudio) o Accused raped a 70-year old woman. o Accused killed a 3-day old child. Age. absent evidence that the killing was deliberately intended to disregard or insult or threaten to insult the rank of the victim. All 4 can be appreciated separately from treachery.am+dg • • • • mean it’s aggravating. robbery with force upon things. appreciated. Almohera) Abuse of Confidence or obvious ungratefulness 4. where no AC appreciated because accused and victim lived together) • house of a squatter since law does not distinguish validity of title • little rooms separated by curtains (sir’s example of his dorm with his brothers) o Appreciated when:  Victim stood in the terrace of his house (P v. The houseboy went to the house of the amo and killed him there. Sir doesn’t agree with this case. Sespene) o Offended must not have given any provocation (sufficient and immediate) o Not necessary that the accused actually entered the house. appreciated together in the same case. SC said no AC because the servants quarters located in the same compound. (P v. and enclosures under the house. Tano)  Not necessarily owned by the offended. but it’s the latter case. o Must be a building or structure exclusively used for rest and comfort  Hence. v. where accused hacked to death an 11-month old child and the SC considered age absorbed by treachery. (P v Lora) o Dwelling and treachery treated separately. Lopez) o But see P v. so it shold prevail.

but the possibility or impossibility of immediate aid to be obtained. or where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties. kupal) Palace of Chief Executive/Worship 5. and o place where the crime was committed was not illuminated Objective test: did it facilitate the commission of the crime? Subjective test: was it purposely sought out by the accused to afford impunity? o Yes to either question will suffice to appreciate night time. are these separate ACs or only one? o GR: Only one. Dela Cruz) Absorbed in treachery if it is part of the treacherous means to insure execution of crime Uninhabited Place (Despoblado) Test: whether or not in the place of the commission of the offense. uninhabited place. revealing greater perversity. Villanueva. Librando) Night time (Nocturnity) Becomes an AC only (requisites) o when sought by the offender. Nighttime: sunset to sunrise o Crime must have been committed exclusively at nighttime There must be evidence that night time was sought for. or the nocturnity facilitated the commission of the offense. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in his presence. If done in the palace of the President. Must show that offender sought the above places for the commission of the crime (lack of respect!) o That’s why it wasn’t appreciated in P. • • • Only in the third circumstance (public authorities engaged in the discharge) is performance of function necessary. but you have to climb a hill to reach the house to render • • • • • • • • Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 34 . Jaurige. o taken advantage by him to facilitate the commission of the crime. where common-law husband (whom the victim called “papa”) raped the victim. where the young lass stabbed the dude’s neck in church after he placed his hand precariously on her thigh Night time. Inherent in: o Qualified theft o Estafa For obvious ungratefulness. in his presence. Cabiles) o The more important consideration is if the commission of the crime makes it possible for the victim to receive aid. Arojado. (P v. o ensured his immunity from capture. P v. Ostia. where accused was the first cousin of the victim) o Also applied in P v.am+dg • • • o Offender abused such trust (P v. or in an uninhabited place. v. • If all three are present. performance of function not necessary. or in a place dedicated to religious worship. or by a band. (P v. there was reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some help It is not the distance.g. That the crime be committed in the night time.  EXCEPT: when the three can be distinctly perceived and can subsist independently of each other. whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense. the offended received favors from the victim but still committed the crime (e. (P v. by a band 6. Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together in the commission of an offense. it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. or in a place dedicated to religious worship.  If the distance is not so great. Ostia) o Such abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the crime Essential that the confidence is IMMEDIATE and PERSONAl such that it gives the accused some advantage and makes it easier to commit the crime (P v.

1 acquitted. offender is sentenced to RP (to death). or conceal it. directly or indirectly. or by entering the passenger's compartments in a train or. Robbery with physical injuries. they are all principals in the commission of the crime. (People v Berayon) Art.4 of Art 294: qualifying circumstance 28 Destructive arson by 2 or more people (Art 320. o Minimal participation as compared to accomplices.3. Casual encounter at night in an uninhabited bukid? Not AC. (People v Arpa 27 SCRA 1037) Dude who burned down his own house and others considered guilty of arson with AC of on occasion of conflagration. shipwreck. — If the offenses mentioned in subdivisions three. But SC still considered band as AC. taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the respective conveyances. (?) (People v Sing) Aid of armed men 8. rape. and five of the next preceding article shall have been committed in an uninhabited place or by a band. since the latter is only a means to commit a crime. the penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon the leader of the band. o principal was not aided o not taken advantage of. o Accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the crime was committed Not appreciated when: o all the accused acted under the same plan and for the same purpose. 29 Irrespective of the application of the above enumerated qualifying circumstances.am+dg • aid. The prosecution must show that the remoteness of the place was chosen by the accused to facilitate the crime. street car. Oco) o Weird case: P v Estante – 4 accused. highway. not AC (P v. regardless of whether their purpose is merely to burn or destroy the building or the burning merely constitutes an overt act in the commission or another violation of law. intentional mutilation. amended by PD 1744): qualifying circumstance 29 When conspiracy is proved. motor vehicle or airship.  Justices Aquino and Abad Santos said NO AC. directly or indirectly. and the intimidation is made with the use of a firearm. Calamity or misfortune • • • • • • • • 7. Art 295. (Art 294) But remember Art 226-B: Rape committed by 2 or more persons. impotency. the offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the proper penalties. The armed men are accomplices who take part in a minor capacity. Band Consists of: o Four or more persons o Armed malefactors (at least four must be armed) o Shall have acted together in the commission of an offense “Armed”: any weapon which by reason of its intrinsic nature or purpose is capable of inflicting serious injuries (bolo. epidemic or other calamity or misfortune. road or alley. in any manner. PY resulting in insanity. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity. club. not the means (which is Par 12) Rationale: instead of helping. cupcake. o If proven that only 2 had weapons. or alley. road. • • • • 28 Elements: o Armed men took part in the commission of the crime. you took advantage pa! Accused must take advantage of the calamity to ensure success of the crime. 1 jumped bail. guns. or with the use of firearm on a street. with relation to 2. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 35 . despobado is considered. 295. It is not absorbed by conspiracy. the penalty of death shall likewise be imposed when the arson is perpetrated or committed by two (2) or more persons or by a group of persons. band can be appreciated. grenades. There should not be any conspiracy nor should the armed men be principals.  If so. 4 – 2 = 2. earthquake. • • • • • Does not refer to acts of men Refers to the occasion of the crime. four. or by attacking a moving train. Art 14: generic aggravating o Generic aggravating in robbery with homicide. In the same cases.) Must prove that 4 or more persons had weapons. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration. or on a street. committed in an uninhabited place and by a band. blindness.

and then accused commits another crime under the same title.” (People v.  Of another crime embraced in the same title of the Code • Hence. A recidivist is one who. since amnesty extinguishes entire crime. • Generic aggravating circumstance • No time limit either. recidivist? No.  But if amnesty? • Not recidivist. He then committed theft on December 30. • What if pardoned for first crime? o Recidivist still.am+dg • • Absorbed by band Aggravating in kidnapping. shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of this Code. Can be attempted or frustrated. Decision not promulgated. He was convicted for theft. Law does not distinguish. Baldera) o Reiteracion  Offender has previously served sentence  First offense must have been punished with an equal or greater penalty. (Monsanto v Factoran) • What if judgment is suspended because of RA 9344. there’s a need for two convictions (first by final judgment. Recividist? No. recidivist? No. but only one judgment. at the time of his trial for one crime. Licop) Band Organize d Crime Syndicat e (Art 62) All principal s 2 or more Crime for GAIN Special aggravat ing Can’t be offset Aid of Armed Men Armed men are accompli ces 2 or more Crime not specified Generic Liability All principal s 4 or more Crime not specified Generic Number Specificit y Nature Habituality 9. and must take place prior to the second convication) o What if 3 separate informations. That the accused is a recidivist. • Accused committed robbery on December 23. After. No prior judgment in that case. he was charged for robbery. Men also means “women. Second crime must be committed after the first conviction. Effects still remain. 10. or Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 36 . That the offender has been previously punished by an offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty. hence no final judgment. (People v Rivera) • No requirement that it be consummated. (P v. • Different forms of habitiluality o Recidivist is one who  At the time of his trial for one crime  Shall have been previously convicted  By final judgment.

serious or less serious physical injuries (FRETSeL)  Found guilty of said crimes a third time or oftener. Third conviction must be committed within 10 years from the second conviction. and not the nature of the crime Recidivism Previous conviction by final judgment Under the same Title of the Code No requirement as to penalty imposed in the prior conviction Reitreacion Service of sentence Need not be under the same Title Prior crime must have been penalized with an equal or greater penalty or 2 or more crimes with lighter penalty A O P o Habitual delinquency  Within a period of 10 years from the date of his release or last conviction. can not be offset Entails additional penalty which increases with the number of convictions Nature Penalty o Quasi-redivisim (Art 160)  Offender has been previously convicted by final judgment  Before beginning to serve such sentence.am+dg   He has committed two or more crimes previously to which the law attaches a lighter penalty (penalty imposed by law. (RET are all under the same title.  Of the crimes of falsification. can be offset Increase is to the max period Habitual Delinquency Three are required FRETSeL Prescribes if the 10-year limit between the second and third convictions are exceeded Special. robbery. • An offender can be a recidivist and habitual delinquent at the same time. not penalty which judge eventually metes out) Does not require that the offenses be covered under the same title of the Code • Generic aggravating circumstance • Reiteracion is concerned with the penalty imposed by law. estafa. • Special aggravating circumstance for which an additional penalty is imposed which escalates with increase in the number of convictions (Art 62) o Boado says in effect a crime by itself because it has its own penalty. • Need for 3 convictions. or while serving the same. theft. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 37 . so with SeL) Recidivism Convictions Crimes covered Prescription Two are enough Must be both under the same Title of the Code None as no time limit given by law between the 1st and 2nd convictions Generic.

am+dg  He commits a felony. • Accused is serving sentence for homicide. Iisipin mo yan eh! • Kidnapping • Robbery • Estafa (intent to gain) Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 38 . That the crime be committed by means of inundation. acceptor AC. (People v. derailment of a locomotive. Reward (yeay!) 11. o No such thing as complex crime of arson with multiple homicide. Inducement must be the primary consideration in the commission of the crime for it to be aggravating. No promise before crime. • • • • • • • • Equally affects the offeror (principal by inducement) and the acceptor (principal by direct participation). Inundation. Services pwede! Mere promise will suffice. dela Serna) Dude gives money after the crime. Mayor Gordon case) Those who did not benefit from the PPR will not have his penalty increased because this AC is personal to the giver and the receiver. Intent PIVOTAL. em. • • • When is it arson. • • • • Elements: o Time when the offender determined to commit the crime o An overt act manifestly indicating that he has clung to his determination o Sufficient lapse of time between such determination and execution to allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act (People v. poison. He’ll get the max period for his second homicide. Need not be money. o Must show when the plan to execute the crime was hatched or what time elapsed before it was carried out  How much times must elapse? • Law does not give formula. murder. stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto. or promise. Promise. can not be offset • Penalizes the convict with the max period for the new felony committed. murder only. Alincastre. (US v Flores) Qualifies homicide to Mordor. just arson. No AC. See discussion of Comadre case in the special penal laws part. etc 12. Malngan) o If intent to burn the building and death is a result. (Error in personae) What happens? o Offeror no AC. Annibong) Connotes adherence to a plant to commit a crime Essence: execution of the criminal act must be preceded by cool thought and reflection of the resolution to carry out the criminal intent during the space of time sufficient to arrive a calm judgment. o Person different from intended! (People v. fire. explosion. Then kills someone in prison. then two distinct crimes. Price. (P v Rodas) Not appreciated when: o Inherent part of the crime (since already considered by the law – Art 62)  Generally. as long as it induced! Dude tells accused to kill X for P5. Case to case basis. • Recidivism inherent in quasi-recidivism. homicide/murder and arson. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price. Accused kills B. or both? (People v. o Why? These crimes are not really decided at the sput of the moment. inherent in specific intent felony. or by the use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin. That the act be committed with evident premeditation. Evident premeditation 13. o If intent to kill (and he has done so) then fire used to cover up the killing. murder. • Special aggravating. Fire. o If intent to kill and fire resorted to as means to kill. reward. Resulting homicide is absorbed.

Jeepney driver gets loko. o Must be a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor. but ends up killing a person in the house who put up some form of resistance. fraud or disguise be employed. • • • • • • • Craft: cunning or intellectual trickery or chicanery resorted to by the accused to carry out his evil design o Assuming position of authority to gain entry in a house Fraud: deceit. o Evident premeditation can be presumed only where conspiracy is directly established (prearranged). Posing as customers of a restaurant. Guillen) o But if one decided to kill a class of persons (like any Ilocano) or anybody he encounters. It did not prove that they coolly thought of murdering and kidnapping the victims. and he does. accused kills accused by hitting him behind the head. evident premeditation is aggravating. not where. but SC here did not consider the AC because was not alleged in the information of the two other accused) Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 39 . and the robbing it = craft. then this AC applies. and they decide to commit it. Craft. SC considered craft in the plan in the robbery scheme. absorbed by treachery (usually absorbed by treachery) o But can be appreciated separately if based on different facts.am+dg • • • • • Piracy in Philippine waters o Attack was made in the heat of anger. guy pretends to hire a jeep because he wants to rob it. or in a chance encounter Is there evident premeditation when he wanted to kill President Roxas. and then killing him = craft. because he did not intend to kill the other guy. manifested by insidious words or machinations Disguise: resorted to conceal one’s identity o If disguise sucked and offender was still recognized. or not take advantage of by the offender in the course of the assault If they were used to insure the commission of the crime against persons without risk to offender. That advantage be taken of superior strength.  For example. (P v. Labaguen) Abuse of superior strength or means taken to weaken the defense 15. (P v. Fraud. or means be employed to weaken the defense. threw a grenade but he ended up killing someone else? (Error in personae) No. (P v. (P v San Pedro. there may be evident premeditation if the conspiracy allowed the conspirators to ponder upon and reflect on their decision to commit a felony. no evident premeditation. That the craft. While on the jeep. If in addition to the crime of robbery. (P v. (P v Curachia) Hiding things for one’s escape under a tree does not prove evident premeditation in the crime of murder and kidnapping because of the possibility that the things could have been used for something other than the murder or kidnapping. o But if he had no plan to kill a person. cannot be aggravating These cannot be AC if did not facilitate the commission of the crime. o Inducing a buyer of cows to a visit a pen of cows. Disguise 14. 1980). where Court said that they could have just hid the stuff to facilitate their escape from the penal colony. Consider the relative strength versus the victim. Treachery in the killing of the driver. conspiracy is merely implied (instant). the accused intended to kill a person (robbery with homicide). Baldogo. Empacis) Aggravating in robbery with homicide.  If two or more persons conspire to commit a crime. Intellectual trickery. • Abuse of superior strength: where offenders intentionally employ excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the victim.) Proof of conspiracy does not imply the existence of evident premeditation. o Superiority in number does not necessarily mean this AC will be appreciated  Must still be proved that the attackers cooperated in such a way as to secure advantage from superiority of strength  There must be proof of deliberate intent to take advantage of superior strength (P v Alarcon [three guys raped a girl].

Escote (hold-up in bus. Treachery only considered as generic aggravating.  Shown through prior conduct. Antonio. employing means. where horny husband couldn’t get some from his estranged wife. using Spanish decisions. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia). impulse killings. No.  It is not qualifying because crime of robbery with homicide is a unique crime. and form were consciously and deliberately chosen. and thus should be considered as a generic aggravating circumstance. manner. or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution. where the six accused robbed palay and then murdered the victims using guns and a grenade. Vallespin) o The accused shooting the major as the former hid in his house as the latter proceeded to effect a warrant of arrest on him. Lovitania. and not at the constituent crime of robbery which is a crime against property. method or execution that would ensure the safety of the offender from any defense or retaliation of the offended party.  In this case. Antonio) The attack must be intended to facilitate the perpetration of the killing without risk to the offender from a defense that the other party might offer. the crime is not only an assault of the property. then it loses its juridical existence. Essence: swiftness and the unexpectedness of the attack o However. who died as a result. Because of P v. holduppers shot passenger-policeman with his own gun). (generic!) Can treachery be considered as qualifying in rape with homicide (to make it rape with murder)? o No. motive/relationship of the parties. Homicide used in generic sense. P v. because it’s a crime against property). 2002]) o If an AC is absorbed by another. without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make. (P v. It is neither inherent in the said crime. unexpected by the victim and without provocation on the part of the latter. o This was reiterated in P v. There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person. (P v. (P v Olivio. (P v. (P v.R. Reason? When robbery is coupled with crimes against persons. Garcia) Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 40 . Ancheta (GR 143935). when accused suddenly shot victim after a game of pusoy-dos)  That’s why chance encounters. Examples: o Killing a guy who was drunk and sleeping. or those preceded by heated altercations are generally not attended by treachery May treachery be considered in carnapping with killing of a person? Before. Homicide is used as a generic term. • • • • • • Conditions: o Employment of means. so he killed her. but also of the victims themselves. and o The means. o Mere suddenness does not by itself suggest treachery. where an Igorot woman was killed) Absorbs band Absorbed by treachery (P v. J Callejo.am+dg • • • • Not appreciated when: o Assault characterized with passion or obfuscation o Made during a quarrel o When the attack was made on the victim alternately and not simultaneously o Inherent in crime (parricide. the suddenness of the attack must be preconceived by the accused. Suyum [2 people killed a guy with a bolo G. yes. 137518. No such crime as rape with murder. methods. rape by force)  Generally accepted that the husband is physically stronger than the wife (P v Galapia. even if the second component is actually murder. o Now. The law looks at the constituent crime of homicide which is a crime against persons. said that treachery is not an element of robbery with homicide. Treachery 16. is murder because his sex and weapon gave him superiority of strength. no.) An attack made by an armed man upon a woman. manner. There is no robbery with murder. Demo. or nature of the killing (dissent in People v.

where victim was ganged up by accused while looking for his goat) o Evident premeditation. treachery doesn’t depend on success. ala Chinese mafia movie. GR: Frontal attack. o Generic in parricide and infanticide. Treachery must be proven. treachery must be shown present at the inception of the attack. Treachery is present even if the victim killed is different than the one intended to be killed. (People v. not in some subsequent stage of the attack. if ever. (P v. ay kill u) o Attacking an unconscious victim o Victim a child of tender age May treachery be considered if the wrongful act done be different from that intended by the offender? o Yes. Base.  One continuous attack cannot be broken up into parts and made to constitute separate. where a commotion occured before the stabbing. or when accused did not do any preparations Treachery may be appreciated even when the victim is warned of the danger to his person.am+dg • • • • • • • • • • • Victim hogtied before he was stabbed with icepicks (P v. and before its termination. o Special aggravating in serious physical injuries because it increases the penalty. Compare with P v. o Special in the sense that applies only to crimes against persons. Castillo. (People v Bernidad) Treachery inherent in murder by poisoning. distinct attacks so that that treachery may be injected therein  Seen in P v. • For example. accused took victim at night. Ong. and cannot be presumed. o EX: when attack is sudden and made in such a manner that insures its execution free from danger and without risk to oneself on account of what the victim might make to defend himself (P v. o Superior strength o Craft o Band  But can they be considered separately? • Yes! If based on different factual settings. Treachery may not be assumed from the mere fact that the fatal wounds were found at the back of the deceased. and yet such would not constitute treachery. or due to passion. • Moral attribute. That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act. Sufficient that it tends to this end. (higher degree given!) o Primordial qualifying circumstance: qualifies homicide into murder. where barangay captain was suddenly shot in the head after opening the door of his residence to the accused) Generic only for crimes other than killing. It can be considered even if not consummated. o Treachery must be present and preceded the commencement of the act which caused the injury complained of o After the commencement of such an attack. then tied victim to the tree in morning. walked all night in the mountains. Dela Cruz. mahjong case. an accused person may have employed means or methods which were of a treacherous character. adds disgrace to the material injury caused by the crime Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 41 . (?) o Special qualifying in serious physical injuries. Abendan) No treachery if attack is an impulse. must come from the victim. yu don’t want pay me mah maney. Hilario. Treachery absorbs: o Nighttime o Superior strength (P v Go-od. o Ignominy 17. where the victim was killed because he was wearing the target’s shirt. Consider night time and treachery separately. o Generic in less serious physical injuries. not from anyone else In a continuous aggression. and then killed him. for what is decisive is that the attack made it impossible for the victim to defend himself or retaliate The retaliation. no treachery. where the court said that evident premeditation can not be appreciated) Does it have to be consummated to appreciate treachery? o No.

There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall. can the extra (2nd or 3rd) killing be counted as an aggravating circumstance analogous to cruelty? (Keep in mind that there’s no such thing as robbery with multiple homicide/rape) o P v. Fuertes. because crime already committed Cruelty 21. Unlawful entry/breaking of wall 18. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commissions. Hence. sexual assault talks of inserting one’s penis into another’s mouth or anal orifice. However. motor vehicles: motor vehicles facilitated the commission of the crime Using a get-away car in a bank robbery: no. Court said yes. floor. • • • • • Must be done while victim was alive and the offender delighted in the suffering of the victim o Offender enjoys and delights in making his victim suffer slowly and gradually causing him unnecessary physical pain in the consummation of the criminal act Test: whether accused deliberately and sadistically augmented the wrong by causing another wrong not necessary for its commission or inhumanly increased the victim’s suffering or outraged or scoffed at his person or corpse (P v. which made it a special qualifying circumstance)  Tying a banana fiber around his junk before raping the victim (enumerated in P v. or window be broken. Aid of minors/use of motor vehicles 20. it will go under Par 19.am+dg • • • • Relates to moral suffering (whereas cruelty refers to physical suffering) Circumstance pertaining to a moral order which adds disgrace to the material injury caused to the offended party. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles. roof. where victim’s privates were severed off after he was shot. Valla) o Raping doggy-style (People v Saylan. and in the sick twisted case of P v Siao)  Rape before father or spouse (this has been amended by RA 8353. 19. door. see discussion below)  Forcing victim to exhibit herself in her full nakedness before the rape  Raping a preggy victim (this has also been amended by RA 8353. That as a means to the commission of a crime a wall. which made it a special qualifying circumstance. or window be broken. The Court did not consider cruelty because no proof that commonlaw dad enjoyed the beating) Multiple wounds not per se cruelty Chopping off head of victim – cruelty In robbery with homicide. o P v. Bacule. roof. adult punished with AC. where sodomy. But either way. robbery which resulted to 2 dead and 3 mortally wounded. Enumeration of Art 14 Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 42 . makes crime more humiliating Victim must still be alive (P v. Sitchon. Regala (2000). where accused sliced off flesh of the victim after the death. where bad common-law dad beat to death his 2-year old son for spreading his poo around the floor. • • • Qualifies theft into robbery Inherent in trespass and robbery with force upon things Par 18 will not apply when ingress is made by breaking. Cachola. was not proven by the prosecution) o Note: Glenn’s notes state that Art 266-A has changed the rulings of the doggy-style cases from rape to sexual assault. Court said no. extra killings should be appreciated as an AC. door. • • Use of o Use of o minor: minor is under 15 years old Conspiracy with minor? Minor exempt. robbery occasioned with 2 rapes. the penis was inserted into the vagina of the victims. or other similar means. (As amended by RA 5438). to appreciate ignominy. to avoid the anomalous situation where from the standpoint of the gravity of the offense. In the two doggy-style cases. But should have been discussed in cruelty. Examples: o Lighting a cigarette on the pubic area of an 8-year old victim (P v. patay na eh) o Same ruling in P v. it should still be covered under rape. not sexual assault. robbery with one killing would be on the same level as robbery with multiple killings. motorized watercraft. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry. Abdul (1999). won’t be appreciated. airships. floor.

or in connection with the crime of rebellion or insurrection. Teacher considered a person-in-authority under DDA Illegal/Unlawful Possession of Firearms and Explosives Section 1.000) shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully manufacture.' 'fire bombs.am+dg o exclusive. rape of mental 12-year old mental retardate Not used in P v. detonation agents or incendiary devices. robbery with 2 dead (hold-up cases. • • • • Qualifying aggravating. – Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to the contrary. . — The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal and a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50. is in furtherance of or incident to. acquire. or machinery. Additional rapes absorbed by robbery with rape. because prosecution used drugs under intoxication.45 and also lesser calibered firearms but considered powerful such as caliber . the use of such explosives. or attempted coup d'etat. such as rimfire handgun. and counted the rape as ignominy. as amended. disposition or possession of explosives. Belgar.357 and caliber . 2. acquire. It was not considered. disposition or possession of firearms or ammunition or instruments used or intended to be used in the manufacture of firearms or ammunition. tapos P5000 lang nakuha). 1 Presidential Decree No. additional killing not an aggravating circumstance. Unlawful manufacture. Used in P v. corporation or entity. company. [en banc decision!] P v.40.32 and other firearm of similar firepower.  Weird case: accused robbed victim. 3 of Presidential Decree No. "If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm. such violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crime of rebellion. no. That no other crime was committed by the person arrested. president. It was only a division ruling.22 center-fire magnum and other firearms with firing capability of full automatic and by burst of two or three: Provided. That no other crime was committed. is hereby further amended to read as follows: "Sec. who shall willfully or knowingly allow any of the firearms owned by such firm. director or other responsible officer of any public or private firm. or possess any low powered firearm. sedition. "The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall carry any licensed firearm outside his residence without legal authority therefor. sedition. v Regala. tool or instrument used or intended to be used in the manufacture of any firearm or ammunition: Provided. is hereby further amended to read as follows: "Sec.380 or . Special Laws Relating to Aggravating Circumstances Dangerous Drugs Act Section 25. "If the violation of this Sec. company. . Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances in the Commission of a Crime by an Offender Under the Influence of Dangerous Drugs. including but not limited to 'pillbox. or attempted coup d'etat. dispose or possess hand grenade(s).41. sale. however. ammunition. raped her and then killed her. Remedy to the anomalous situation lies with legislature. and other explosives. "When a person commits any of the crimes defined in the Revised Penal Code or special laws with the use of the aforementioned explosives. corporation or entity to be used by any person or persons found guilty of violating the provisions of the preceding paragraphs or willfully or knowingly allow any of them to use unlicensed firearms or firearms without any legal authority to be carried outside of their residence in the course of their employment. Court convicted him of robbery with homicide. 3.38 caliber and 9 millimeter such as caliber . Sec. "The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine of Thirty thousand pesos (P30. 1866. "The same penalty shall be imposed upon the owner. rifle grenade(s). Unlawful manufacture. Sec.' 'molotov cocktail bombs. manager. deal in. .' or other incendiary devices capable of producing destructive effect on contiguous objects or causing injury or death to any person. sale. a positive finding for the use of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating circumstance in the commission of a crime by an offender. such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance. 1. acquisition.000) shall be imposed if the firearm is classified as high powered firearm which includes those with bores bigger in diameter than . or insurrection. assemble. part of firearm. detonation agents or incendiary devices shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance. De Jesus (2004). Should not prevail over P. 1866. deal in.44. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 43 . and the application of the penalty provided for in the Revised Penal Code shall be applicable. dispose. Sitchon. which results in the death of any person or persons. . WRONG. acquisition." Sec. as amended.000) shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully manufacture. — The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine of not less than Fifteen thousand pesos (P15.

not even crime separate offense For unlicensed explosives. P. v Dela Rosa) o Temporary possession not covered. this AC does not apply. Interpretation of doubts must be always for the accused." • What happens? Unlicensed Firearms Homicide or Special AC murder Political crimes Absorbed Used in other Not AC. v Palaganas) What if robbery with homicide? The use of illegal firearms is not an AC. where husband shot wife.(P v.  Hence. even if its penalty is heavier than direct assault. Abdul (2000). sedition or attempted coup d'etat. Now. o The murder or homicide must be consummated. before this anomaly in the law can be used by the accused. o Take note of the phrase “that no other crime was committed. insurrection. That’s it.) It is a special AC. • • • • • • Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 44 . or in connection with the crime of rebellion. corporation or entity. RA 9516 has removed any mentioned of explosives being absorbed by political crimes or being aggravating only when death arises. "The same penalty shall be imposed upon the owner. an accused may evade conviction for illegal possession by using such weapons in committing an even lighter offense. who shall willfully or knowingly allow any of the explosives owned by such firm. like alarm and scandal or slight physical injuries. is in furtherance of. Mendoza. Comadre. If crime merely attempted or frustrated. only aggravating. (P v. o So if you grabbed the gun from an assailant to protect yourself. you’re not guilty of illegal possession. o Note that the person must first be convicted for that other crime. Take note that if unlicensed firearm is used to commit murder or homicide. (P v Ladjaalam)  Nor can use of an unlicensed firearm be used as an AC against him (since it only pertains to murder and homicide). the Court said that 8294 amended Art 14 (12) by adding the use of unlicensed explosives as an aggravating circumstance. the accused can no longer be charged with the separate offense of illegal possession of firearms. But the use of arms can be used against him  homicide with use of weapon. insurrection. qualified to murder. manager. it shouldn’t be qualifying. Can’t be offset. corporation or entity. because it says any crime in the RPC. becomes a special AC only when: o Used to commit ANY crime (RPC or SPL). or incident to. If illegally possessed. not merely generic. Remedy is with Congress. and o Someone dies. Only considered if murder or homicide. the SC 1st division affirmed the RTC ruling which considered it as an AC. de Leon. (P v Ladjaalam)  Moreover.  Use of an unlicensed explosives is aggravating. president.am+dg "If the violation of this Sec. o Dissent: Absurd. (P v. company. Sabadao) o But in People v. This is wrong. In P v. So that should include murder.” This means that if an unlicensed firearm is used in the commission of any crime (not murder or homicide since it has its own paragraph). But can be argued that the broad interpretation is wrong. company. if the crime was direct assault and multiple attempted homicide. it is merely an aggravating circumstance. o “Murder or homicide” includes parricide or infanticide. director or other responsible officer of any public or private firm. sedition or attempted coup d'etat. such violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crimes of rebellion. to be used by any person or persons found guilty of violating the provisions of the preceding paragraphs. Intent to possess firearm essential (P. there can be no separate offense of simple illegal possession of firearms. But if legally possessed.  What if no one dies? • Mickey Note: This was the ruling before RA 9516.

am+dg

• • •

In People v. Domacyong (2003), the SC ruled that that the AC of illegal possession can be considered in robbery with homicide. This is wrong. (The Court was right though for acquitting them of the separate charge of illegal possession) Security agency has license to possess firearm, guard does not. Guard uses gun to commit murder. AC? Yes, guard has no license to possess that firearm, only the employer. (Catalina v Decano, “Pursuant to Section 1 in relation to Section 5, the firearm used in an unauthorized manner shall be considered an aggravating circumstance. We are in agreement that even if the firearm used was properly licensed to the security agency, its unauthorized use by the appellant aggravated his offense.”) o Compare to Cuenca v People (1970), where security guard was charged for illegal possession. He did not know that agency did not have the proper license. He was acquitted. Does the firearm have to be presented during trial? o No! The corpus delicti is the possession of the firearm. Not the firearm. You just have to prove possession without license. You can do this through a certification from the PNP that accused did not have a license. Are paltiks covered? Yes. You have a license, but no permit to bring it out of your house, and then you bring it out. What happens? Liable ka boy. (Pastrano v CA) Accused in possession of two guns, one high-powered and the other low-powered. Can he be charged for 2 crimes? Yes! Different penalty for high-powered and low-powered eh! o What if he has 3 high-powered guns, can he be charge for 3 crimes? No, just 1 crime. Since it only has one penalty! Gun ban during election, right? Accused brings out his unlicensed firearm. Solve. o Not AC (not murder or homicide) and not even considered separate (used in other crime eh!) o Guilty of violating the gun ban. o Anti-Rape Law

Article 266-B. Penalties. Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death. 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 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: 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; When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement or penal institution; When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse, parent, any of the children or relatives within the third civil degree of consanguinity; 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; When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old; When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV) Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim; When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines of 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; When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime; and 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 crime. Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding article shall be punished by prison 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 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 Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

45

am+dg circumstances mentioned in this article.

• •

RA 8353 is found in Art 266-B of the RPC. Crime of simple rape becomes qualified, becomes RP to death. Did RA 8353 amend Art 14? o In sense, RA 8353 amended Art 14. o In 266-B, the use of a deadly weapon to commit rape is a special qualifying circumstance. It is not anymore an AC under Art 14, but is under 266-B. Alternative Circumstances

Art. 15. Their concept. — Alternative circumstances are those which must be taken into consideration as aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and effects of the crime and the other conditions attending its commission. They are the relationship, intoxication and the degree of instruction and education of the offender. The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be taken into consideration when the offended party in the spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister, or relative by affinity in the same degrees of the offender. The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into consideration as a mitigating circumstances when the offender has committed a felony in a state of intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit said felony but when the intoxication is habitual or intentional, it shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.

• • •

Always generic Denominated as AC or MC, as the case may be Relationship o Exclusively: (SADBRoSA)  Spouse  Ascendant  Descendant  Legit, natural or adopted Brother or Sistah  Relative by affinity in the same degrees • Stepparents and stepchildren included by analogy o But the step spouse and the parent of the child must be legally married.  Do they always have to be married for relationship to be considered aggravating? • No. See 266-B, where even the common-law spouse is included. However, this is considered a special qualifying circumstance. • Uncles and nieces: NO. • No other relatives by consanguinity included. (hence first cousins not included) o GR: in crimes against chastity, relationship AGGRAVATING, whether the offender is a higher or a lower degree relative of the offended party.  What about rape, since it’s now crime against persons? • Since Art 15 does not say when relationship is an AC and when it’s an MC, and rape was punishable by death, relationship should not be deemed an AC. In case of doubt, you must favor the accused, hence, it should not be considered an AC. (discussion academic since no more death penalty and because of 266-B) o But see Art 266-B which now makes relationship in rape cases a special qualifying circumstance. • However, for civil liability, consider it as an AC. o GR: in crimes against persons, relationship AGGRAVATING.  In sexual assault, relationship aggravating. (People v Abello, 2009)  But see People v Velarde (36 Phil 991), where dude struck his brother in law. Court considered it mitigating since it was for a laudible purpose. (exceptional case!) o In crimes against property, it depends.  If robbery with homicide, aggravating. (P v. Larosa)  If theft, estafa, malicious mischief, exempting because of Art 332. o In Child Abuse cases, relationship AGGRAVATING, because of Sec 31 (c) of RA 7610. 30

30

The penalty provided herein shall be imposed in its maximum period when the perpetrator is an ascendant, parent guardian, stepparent or collateral relative within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity, or a manager or owner of an establishment which has no license to operate or its license has Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

46

am+dg

When does relationship become exempting?  Art 20 (accessories exempted)  Art 247 (legally married spouse catching spouse having sex with another)  Art 332 (theft, swindling, or malicious mischief by relatives, see codal)  Sec 6, RA 9372 (relatives who are accessories in the Human Securities Act except those who profited)31  What about if theft with falsification? ABANGAN! o When should relationship not be considered?  If inherent in the crime. Like parricide. Intoxication o To be mitigating:  Actually intoxicated/drunk (self-control diminished), and  Not a habitual drinker and did not take the alcoholic drink with the intention to reinforce his resolve to commit the crime o To be aggravating:  Habitual drunk  Drank to strengthen resolve o What about in VAWC (Art 9262), can you use intoxication as a defense?  Hell no.32 But can you use it as mitigating? Dandandan! Degree of instruction or education o If crime is basically wrong, like parricide, robbery or rape, it is immaterial whether the offender is schooled or not. It’s not mitigating.  But see People v Limaco (83 Phil 85) where dude butchered his kids and he only finished grade 1. Court considered mitigating.  Also People v. Ramos where robbers killed a 96 year old man. Court considered lack of education mitigating. Both are unusual cases. o It is not illiteracy alone but the lack of intelligence of the offender that is considered. o The high degree of learning should be taken in relation to the crime committed whether his education puts him into a better position than the ordinary offenders.  Like estafa or malversation committed by a lawyer should be considered aggravating.  Slander by a medical student? AC according to P. v. Roque (40 OG 1710). Don’t know how the crime committed put him in a better position to commit the slander though. • High degree of instruction was considered AC when a judge was smoking opium. Again, don’t know how that put him in a better position. (P v. Gabud, old case!)  But if a lawyer punches an annoying person, high degree of learning should not be considered aggravating. Walang kinalaman eh. o High degree of learning should also not be considered aggravating for abortion practiced by a physician or midwife, since their skills are already inherent in that crime. o GR: Low degree of learning may be mitigating, never aggravating. o GR: High degree of learning may be aggravating, never mitigating. o

Title Two PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES Art. 16. Who are criminally liable. — The following are criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies: 1. Principals. 2. Accomplices. 3. Accessories. expired or has been revoked 31 Any person who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, and without having participated therein, either as principal or accomplice under Articles 17 and 18 of the Revised Penal Code, takes part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manner: (a) by profiting himself or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime; (b) by concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects, or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery; (c) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime, shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment. Notwithstanding the above paragraph, the penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with the single exception of accessories falling within the provisions of subparagraph (a). 32 SECTION 27. Prohibited Defense. – Being under the influence of alcohol, any illicit drug, or any other mind-altering substance shall not be a defense under this Act. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo

47

or effective authority and control as the case may be. equipment or other facility. association or juridical entity to which they are affiliated. the superiors are liable for the acts of their subordinates. The state is not prevented from penalizing a corporation for violation of a penal law. even if the crime is committed by its agents. as an instrument in the importation. trading. trustee. may a private corporation. assisted. did not take preventive or corrective action either before. Accessories are given the penalty two degrees lower than the principals. if the law provides a penalty for the corporation. Criminal Liability of Officers of Partnerships. Responsibility of Superiors. o Also applied in the Dangerous Drugs Act (Sec 30). 34 Section 10. corporation. sale. trustee. owing to the circumstances at the time. Associations or Other Juridical Entities . aircraft. v Chow Duri and Ching v Sec of Justice) o Principle applied in the Trust Receipts Law. if such vehicle. inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be liable as principal Any superior military. former officers. • For light felonies. estate administrator. inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment or who cooperated in the execution of the act of torture or other cruel. transportation or manufacture of dangerous drugs. despite such knowledge. Officers liable. corporation. accessories are not liable because the light felonies are punished with arresto menor. the commission thereof by his/her subordinates. – In case any violation of this Act is committed by a partnership. but prescribes a penalty on the officers or directors or employees.  Also in the Anti-Torture Act. (P.In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility for crimes defined and penalized under this Act. owing to the circumstances at the time. . Corporations. when Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 48 . during or immediately after its commission. 35 Section 13. abetted or allowed. a superior shall be criminally responsible as a principal for such crimes committed by subordinates under his/her effective command and control. whether directly or indirectly. manager. If he/she has knowledge of or. or officer who knowingly authorizes.35 • • • • 33 Section 30. is being committed. administration. director. or officer who consents to or knowingly tolerates such violation shall be held criminally liable as a co-principal. Or even if the crime is committed by a corporation. Principals 2. Special stuff for special students First off. police or law enforcement officer or senior government official who issued an order to any lower ranking personnel to commit torture for whatever purpose shall be held equally liable as principals. president. aircraft. the partner. as a result of his/her failure to properly exercise control over such subordinates. association or any juridical entity. There is nothing two degrees below arresto menor. even if they weren’t there  Frat/sorority advisor who was present but didn’t stop it  Anyone there who did not prevent it o Accessory  Owner of the place where the hazing occurred and who knew of the hazing and did not stop it  School authorities who actually knew and consented to it Is there command-responsibility in Philippine Law? o GR: No. .34 Keep in mind that this only applies to RA 9851. In the Anti-Torture Act of 2009.am+dg The following are criminally liable for light felonies: 1. or negligence committed by him/her that shall have led. partnership or association or other juridical entity be criminally liable? o Yes. what are the rules? o Principals:  Those who actually participated in the hazing  Parent of a frat/sorority member who owned the place where the hazing occurred. should have known that acts of torture or other cruel. The penalty provided for the offense under this Act shall be imposed upon the partner. The immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned of the AFP or the immediate senior public official of the PNP and other law enforcement agencies shall be held liable as a principal to the crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment for any act or omission. Accomplices. president. distribution. knew of it but still did not do anything to stop it  Officers. See Sec 13. vessel. manager. estate administrator.  EXCEPT: in the Genocide Law (RA 9851). or has been committed by his/her subordinates or by others within his/her area of responsibility and. Who are Criminally Liable.Any person who actually participated Or induced another in the commission of torture or other cruel. senior officers who give orders to their minions to torture people are liable as principals. tolerates or consents to the use of a vehicle. where: (a) That superior either knew or. and the Labor Code (where the license of one found to be an illegal recruiter can be revoked). inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment shall be committed. 33 What about in the Anti-Hazing Law (RA 8049). should have known that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes. director. dispensation. vessel. equipment or other instrument is owned by or under the control or supervision of the partnership. alumni who planned it. or chemical diversion. delivery. (b) That superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his/her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution.

• For as long as the conspirators perform specific acts that were coordinated pursuant to the conspiracy. enough to be held as co-principal through conspiracy. • Yes.am+dg Art. v. v. Friend homicide. They shot him at the same time. Nagkataon lang. v.  Must conspirator know every single detail of the crime? • No. (P. (P. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would not have been accomplished.  Review of conspiracy doctrines for complex crimes. what happens? • Qualifying circumstance.  Can a private person be liable for malversation? • Yes. or an act which materially executes the crime? • Active participation (dude shot the other guy). However. but different liabilities. v. (P. (P. • The general rule is that the PDP must be at the place of the commission of the crime. it’s possible that one is liable for robbery only. get pissed at some dude at a bar. 3. inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment but failed to prevent or investigate allegations of such act. Is it a complex crime? • No. moral support or exercising moral ascendancy. Look-outs who are conspirators are also principals are also principals even if they just stand outside the scene of the crime. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act. (P. same over act. v. as long as there is involvement in the planning and commission. while sick wife holds the victim’s arms. Principals. Verayon)  Rape committed by 2 or more persons. Both are liable as PDP. Even if their acts are performed in different places. • GR: in robbery with homicide. they are all principals. If husband rapes the victim. Number of crimes committed is not dependent on the number of conspirators. v.e.  But can there be PDP without conspiracy? • Yes! Two guys. By conspiring with a public official. the law does not require that PDP is there in the scene of the crime (locus ciminis). • Masterminds are principals even if they’re not actually there. they expect that it can be attended by violence. while escapee liable for evasion of sentence. wife PIC. 2. • Moral assistance to the other conspirators (other dudes cheered him on). Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 49 . Figueroa)  What about the mastermind. Napalit). Also. Hence. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it.  What do you mean by an overt act. o Private individual liable for delivery of prisoner. o But keep in mind that mere presence doesn’t make him PDP unless he gave moral assistance or exercised moral ascendancy. husband PDP. there’s consiparcy. As long as he knows his role. Flores)  Can someone not be in the scene of the crime and still be a principal? • Opowz koyah/ateh. while the others he/she has the authority to prevent or investigate allegations of torture or other cruel. when persons conspire to commit robbery. who don’t know each other. (P. Hofilenia)  Is it possible that 2 persons are conspirators but are liable for different crimes? i. but on number of victims. Husband parricide. 17. — The following are considered principals: 1. o Husband and friend killed wife. • Direct participation (PDP) o Those who materially execute the crime o Those who carried out the plan and directly participated in the execution of the crime o Usually. Masagnay)  Three guys killed a victim by all stabbing him. Only one crime of homicide. whether deliberately or due to negligence shall also be liable as principals. o EX: one desisted before the homicide was committed. does he have to commit an overt act in the execution of the planned conspiracy? • No.

Only horny robber guilty of robbery with rape. (P v Po. but liar liable as a PDI. (gulo ng crim putek. It’s imputed both on the PDI and the PDP. Masama bang magcomment? It is essential that the inducement must be the sole cause that the crime was committed. In PDI.  Moral ascendancy. however. even those who didn’t put their peepees in the victim’s vajayjays. P v Punsalan) o EX: those who endeavored to prevent the rape by overt acts will not be liable for the rape. Does PDI have to be in the scene of the crime to be liable?  No. • Crime committed must be the crime A induced B to do. Inducement must be the sole cause. PDI not liable. B killed C. Two ways of becoming a PDI:  By directly forcing another to commit a crime • Though irresistible force or causing uncontrollable fear  By directly inducing another to commit a crime • By giving a price. All are liable for robbery with rape. the PDI must intend that his inducement should be obeyed.  But totally different when they robbed. PIC liable.  Mere silence is not enough. Laohas) • If PDP does it for his own reason. Mere careless comment made by one who does not possess dominance or moral ascendancy over the offender will not make the former a PDI. B had two motives – money and revenge. Is A a PDI? • No. reward or promise? It’s a qualifying circumstance in murder. such that the PDP has no other recourse but to obey the command. they are liable even if they did not appear in the scene. Inducement (PDI) Difference between PDP and PDI: in the former. doesn’t really do the overt act. The one who made the careless comment is not even criminally liable. B killed D by mistake.) How does error in personae affect the PDI?  A induced B to kill C.am+dg o • Direct o o o o o o o o o o o are liable for robbery with homicide. and  Inducement be the determining cause of the commission othe crime by the material execution. PDP exempt. offering a reward or promise • By using words of command Requisites:  Inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime. Can the PDP be exempt. but in truth. went on their merry way. just robbery. As to the first requisite. PDI must have moral dominance over the PDP. The use or words must have actually moved the hands of the PDP.  A offered B P50 to kill C. (P. Remember price. Dumanacas 320 SCRA 600). v. (P v. • A not PDI in the killing of D. he had been wanting to kill C ever since. Same rule with robbery with rape. (P v Verseles. as long as he was induced in the first place. Clerk is not liable because he was in good faith. • Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 50 . the PDP does an overt act. What if the PDP is not paid by the PDI after the inducement? What if PDI reneged on his promise?  Doesn’t matter.  Also when the PDP can make use of exempting circumstances. but horny robber went back to rape the victim. A’s offer was not the determining cause. The reason they induce people to do their dirty work is so that they don’t have to be there in the first place. B was not paid.) May one be a PDP on the basis of a presumption?  Yes. One caught in possession of recently stolen property is presumed to be author of the theft or robbery.)  Also when a guy lies about this details to a clerk to get his residence permit. nor is running away. the PDI induces. B accepted it. B is PDP for death of D. while the PDI/PIC still held liable?  Yes! Under Article 332. (bad dude induces 8-year old kid to do some crime. is not enough.

36 • What if A does not give herself buong buo to D? Indispensable cooperation (PIC) o Difference from PDP: PIC’s act is different from the overt act of the PDP o Direct participation in the criminal design by another act which the crime could not have been committed. “ako bahala sa iyo pre. who loved C. A got to encash the check. telling him that he didn’t have any money it that account. People v Samson. • A is PDI in the death of C. 18. Pero sinunod ko lang ang puso ko. talked to employee B. (Andan v People. A as PDP.Angelu de Leon. o A killed B. His acts must have a relation to the crime of the principal. But while B was being stabbed by A. mali na rin kung mali. o Does the PIC have to be in the scene of the crime?  No. B gave it to him.  A convinced B to give him a check worth P500. even if he wasn’t there while the others were planning. Wala Na Bang Pag-ibig? (1997) @PinoyMovieQuotes Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 51 . o Can love be used to induce?  Yes. A would not have been able to achieve his criminal scheme were it not for B’s negligence.” A went to the drawee bank. Article 4 applies. C dies. C stole from B. Accomplices. not over acts for commission An accomplice agrees to contribute or to assist.” B allowed without verifying the identity. he becomes a principal His cooperation is not indispensable to the commission of the crime o His prior or simultaneous acts not indispensable for commission of crime.  A. • A liable for dolo. B as PIC. Malversation through falsification of public documents committed by a public offier in conspiracy with a private individual. “ako ay sa iyo na. Both are liable for estafa.am+dg • How does Art 4 affect the PDI?  A told B to punch C in the back. Mali ba un?" . not being included in Art. yet the PIC by culpa?  Yes.  Husband gives poison to friend to kill wife. and convinced B that she was “X. C was the lookout. People v Magsuci)  A made check payable to “X. if his act was indispensable to the crime.” D killed B. B by culpa. Husband parricide. buong buo. Private individual may be liable for malversation. o Can the PDP be liable by dolo. o Can a PIC commit a crime different from the PDP?  Yes. (P v. B is PDP. A has a paramour B. who lives in the US. if his act showed that it was indispensable to the criminal design of the PDPs. o Art. A is PIC. 17. A said. — Accomplices are those persons who. he will be liable as a PDI.  Hence. Friend homicide. B used the poison to kill C here in the Philippines. A is PDI. A told D to kill B with the promise that if he does. cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts. o The PIC need not be a party in the planning stage of a conspiracy for he may become a principal at the moment of the execution of the crime with the other principals. What’s the 36 "Ahas na kung ahas. and o Intends to take part in the commission of the crime Conspiracy not needed for he is not a principal but he supplies material or moral aid to the principal in an efficacious way o If there’s conspiracy. • • • • • An accomplice is one who: o Not being a principal o Cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts o Role in perpetration of the crime is of a minor character To be an accomplice: o Offender should take part in the execution of the crime by previous or simultaneous acts. even if he was only negligent.” A negotiated the check to C for P1m. Sandaydiego). 91 Phil 678). (P v Ramos. gives B poison to kill C.

(P v.  B – robbery with homicide. The accomplice/accessory is like a shadow that follows the PDP and not the other way around. the case against the accessory/accomplice must also be dismissed because the liability of the accomplice/accessory is subordinate to that of the PDP. (PCGG v Desierto) • BUT if the PDP is exempted from the crime. he becomes a PDP. The accomplice does not decide the commission of a crime. Principals and accomplices both know and agree with the criminal design. crime would not be committed Accomplices Inducement or utterance is not indispensable. the crime would still be committed (since principal already determined to commit the crime) Indispensable Minor Both act before or during the commission of the crime Decide that the Merely concur it crime should be in and cooperate committed in the accomplishment Authors of the Mere crime instruments who perform acts not essential to the perpetration Cooperation When acts are committed Conspiracy • • • • Mere knowledge and participation therefore do not suffice to make one a conspirator. B killed C. or that the case against the accomplice/accessory should be dismissed as well. especially if even without his participation (like a look-out). accomplices just come to know about it after. he does not conspire. The accomplice just agrees after the criminal resolution is accomplished. determination of criminal responsibility of accessory/accomplice may be determined independently of and separately from liability of PDP. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 52 . where the acts of the accused show that he shared in the community of purpose with the principals and their acts collectively demonstrate the existence of a common design. o Difference lies in the fact that conspirators know the criminal intention because they themselves have decided to commit the crime. But if the accomplice commits an act of execution. Rafael)  But if the case is dismissed against the PDP. They have that in common. May one be charged and convicted as accomplice/accessory even before the principal is charged or convicted? Should the PDP first be convicted before the accomplice/accessory be charged or convicted? o As long as the commission of the crime is proven beyond reasonable doubt. However. with or without such. it does not follow that the accomplice/accessory is exempted. When does the accomplice acquire knowledge of the commission of the crime by the PDP? o Accomplices come to know of the criminal resolution of the principals after the latter have reached a decision to commit a crime. the crime could have been accomplished. o A and B agreed to rob C. As to… Inducement Principals Without such inducement. Liabilities?  A – robbery with homicide. conspiracy becomes evident and all will be liable as principals.  Principal of the robbery of B. for such are elements also of an accomplice.am+dg • liability of C?  Accomplice to the murder of B.

or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime. By harboring. he is liable whatever crime may have been committed by the offender • By a private individual and only when the author of the crime is guilty of treason. 19. What happens to accomplice/accessory?  They can’t be charged.  One case (P v. Any person who knowingly and in any manner aids or protects pirates or highway robbers/brigands. 37 In Human Securities Act (RA 9372). • • Accessories are those who: o Have knowledge of the commission of the crime o Without having participated therein o Take part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manners:  Profiting or assisting the offender to profit from the effects of the crime  Concealing the body of the crime or effects or the instruments thereof to prevent its discovery  Harboring. abets or otherwise assists in its commission or attempted commission. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime. not being a principal under Article 17 of the Revised Penal Code or a conspirator as defined in Section 4 hereof. take part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manners: 1. such as giving them information about the movement of police or other peace officers of the government. in order to prevent its discovery. Compare this to the public officer who is guilty for whatever crime. or acquires or receives property taken by such pirates or brigands or in any manner derives any benefit therefrom. Nepomuceno) said A is a PDP. having knowledge of the commission of the crime. cooperates in the execution of either the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism by previous or simultaneous acts shall suffer the penalty of from seventeen (17) years. and without having participated therein. o PDP is dead. Arcilla) said A is a PDP. marries B who knew of A’s subsisting marriage. they can still be prosecuted. (So I guess follow the RPC definition? Since suppletory?) Are there accomplices in bigamy? o A. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 53 . while B is a PIC. Can accomplice/accessory still be charged?  Yes. provided the accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason. It shall be presumed that any person who does any of the acts provided in this Section has performed knowingly. four (4) months one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment. anyone who aids or abets piracy or robbery in the highway is considered an accomplice. 38 In the Genocide Law (RA 9851). Crime was not committed. attempt on the life of the Chief Exec. or the effects or instruments thereof. parricide. an accomplice is one who facilitates the commission of the crime.am+dg • • • • • AND dismissal of the case against the accomplice/accessory does not result to the dismissal of the case against the PDP. including providing the means for its commission. shall be considered as an accomplice of the principal offenders and be punished in accordance with the Rules prescribed by the Revised Penal Code. murder. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime. Accessories.  Another case (P v. or assisting in the escape of the principals of the crime. 38 Section 5. there is no definition of an accomplice. 37 Section 4. either as principals or accomplices. 2. murder. or any person who directly or indirectly abets the commission of piracy or highway robbery or brigandage. 39 In the Anti-Torture Act (RA 9745). 39 Section 8 (b) A person shall be criminally liable as accomplice for facilitating the commission of a crime defined and penalized in this Act if he/she aids. parricide or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime o So a private individual will only be liable as an accessory for harboring the escape of the offender for those crimes enumerated. o Take note that in the second instance. Profiting or assisting the offender to profit o Intent to gain not enough. an accomplice basically follows the same definition of the RPC. unless the contrary is proven. not an accessory. a married man. In PD 532 (Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law). 3. o PDP acquitted because crime was not committed at all. concealing or assisting the escape of the principal (see two kinds below) • By a public officer who acts with abuse of public functions. Any person who. or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive. concealing. Aiding pirates or highway robbers/brigands or abetting piracy or highway robbery/brigandage. • Art. — Accessories are those who. while B is an accomplice. the principal must have been adjudged guilty. there must have been some gain or material benefit.

40 (SPL)  Accessory to the principals in the crime of robbery or theft. Antonio. has actual knowledge or should have known subject is from robbery or theft.  Is the policeman accessory to murder or evasion? • Justice Callejo: evasion! o But isn’t the policeman a PDP or PIC? Leviste couldn’t have escaped were it not for the actions of the policeman. o If the crime is robbery/theft and one bought.) • Boado: those who assist the principal to escape maybe prosecuted under PD 1829 on obstruction of justice not as accessory but as a principal. under 3rd paragraph. sold. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 54 . what is he guilty of?  Principal for crime of fencing. (P v. It was his duty to arrest culprit and not to conceal commission of crime by silence or misleading authorities that accused was really culprit. No assisting of an accomplice. o Accused policemen witnessed the killing of the victim by co-accused. Concealing the body of the crime/effects/instruments thereof to prevent its discovery o Body of the crime/corpus delicti is the substance of the crime. • Prosecution has option of choosing what to charge. concealing. is guilty as an accessory by profiting. intent to acquire. o Accomplice Before or during the commission of the offense Knows the criminal design of the principal Provides material or moral aid in an efficacious way but not in a manner indispensable to the offense No exemption Accessory Subsequent to the commission of the offense Knows the commission of the offense Acts in the 3 ways in Art 19 Participation Knowledge Acts Liability Penalty 1 degree lower than principal’s Exempted under Art 20 and for light felonies (Art 16) 2 degrees lower than principals’ 40 Elements of Fencing: robbery or theft committed. accused acquires proceeds of robbery or theft. July 2000) o Policeman helps Leviste (serving time for murder) escape. or assisting in the escape of the principal o See notes above o The offender to be assisted must be the principal. (criminal event) and  Existence of a criminal agency as the cause of this act or result. o One who receives part of the ransom/loot from kidnapper/robbery with homicide is an accessory to the crime of kidnapping/robbery with homicide. By his acts. Made up of 2 things:  Existence of a certain act or result forming the basis of the criminal charge. accused does not participate in the robbery or theft. (ewan. or profited from the goods stolen. Policeman failed to arrest culprit and even told co-accused not to tell the other policeman. Was policeman an accessory? Damn right he was. knowing the property was stolen. The fact that a crime has actually been committed. provided that a separate information shall be prepared for the crime of obstruction. he abused his public position.am+dg • • A person who received any property from another and used it. possessed. Liabilities?  Policeman principal for infidelity. (criminal responsibility) Harboring.  Leviste principal for evasion of sentence.

Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability . as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code. There must be limits imposed by law. or relatives by affinity within the same degrees. • RA 9346 which prevents the imposition of the death penalty could be apply retroactively because it favors the accused. A and C buried B. with the single exception of accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article. What if policeman furnishes means for his brother to escape with abuse of public position? Is the policeman exempt? o Pacheco: Yes. and one gets beaten up. Congress intended it Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 55 . natural. — No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission. Exempt for acts in art 19 EXCEPT if they profit or assist the offender to profit (because no longer natural affection. • • • • • Who are exempt? (SADBroSA) o Spouse o Ascendant o Descendant o Legitimate. and adopted brothers and sisters. But it can never imposed “fine and/or imprisonment. natural. Does the pari delicto rule apply in criminal cases? o No. o Justice Callejo: I agree with that shiznit. — Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony. it compels one to conceal crimes by relatives. • • • • • Only penalties prescribed by law prior to its commission can be imposed on the offender. Retroactive effect of penal laws . Art. No imprisonment at the discretion of the court. civil liability is still dependent on the nature of heinous crimes. SC: Sister exempt. He can sue the other for physical injuries. — The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses. 21. descendants.am+dg Art. This doesn’t mean that the SC abolished imprisonment. Does estoppel apply? o No. Penalties • • Title Three PENALTIES Chapter One PENALTIES IN GENERAL Art. o Law does not distinguish between private individuals and public officers either. Estoppel does not apply against the State. o Justice Callejo: I don’t agree with that shiznit. legitimate. if two people agree to fight. ascendants. Got to preserve the cleanliness of one’s name. 20. RA 9346 will still benefit him. although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same. A killed B. Penalties that may be imposed. 22. Moreover.” Accused can’t choose how he wants to serve his sentence. Court can impose either fine or imprisonment. ties of blood constitute a more powerful incentive than call of duty (modern warfare). In BP22 and libel. told sister C to hide body of B. the classification of heinous crimes still remains because of the possibility that it will once again be revived. but because of greed). and adopted bros and sis o Relatives by affinity within the same degrees Why? Natural affection for the offender. who is not a habitual criminal. the SC issued admin orders giving preference to fine over imprisonment. (P v Bon) o Even if the offender is a habitual delinquent. The favorable judgment by the appellate court on an accused will be applied to his co-accused if it is favorable and applicable to the latter. o Even if no more death penalty.

Public censure. Court can apply even if not invoked by the accused. Destierro. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. EXCEPT  Saving clause in the repealing statute  When repealing statute re-enacts the former statute and punishes the act previously penalized under the old law What if implied repeal or repeal by re-enactment? o The first law will govern if the accused is a habitual delinquent or the favorable second law prohibits retroactivity. — The penalties which may be imposed according to this Code. Effect of pardon by the offended party . Suspension. — A pardon of the offended party does not extinguish criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of this Code. superior officials may impose upon their subordinates. Correctional penalties: Prision correccional. o While the second law will govern if favorable to the offender who is not a habitual delinquent or the law is silent as to its retroactivity. but civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is extinguished by his express waiver. 24. Reclusion temporal. 4. Not a penalty but a measure to enhance the person of a minor. What is the effect of an absolute repeal of penal laws? o Extinguishes liability of accused. This article applies equally to the RPC and to SPLs. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil laws may establish in penal form.am+dg • • • • to benefit even the habitual delinquent. Light penalties: Arresto menor.suspension of public official after filing of a valid information o VAWC (RA 9262) – offended party entitled to protection orders. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification. o See Juvenile Justice Act (RA 9344) which was applied retroactively to kids who were below 18 at the commission of the crime o Sir also mentioned VAWC (RA 9262). Penalties common to the three preceding classes: Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 56 . Prision mayor. 2. I don’t know why. Other relevant special laws: o PNP Act (RA 6975) – preventive suspension of policemen during criminal trials (Sec 41 and 47) o Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) – suspension of public official after filing of a valid information o Plunder Act (RA 7080) . 25. or accused must file a bond to keep the peace Chapter Two CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES Art. Arresto mayor. Fines and other corrective measures which. • • Amended by RA 8353 See Art 89 Art. or illness requiring their confinement in a hospital. The arrest and temporary detention of accused persons. Measures of prevention or safety which are nor considered penalties. Penalties which may be imposed. Suspension from the employment of public office during the trial or in order to institute proceedings. Art. and their different classes. Afflictive penalties: Reclusion perpetua. • • • Not imposed after trial but mere preventive measures Paragraph 2 has been repealed by the Juvenile Justice Act. as well as their detention by reason of insanity or imbecility. 5. The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions mentioned in Article 80 and for the purposes specified therein. are those included in the following: Scale Principal Penalties Capital punishment: Death. in the exercise of their administrative disciplinary powers. (repealed! See Art 9344) 3. 23. — The following shall not be considered as penalties: 1.

Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of the offense.  But under Art 74. instead of the usual 30 years. and Bond to keep the peace. they should just impose RP. the profession or calling.  Court can not extend the DQ or suspension if it merely follows the principal penalty. Suspension from public office. but to the eligibility of parole and for purposes of computing the 3-fold rule. it may be reduced by 1 or 2 degrees o After imprisonment of 30 years. or hold office. and for applying Art 50-57 Death penalty o Can no longer be imposed. Dual personality of disqualification and suspension o It can be a principal penalty  Temporary DQ – 6 years. Civil interdiction. elective or appointive. with accessory penalties of death and cannot be pardoned until after 40 years. penalty is 2 degress higher. court imposed 40 years of RP. o Different from life imprisonment  Except in PD 818 Syndicated Estafa: max of 30 years. theft is punishable by RT. with accessory penalty of death. Suspension o All prisoners whether under preventive detention or serving final sentence. then it becomes RP. but RA 9346 did not abolish it since the Constitution allows it to be imposed in heinous crimes Reclusion perpetua o Court should use proper RPC nomenclature o Indivisible penalty (RP. 1 day to 40 convict) years) No accessory penalties With accessory penalties o In P v Canales. 1 day to 6 years o It can also be an accessory penalty  Follow the period of the principal penalty. There 30 years doesn’t refer to the duration of RP. cannot practice their profession or engage in any business or occupation. which is death. even if there is special aggravating or two mitigating. No occasion to mete this penalty on a convict. Payment of costs. Indemnification. it will not be affected • But if PRIVILEGED mitigating. Accessory Penalties Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. But for qualified theft. o Compare with bond for good behavior (Art 248 for grave and light threats only). This is also the reason why he can’t be pardoned before 40 years. public censure)  Not affected by mitigating or aggravating circumstances  Impose penalty in its entirety. Failure to post Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 57 . Perpetual absolute or special DQ. • • • • • • General characteristics of penalties in the RPC: o Graduated according to ceverity o Divided into periods (except RP) o Classified into principal or accessory o Deemed imposed for consummated crimes o Imposed against the principal offenders o Max imposable for the particular crime to which they are respectively prescribed o Understood to be a degree for purposes of lowering the penalty under the ISL. the right to vote and be voted for. while in detention. 1 day to 12 years  Suspension – 6 months. How come?  Under Art 309. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification.am+dg Fine.  Court may not impose “30 years of RP”. Bond to keep the peace is a principal penalty yet there is no crime in Book II which imposes it. with accessory penalties provided by RP for 30 years Life Imprisonment Reclusion Perpetua SPL RPC No fixed duration (through lifetime of Fixed duration (20 years. eligible for pardon. privileged mitigating. if the next higher penalty is death. can’t extend beyond principal penalty.

Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. if he is convicted. It’s considered a light felony and prescribes in 2 months. It’s considered correctional. 29. — Duration of Penalties Art. it is given to the State. unless such person by reason of his conduct or some other serious cause shall be considered by the Chief Executive as unworthy of pardon.am+dg • What o o o bond for good behavior means destierro for accused. — Any person sentenced to any of the perpetual penalties shall be pardoned after undergoing the penalty for thirty years. and prescribes in 10 years. — The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be from twelve years and one day to twenty years. The duration of the other penalties shall be computed only from the day on which the defendant commences to serve his sentence. — The duration of the penalties of prision mayor and temporary disqualification shall be from six years and one day to twelve years. and a light penalty if it less than 200 pesos. It’s completely independent. Bond to keep the peace. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of imprisonment. Arresto mayor. how do you reconcile Art 9 and Art 26? o Art 9 should prevail when the issue is prescription of crime. Reclusion perpetua. or light penalty . Fine is for vindication! Accused can use his cash bail bond to pay his fine. Reclusion temporal. 27. If the offender be not in prison. What if exactly P200. Fine is not a substitute for imprisonment. It is only meant to ensure his attendance during the process.000 pesos but is not less than 200 pesos. When afflictive. — A fine. — The bond to keep the peace shall be required to cover such period of time as the court may determine. 26. if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners. Arresto menor. with the full time during which they have undergone preventive imprisonment. except when the penalty of disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty. suspension and destierro shall be from six months and one day to six years. except when suspension is imposed as an accessory penalty. Law does not prohibit him from using his cash bail bond to pay his fine. — The duration of the penalties of prision correccional. If he appeals.000 pesos. suspension. time from arrest What if he was in prison? o From finality of date of conviction. Prision correccional. whether imposed as a single of as an alternative penalty. Computation of penalties. a correctional penalty. Chapter Three DURATION AND EFFECTS OF PENALTIES Section One. Art. — If the offender shall be in prison. in which case. if it does not exceed 6. the term of the duration of the penalty consisting of deprivation of liberty shall be computed from the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities for the enforcement of the penalty. are some instances when a lesser offense absorbs the graver offense? Rebellion (RT) absorbs murder (RP) Forcible abduction (RT) absorbs illegal detention of a woman (RP) Slavery involving kidnapping of a person (PM) absorbs kidnapping (RP) Art. o But Art 26 should prevail when the issue is prescription of penalty. and destierro. in which case its duration shall be that of the principal penalty. • • How do you compute the penalty if the accused is not in jail during trial? o If absent during trial. When they are recidivists or have been convicted previously twice or more times of any crime. 28. — Offenders who have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty. its duration shall be that of the principal penalty. Failure to post bond to keep the peace means detention for accused. and Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 58 . • • • • • Read in conjunction with Art 38 (order of payment of pecuniary liabilities) Fine is not given to the complainant. correctional. except in the following cases: 1. if it exceeds 6. he has to wait until the finality of conviction. — The duration of the penalty of arresto mayor shall be from one month and one day to six months. shall be considered an afflictive penalty. — The duration of the penalty of arresto menor shall be from one day to thirty days. Art. the term of the duration of the temporary penalties shall be computed from the day on which the judgment of conviction shall have become final.

or the right of suffrage. Moreover. profession or calling. then sentenced to imprisonment and fine. rp or death. The deprivation of the public offices and employments which the offender may have held even if conferred by popular election. 214. • In these cases. Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period equal to or more than the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet terminated. Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is destierro. No. — The perpetual or temporary special disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage shall deprive the offender perpetually or during the term of the sentence. Preventive imprisonment applies to destierro.O. according to the nature of said penalty. The deprivation of the office. 32. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office formerly held. It usually occurs if the accused is unable to post bond. 2. profession or calling affected. In case of temporary disqualification. he shall be credited in the service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment. employment. 33. 1970). The deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any popular office or to be elected to such office. If accused is preventively detained during trial. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage. If the convict is sentenced to life imprisonment. and the exercise of the right of suffrage shall disqualify the offender from holding such office or exercising such profession or calling or right of Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 59 . Section Two. director can determine if child still has to stay in rehab. profession or calling shall produce the following effects: 1.am+dg 2. The disqualification for the offices or public employments and for the exercise of any of the rights mentioned. such disqualification as is comprised in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article shall last during the term of the sentence. If he’s served the max time. o If the child has served the full time. 4. the offender shall not be permitted to hold any public office during the period of his disqualification. If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners. Effects of the penalties of suspension from any public office. See Juvenile Justice Act. Art. June 17. of the right to vote in any popular election for any public office or to be elected to such office. profession or calling. 30. 2. he shall be released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification. Sec 41 – Any form of physical restraint imposed on a child in conflict with the law including his community service or commitment to a rehab center shall be considered as preventive imprisonment. (As amended by Republic Act 6127. o He can’t get full credit if:  He’s a recidivist or a habitual delinquent (P v Gana)  He fails to surrender voluntarily upon being summoned for the execution of the sentence. he can get full credit for the time he spent there if he voluntarily agrees in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed on convicts. may he be released? No. The disqualification for holding similar offices or employments either perpetually or during the term of the sentence according to the extent of such disqualification. — The penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification for public office shall produce the following effects: 1. 31. He has to pay the fine first. • • • • • • • Preventive imprisonment is not a penalty. he is still entitled to benefit from this provision. — The suspension from public office. July 10. 1988). o If the minor juvy is imprisoned pending trial. or the crime charged is not bailable. 3. — The penalties of perpetual or temporal special disqualification for public office. What if the accused is detained. he’ll only be credited 4/5 of the time spent. if the same is under review. he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily. Art. Art. — Effects of the penalties according to their respective nature Art. he shall be credited with the service of the sentence with the full time in which the child was preventively imprisoned. and he has already served his sentence but has not yet paid the fine. (As amended by E. file a petition for habeas corpus.

or otherwise to deposit such amount in the office of the clerk of the court to guarantee said undertaking. but such penalty is of fixed duration. He can’t be ordered to serve subsidiary imprisonment for failure to pay pecuniary liability (reparations). — Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender during the time of his sentence of the rights of parental authority. Pecuniary liabilities. 35. Court must EXPRESSLY state that subsidiary imprisonment shall be served in case of insolvency. • • Convict can prepare a will since it’s not a donation inter vivos Read codal na lang. 2. beginning with the first final judgment. indemnification. and then to the government (fine and costs) If guilty of several offenses. • • • • Subsidiary imprisonment can only be imposed if the accused is penalized with a fine (either fine only. April 21. 38. Subsidiary penalty. if for a light felony. the same shall be met in the following order: 1. The fine. 3. of marital authority. Fine is actually a pecuniary penalty. Should the person sentenced fail to give the bond as required he shall be detained for a period which shall in no case exceed six months. 4. either as to the person or property of any ward. • • • • Order for pecuniary liability: reparation. What are included. Art. to present two sufficient sureties who shall undertake that such person will not commit the offense sought to be prevented. if for a light felony. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by confinement in a penal institution. Effects of bond to keep the peace. Since it is a penalty. — In case the property of the offender should not be sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary liabilities. 5.am+dg suffrage during the term of the sentence. no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit. subject to the following rules: 1. the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months. he cannot pay it. from the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve. or fine and imprisonment) and because of insolvency. (As amended by RA 5465. 39. When the principal imposed is higher than prision correccional. or amounts not subject to schedule. Art. The cost of the proceedings. he shall remain under confinement until his fine referred to in the preceding paragraph is satisfied. Art. the period of duration of the bond. First to the offended (reparation and indemnification). Subsidiary penalty not proper in the following cases: o Principal penalty imposed is more than PC (6 years and 1 day or more) o Principal penalty is other than prison sentence which is not of fixed duration Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 60 . follow the chronological order of the dates of final judgment rendered against the convict. 1969). fine. according to Art 25. The court shall determine. of the right to manage his property and of the right to dispose of such property by any act or any conveyance inter vivos. 3. he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of one day for each eight pesos. is he shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony. but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of the sentence. if the culprit shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony. 34. or guardianship. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or arresto and fine. whether they be fixed or unalterable amounts previously determined by law or regulations in force. — It shall be the duty of any person sentenced to give bond to keep the peace. Civil interdiction. o It is not an accessory penalty that follows the principal penalty as a matter of course. Art. and that in case such offense be committed they will pay the amount determined by the court in the judgment. the convict. 37. but he can serve for pecuniary penalty (fine). and shall not exceed thirty days. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine. and shall not exceed fifteen days. The person suspended from holding public office shall not hold another having similar functions during the period of his suspension. Order of payment. — Costs shall include fees and indemnities in the course of the judicial proceedings. 2. and in no case shall it continue for more than one year. Art. shall continue to suffer the same deprivations as those of which the principal penalty consists. and no fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the prisoner. costs. Indemnification of consequential damages. The reparation of the damage caused. 4. during the period of time established in the preceding rules. — If the convict has no property with which to meet the fine mentioned in the paragraph 3 of the nest preceding article. according to its discretion. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him. Cost.

o But see P v Subido where the court allowed him to choose. (P v Singson) o In case of bribery. 40. Art. Prision mayor. unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. the court has no jd to order the forfeiture or destruction of such. otherwise. 45. Art. Its accessory penalties. 43. Art. The tool/instrument must belong to the accused himself. Arresto. from the right to follow a profession or calling. The offender shall suffer the disqualification provided in the article although pardoned as to the principal penalty. like BP 22 or possession of illegal firearms. unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. if the duration of said imprisonment shall exceed eighteen months.am+dg • • • • o Subsidiary penalty is not expressly stated in the sentence o Sentence imposed does not include fine o Convict has the means to pay the fine Follow the actual penalty meted out in determining whether subsidiary imprisonment can be applied. He has no choice but to pay the fine. If it belongs to someone else and he has no Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 61 . 44. if the total of the penalties exceed 6 years. unless they be property of a third person not liable for the offense. Its accessory penalties. Supposing the accused is charged with 2 or more offenses and there was just 1 decision which convicted him of all the charges. Hence. Death. when it is not executed by reason of commutation or pardon shall carry with it that of perpetual absolute disqualification and that of civil interdiction during thirty years following the date sentence. Art. How do we determine the 6-year limit? o The 6-year period shall be based on the total duration of the penalties imposed by court (after joint trial) based on the 3-fold rule under Art 70. • When the penalty imposed is RP as a penalty next higher in degree. and that of perpetual absolute disqualification which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the principal penalty. Its accessory penalties. — The death penalty. and that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage. Justice Callejo doesn’t agree with that. — The penalty of prision mayor. who has money. (P v Bago) Art. the tools/instruments must be presented to the court as evidence. 42. Not the penalty prescribed by law. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal. — The penalty of prision correccional shall carry with it that of suspension from public office. o But before the court may do so. there could be no difference at all between RP when imposed as apenalty next higher in degree and when it is imposed as a penalty fixed by law. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of the crime. — Every penalty imposed for the commission of a felony shall carry with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools with which it was committed. • • Only the trial court who convicted the accused may order the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools used in the crime. — Penalties in which other accessory penalties are inherent Art. Otherwise. the money used may be forfeited in favor of the state. 41. shall carry with it that of temporary absolute disqualification and that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage which the offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the principal penalty. Section Three. choose not to pay the fine and go to jail instead? No. unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. Their accessory penalties. Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government. — The penalty of arresto shall carry with it that of suspension of the right too hold office and the right of suffrage during the term of the sentence. unless such accessory penalties have been expressly remitted in the pardon. but those articles which are not subject of lawful commerce shall be destroyed. Its accessory penalties. no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed. Prision correccional. the accessory penalty shall be that under Art 40 but the offender shall not be given the benefit of the provision of Art 27 until 40 years have elapsed. even if the penalty for each of the crimes is less than 6 years. — The penalties of reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal shall carry with them that of civil interdiction for life or during the period of the sentence as the case may be. Subsidiary imprisonment also applies to SPL. Can the accused.

or delito complejo: when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other Art 48 is actually for the benefit of the offender under the pro reo principle. Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony is general terms. all the members thereof are not unanimous in their voting as to the propriety of the imposition of the death penalty. the Supreme Court shall render its decision per curiam. or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other. 48. 47. The court may order destruction nonetheless if the items are contraband. o Take note of the word ‘felonies. Sec 20 – those subject of the crime. o If you want to charge someone with forcible abduction with rape. Penalty for complex crimes. Only one information must be filed charging the complex felony. Art. 46. the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed. — The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be imposed under existing laws. you have to allege the elements of both forcible abduction and rape. except in the following cases: 1. unless belonging to the third persons without involvement of the crime. the light felony shall be treated as a separate offense. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 62 . — The penalty prescribed by law for the commission of a felony shall be imposed upon the principals in the commission of such felony. the same to be applied in its maximum period. In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed. — When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general. When the guilty person be more than seventy years of age. • • • • There are two kinds of complex crimes under Art 48 o Compound crimes. Dangerous Drugs Act.  The felonies resulting from the single act must be felonies in the RPC. o The reason for the single penalty is that the basis of the felony is the singularity of the act. Elona) Applicable also to SPL. 2. In the eyes of the law. still forfeited o Proceeds of sale or disposition of the property forfeited must be used to pay the expenses incurred in the proceedings including cost of the proceedings Chapter Four APPLICATION OF PENALTIES Section One. Compound crimes (delito compuesto) o Committed when a single act results to two or more grave or less grave felonies  Either two or more grave felonies  Two or more less grave felonies  One or more grave and one or more less grave  If a light felony likewise resulted.am+dg • • • involvement in the crime. A separate information must be filed for them. o Since even if two crimes are committed. — Rules for the application of penalties to the persons criminally liable and for the graduation of the same. or delito compuesto: when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies o Complex crime proper. (P v. • RA 9346 has proscribed the imposition of the death penalty and in its steal shall be RP or life imprisonment as the case may be without any right of the offender to avail of the benefit of parole under Act 4103. can be ordered forfeited in favor of the government. This applies to both compound crimes and complex crime proper. unless some member or members thereof shall have been disqualified from taking part in the consideration of the case. Art. the ISL. o EXCEPTION to the third person rule – if the items are beyond lawful commerce. which shall be signed by all justices of said court. including proceeds derived from drug trafficking and even money and assets acquired in violation of the DDA. When upon appeal or revision of the case by the Supreme court. although it is in the maximum.’ This precludes application to ordinances and SPLs. the law only punished the offender for one. there can be no such declaration. For the imposition of said penalty or for the confirmation of a judgment of the inferior court imposing the death sentence. it shall be understood as applicable to the consummated felony. Art. in which even the unanimous vote and signature of only the remaining justices shall be required. the two crimes stem from one criminal intent – this is less perverse in the crimes of the law compared to punishing him for two crimes.

Man threw a grenade. Man threw hand grenade to a group of people. Accused guilty of one count of rape and two counts of sexual assault.  Hence. • Estafa and illegal recruitment • Estafa and BP 22 • Rape and sexual assault (SPL) (P v Abay) o Accused inserted his fingers. Complex rime of murder and serious physical injuries. as in the following: o Stealing of 13 cows (P v Tulos) o Taking two roosters on one occasion (P v de Leon. Some died. (P v. The offender may be charged and convicted for both crimes. Both wife and baby died.am+dg o o o o o o o o o If punishable under the RPC and an SPL (or an ordinance). and then his penis to victim’s vagina. convicted of just one theft) o Raped niece at 10 am. One count rape. when accused inserted private organ and raped the victim. some didn’t. however. Homicide with attempted homicide. so Art 48 will apply to it. killed his father and his father’s friend. Does it have to be consummated? No. killed some people. SC has used the single act test. Not a complex crime. (P v Obrique. Governor was performing duties and was killed by accused. even if same place and same occasiln. separately without double jeopardy. Andaya) What if there was no intent to kill. (P v Magalona) What if only one victim. Complex crime of parricide with murder. • The SC.  Example: dude stabbed wife who was 7 months pregnant. (P v Nequia) Can be either dolo or culpa  Person was convicted for reckless imprudence resulting into homicide and destruction of property (P v de los Santos) • Reckless imprudence is a felony. but there abberatio ictus or error in personae. can the crime committed by the accused be a complex crime?  Yes. 11 am. look at intent) What is the test to determine whether Art 48 will apply – single criminal act or single criminal intent/impulse?  Law is clear: SINGLE ACT. (P v Avaron wherein the prosecutor argued that there should be as many crimes of rape as to the number of pushes and pulls) [don’t remove it!]  Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 63 . Supposing one wants to kill another with treachery. killed two people. Art 48 applies even to praeter intentionem. (P v Intong)  Hence. Complex crime of direct assault with homicide. dela Rosa) • Can it be two different crimes. has applied the single impulse test in some cases. one count sexual assault. and still complex? Yes. when the accused inserted his penis into the vagina of the victim and made several push and pull movements but without removing his organ until he reached orgams. Examples:  Man threw a grenade. the bolo hit both the victim and the person behind him. will Art 48 apply? Yes. Complex crime of murder with attempted murder. She sustained less serious physical injuries in her vagina. 12 pm at same grassy area. Art 48 will not apply. injured others. but two people died because of the acts of the accused. (P v. the accused is guilty of only one count of rape. Complex crime of multiple murder with double frustrated murder and double attempted murder. (P v Patrolla)  Accused forcibly inserted his penis into the vagina of the woman.  Dude stabbed victim with a bolo. (P v Paycana. NOT complex crime. will Art 48 apply?  Yes. Jr) BUT remember: NO COMPLEX CRIME of ARSON with MURDER (P v Malngan. Complex crime of double murder. Complex crime of rape with less serious physical injuries. Complex crime of parricide with unintentional abortion. SC said no complex crime. and then inserted his finger twice into the vagina at the same place and same occasion. This is a unique case) For cases of RAPE. (P v Comadre)  Man threw a pillbox.

Convicted of 3 charges of falsification because 3 documents falsified. SC has used the single act test. Not continuing. SC held 7 counts of rape. kidnapping with homicide – these are all special complex crimes. the number of crimes of kidnapping will depend on the number of persons kidnapped. • No single criminal intent because each time he committed the crime was on different days. he is guilty for every month he fails to account. (P v Villanueva)  Accused falsified the roll of attorneys by including 3 names.  There as many crimes as the vouchers falsified. What test will you apply to BP 22?  Single act. kidnapped victim was raped. • Kidnapping with murder. Is he guilty of 3 counts of falsification per document? NO. if accused kidnaps 5 kids. Hence. inserting his finger once a day.  Accused committed estafa by withdrawing from account. Accused did not intend to commit just one crime. Sollano)  Accused raped his daughter every day for a week against the wishes of his wife. Each constitutes separate crimes. Even if it is in the same situs. For cases of FALSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS. there were as many crimes of estafa as the number of times the accused fraudulently collected from the victims. (P v Escoton) For cases of KIDNAPPING. making it appear that the relatives-vendors were still alive at time of sale.  Even if the persons were kidnapped on the same occasion and place. how many counts of rape?  Accused raped his niece once a day. • Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 64 . he was animated by separate criminal intents on each occasion. • As far as the lot buyers were concerned. naturally. Even if the homicide or rape was a mere afterthought. the accused swindled both the lot buyers and the corporation he was working for. there are as many crimes of estafa as the number of days he failed to account. SC has used the single act test. For cases of LIBEL. (P v.am+dg o o o o One count of rape = putting it in. it depends on the obligation to account. the crime was committed. o For example. SC DIVISION said only 1 crime of kidnapping with homicide. if you take it out. Moment that withdrawal was made. this would still be the name of the crime. (Gamboa v CA)  In Ilagan v CA.  There are as many crimes of estafa through forgery as there are acts. (P v Gonzales)  Accused falsified three money orders separately. he falsified each document in 3 modes. If he is obliged to account every month. (P v Laranaga) • Hence. If he is obliged to account everyday and he fails to do so. kidnapping with rape. (P v Segovia)  Important case: relatives died leaving 3 parcels of land. Can’t apply criminal intent test because it’s mala prohibita and a SPL. Convicted of 5 counts of rape. Number of counts of estafa = number of withdrawals. (P v Rimurin [?]) o Strange case: 7 persons kidnapped and two died. Only one crime of falsification of public document even if there were multiple modes. forging and making it appear that the relatives were still alive. Accused executed three separate deeds of sale on the same day. SC held as many crimes of rape and sexual assault equal to how many times he inserted his organ and finger. there was as many crimes of kidnapping as there were persons. and not complex crimes under Art 48. (Lastrilla v Granda) • Accused did it by antedating. In other words. • As far as the corporation is concerned.) • Same rule for kidnapping for ransom. then put it back in. How many special complex crimes? As many as the number of persons kidnapped and raped. SC has used the single act test. number of bouncing checks equals number of violations of BP 22. for 16 consecutive days in different locations. he is liable for 5 counts of kidnapping. Not a complex crime. (Justice Calljo does not agree with this. Each constitutes separate crimes. (P v Gorbida)  Accused raped victim 5 times in the same place and on the same night.

one of accused-appellants exclaimed in frustration after the ambush: “My gosh. element na siya) • Hence. But the Court only did this because it was impossible to determine who killed who. there is only one crime of libel. it was seen as a single act. hence. the Court held the accused guilty for multiple murder with multiple frustrated/attempted murder. the following are not complex crimes: o A crime to conceal another because such is not to commit but to conceal the other crime o A crime which is an element of the other for in that case. two people get hurt.  According to Justice Callejo. Thus. if there was only one publication. followed J Makasiar. we were not able to kill all of them. So. First. single act of pulling trigger. there are as many offenses as the numbers of victims of the bullets fired. but I can’t find it.  Hence. using the single impulse test. saying it should be single act. Art 48 will apply. Dalmacio [2002. On the contrary. will place it under Art 48.am+dg • One count of libel doesn’t depend on persons damaged. what is the rule?  According to Boado and Reyes. but the correct test is the single act test. the two crimes comprise one complex crime o The first crime must be a necessary means to commit the other  The first is committed to insure and facilitate the commission of the next crime  The first is necessary but not indispensable (because if indispensable. where the victims were killed after a series of gunshots (armalites fired successively). but on the number of publications. there is no evidence that accused-appellants intended to fire at each and every one of the victims separately and distinctly from each other. wherein the accused shot once and killed two people with one bullet. the Court convicted them all under the complex crime of multiple murder. • On MR. they constitute only one crime in the eyes of the law as well as in the conscience of the offender. separate crimes for each victim. The accused were guilty of as many crimes as how many people were injured. the evidence clearly shows a single criminal impulse to kill Marlon Tugadi’s group as a whole. o For cases of malversation  If there are different kinds of property malversed in one occasion. we were not able to kill all of them. there’s only one crime • Accused malversed money and personal property in one occasion  If on different occasions. the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed in its maximum period. the SC finally said that Art 48 talks of a single act. the single act of pulling the trigger. Art 48 won’t apply. (P v Lawas)  When there were several killings inside Bilibid prison. In that case. even if lots of bullets are fired. • This was also the case of P v Pacificador. The court applied Art 48 for two reasons. their individual acts done in pursuance of that purpose are looked upon as a single act. the Court reneged. Although several independent acts were performed by the accused in firing separate shots from their individual firearms.” Where a conspiracy animates several persons with a single purpose. or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other.  So with the use of one bomb and lots get injured. but lots of bullets fired. Art 48 will apply.” In a complex crime. then different counts of malversation Complex crimes proper (delito complejo) o These are felonies where one offense is necessary to commit another. o For automatic weapons. in view of the special characteristic or mechanism of automatic machine guns. division].” 85 empty armalite shells were recovered in the scene of the crime. (P v Aquino) o For crimes against persons. although two or more crimes are actually committed. applying the single impulse test (P v Pingcalin) • J Makasiar dissented. The accused showed a single criminal impulse when he said “oh my gosh. when with one thrust of a knife. et al. And there was a single criminal impulse which showed a conspiracy to kill. speaking of complex crimes. it was not possible to determine who among them actually killed victim Rolando Tugadi. the accused ambushed a jeepney with their armalites and other guns. it was impossible to determine who killed the victim. 48 of The Revised Penal Code which.41 • Justice Callejo also cited the cases of Manghoy and Mision.  Even if two or more persons were subject to libel. the court has applied both. the former shall  41 We fully agree with the lower court that the instant case comes within the purview of Art. Moreover. giving rise to a single complex offense Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 65 . Do not apply the single impulse test. the act of execution.  When the constabulary officers killed around 50 Maranaws with guns.  In P v Pineda. • See P v Sanidad [2003 en banc]. provides that when “a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies.

Hence. It was the means to commit estafa. o Where the intent is really to commit the second crime but the first act although also a crime is incidental to the commission of the second crime. (Justice Callejo)  Boado breaks it down: • Intent to rape: simple rape. and the victim was brought to a place to rape her. (P v Almanzor) • Victim was abducted and brought to a grassy area near her house. The second and third rapes were separate crimes. no. hence you can’t have a complex crime. Only rape. Hence. Hence. damage is already an element of falsification of private documents. through falsification by culpa. The employee of the bank did not bother to check since they were friends. (Samson v CA)  Is there falsification through culpa of private documents? No. yes. complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. No complex crime of abduction with rape but only simple rape) o Special complex crimes Is it possible that one crime is dolo and the other is culpa?  Yes. Court said forcible abduction with rape. • It depends on the number of women he abducted. • Intent was to kidnap for ransom. Abduction still absorbed by rape. (P v Abarquez)  Main determinant is the specific intention of the offender. Now. official. (P v Laranaga)  Can there be forcible abduction with acts of lasciviousness? • Before. (Taking away a woman to rape here. or commercial documents. (P v Garcia. because as stated earlier. More on forcible abduction with rape vs simple rape:  If the intent was to rape. The employee’s failure to ascertain the identity of payee was falsification by culpa. you can have a complex crime of estafa through falsification of public. then forcible abduction with rape was consummated. official or commercial documents does not have the element of damage. (P v Godinez)  But when is it not absorbed?! • Abducted to place 100m from her house. accused cashed check on behalf of an impostor. Taking incidental. One damage cannot give rise to two crimes. how’s that? • He’s guilty of two counts of forcible abduction with rape.  What if there was abduction (which was necessary to commit the rape) and then there were three rapes done after? • The moment the first rape was committed. and then raped both. then other rapes file separately. but after rape was committed as an afterthought: special complex crime of kidnapping with rape Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 66 . and not the distance. there is no complex crime of estafa thru falsification of private documents. • Intent to take woman against her will with lewd designs: forcible abduction with rape (information must allege lewd designs) o If multiple rapes. Abduction is absorbed by rape. one complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. no complex crime.  Compare with kidnapping with rape which is a special complex crime (not a complex crime under Art 48). (P v Mojerada) • Victim brought 600m from her house where she was raped.am+dg o o be absorbed by the latter (like trespassing which is an element of robbery) o A crime which has the same element as the other crime committed  Estafa and falisfication of private documents have the same element of damage. and then two separate simple crimes of rape. Abduction was absorbed. The taking is merely incidental. She was raped. estafa. Hence. • But in falsification of public. P v Caraang) • But isn’t abduction a continuing crime? Dandan!  If accused abducted two women at the same time.

 Trespass to dwelling with murder • Art 48 won’t apply because trespass already absorbed  Political crimes with common crimes • Art 48. • Important to know the motive to determine if absorbed or not. she can be guilty of estafa through falsification of a public document. torture shall be treated as a separate and independent criminal act whose penalties shall be imposable without prejudice to any other criminal liability provided for by domestic and international laws.42 • Art 48 won’t apply. Only one crime is committed. The distinction it seems is academic. or as a means in the conduct or commission thereof. Torture as a Separate and Independent Crime. (P v Hernandez) • Even SPLs are absorbed in political crimes. Art 332 will no longer apply. The exemption will not lie. not by persons-in-authority. kidnapping with murder/rape/homicide (special complex crimes)  Kidnapping and torture • Torture considered special aggravating (torture here done by kidnappers. the effect being the same – that only one crime is considered committed. however. but are not complex under Art 48:  Usurpation of private property with violence • Art 48 won’t apply because the law provides a penalty for it already. Always a separate crime. he lumped them together as delito continuado. distinguished between the two. but only one killed her. both will still be liable for rape with homicide (even if only one killed the victim)  Special complex crimes under the Anti-Torture Act • Torture with homicide • Torture with rape • Torture with mutilation • Torture with sexual abuse • Torture against kids  Plunder • Art 48 won’t apply.am+dg • • • Give examples of crimes that look complex. o Will Art 332 (exempting relatives from certain crimes) still lie in complex crimes?  No. If the accused swindles her brother-in-law by falsifying a public document. Common crimes are absorbed in political crimes. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 67 .  Robbery with homicide/rape/intentional mutilation.  May torture by persons-in-authority be absorbed? • NEVER. Boado.  Malicious procurement of search warrant through perjury • Art 48 won’t apply because Art 129 already provides a penalty for it. but only bear a semblance to complex crimes. Break muna. if 2 people raped victim. besides complex crimes and compound crimes. you ain’t gonna be bringin yo shiznat to these crimes. Hence the relative will be liable of estafa through falsification of a public document. Composite Complex o 42 Section 15. Okay. hence commentators usually discuss them together) o Composite crimes or special complex crimes o Continued crime or delito continuado o Continuing crimes or transitory crimes  NOTE: Justice Callejo did not distinguish between continued crimes and continuing crimes. . Composite crimes o those which in the eyes of the law are treated as single indivisible offenses although in reality are made up of more than one crime. Other crimes are merely predicate crimes.Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be absorbed by any other crime or felony committed as a consequence. If constitutive of a complex crime. • It can’t absorb other crimes either. In which case. so Anti-Torture Law won’t apply)  Stuff under 266-B • They have their own penalties • For rape with homicide. what are the other kinds of plurality of crimes where a single penalty is imposed? (Take note that these aren’t covered by Art 48.

If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower than that corresponding to the one which the accused intended to commit. kidnapping. (Not sure about the facts. this is where the single criminal impulse test applies o Single larceny rule: taking of several things belonging to the same or different owners at the same time and place constitutes but one larceny. the lower penalty for homicide will be imposed. See Santiago v Garchitorena. o May also refer to any offense which is continuing in time  Rebellion  Squatting  Violation of BP 22  Abduction. in which case the penalty provided for the attempted or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in its maximum period. parricide was committed. It’s an extenuating circumstance.am+dg Combo of offenses is fixed by law Penalty is specific Even if there are more than one count of the component crime (like several rapes). 2. — In cases in which the felony committed is different from that which the offender intended to commit. he mortgaged two lots to secure the debt. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 68 . the penalty for the former shall be imposed in its maximum period. while the other counts are treated as separate crimes (forcible abduction with rape. • • Applies to error in personae only. o Does NOT apply to formal/instantaneous crimes. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher than that corresponding to the offense which the accused intended to commit. but for the most serious offense in the max period If more than one count of the crime forming part of the complex crime. still just one composite crime to be charged • • If light felony accompanies the commission of the composite offence. they have to be filed separately Art. such is absorbed Continued crimes (delito continuado) o Impelled by a single criminal impulse but commited by a series of overt acts at about the same time in about the same place and all the overt acts violate one and the same provision of law o Apparently. Each sexual act is an offense. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime committed is different from that intended. went to the aunt to borrow instead. the following rules shall be observed: 1. It is consummated and exhausted (like the accuseds) at the time of carnal union. The rule established by the next preceding paragraph shall not be applicable if the acts committed by the guilty person shall also constitute an attempt or frustration of another crime. The titles were falsified. illegal detention o Applicable to SPL? Yes. Combo is not specified but generalized Not specific. 3. and mortgaged the same two lots. where Court said that Miriam’s signing the order to allow 32 aliens to stay was a continuing crime. Mallari wanted to borrow P300k. Doesn’t apply to pareter inentionem (covered by Art 13). the first shall be complexed. Same if vice versa. 49. with subsequent rapes charged separately) Light felonies are not absorbed. Continuing Crime o One where any of the elements of the offense was committed in different localities such that the accused may be indicted in any of those localities o Only considered as one crime. the penalty corresponding to the latter shall be imposed in its maximum period. if the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter offenses. o Applied in:  Theft of 13 cows at same place and time  Theft of 6 roosters belonging to 2 different owners from the same coop and at the same time  Mallari v People. but the lender only wanted to give him P150k. Adultery is not a delito continuado. She was charged only once. o If intended crime was homicide but due to error in personae. just copied from Glenn). There was delito continuado even if there were two transactions because there was a single criminal resolution leading to a single crime of estafa throught falsification of public document.

58. Art. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of attempted crimes. inclusive. 60. — Those accessories falling within the terms of paragraphs 3 of Article 19 of this Code who should act with abuse of their public functions. Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain accessories. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in an attempted crime. 59. having in mind the social danger and the degree of criminality shown by the offender. the court. -1. 52. where do we start counting from. and that of absolute temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less grave felony. 55. prison correccional. 53. it does not apply if the intended crime is a light felony. 50. 54.am+dg • Doesn’t apply to abberatio ictus (covered by Art 48) Art. — The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a frustrated felony. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in consummated crime. So death penalty cannot be imposed anymore. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories to the commission of a consummated felony. shall suffer the additional penalty of absolute perpetual disqualification if the principal offender shall be guilty of a grave felony. — The penalty next lower in degree than prescribed by law for the frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the commission of a frustrated felony. Art. How to apply. Exception to the rules established in Articles 50 to 57 . death or rp? o In People v Bon (2003). Penalty to imposed upon accomplices in a frustrated crime. 56. o If accomplice and consummated. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of a frustrated crime. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an attempted crime. Art. Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit the crime because the means employed or the aims sought are impossible. shall impose upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 500 pesos. — A penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principals in an attempt to commit a felony. — The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principal in a frustrated felony. — The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the attempted felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the attempt to commit a felony. of this Code shall not be applicable to cases in which the law expressly prescribes the penalty provided for a frustrated or attempted felony. — The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a consummated felony. hence reclusion temporal. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated crime. Art. — The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for an attempt to commit a felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in an attempt to commit the felony. 57. Art. 51. Art. For Art 59 (impossible crimes). Art. court counted from RP. in degrees Principal Consummate d Frustrated Attempted Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 69 . penalty is reclusion perpetua. Art. or to be imposed upon accomplices or accessories. right? If the penalty prescribed by law is death. -3. — When the person intending to commit an offense has already performed the acts for the execution of the same but nevertheless the crime was not produced by reason of the fact that the act intended was by its nature one of impossible accomplishment or because the means employed by such person are essentially inadequate to produce the result desired by him. Art. o If accomplice and attempted. — The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the consummated shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the commission of a consummated felony. — The provisions contained in Articles 50 to 57. Art. • • • As provide by -1 -2 law Accomplice -1 -2 -3 Accessory -2 -3 -4 Sample: simple rape.

5. but always in the proper period. However. if possible. the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods. the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the respective graduated scale. of this Code. 2. the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately following the minimum prescribed and of the two next following. Art. the courts. Art. the penalty of death is still the penalty to be reckoned with. the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed. otherwise from the penalty immediately following in the above mentioned respective graduated scale. or from any other personal cause. shall impose corresponding penalties upon those guilty as principals of the frustrated felony. the penalty next lower in degrees shall be that immediately following that indivisible penalty in the respective graduated scale prescribed in Article 71 of this Code. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 70 . 4. (b) Upon a fourth conviction. in P v Sarcia (2009) and P v Jacinto (2011). Jacinto was by division. Read with Art 71. When in the commission of the crime. the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the medium and minimum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum period of that immediately following in said respective graduated scale. corresponding to different divisible penalties. Sir didn’t really discuss this anyway. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one or two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of another divisible penalty. shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals. and upon accomplices and accessories. — Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and habitual delinquency shall be taken into account for the purpose of diminishing or increasing the penalty in conformity with the following rules: 1. 5. the total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender. When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in some manner not especially provided for in the four preceding rules. the proper imposable penalty for the accused-appellant is reclusion perpetua. when the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of several periods. or of attempt to commit the same. both cases were for qualified rape by a minor on a minor. Rules for graduating penalties.43  So start counting from DEATH. or from his private relations with the offended party. 62. 4. 61. for purposes of determining the proper penalty because of the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority. when the offender is a minor under 18 years. which shall be taken from the penalty prescribed. Effect of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency. Habitual delinquency shall have the following effects: (a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided by law for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods. or in the means employed to accomplish it. or as accomplices or accessories. An organized/syndicated crime group means a group of 2 or more persons collaborating. 3. and (c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction. according to the provisions of Articles 50 to 57. the penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances. shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein. are to be imposed upon persons guilty as principals of any frustrated or attempted felony. — For the purpose of graduating the penalties which. in appreciating the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority (Art 68) court counted from DEATH. Sarcia was en banc. accomplices and accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof. proceeding by analogy. Thus. advantage was taken by the offender of his public position. the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period. The maximum penalty shall be imposed it the offense was committed by any person who belongs to an organized/syndicated crime group. • • Just read the codal for the rules. 1 (a).am+dg o HOWEVER. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which are included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty. Notwithstanding the provisions of this article. confederating or mutually helping one another for puposes of gain in the commission of any crime. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender. inclusive. or of one or more divisible penalties to be impose to their full extent. 43 Under Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code. shall in no case exceed 30 years. the following rules shall be observed: 1. When the penalty prescribed for the felony is single and indivisible. The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act. in conformity herewith. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of two indivisible penalties. 2. 3.

2. 4. the court shall reasonably offset those of one class against the other according to their relative weight. according to the result of such compensation. it shall be applied by the courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances that may have attended the commission of the deed. Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. hurto. is within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries. according to the number and nature of such circumstances. he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. • • Inoperative because of RA 9346. according to whether there are or are not mitigating or aggravating circumstances: 1. whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed of three different penalties. Art. so with relationship Take note that this article made the following SPECIAL aggravating circumstances: o Abuse of public position o Committed by organized/syndicated crime group  CAN NOT BE OFFSET by generic mitigating If policeman uses his gun to murder someone. each one of which forms a period in accordance with the provisions of Articles 76 and 77. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present. o Cannot be affected by generic mitigating circumstances. 63. estafa or falsification. Now. o However. robo. the greater penalty shall be applied. When only a mitigating circumstances is present in the commission of the act. — In cases in which the penalties prescribed by law contain three periods. 3. the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one another in consideration of their number and importance. in the period that it may deem applicable. the court shall determine the extent of the penalty according to the number and nature of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and the greater and lesser extent of the evil produced by the crime. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended the commission of the act. for the purpose of applying the penalty in accordance with the preceding rules. o Passion and obfuscation will only apply to the one who was actually enraged.am+dg For the purpose of this article. 69). 3. 4. 64. a person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent. the courts shall not impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by law. it can be affected by privileged mitigating circumstances (like Art 68. 6. When the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance. When in the commission of the deed there is present only one aggravating circumstance. the use of his gun is a special aggravating circumstance under the Illegal Firearms Law. they shall impose the penalty in its maximum period. • • • • This article gives the rules on when not to consider stuff as aggravating: o If element of the crime (included by the law in defining the crime and prescribing its penalty) o Inherent in the crime Additional rule: those which are caused by the moral attributes of the offender or his relations with the offended or any other personal causes will only affect the offender having such attribute. Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating circumstances. • Rules when penalty is divisible: o No aggravating and no mitigating – medium o Mitigating only – minimum o Aggravating only – maximum o Some of both – offset. Within the limits of each period. Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods. then apply the above rules Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 71 . 5. the court shall impose the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law. the following rules shall be observed in the application thereof: 1. only RP is indivisible. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances are present. When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance. When an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of the act. the lesser penalty shall be applied. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances. the lesser penalty shall be applied. in its maximum period. they shall impose the penalty in its minimum period. but can his abuse of position be appreciated as well? Art. In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible penalties. 2. the court shall observe for the application of the penalty the following rules. 7.  Privileged mitigating always considered whether divisible or indivisible penalty. they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period. — In all cases in which the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty.

 Lower to PM. Rule in cases in which the penalty is not composed of three periods. and during trial he pays the value of the check. • Lack of requisites in performance of lawful act – AM max to PC minimum (if grave). 65. the court can choose between those bounds. Then use the 2 remaining mitigating to find the period. 66. o Art. not the offended party. AM min to med (if less grave) Art.am+dg • • • • • • Two or more mitigating with no aggravating – lower the penalty one degree but always in the proper period If there are a lot of aggravating but no mitigating. (See Art 75) Fine cannot be used as substitute penalty to imprisonment. o Imposed by law: RT. can the penalty be lowered by one degree? NO. — In cases in which the penalty prescribed by law is not composed of three periods. can’t lower penalty by degree. Penalty of the fine goes to the State. not only to the mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Art 64 is important in the ISL because the modifying circumstances are first considered in the determination of the maximum penalty in the ISL. and forming one period of each of the three portions. the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon the culprit if he shall have been guilty of a grave felony. Penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen years of age. Penalty to be imposed when not all the requisites of exemption of the fourth circumstance of Article 12 are present. should he still be convicted for a fine? Yes. They can’t just fine the accused for P1m. 67. in fixing the amount in each case attention shall be given. you use two to lower the penalty by one degree. if of a less grave felony. • • • • • • • • • Study with Art 75. Increase or reduction in the degree of the fine. can the courts increase the penalty to one greater than that prescribed by law? NO. You can’t use the remaining two to lower the penalty by another degree.— When all the conditions required in circumstances Number 4 of Article 12 of this Code to exempt from criminal liability are not present. If the accused drew and issued a check but it bounced. as long as there was aggravating. court must be judicious. If after offsetting (meaning there was aggravating and mitigating). If the accused is sentenced to RP and has two generic mitigating circumstances (and no AC). but more particularly to the wealth or means of the culprit. it can’t leave to the accused the choice on what penalty he wants to serve.) o Just divide the period given by 3 to get the min. The LAW can prescribe the following: o Fine only o Fine AND imprisonment o Fine OR imprisonment The court can’t give the accused a penalty of fine OR imprisonment. • This is applied when the law prescribes a penalty not composed of three periods (like robbery in an uninhabited place whose penalty is PC in medium to maximum. med and max. If the law states “fine of P50k to 150k”. (Only a privileged mitigating can give a penalty lower for an indivisible penalty) This article doesn’t apply to Art 365 because modifying circumstances don’t apply to quasi-offfenses. and arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods. (sir won’t ask to compute ISL) o Art 64 is not considered in the determination of the minimum penalty in the ISL. — In imposing fines the courts may fix any amount within the limits established by law. Imposition of fines. dividing into three equal portions of time included in the penalty prescribed. Penalty of fine is independent from penalty of imprisonment. The remaining two are used to find the period. court must impose the definite fine. the courts shall apply the rules contained in the foregoing articles. the following rules shall be observed: Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 72 . The court has to make a choice. Art. If the law states “fine not less than P15k”. 4 mitigating. — When the offender is a minor under eighteen years and his case is one coming under the provisions of the paragraphs next to the last of Article 80 of this Code. If there are four mitigating circumstances. The minimum penalty in the ISL must be within the whole range of the penalty next lower in degree. Art. there are 2 mitigating left. 68. penalty can NOT be lowered by one degree since it’s an indivisible penalty. that’s it. So PM minimum. If the law states “fine of P15k”.

o If between 15-18 and acted with discernment. Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed.45  After the suspension. . the case shall proved. 46 Remember: even if minor criminally exempt. 46 SEC. in view of the number and nature of the conditions of exemption present or lacking. Art 69 makes it privileged mitigating because the penalty is lowered by one or two degrees. RA 9344 does not distinguish. should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty 44 SEC. — A penalty lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable by reason of the lack of some of the conditions required to justify the same or to exempt from criminal liability in the several cases mentioned in Article 11 and 12. the following rules shall be observed: In the imposition of the penalties. but basta lowered degree) to PC. but always lower by two degrees at least than that prescribed by law for the crime which he committed. but always in the proper period. criminally exempt. Confinement of Convicted Children in Agricultural Camps and other Training Facilities. lower by another degree (Art 64) to AM. a discretionary penalty shall be imposed. Section 4 of Presidential Decree No.  If child is determined to be criminally liable and the diversion program is not consented to. is hereby amended accordingly Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 73 . 42. As long as child was under 18 when he did the crime. o Like life imprisonment in illegal recruitment. o Then since there are 2 generic mitigating. — When the culprit has to serve two or more penalties. • • • • • Art 69 applies when the majority of requisites for justifying and exempting circumstances are present. (P v Candelario) Art. who is not exempted from liability by reason of the court having declared that he acted with discernment. maintained. o Hence. What if not majority of requisites. The courts shall impose the penalty in the period which may be deemed proper. he can also be granted probation. Probation as an Alternative to Imprisonment. Lower to minimum period. 40. For this purpose. o Lower by two degrees (don’t know why 2. there must be unlawful aggression for Art 69 to apply. 70. o Suspension can apply until he’s 21 (discretion of court). (People v Narvaez) Art. like isa lang? Ordinary mitigating only. 45 SEC. Can’t be lowered by 1 or 2 degrees. supervised and controlled by the BUCOR. the court shall determine whether to discharge the child in accordance with this Act. be made to serve his/her sentence. he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so permit otherwise. Even if minor is charged with a heinous crime. o Unlawful aggression in self-defense is a condition sine qua non to justify the act. otherwise known as the "Probation Law of 1976". in coordination with the DSWD. . incomplete self-defense (for example) can’t be offset by any aggravating circumstances. Remember.am+dg 1. 2. or if the child in conflict with the law has willfully failed to comply with the conditions of his/her disposition or rehabilitation program. Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable. Paragraph 2 modified. 968. after conviction and upon order of the court. in an agricultural camp and other training facilities that may be established. suspension of sentence will apply. 69. (P v Garcia) What if SPL which does not follow nomenclature of RPC? Minor not entitled to privileged MC. he is still civilly liable. The child shall enjoy the privileged mitigating circumstance under Art 68 but shall nevertheless be entitled to suspension of sentence whether or not he is no longer a minor. But incomplete self-defense.The court may. . the child in conflict with the law shall be brought before the court for execution of judgment. plus two generic mitigating circumstances. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of age. If said child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years of age while under suspended sentence. in lieu of confinement in a regular penal institution. 44  After the suspension. Example: guilty of homicide. place the child on probation in lieu of service of his/her sentence taking into account the best interest of the child. criminally liable. provided that the majority of such conditions be present. child may serve his sentence in agricultural camps or other training facilities. • • • • • • • Paragraph 1 implied repealed by Juvenile Justice Act. o As long as below 15 or 18 (without discernment).A child in conflict with the law may. however. 51. and upon application at any time. or to extend the suspended sentence for a certain specified period or until the child reaches the maximum age of twenty-one (21) years. Recommendation of social worked not binding on the court. to order execution of sentence. Successive service of sentence . he is still entitled to suspension of conviction. the order of their respective severity shall be followed so that they may be executed successively or as nearly as may be possible. after it shall have convicted and sentenced a child in conflict with the law. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court. that for incomplete self-defense to be privileged mitigating. RT.If the court finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon the child in conflict with the law have not been fulfilled.

7. Public censure. For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding paragraph the respective severity of the penalties shall be determined in accordance with the following scale: 1. • • • • • • • • • • When a convict is given multiple sentences. What are the penalties that can be served simultaneously with penalty of imprisonment? o Perpetual absolute DQ o Perpetual special DQ o Temporary absolute DQ o Temporary special DQ o Suspension o Public censure o Fine o Bond to keep the peace o Civil interdiction o Confiscation and payment of costs Destierro can NOT be served simultaneously with imprisonment. unless it is in excess of 40 years in which case the culprit shall serve only 40 years. How to compute: o Step 1: get the most severe penalty meted out as listed in Art 70 o Step 2: Multiply the duration of that by 3 o Step 3: Add the duration of all the different sentences o Step 4: Compare the results of 2 and 3 o Step 5: Accused to serve the lesser period. o Such max period shall not exceed 40 years. Limitations on the service of sentence: o 3-fold rule: maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than 3-fold of the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him. Reclusion perpetua. 8. In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties (pena perpetua) shall be computed at thirty years. the right to vote and be voted for. 9. the maximum duration of the convict's sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him. 2. No other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period. The imputation of the 30-year duration to reclusion perpetua in this article is only to Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 74 . Suspension from public office. (see boado for example) If ISL is imposed. Death.am+dg or penalties first imposed. 3. the penalties shall be served successively in the order of severity as prescribed above. and 12. 10 Temporal absolute disqualification. Arresto mayor. Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years. o You can’t serve 3 reclusion perpetuas simultaneously. whichever is lower. 11. 5. Otherwise. 6. it shall not be more than 40 years. Whatever is lower between the total penalties and 3x the most sever.  i. Destierro. if penalties of different degrees of severity are imposed. (As amended). or should they have been served out. Perpetual absolute disqualification. starting from the most severe. Hence they should be served successively. Prision mayor. Prision correccional.e. Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding. the maximum penalty is three times the most severe or the total of the penalties imposed. the three-fold penalty is three times the indeterminate sentence also. (Director v Bagtas) If the penalty is complex. the right to follow a profession or calling. 4. Do not include subsidiary imprisonment penalty in the computation of the 40 years because subsidiary liability is uncertain if it will even happen. Arresto menor. he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties permits simultaneous service of sentence. Reclusion temporal. use the max period in computing because the max period is the most severe.

o Why? Because when the convict is pardoned. 5. 71. How long should he remain in jail? 40 years. o This article deals with SERVICE of sentence. Public censure. 43 and 44 of this Code. Arresto mayor. — In the case in which the law prescribed a penalty lower or higher by one or more degrees than another given penalty. 2. Article 70 doesn’t strictly apply. the right to follow a profession or calling. it must be understood that the accessory penalties are also imposed upon the convict. 1 1. 41. Successive nga eh. 72. The judge should NOT refrain from imposing the correct penalties even if these would exceed the limitation of penalties in this article. — Whenever the courts shall impose a penalty which. 42. Perpetual absolute disqualification. 4. Preference in the payment of the civil liabilities. Fine. Graduated scales. which must be in the decision for it to be imposed. he should still serve the other sentences meted on him. destierro follows arresto menor in the degree of severity. Reclusion temporal. Prision mayor. — In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty higher than another given penalty. 74. Art. SCALE NO. Does Art 70 apply to SPL? Art. 5. all RP. Why? o Arresto mayor is imprisonment or complete deprivation of liberty. — Provisions common in the last two preceding sections Art. without specially designating the name of the former. o The court should impose the correct penalties even if these will amount to more than the lifetime of the prisoner. carries with it other penalties. o What sentence should accuse serve first? Parepareho lang naman eh. Section Three. even if not indicated in the decision. the penalty next lower than arresto mayor is destierro. Prision correccional. • Note that in Art 71. Justice Callejo: Follow order of docket numbers. shall observe the following graduated scales: SCALE NO.am+dg • • • • o serve as a basis for determining the convict’s eligibility for pardon or o for the application of the three-fold rule in the service of multiple penalties. The courts. Destierro. Arresto menor. in applying such lower or higher penalty. 73. Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain cases. Death. They must not be judged by the duration of each of these penalties. 4. Presumption in regard to the imposition of accessory penalties. according to the provisions of Articles 40. if such Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 75 . not with imposition. o Compare this with subsidiary imprisonment. by provision of law. not arresto menor. Suspension from public office. 2. Fine. the right to vote and be voted for. • The accessory penalties are automatically imposed because of this article. Accused is convicted for 10 counts of rape. 9. Destierro is considered lighter than arresto mayor. Temporal absolute disqualification 3. but by degree of deprivation of liberty involved. Public censure. But in Art 70. 2 1. 3. 10. Destierro means banishment for a specified length of time. 7. (P v Conte) The second sentence should only commence after the 1 st. beginning with the first in order of time. The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in which is comprised the given penalty. 8. the rules prescribed in Article 61 shall be observed in graduating such penalty. Reclusion perpetua. Art. 6. — The civil liabilities of a person found guilty of two or more offenses shall be satisfied by following the chronological order of the dates of the judgments rendered against him.

that’s the range of the fine. 4 mon ths and 1 day to 4 year s and Max 17 year s. 2 year s. 8 mon ths. and the maximum in the manner shown in the following table: TABLE SHOWING THE DURATION OF DIVISIBLE PENALTIES AND THE TIME INCLUDED IN EACH OF THEIR PERIODS Pen altie s Recl usio n Tem por al Full Peri od 12 year s and 1 day to 20 year s Mini mu m 12 year s and 1 day to 14 year s and 8 mon ths 6 year s and 1 day to 8 year s. 10 year s and 1 day to 12 year s. 4 mon ths and 1 day to 20 year s Prision mayor. the medium. Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one or more degrees . • • • • This deals with the reduction of fines when the felony is attempted or frustrated or when imposed upon the accessory or the accomplice. forming three periods. changing the minimum. 76. 6 mon ths and 1 day to 6 year s. 4 year s.) o You’ll end up with 200-300. ¼ of the max amount is taken. respectively.am+dg higher penalty should be that of death. it has to be reduced by two degrees. the same penalty and the accessory penalties of Article 40. In no case shall the penalty computed be lower than the minimum prescribed by law. — The legal period of duration of divisible penalties shall be considered as divided into three parts. o Fine by law is 200-600. 75. but are made proportional. Legal period of duration of divisible penalties. suspension and destierro 6 year s and 1 day to 12 year s. it shall be increased or reduced. For each degree. The same rules shall be observed with regard of fines that do not consist of a fixed amount. that’ll be your penalty. then subtract it twice from 600. o Example. 2 mon ths and 1 day to 6 year s. by one-fourth of the maximum amount prescribed by law. the minimum. absolute disqualification and special temporary disqualification Prision correccional. Sir said he won’t ask this. without however. — Whenever it may be necessary to increase or reduce the penalty of fine by one or more degrees. (REPEALED) Art. for each degree. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 76 . Art. (So get ¼ of 600. 1 day to 17 year s and 4 mon ths 8 year s and 1 day to 10 year s. shall be considered as the next higher penalty. 6 mon ths and 1 day to 2 year s and 4 mon Med ium 14 year s.

When the penalty is a complex one composed of three distinct penalties. Arre sto may or 1 mon th and 1 day to 6 mon ths. Fro m1 to 30 day s. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 77 . and the most severe the maximum period. Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have one of the forms specially provided for in this Code. and other incidents connected therewith. 2 mon ths and 1 day to 4 mon ths. law says penalty is RT. he can’t be subjected to public censure (P v. the relief which they may receive. nor with any other circumstances or incidents than those expressly authorized thereby. the periods shall be distributed. • • • No penalty to be executed except by virtue of final judgment If the person is acquitted. 1 to 2 mon ths. the time of its performance. and their diet. • For example. The regulations shall make provision for the separation of the sexes in different institutions. The respective provisions of this section shall also be observed if the insanity or imbecility occurs while the convict is serving his sentence. 77. 11 to 20 day s. applying by analogy the prescribed rules. In addition to the provisions of the law. Arre sto men or 1 to 10 day s. unless the penalty shall have prescribed in accordance with the provisions of this Code. o Guardian can be appointed to administer the property. the relations of the convicts among themselves and other persons. When and how a penalty is to be executed . PM medium. 4 mon ths and 1 day to 6 mon ths. PC minimum. he can not be compelled to serve sentence because no such thing as 25 years of RP.am+dg ths. RT will be max. the special regulations prescribed for the government of the institutions in which the penalties are to be suffered shall be observed with regard to the character of the work to be performed. PM. • • If the convict becomes insane or an imbecile: suspend service of sentence and send to hospital for treatment But civil liability shall still be enforced in spite of insanity and imbecility. each one shall form a period. his sentence shall be executed. the lightest of them shall be the minimum the next the medium. so civil liability can be imposed. — In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of three distinct penalties. — General Provisions Art. the provisions of the second paragraph of circumstance number 1 of Article 12 being observed in the corresponding cases. If at any time the convict shall recover his reason. Chapter Five EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES Section One. 79. the execution of said sentence shall be suspended only with regard to the personal penalty. Art. • If you forget the periods. 21 to 30 days . Art 80 – repealed. or at least into different departments and also for the correction and reform of the convicts. Suspension of the execution and service of the penalties in case of insanity. — When a convict shall become insane or an imbecile after final sentence has been pronounced. and PC. Remedy is writ of habeas corpus. just follow the steps: o Step 1: get the duration of each period o Step 2: divide that by 3 o Step 3: add the quotient to the beginning of each period starting with the minimum Art. — No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a final judgment. Abellera) If the judge sentence accused to 25 years of RP. A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that prescribed by law. 78. 2 mon ths.

he shall be anaesthetized at the moment of the electrocution. or in the house of the defendant himself under the surveillance of an officer of the law. be furnished such assistance as he may request in order to be attended in his last moments by priests or ministers of the religion he professes and to consult lawyers. 81. Notification and execution of the sentence and assistance to the culprit. for the purpose of study and investigation. by the physician and the necessary personnel of the penal establishment. — The court shall designate a working day for the execution but not the hour thereof. In this last case. — The execution shall take place in the penitentiary of Bilibid in a space closed to the public view and shall be witnessed only by the priests assisting the offender and by his lawyers. not exceeding six. • • • Memorize this. If the person under sentence so desires. Destierro is a correctional penalty (6 months – 6 years) Violation of destierro will give rise to evasion of sentence (Art 156-159). Destierro. when the court so provides in its decision. if he so request. In no case shall the burial of the body of a person sentenced to death be held with pomp. the corpse of the culprit shall. — Any person sentenced to destierro shall not be permitted to enter the place or places designated in the sentence. 89. During the interval between the notification and the execution. endeavoring so far as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the person under sentence during electrocution as well as during the proceedings prior to the execution. Art. 82. or of the care of his descendants. reclusion temporal. Otherwise. Reclusion perpetua. be turned over to the institute of learning or scientific research first applying for it. but before sunset. and the execution shall not take place until after the expiration of at least eight hours following the notification. the Director of Prisons shall order the burial of the body of the culprit at government expense. reclusion temporal. of the administration of his property. — Execution of principal penalties. the death sentence shall be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties provided in Article 40.am+dg Section Two. 88. Art. — The penalties of reclusion perpetua. prision correccional and arresto mayor. Art. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. 84. Suspension of the execution of the death sentence . — The death sentence shall not be inflicted upon a woman within the three years next following the date of the sentence or while she is pregnant. upon the completion of the legal proceedings subsequent to the execution. 85. Art. as well as in order to make a will and confer with members of his family or persons in charge of the management of his business. and by his relatives. Extinction of Criminal Liability Title Four EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY Chapter One TOTAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY Art. 86. 83. — The penalty of arresto menor shall be served in the municipal jail. When and how the death penalty is to be executed. Art. 87. prision correccional and arresto mayor. granting permission to be present thereat to the members of the family of the culprit and the friends of the latter. in so far as possible. • Consti policy: no excessive fines or cruel or inhuman punishment shall be imposed. Art. — Unless claimed by his family. and such designation shall not be communicated to the offender before sunrise of said day. nor within the radius therein specified. The death sentence shall be executed under the authority of the Director of Prisons. — The death sentence shall be executed with reference to any other and shall consist in putting the person under sentence to death by electrocution. provided that such institute shall take charge of the decent burial of the remains. taking into consideration the health of the offender and other reasons which may seem satisfactory to it. and by such persons as the Director of Prisons may authorize. — Criminal liability is totally extinguished: Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 78 . the culprit shall. Arresto menor. Place of execution and persons who may witness the same. Art. prision mayor. nor upon any person over seventy years of age. prision mayor. shall be executed and served in the places and penal establishments provided by the Administrative Code in force or which may be provided by law in the future. which shall be not more than 250 and not less than 25 kilometers from the place designated. Provisions relative to the corpse of the person executed and its burial. Art.

o Marriage must be valid. as provided in Article 344 of this Code. 7. Effect of pardon by the offended party . o But to extinguish civil liability. Nobody will be there to serve the penalty. Art. its effect. By prescription of the crime. and Art 344 (seduction. 23. acts of lasciviousness.am+dg 1. Service of sentence o Period during which convict was not inside prison walls cannot be regarded as service of sentence. 4. Pardon. By the death of the convict. A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence. as manifested by Senator Enrile’s statement in SB 950. concubinage. (Upon Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 79 . — A pardon of the offended party does not extinguish criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of this Code. (P v Bayotas)  Whether asserted in a criminal action or in a separate civil action. By prescription of the penalty. Art. PIC. 36. By the marriage of the offended woman. unless such rights be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon. 5. as to the personal penalties and as to pecuniary penalties. It can be executed against the estate. By service of the sentence. 2.  So even if the convict is already serving sentence. — A pardon shall not work the restoration of the right to hold public office. death must be before final judgment. then it survives. 3. but civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is extinguished by his express waiver. or the right of suffrage. • • • • Crim liability is extinguished by: o Death of convict (pecuniary liability extinguished if death occurs before final judgment) o Service of sentence o Absolute pardon o Amnesty o Prescription of crime o Prescription of penalty o Marriage of the offended woman under 266-C and 344 o Express repeal of penal law Death of convict extinguishes criminal liability at any stage of the proceeding. 6. abduction) • Art 266-C: VALID marriage between offender and offended party in rape or sexual assault will extinguish o criminal liability and o even the penalty already imposed. adultery. If void. o The civil liability extinguished by death before final judgment includes duty to restitute the proceeds of the crime. (de Guzman v People)  Final judgment – judgment beyond recall. By amnesty. civil liability ex-delicto is extinguished by the death of the accused while is his conviction is on appeal. and an accomplice. no extinguishment of crim liability. o But if civil liability predicated on a source other than the delict. looks to the future and is not retrospective  Civil liability NOT extingiushed o Pardon by offended party does not extinguish criminal liability. This was the intent of the Senate when they removed the original proviso stating that the co-principal. Pardon o Does not look back. Service of sentence must be in a penal institution.  EX: Art 266-C (valid marriage between offender and victim in rape). marriage with the victim will extinguish his criminal liability. will the marriage between the victim and the PDP extinguish the liability of the other accused?  Yes. liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment. which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects. o If there are 3 accused: PDP. etc are not benefited. By absolute pardon.

as if no offense ever happened o Public act. etc. Pardon by the President  Private act of the President and must be proved by the accused  Must be done after final judgment  Does not extend to cases of impeachment  Absolute pardon by the President restores all civil rights. except in Art 266-C and Art 344 Before institution of criminal action GR: doesn’t extinguish but can be waived by offended party President Any crime When Civil liability After final judgment Doesn’t extinguish civil liability • Amnesty o Act of grace. relieves the offender not only from suffering the penalty but obliterates the effects of the conviction as if the act were not criminal o Usually given to political offenders o Looks backward. Does the amnest cover other members of the AFP (“any person who may have been involved in the rebellion?”)  Yes. is the pardon of the parents of the victim without the concurrence of the minor victim herself effective?  Boado says no. does the accused go back to prison?) o In rape cases. The latter msut specify the crimes to which amnesty is extended. But the amnesty does not include any crime not covered by the proclamation itself. Amnesty Generally to political crimes and offenders Obliterates the effects of conviction as if the act were not criminal Concurrence Pardon Generally to ordinary crimes and offenders Relieves the offender of penalty but the effects of conviction stay Concurrence not Application Effect Congress Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 80 . • What is the effect of an affidavit of desistance? Simply an additional ground to buttress the accused’s defenses. not the sole consideration that can result in acquittal.am+dg o declaration of the court that it was void. abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense itself. EXCEPT • Right to suffrage • Right to hold public office o These two rights must be specifically granted by the pardon of the President Pardon by General rule Offended Party Can’t pardon. Kapunan. Offended minor must also give her express pardon. must be concurred to by the Congress o Ramos issued a proclamation granting amnesty to Honasan. • Art 344: Offended party may pardon before institution of criminal case (filing of complaint) • Can the President pardon even if it’s a private crime? Yes.

When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one. which shall prescribe in five years. 1966). with the exception of those punishable by arresto mayor. Light offenses prescribe in two months. or their agents. — The period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party.am+dg When given To whom given Nature required Even before conviction Class of persons Public act of the President. The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six months. Art. • • • • • • When a crime has prescribed. where the court said that the crimes could not have been discovered because of the unique situation of the Marcos era. the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the application of the rules contained in the first. when does it start? Prescription period runs after the occurrence of the last act. But civil liability extinguished. crime already committed. — Crimes punishable by death. What if accused returns property in malversation? o Not extinguished. so it prescribes in 10 years. but returns money. the authorities. or their agents  How do you “discover” a crime? By learning of the corpus delicti. 91. It can be mitigating if done before the institution of the criminal complaint (analogous to voluntary surrender) (Sajop v People) Public officer charged with Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019). even if you don’t know who did it. and it’s discovered. Consider the following to determine if a crime has prescribed: o Period of the offense charged o Period when it begins to run o Period when it is interrupted When does the period begin to run? o Upon discovery of the crime by the offended party. If he pays within this period. When is the period interrupted? o Upon filing of the complaint for filing of preliminary investigation with the public prosecutor or Ombudsman. or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him. Prescription of crime. Art. second and third paragraphs of this article. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago. Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen years. The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year. (Domingo v Sandiganbayan)  For a continuing crime. Destierro is correctional. Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten years. the basis for prescription is the highest penalty. approved June 19. (Chua v People) Take note of BP 22: there’s an amnesty period of 5 days from notice of dishonor for the issuer to pay. He withdraws the petition for naturalization. he has no liability. Application is the only one extinguished. no judicial notice • • • • Suppose an accused made perjurious statements in petition for naturalization. and shall commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or acquitted.  See the Ad Hoc Commission v Ombudsman Desierto. 90. the State loses its right to prosecute. reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal shall prescribe in twenty years. If the penalty imposed on the convict is a compound one. and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information. Does this extinguish liability? o No. (As amended by RA 4661. the authorities. courts can take judicial notice needed After final conviction Specific individual Private act of the President. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 81 . What happens? o Crim liability remains. Computation of prescription of offenses.

prescribe in accordance with the following rules: (a) after a year for offenses punished only by a fine or by imprisonment for not more than one month. Sec. in twenty years. Violations penalized by special acts shall. State or its agents. deed of sale) and it is falsified. soon after it discovered the questionable acts of the respondents. For SPECIAL PENAL LAWS. . 47 Section 1. such investigation would surely interrupt the prescription period. the prescription period is interrupted when the complaint is filed with the DOJ for preliminary investigation. unless otherwise provided in such acts. or both. shall not be subject to any prescription. Death and reclusion perpetua. (P v Reyes)  Can the period start earlier? • Yes. o No. in a complaint under the Intellectual Property Law. the period begins to run upon filing with the RD. but less than two years. bigamous marriages are usually done in a concealed manner. Pacifacador) Does this apply to marriages for bigamy? Since The marriage certificate is registered with the civil registrar anyway. 48 Section 11. this is accomplished by initiating the preliminary investigation. which is equivalent to the preliminary investigation conducted by the DOJ in criminal cases. The prescription shall be interrupted when proceedings are instituted against the guilty person. (P v.  Omnibus Election Code – 5 years  Genocide Law (RA 9851) – never prescribes48  Human Security Act (RA 9372) – RPC to apply suppletorily (RPC prescription will apply) o In Act 3326. and the execution of sentences imposed on their account. (b) after four years for those punished by imprisonment for more than one month. the prescription period is interrupted by commencing the proceedings for the prosecution of the accused. This means investigation by the executive department.am+dg • • • • • • When does it resume again? o When the proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or acquitted. Non-prescription. their prosecution. the prescriptive period is interrupted when the information is filed in the MTC (no preliminary investigation eh. Why? Because PD 1529 says that filing with the RD is constructive notice to all persons. For cases under the Rules on Summary Procedure. In criminal cases. and if the same be not known at the time. effectively interrupted the prescription period. Moreover. The prosecution of offenses punishable under the Revised Securities Act and the Securities Regulations Code is initiated by the filing of a complaint with the SEC or by an investigation conducted by the SEC motu proprio.The crimes defined and penalized under this Act. There is no counterpart provision in the Civil Register Act which states that filing with the civ register is constructive notice. (c) after eight years for those punished by imprisonment for two years or more. which shall prescribe after twenty years. or o When the proceedings terminate for any reason not imputable to the accused o Duration of the resumed period should be the unexpended portion only for to give the period a fresh start every time it is interrupted is prejudicial to the offender.” Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 82 . 49 “Indubitably. When and how penalties prescribe.) Art. Violations penalized by municipal ordinances shall prescribe after two months. and shall begin to run again if the proceedings are dismissed for reasons not constituting jeopardy. If the falsification is discovered before filing with the RD. See footnote on exact words of SC. the investigation that was commenced by the SEC in 1995. acquired actual knowledge of the second marriage. — The penalties imposed by final sentence prescribe as follows: 1. the period will only begin to run upon discovery of the bigamous marriage. but less than six years. what does “proceedings” mean?  It includes judicial proceedings. Hence.47 o But there are some SPLs which provide for their own prescription rules. When does the period run? o For documents required to be filed with the Register of Deeds. 92. ACT 3326 will apply. when a criminal complaint is filed in SEC for the investigation of a crime. except the crime of treason. Thus. (SEC V Interport. 2. the period is interrupted. Given the nature and purpose of the investigation conducted by the SEC. Prescription shall begin to run from the day of the commission of the violation of the law. from the discovery thereof and the institution of judicial proceeding for its investigation and punishment. • Hence. and (d) after twelve years for any other offense punished by imprisonment for six years or more. The prescriptive period should begin to run from when the offended party. Only after a finding of probable cause is made by the SEC can the DOJ instigate a preliminary investigation. • See also Panaguiton v DOJ (2008) which said the same thing.49) • Hence. When does it not run? o When the offender is absent from the Philippines Supposing a real estate document is executed (like a REM. and  It also includes executive proceedings. wherein the Court said that the investigation of the SEC for a crime under the Revised Securities Act interrupted the period.

Condition. Art. When does it start? o When the culprit evades the service of his sentence When is it interrupted? o Convict gives himself up o He’s captured o Goes to a country which has no extradition treaty  If it has an extradition treaty. • • • • Must be given after final judgment and must be accepted by accused Does not extinguish civil liability If one violates his conditional pardon. Other afflictive penalties. • Causes o o o o o o of partial extinction: Conditional pardon Commutation Good conduct allowances Parole under the ISL Probation Partial repeal of a penal law Art. in fifteen years. his non-compliance with any of the conditions specified shall result in the revocation of the pardon and the provisions of Article 159 shall be applied to him. — Any person who has been granted conditional pardon shall incur the obligation of complying strictly with the conditions imposed therein otherwise. and it shall be interrupted if the defendant should give himself up. in ten years. and o Prosecuted under 159 of the RPC Suppose dude was given conditional pardon. 3. two things can happen: o President orders his rearrest and incarceration (no need for judicial determination of guilt). Computation of the prescription of penalties. in one year. What are his liabilities? o Article 159 o Homicide  Not complex crime! Different crimes! Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 83 . 2. be captured. which prescribes in five years. 93. By conditional pardon. 4. He kills an annoying person. By commutation of the sentence. Partial Extinction of criminal liability . or should commit another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription. 95. — Criminal liability is extinguished partially: 1. Correctional penalties. period is interrupted o Commits another crime (other than evasion of sentence) before the expiration of the period of prescription o Acceptance of conditional pardon (Pontillas) Applicable to destierro Prescription of Crime Loss of right to proscute Prosecution has yet to begin Convict may not have been under custody Begins when corpus delicti discovered Prescription of Penalty Loss of right to enforce the penalty Trial on the merits already concluded Convict already was in custody Begins when crime of evasion of service of sentence is done Chapter Two PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY Art. and 3. Light penalties. 94. — The period of prescription of penalties shall commence to run from the date when the culprit should evade the service of his sentence. should go to some foreign country with which this Government has no extradition treaty. with the exception of the penalty of arresto mayor. • • • • Loss of the State of the right to make the convict serve his sentence by the lapse of time. but does not cover the said crime.am+dg 2. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence. Obligation incurred by person granted conditional pardon. he shouldn’t kill no more.

98. During the third to the fifth year. Indeterminate Sentence Law ACT NO. During the following years until the tenth year. he shall be allowed a deduction of five days for each month of good behavior. Section 1. Lesson: escape. the maximum term of which shall not exceed the maximum fixed by said law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum term prescribed by the same. except as provided in Section 5 hereof. could be properly imposed under the rules of the said Code. . 97. he shall be allowed a deduction of fifteen days for each month of good behavior. he shall be allowed a deduction of eight days for each month of good behavior. inclusive. of his imprisonment. the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence. Art. to those who are habitual delinquents. It looks at the convict as private individual and a member of society as a whole. and to increase his economic contribution. the Director of Prisons shall grant allowances for good conduct. and then the minimum. If he doesn’t escape. or doesn’t return within 2 days.am+dg Art. 4225 and Republic Act No. inclusive. — A deduction of one-fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who. Art. Sec. 4203 [June 19. to those who having been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive shall have violated the terms thereof. to those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year. and 4. 2. sedition or espionage. — The commutation of the original sentence for another of a different length and nature shall have the legal effect of substituting the latter in the place of the former. gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe to in said article. Such allowances once granted shall not be revoked. rebellion. to those convicted of treason. and if the offense is punished by any other law. he shall be allowed a deduction of ten days for each month of good behavior. If he escapes for good. 3. Art. • • • • • • The venerable Justice won’t ask us to compute. Effect of commutation of sentence. Hereafter. Court must determine the max of the indeterminate penalty first. not to those already sentenced by final judgment at the time of approval of this Act. he will get 1/5 addition to the remaining sentence which shouldn’t be more than 6 months. Special time allowance for loyalty . During the first two years of his imprisonment. Who grants time allowances. AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. During the eleventh and successive years of his imprisonment. or its amendments. 2. but gets captured. — Whenever lawfully justified. the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence the maximum term of which shall be that which. 96. o With the minimum the court has unlimited discretion within the range of the minimum of the penalty one degree lower than the penalty imposed by law. The ISL is for the benefit of the convict. The state is interest in redeeming the individual for economic usefulness and other social ends. but return. just stays put in the prison. TO CREATE A BOARD OF INDETERMINATE SENTENCE AND TO PROVIDE FUNDS THEREFOR. — The good conduct of any prisoner in any penal institution shall entitle him to the following deductions from the period of his sentence: 1. The following can NOT avail of the benefits of the ISL: Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 84 . 99. he doesn’t get any good conduct allowance. and the minimum which shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the offense. in view of the attending circumstances. to those convicted of misprision of treason. to those convicted of piracy. 4103 (As Amended by Act No. It stems from the positivist theory. Allowance for good conduct. to those who have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence. in imposing a prison sentence for an offense punished by the Revised Penal Code. This Act shall not apply to persons convicted of offenses punished with death penalty or lifeimprisonment. of his imprisonment. conspiracy or proposal to commit treason. • • • • Good conduct allowance given when: o There was an occurrence of a disorder/calamity which the prisoner did not participate o Convict escapes o He gives himself up 48 hours after proclamation that no more calamity He gets 1/5 deduction of his service! He must escape and then return. 1965]) AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR AN INDETERMINATE SENTENCE AND PAROLE FOR ALL PERSONS CONVICTED OF CERTAIN CRIMES BY THE COURTS OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. having evaded the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in Article 58 of this Code.

7. sedition. report personally to such government officials or other parole officers hereafter appointed by the Board of Indeterminate Sentence for a period of surveillance equivalent to the remaining portion of the maximum sentence imposed upon him or until final release and discharge by the Board of Indeterminate Sentence as herein provided. and from the study and investigation made by the Board itself. to determine the penalty next lower in degree. In one case. which shall entitle him to final release and discharge Sec. etc o Based on Offenses  Convicted of treason. When the penalty is originally exempt from the ISL and after the lowering due to privileged mitigating circumstances it becomes within the law. Whenever any prisoner released on parole by virtue of this Act shall. the law should apply. The Board shall file with the court which passed judgment on the case. not what is imposable. the Board of Pardons and Parole will give out final release and discharge. the ISL does not apply because it applies only to penalty of imprisonment with divisible penalty. the maximum was 4 months and a day. Parole lasts for a certain period of time. The limits of residence of such paroled prisoner during his parole may be fixed and from time to time changed by the said Board in its discretion. that there is a reasonable probability that such prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating the law. Sec. said Board of Indeterminate Sentence may. disqualification. and shall make recommendation in all such cases to the Governor-General with regard to the parole of such prisoners as they shall deem qualified for parole as herein provided. LI. The reason is the complex nature of the offense. If crime is a complex one. There are some laws which expressly provide that the convict is not entitled to the benefits of the ISL and parole (like the anti-terrorism law) Offenders who commit crimes while on parole are disqualified from the ISL. during the period of surveillance. in its discretion. It shall be the duty of the Board of Indeterminate Sentence to look into the physical. not merely the imposable penalty. espionage. and that such release will not be incompatible with the welfare of society. the full range of the penalty prescribed by law for the offense must be the starting point. o Parole50 When the person serves the minimum of the ISL. that such prisoner is fitted by his training for release. at such times and in such manner as may be required by the conditions of his parole. 8. from the reports of the prisoner's work and conduct which may be received in accordance with the rules and regulations prescribed. The court can impose a straight penalty of 60 days. rebellion. RP (for purposes of ISL: LI and RP are synonymous)  Maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year  Non-prison sentences of fine. When can a court impose a straight penalty? o When both the minimum and maximum durations of imprisonment are less than 1 year. the Board of Indeterminate Sentence may issue an order for his re-arrest which may be served in any part of the Philippine Islands by any police officer. destierro. violate any of the conditions of his parole. In such case the prisoner so re-arrested shall serve the remaining unexpired portion of the maximum sentence for which he was originally committed to prison. 6. as may be designated by the said Board for such purpose.am+dg • • • • • • Based on Penalties  Convicted and punished with death. and it shall appear to the Board of Indeterminate Sentence. the Board of Indeterminate Sentence may issue a final certificate of release in his favor. authorize the release of such prisoner on parole. • • • 50 Sec. Whenever any prisoner shall have served the minimum penalty imposed on him. Sec. The officials so designated shall keep such records and make such reports and perform such other duties hereunder as may be required by said Board. Every prisoner released from confinement on parole by virtue of this Act shall. The said Board of Indeterminate Sentence shall also examine the records and status of prisoners who shall have been convicted of any offense other than those named in Section 2 hereof. he may apply for parole. misprision of treason. and with the Chief of Constabulary. and in accordance with the rules and regulations adopted hereunder. 5. after they shall have served a period of imprisonment not less than the minimum period for which they might have been sentenced under this Act for the same offense. mental and moral record of the prisoners who shall be eligible to parole and to determine the proper time of release of such prisoners. unless the Board of Indeterminate Sentence shall. a certified copy of each order of conditional or final release and discharge issued in accordance with the provisions of the next preceding two sections. in its discretion. If during the period of surveillance such paroled prisoner shall show himself to be a law-abiding citizen and shall not violate any of the laws of the Philippine Islands. upon such terms and conditions as are herein prescribed and as may be prescribed by the Board. grant a new parole to the said prisoner Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 85 . and have been sentenced for more than one year by final judgment prior to the date on which this Act shall take effect. What controls is the penalty imposed. He will be allowed to leave the penal institution under certain conditions. piracy o Based on Offenders  Habitual delinquents  Those who escaped from confinement or evaded sentence  Committed crimes while on parole  Violated conditional pardon  Those already sentenced upon passage of Act If the court imposes a penalty of fine (if alternative between imprisonment and fine). If he complies with the conditions of the parole.

Sec. Grant of Probation. 2. — As used in this Decree. 3. Disqualified Offenders. Sec. is released subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer. Sec. The filing of the application shall be deemed a waver of the right to appeal. the court shall consider all information relative. or (b) there is undue risk that during the period of probation the offender will commit another crime. Sec. antecedents. — No person shall be placed on probation except upon prior investigation by the probation officer and a determination by the court that the ends of justice and the best interest of the public as well as that of the defendant will be served thereby. mental and physical condition of the offender. 9. or (c) probation will depreciate the seriousness of the offense committed. and available institutional and community resources. Title and Scope of the Decree. The court may also require the probationer to: (a) cooperate with a program of supervision. 8. — In determining whether an offender may be placed on probation. the court may. to the character. (h) abstain from drinking intoxicating beverages to excess. 4. recreation or residence of persons on probation. (b) "Probationer" means a person placed on probation. — This Decree shall be interpreted so as to: (a) promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing him with individualized treatment. — The benefits of this Decree shall not be extended to those: (a) sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years. environment. (d) undergo medical. Purpose. — Every probation order issued by the court shall contain conditions requiring that the probationer shall: (a) present himself to the probation officer designated to undertake his supervision at such place as may be specified in the order within seventy-two hours from receipt of said order. An application for probation shall be filed with the trial court. An order granting or denying probation shall not be appealable. and (e) who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive provisions of this Decree became applicable pursuant to Section 33 hereof. It shall apply to all offenders except those entitled to the benefits under the provisions of Presidential Decree numbered Six Hundred and three and similar laws. with notice to the appellate court if an appeal has been taken from the sentence of conviction. Probation may be granted whether the sentence imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 86 . (b) provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent offender which might be less probable if he were to serve a prison sentence. — Subject to the provisions of this Decree. after conviction and sentence. suspend the execution of said sentence and place the defendant on probation for such period and upon such terms and conditions as it may deem best. the following shall. (c) "Probation Officer" means one who investigates for the court a referral for probation or supervises a probationer or both. (b) meet his family responsibilities. when required for that purpose. Post-sentence Investigation. or the automatic withdrawal of a pending appeal. 10. (g) refrain from visiting houses of ill-repute. (d) who have been once on probation under the provisions of this Decree. Criteria for Placing an Offender on Probation. and (c) prevent the commission of offenses Sec. after it shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant and upon application at any time of said defendant. Meaning of Terms.am+dg Parole Minimum sentence must be served Granted by law Pardon Service not required for grant By Pres Probation Law Section 1. (c) who have previously been convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by imprisonment of not less than one month and one day and/or a fine of not less than Two Hundred Pesos. Conditions of Probation. Sec. be construed thus: (a) "Probation" is a disposition under which a defendant. (b) report to the probation officer at least once a month at such time and place as specified by said officer. (b) convicted of any offense against the security of the State. 5. — This Decree shall be known as the Probation Law of 1976. (f) attend or reside in a facility established for instruction. (e) pursue a prescribed secular study or vocational training. Sec. (c) devote himself to a specific employment and not to change said employment without the prior written approval of the probation officer. psychological or psychiatric examination and treatment and enter and remain in a specified institution. Probation shall be denied if the court finds that: (a) the offender is in need of correctional treatment that can be provided most effectively by his commitment to an institution. unless the context otherwise requires.

the accessory penalty included. the penalties exceed 6 years. a writ of execution for the civil liability can still be enforced. the provisions regarding release on bail of persons charged with a crime shall be applicable to probationers arrested under this provision. the period of probation shall not be less than nor to be more than twice the total number of days of subsidiary imprisonment as computed at the rate established. you cannot appeal. or (k) satisfy any other condition related to the rehabilitation of the defendant and not unduly restrictive of his liberty or incompatible with his freedom of conscience. Civil liability is not extinguished by a grant of probation. Consider the penalty for each crime. — A probation order shall take effect upon its issuance. o Appeal and probation are mutually exclusive. If you apply for probation. the court may order the final discharge of the probationer upon finding that he has fulfilled the terms and conditions of his probation and thereupon the case is deemed terminated. shall immediately be brought before the court for a hearing. Even if purpose of appeal is to reduce the penalty. 16. The probationer and the probation officer shall each be furnished with a copy of such order. (Pablo Francisco v CA) What if on appeal. 11. The probationer.am+dg (i) permit the probation officer or an authorized social worker to visit his home and place of work. You already appealed.  You can’t have your red velvet cake and eat it too.  Except under RA 9344. REMEMBER: if you file an appeal. right? What if he was sentenced for 3 crimes tried jointly. o If you file for appeal. 14. you lose probation. — At any time during probation. Arrest of Probationer. you lose probation. o If you file for probation. In such a case. as amended. the court shall order the probationer to serve the sentence originally imposed. If you file for probation. o Accused still entitled to probation. the court may issue a warrant for the arrest of a probationer for violation of any of the conditions of probation.  Even when the probation is granted. The final discharge of the probationer shall operate to restore to him all civil rights lost or suspend as a result of his conviction and to fully discharge his liability for any fine imposed as to the offense for which probation was granted. If the violation is established. once arrested and detained. — (a) The period of probation of a defendant sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than one year shall not exceed two years. — After the period of probation and upon consideration of the report and recommendation of the probation officer. Effectivity of Probation Order. the moment one appeals. The defendant may be admitted to bail pending such hearing. which allows probation even if you appeal. each having less than a 6 year penalty. in Article thirty-nine of the Revised Penal Code. and in all other cases. Subsequent Disposition. Sec. judgment is suspended. Following are disqualified from applying for probation: o Sentenced to a max term of more than 6 years imprisonment o Convicted of subversion or any crime against national security or the public order o Previously convicted by fj of offense punished by imprisonment of not less than 1 month and 1 day and/or fine of not less than P200 o Once been on probation (you can do probation once) o Convicted of drug pushing (DDA) o Convicted of terrorism (Anti-Terrorism Act) o Already serving sentence upon the effectivity of the law o Those who already perfected appeals 6 years lang. judgment is deemed final. An order revoking the grant of probation or modifying the terms and conditions thereof shall not be appealable. Termination of Probation. o The “appeal” here is the appeal from the trial court to the CA. he shall serve the penalty imposed for the offense under which he was placed on probation. (b) When the sentence imposes a fine only and the offender is made to serve subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. Sec. 15. o But the civil liability is NOT suspended. said period shall not exceed six years. • • • • • • Probation is a mere privilege. the court may revoke or continue his probation and modify the conditions thereof. the CA reduces the penalty? o Can’t apply for probation. it forecloses application to probation. which may be informal and summary. but if you add them. (j) reside at premises approved by it and not to change his residence without its prior written approval. Period of Probation. (P v Evangelista) Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 87 . at which time the court shall inform the offender of the consequences thereof and explain that upon his failure to comply with any of the conditions prescribed in the said order or his commission of another offense. not the aggregate. If revoked. Sec. Sec. not a right. of the violation charged.

ok na! he can’t be compelled to do the conditions or go back to jail. he recovers whatever he lost due to his accessory penalties. the civil action is instituted along with it. it’s an order. Imprisoned for not complying with condition. (Mandatory conditions are to present himself to probation officer and report to prob officer once a month) o Condition was to submit a program for payment of the civil liability. is it appealable? No. o Fine only (with subsidiary imprisonment). o But if the state is the one aggrieved. — Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. o More than one year. need not be applied for by the convict Sent ence Penal ty Dispo sition Violat ion Appe al Avail abilit y Natur e Civil Liability Title Five CIVIL LIABILITY Chapter One PERSON CIVILLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES Art. Court can give conditions for the probation. Accused didn’t pay and his probation was revoked.am+dg • • • • • • What if you withdrew the appeal within 15 days. (Llamado v CA) If the application for probation is sufficient in form. but they cannot extend it. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. Moreover. Mere expiry of probation period does NOT automatically terminate probation. o Imprisonment of not more than one year. (Art 332 – swindling relatives) Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 88 . o Remember torts principles and independent civil actions. Probation Must not be more than 6 years Imprisonment or fine Sentence is suspended Entire sentence shall be served Forecloses privilege of probation Only once Mere privilege. probation shall be twice the number of days of subsidiary imprisonment. go for Rule 65. • • • • Civil liability can be incurred whether the act is punishable by law or not (since it can be based on felonies or quasi-delicts/torts) The moment the criminal action is instituted. (Bala v Martinez) o Court must still determine if accused complied with the conditions of the probation. 100. probation shall not exceed two years. Need for a final discharge from the court. SC: Mali ka boy. the convict may be allowed to post bail. but there’s still civil liability. must be applied for by the convict ISL Max must be more than 1 year Imprisonment only Minimum to be served Unexpired portion only to be served No effect on the operation of the law Everytime as long as the offender is not dq’d Mandatory. o Once discharged. Can court grant shorter periods of probation? o Yes. He claimed he was being imprisoned for nonpayment of debt. pwede pa ba? Pwede! Should be a perfected appeal. Court must think of the accused. (Malversation) Also possible that there’s no crime. like in victimless crimes. (Baclayon v Mutia) If the court approves/denies the application. (Salgado v CA) o But a condition which prohibits a teacher from teaching again is wrong. Possible that there’s a crime but no civil liability. o But the court cannot extend beyond the period beyond the period to study the application. probation period shall not exceed 6 years. the state can recover civil liability. not for nonpayment. So.

the civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile or insane person. (P v Hernandez) o Also when homicide is absorbed by arson. If two crimes (one SPL and one RPC). killed two people. legal guardianship or control. said insane. imbecile or minor under his authority. or just once? o Although there are two crimes. Such action requires only a preponderance of evidence. You will still be civilly liable for the murder. no civil liability o EXCEPT Art 11. In such cases.000 pesos. there must be evidence that a party including the government sustained substantial injury so that the accused may be civilly liable. they will all bear the liability proportionately. For example. the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its maximum period. the court shall so declare.000 pesos. the penalty shall be termed reclusion temporal and the accessory penalty pertaining thereto provided in the Revised Penal Code shall also be imposed. (P v Malngan) If a check bounces. accused can be liable for BP22 and estafa. shall devolve upon those having such person under their legal authority or control. those doing the act shall be liable. adding one year for each additional 10. a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may be instituted. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases . The courts shall determine. whenever the damages have been caused with the consent of the authorities or their agents. even if it lost its juridical existence. there is only one check. indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed by special laws or regulations. and by a person under nine years of age. or to the majority of the inhabitants of the town. In cases of subdivisions 1. 5 and 6 of Article 12 and in subdivision 4 of Article 11 of this Code does not include exemption from civil liability. Civilly liable to both victims. If there were several benefited. • If justifying circumstance. the persons for whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which they may have received. if there be no such persons. Thus. can there be more than 1 civil liability? o No. unless it appears that there was no fault or negligence on their part. there should only be one payment of the payment.am+dg • • • • • • What if the accused is acquitted? 51 o If based on the ground that accused was not the author of the act/omission complained of: no civil liability based on delict o If based on reasonable doubt: civil liability still possible by a preponderance of evidence If SPL. Third. Par 4 (person who avoided a greater evil or injury): primary liability is on the one who benefited from such avoidance.  BP 22  Anti-Fencing (PD 1612) – Sec 3(a) includes accessory penalty of RPC (hence. 3. imbecile. 29. even approximately. or if such person be insolvent. the court may require the plaintiff to file a bond to answer for damages in case the complaint should be found to be malicious. can there be civil liability in the absorbed crime? o Yes. 101. When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article 12. (Rodriguez v Pomferada) If there is a complex crime (2 crimes). and 3 of Article 12. Upon motion of the defendant. in all events. 51 Civil Code Art. Should there be no person having such insane. If crime is absorbed by another crime. the persons using violence or causing the fears shall be primarily liable and secondarily. saving always to the latter that part of their property exempt from execution. which shall be enforced subject to the following rules: First. and. See BP22/estafa example. it may be inferred from the text of the decision whether or not the acquittal is due to that ground. is there civil liabilities? o Yes. or. or minor shall respond with their own property. Will the accused pay the value of the check twice. in sound discretion. Liable for civil indemnity and moral damages. the proportionate amount for which each one shall be liable. — The exemption from criminal liability established in subdivisions 1. or when the liability also attaches to the Government. who has acted without discernment. just one civil liability. civil liability under Art 104 [restitution])52  VAWC (RA 9262) – accused liable to battered woman. in accordance with the civil law. excepting property exempt from execution. Art. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11. but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years. can there be more than 1 civil liability? o Yes. Still liable for civil indemnity and moral damages for the homicide. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 89 .000 pesos but not exceeding 22. Number of civil liabilities for as many victims. Second. If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based upon reasonable doubt. o Same when estafa and illegal recruitment. or by one over nine but under fifteen years of age. 52 a) The penalty of prision mayor.  Dude shot one bullet. if the value of such property exceeds the latter sum. When the accused in a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground that his guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. 2. In the absence of any declaration to that effect. if the value of the property involved is more than 12. you murder someone in furtherance of rebellion. 2.

Par 4 and 7): no civil liability!  The great Justice Regalado says these are actually justifying circumstances and should’ve been under Art 11. 103. or for the payment of the value thereof. teachers. Par 5-6): primary liability on the person employing the force or causing the fear  Secondary liability is on the person doing the act. or under 18 with no discernment 53 (Art 12. establishment o Person criminally liable is insolvent  All three present? Then keepers/props civilly liable. innkeepers. persons. — The subsidiary liability established in the next preceding article shall also apply to employers. apprentices. or the person representing him. save for their property exempt from execution o Doing a lawful act. • • • 53 Is the adopter civilly liable for the damage caused by the adopted minor? Yes. Par 1-3): primary liability on the person who has control or authority over them.am+dg • If exempting circumstance o Insane person. unless he is without fault or negligence  If no fault or negligence. or employees in the discharge of their duties. pupils. Art. and corporations engaged in any kind of industry for felonies committed by their servants. • • • Elements under Par 1: o Innkeeper. and any other persons or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes committed in their establishments. Elements under Par 2: o Guests notified in advance the innkeeper or the person representing him of the deposit of their goods within the inn or house o Guests followed the directions of the innkeeper or his representative with respect to the care of and vigilance over such goods o Such goods were taken by robbery with force upon things or theft committed within the inn or house  All three present? Innkeeper subsidiarily liable. — In default of the persons criminally liable. provided that such guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper himself. It is deemed written into the RA 9344: The exemption from criminal liability herein established does not include exemption from civil liability. tavernkeepers. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers. tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments. failure to do an act because of some lawful insuperable cause (Art 12. inn. in all cases where a violation of municipal ordinances or some general or special police regulation shall have been committed by them or their employees. Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging therein. and shall furthermore have followed the directions which such innkeeper or his representative may have given them with respect to the care and vigilance over such goods. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. 102. No liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons unless committed by the innkeeper's employees. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 90 . which shall be enforced in accordance with existing laws. imbecile. tavernkeeper or proprietor of establishment or his employee committed a violation of municipal ordinance or some general or special police regulation o Crime committed in such tavern. workmen. Art. then property of minor or insane (except property exempt from liability) o Acting because of an irresistible force or uncontrollable fear (Art 12. No liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons. Requirements for subsidiary civil liability of the employer: o EE-ER Relationship o ER engaged in some kind of industry  “engaged in some kind of industry”: capital and labor are habitually employed for the purpose of gain/profit o EE guilty of the wrongful act and found to have committed the offense in the discharge of his duties (not necessarily any offense he commits while in the discharge of such duties) o EE is insolvent as shown by the non-satisfaction of the execution against him o Conviction attained finality No need for court to pronounce subsidiary liability of the employee. of the deposit of such goods within the inn. o EXCEPT when committed by the innkeeper’s employees.

Art. Indemnification. ER may assist in the defense of his employee. If the employee is acquitted based on reasonable doubt. even though it be found in the possession of a third person who has acquired it by lawful means. — The court shall determine the amount of damage. and reparation shall be made accordingly. Art. This provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing has been acquired by the third person in the manner and under the requirements which. How made. and 103 of this Code includes: 1. Only time when no civil liability is when the court says that he did not actually commit the acts on which the charge is based on. but also those suffered by his family or by a third person by reason of the crime. — The restitution of the thing itself must be made whenever possible. by law. with allowance for any deterioration. o Registered owner liable. Regardless as to who the actual owner of the car is. the registered owner is the operator of the same with respect to the public or 3rd persons. • • Civil liability includes: o Restitution (return of the thing itself) o If restitution not possible. Reparation of the damage caused. Patient died. Is teacher liable for student’s acts? Only when engaged in industry. Can the ER challenge the sheriff’s return which showed non-satisfaction? Yes! He must do it upon submission of the sheriff’s return. Indemnification for consequential damages. He may not be a party but in effect. bar an action for its recovery. o Moreover.am+dg • • • • • • judgments of the cases. o The judgment binds the ER. Art. o Extent of liability of ER: only in terms of civil liability (he can’t be jailed) and the amount of the civil liability. but can recover from the actual owner. — Indemnification for consequential damages shall include not only those caused the injured party. Restitution. What is included in civil liability. or diminution of value as determined by the court. private corporation who owned the hospital was subsidiarily liable under corporate responsibility. 102. 107.  Except if there’s collusion between the offended and the erring EE. Restitution. 101. is there civil liability for the employer? o Yes. The thing itself shall be restored. 106. 105. he is bound by the judgment. 3. saving to the latter his action against the proper person. Are hospitals liable for consulting/visiting doctors? (Ramos v CA/Pro Services v Agana) o Yes. 2. His civil liability can’t be separated from his EE.  Consultants’ acts subject to review by hospital  Hospital controlled staff of consultants. What is included. 104. — The civil liability established in Articles 100. reparation of the damage caused o Indemnification for consequential damages (based on Civil Code) Restitution o Includes return of ransom in kidnapping with ransom o What if a third person acquired property subject of crime?  Can still recover the item from that person Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 91 . Important doctrines from the Philippine Rabbit Bus case: o Filing of criminal action necessarily includes subsidiary liability of employer. Reparation. taking into consideration the price of the thing. (Compare with 2180 which talks of quasi-delicts) Visiting doctor left gauze in stomach of patient. and its special sentimental value to the injured party. (transpo cases) Chapter Two WHAT CIVIL LIABILITY INCLUDES Art. because of:  Control in hiring and firing of these consultants/doctors  Performance of duties within hospital premises. whenever possible. who may be liable to him. but he may not actually participate in the criminal case. How made.

there must be a separate award for each crime. temperate.  Hence. Given na yon. you can get moral damages. the damages to be adjudicated may be respectively increased or lessened according to the aggravating or mitigating circumstances. In crimes and quasi-delicts. money paid by the applicant must be returned (P v Billaber) • With 12% interest from the time of filing of the case until amount has been paid. Exemplary damages o Imposed. general. the defendant shall be liable for all damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission complained of. It is not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could have reasonably been foreseen by the defendan Art. civil indemnity will be awarded o Also been granted in rape Actual damages o Must be proved Moral damages o Because of physical suffering. o To serve as a deterrent to serious wrong doings and vindication o No need for proof of actual loss o Distinct and separate from penalty of fine. moral. In BP 22. • Same with kidnapping with ransom (demand for ransom is qualifying). rape (even attempted rape). In illegal recruitment. in addition to the moral. Can’t be lumped together. o In the cases enumerated. 2200. the value of the thing taken will do • What is basis for the value? Value at the time of the commission of the crime. serious anxiety.  However. as long as proven. lascivious acts • Parents may also recover moral damages  Adultery. o When a crime has one or more ACs. 2230) o What if the AC was not alleged in the information (hence. but proved during trial. by way of example or correction for the public good. liquidated or compensatory damages. concubinage  Illegal/arbitrary detention/arrests  Illegal search  Libel. temperate. there are some cases which say that heirs must prove that they suffered emotional pain. slander. In crimes. besmirched repuration. qualifying. exemplary may still be imposed. 54 55 56 Art. abduction. etc. fright. 2204. even if treachery is qualifying in Art 248. wounded feelings o Recovered in:  Crimes leading to physical injuries (includes DEATH)  Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries (includes DEATH)  Seduction. mental anguish. it can still be treated as aggravating for imposing exemplary damages. liable for all natural and probable consequences of act or omission 54 o May be increased or decreased depending on aggravating or mitigating circumstances 55 o Also includes lost profits. can’t be used against accused for his penalty). not only value lost56 Civil indemnity o As long as the crime results to death. defamation  Malicious prosecution  Others are based on civil code na o If raped three times. no need to allege emotional suffering in the information. exemplary. includes specific. can exemplary damages still be imposed?  Yes. Indemnification for damages shall comprehend not only the value of the loss suffered. Art.  But basta ikaw yung victim. then get the whole amount then 12% until amount was paid (Palana v P) • • • • Damages o Actual. etc. nominal o In crimes and quasi-delicts. exemplary damages may be imposed (Civ Code.am+dg    • • But the buyer in good faith is entitled to reimbursement from thief or criminal If stolen property cannot be returned anymore. 2202. but also that of the profits which the obligee failed to obtain Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 92 . even if not alleged in the complaint or information. 6% from filing of information until finality of decision. o “Aggravating” should be applied in its generic sense.

exemplary damages may be imposed if shown to have had gross negligence. may be recovered when the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount can not. As long as there’s an AC. but same victim.am+dg • • • Also. murder. o Can exemplary damages be awarded in arson? Yes. (parricide) o Does set-off apply in terms of exemplary damages? No.  But if they can’t prove actual damages. It’s an anti-social act. relationship may be a basis for granting exemplary damages even if it is an inherent element of the crime. o In reckless imprudence. o Two separate crimes of rape. Attorney’s fees o Must be reasonable o Discretionary upon the court Interest o 12% from date of final judgment  Even with RA 9346. from the nature of the case. how many exemplary?  As many as the number of crimes committed. even if the victim was the same. He claims that the offender must still • Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 93 . Temperate damages o More than nominal but less than compensatory damages. To correct the behavior. the heirs of a deceased in homicide. the classification of crimes as heinous (death) and quasi-heinous (RP) still remains. also liable for support (except if woman is already married. exemplary may be imposed. It is important in determining the civil indemnity and moral damages of the crime. parricide are entitled to actual damages.) This exception is dissented to by the omniscient Justice Regalado. be provided with certainty o Must be reasonable o For example. the court may give temperate damages. o Heinous:  Indemnity: P75k  Moral damages: P50k o Quasi-heinous:  Indemnity: P50k  Moral damages: P50k  Crime Indemnity Moral Others Damages Rape with 100k 50k homicide Qualified 75k 50k rape Simple rape 50k 50k If a child is born out of the rape.

am+dg pay. But the offender cannot be obliged to acknowledge offspring in adultery and concubinage when the offended party is married and paternity cannot be determined. per extra rape 75k (if death) 50k (if RP) 75k Kidnapping with rape Kidnapping with homicide Kidnapped was 8 years old (Kidnap Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 75k 75k 50k 75k 75k 200k 100k exemplary (because of 94 . extra P50k indemnity and 50k moral damages. provided that the paternity is established. depends talaga!) 75k (death) 50k (RP) 50k If multiple rape. Sexual assault (fingered) Attempted rape Acts of lasciviousnes s (for each count) Murder Parricide 30k 30K None 30k 25k 5k 10k exemplary 2k exemplary 75k 50k 75k 50k Shouldn’t there be exemplary here? Homicide Frustrated homicide Attempted homicide Robbery with homicide Forcible abduction with rape (for each count) 50k None. no one died None 50k 30k 30k (one case 10k.

Art. Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability has been enforced. against that of the accomplices. Callejo Eow powz. 109. next. 111. Obligation to make restitution in certain cases. lastly. — Notwithstanding the provisions of the next preceding article. and. each within their respective class. Several and subsidiary liability of principals.am+dg for ransom) Qualified carnapping RA 7610 ransom) 75k 20k 50k 15k Not sure. and indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of the person injured. 110. The subsidiary liability shall be enforced. Art. against that of the accessories. reparation. the principals. Obligation to make restoration. Share of each person civilly liable. Art. reparation for damages. the courts shall determine the amount for which each must respond. just got this from J. shall be liable severally (in solidum) among themselves for their quotas. Upon whom it devolves. and accessories. accomplices and accessories of a felony. and subsidiaries for those of the other persons liable. the person by whom payment has been made shall have a right of action against the others for the amount of their respective shares. — Any person who has participated gratuitously in the proceeds of a felony shall be bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent to the extent of such participation. The action to demand restoration. first against the property of the principals. Preference in payment. Zombie apocalypse 0k 0k Art. accomplices. 108. — If there are two or more persons civilly liable for a felony. — The obligation to make restoration or reparation for damages and indemnification for consequential damages devolves upon the heirs of the person liable. or indemnification for consequential damages and actions to demand the same. Mickey Ingles 4C 2012 Justice Callejo 95 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful