ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

1

CRIMINAL LAW I
I. DEFINITION AND SOURCES
A. DEFINITION

suppression of crimes, such power is delegated to subordinate government subdivisions such as territories. The Philippine Legislature by virtue of the Jones Law, like other territories of the US, has the power to define and punish crimes. The present government of the Philippines created by the US Congress is autonomous. It is within the power of the legislature to prescribe the form of the criminal complaint as long as the constitutional provision of the accused to be informed of the nature of the accusation is not violated. US v. Pablo (1916) Facts: Pablo, a policeman, arrested Dato who was found in a vacant lot where a jueteng game was conducted. He presented a memorandum to his chief claiming that he saw Malicsi and Rodrigo leaving the area. However, during the trial, he changed his statement and claimed that he did not see Malicsi nor Rodrigo leaving the area. As a result, the two accused were acquitted. Pablo was charged with the crime of perjury and was convicted under Act. No. 1697. It was claimed that the Act repealed the provisions of the Penal Code relative to perjury, and the last provision of the Administrative Code repealed the Act, thus, there is no penal sanction for the crime of false testimony or perjury. Held: Notwithstanding that the Act no. 1697 has been interpreted by this court in its decisions to have repealed provisions of the Penal Code relating to false testimony, it did not expressly repeal the pertinent provisions of the RPC. Also, the Administrative Code, in totally repealing Act no. 1697, did not expressly repeal the said articles of the Penal Code. Hence, the provisions of the Penal Code relative to perjury remain in force. The reason behind such interpretation is that crimes should not go unpunished or be freely committed without punishment of any kind. 2. LIMITATIONS TO STATE AUTHORITY TO PUNISH CRIMES 1987 Constitution, Art. III Sec. 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. Sec. 14. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to gave compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable. Sec. 18. No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations. No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. Sec. 19. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.

Criminal law is that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment. B. STATE AUTHORITY TO PUNISH CRIMES

1. SOURCES OF PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL LAW (REYES) 1. The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) and its amendments 2. Special penal laws passed by the Philippine Commission, Philippine Assembly, Philippine Legislature, National Assembly, the Congress of the Philippines, and the Batasang Pambansa. 3. Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Martial Law. ¤ 1987 Constitution Article II, Section 5 Declaration of Principles and State Policies. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty and property, and the promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy. ¤ 1987 Constitution Article VI, Section 1 The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum. People v. Santiago (1922) Facts: Santiago was driving an automobile at a high speed notwithstanding the fact that he had to pass a narrow space between a wagon standing on one side of the road and a heap of stones on the other side where there were two boys standing. He ran over Parondo who was instantly killed as a result of the accident. Santiago was convicted by the lower court of the crime of homicide by reckless imprudence. The accused appealed challenging the validity of Act No. 2886 which amended General Order no. 58 (which provides that all prosecutions for public offenses shall be in the name of the United States against the persons charged with the offenses), claiming that the legislature is not authorized to amend the latter because its provisions have the character of Constitutional Law. Sec. 2 of Act No. 2866 contains that “all prosecutions for public offenses shall be in the name of the People of the Philippine Islands against the person charged with the offense.” Held: The procedure in criminal matters is not incorporated in the Constitution of the States, but is left in the hands of the legislature, so it that it falls within the realm of public statutory law. The states, as part of its police power, have a large measure of discretion in creating and defining criminal offenses. It is urged that the right to prosecute and punish crimes is an attribute of sovereignty, but by reason of the principle of territoriality as applied in the

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

2

The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. Sec. 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax. Sec. 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted. 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 115 Section 1. Rights of accused at trial. – In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled to the following rights: (a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt. (b) To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. (c) To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of the judgment. The accused may, however, waive his presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail, unless his presence is specifically ordered by the court for purposes of identification. The absence of the accused without justifiable cause at the trial of which he had notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to be present thereat. When an accused under custody escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived his right to be present on all subsequent trial dates until custody over him is regained. Upon motion, the accused may be allowed to defend himself in person when it sufficiently appears to the court that he can properly protect his rights without the assistance of counsel. (d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on matters covered by direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner prejudice him. (e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself. (f) To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the trial. Either party may utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness who is deceased, out of or can not with due diligence be found in the Philippines, unavailable, or otherwise unable to testify, given in another case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter, the adverse party having the opportunity to cross-examine him. (g) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and production of other evidence in his behalf. (h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial. (i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law. Civil Code, Article 2 Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations. Pesigan v. Angeles (1984) Facts: Anselmo and Marcelo Pesigan were transporting carabaos in the evening of April 2, 1982 from Camarines Sur to Batangas when the carabaos were confiscated purportedly in accordance with E.O. No. 626-A which prohibits transportation of carabao and carabeef from one province to another. Held: The E.O. should not be enforced against the Pesigans because it is a penal regulation (because of

its confiscation and forfeiture provision) and was published only in the Official Gazette on June 14, 1982. Justice and fairness dictate that the public must be informed of that provision by means of publication in the Gazette before violators of the executive order can be bound thereby. The summary confiscation was not in order. The carabaos must be returned. However, the Pesigans cannot transport the carabaos to Batangas because they are now bound by the said E.O. Tañada v. Tuvera (1985) Facts: The petitioners seek a writ of mandamus to compel respondent public officials to publish or cause the publication of various PD’s, EO’s, LOI’s etc. invoking the Constitutional right of the people to information on matters of public concern. Held: The publication of all presidential issuances of a public nature or of general applicability is mandated by law. It is a requirement of due process. It is a rule of law that before a person may be bound by law, he must first be officially and specifically informed of its contents. The Court therefore declares that presidential issuances of general application which have not been published shall have no force and effect. However, the implementation of the PDs prior to its publication is an operative fact which may have consequences which cannot be justly ignored. The past cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration. From the report submitted by the clerk of court, it is undisputed that none of these unpublished PDs has ever been implemented by the government. PENOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES a. Prevention – This assumes that man has a tendency to commit crime and punishing offenders will prevent them from doing so again. Suppression can only be made possible through penal jurisprudence. b. Deterrence/Exemplarity – This assumes that man is endowed with free will and of his awareness of the sanctions against crimes and his fear of such. Especially if there is: 1. Certainty - that all crimes will be punished. 2. Celerity – that punishment will come swiftly 3. Severity – that punishment is proportionate to his crime. It is also assumed that punishing the offender with cruel and conspicuous penalties will make an example of him to deter others from doing the same in the future. c. Self-Defense – This is probably a conclusion reached by the social contract theorists who hold that there is an unwritten contract between men and their society where individuals agree to give up certain rights in exchange for the protection and benefits offered by a community. If individuals violate this contract, then the society, through the State, has the right to enforce its laws and protect its own existence. d. Reformation – This assumes that punishment is capable of changing/rehabilitating individuals. e. Retribution – This rests on the basic premise that justice must be done: the offender shall not go unpunished. This belongs to that which maintains that punishment is inherent in the very nature of a crime and is thus its necessary consequence. C. BASIC PRINCIPLES

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

3

Criminal law has three main characteristics: 1) general, 2) territorial, and 3) prospective. 1. GENERALITY of Criminal Law ¤ 1987 Constitution, Article VI, Section 11 A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session. No Member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof. ¤ Civil Code, Article 14 Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all those who live or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations. General Rule: The jurisdiction of the civil courts is not affected by the military character of the accused. a Civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction with general court-martial over soldiers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines even in times of war, provided that in the place of the commission of the crime no hostilities are in progress and civil courts are functioning. a When the military court takes cognizance of the case involving a person subject to military law, the Articles of War apply, not the RPC or other penal laws. a The prosecution of an accused before a court-martial is a bar to another prosecution of the accused for the same offense. a Offenders accused of war crimes are triable by military commission. A military commission has jurisdiction even if actual hostilities have ceased as long as a technical state of war continues. Exceptions to the general application of criminal law Art. 2, RPC, “Except as provided in the treatise or laws of preferential application…” Art. 14, Civil Code, “…subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations.” a An example of a treaty or treat stipulation is the Bases Agreement entered into by the Philippines and the US on Mar. 14, 1947 and expired on Sept. 16, 1991. a Another example would be the VFA signed on Feb. 10, 1998 where the Philippines agreed that: a. US military authorities shall have the right to exercise within the Philippines all criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction conferred on them by the military law of the US over US personnel in RP; b. US authorities exercise exclusive jurisdiction over US personnel with respect to offenses, including offenses relating to the security of the us punishable under the law of the US, but not under the laws of RP; c. US military authorities shall have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over US

personnel subject to the military law of the US in relation to: (1) offenses solely against the property or security of the US or offenses solely against the property or person of US personnel; and (2) offenses arising out of any act or omission done in performance of official duty. a An example of a law of preferential application would be R.A. No. 75 which penalizes acts which would impair the proper observance by the Republic and inhabitants of the Philippines of the immunities, rights, and privileges of duly accredited foreign diplomatic representatives in the Philippines. a Persons exempt from the operation of our criminal laws by virtue of the principles of public international law (1) Sovereigns and other chiefs of state. (2) Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary, ministers resident, and charges d’affaires. * a consul is not entitled to the privileges and immunities of an ambassador or minister. * under the Constitution, members of Congress are not liable for libel or slander in connection with any speech delivered on the floor of an house during regular or special session. US v. Sweet (1901) Facts: Sweet was an employee of the US army in the Philippines. He assaulted a prisoner of war for which he was charged with the crime of physical injuries. Sweet interposed the defense that the fact that he was an employee of the US military authorities deprived the court of the jurisdiction to try and punish him. Held: The case is open to the application of the general principle that the jurisdiction of the civil tribunals is unaffected by the military or other special character of the person brought before them for trial, unless controlled by express legislation to the contrary. 2. TERRITORIALITY of Criminal Law ¤ 1987 Constitution, Article I The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domain including the territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines. a The provisions of the RPC are enforceable to all crimes committed within the limits of Philippine territory but it may also apply outside of the Philippine jurisdiction against who: 1. should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship; 2. should forge or counterfeit an coin or currency note of the Philippines or obligations and securities issued by the Philippine government; 3. should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into the country of the obligations and securities aforestated;

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

Court-Martial has no jurisdiction because the Port of Manila is not a base under the Bases Agreement entered into by the Philippines and the US. 4 Laws shall have no retroactive effect. He is under the custody of Commanding General. Ex post facto law is one that is specifically made to retroact to cover acts before it became effective to the prejudice of the accused. who is not a habitual criminal. Held: Bringing opium in local territory even if it is merely for personal use and does not leave the foreign merchant vessel anchored in Philippine waters is subject to local laws particularly under Sec. • We observe the English Rule. a This is consistent with the general principle that criminal laws. Virtvs. a When the repealing law fails to penalize the offense under the old law. He has been charged with disposing in the Port of Manila area things belonging to the US army. a When the repeal is absolute the offense ceases to be criminal. General Rule: Ex post facto law is prohibited. a LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. PROSPECTIVITY of Criminal Law ¤ RPC. the offenders punished by the proper authorities of the local jurisdiction. the new law shall be applied. if need be. importation includes merely bringing the drug from a foreign country to Philippine port even if not landed. the authorities in making the search found the 8 cans of opium. unless the contrary is provided. except when the offender is a habitual delinquent or when the new law is made not applicable to pending action or existing causes of action.a. 22. French rule – Such crimes are not triable in the courts of that country unless their commission affects the peace and security of the territory or the safety of the state is endangered. If the new law totally repeals the existing law so that the act which was penalized under the old law is no longer punishable. while being public officers or employees. US v. Defendant admitted being the owner but did not confess as to his purpose in buying the opium. 4 Act. Miquiabas v. Vnitas.k. Gumabon v. the offender can be tried under the old law. the crime is obliterated. should be construed strictly against the State and liberally in favor of the accused. Different effects of repeal of penal law. – Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect in so far as they favor the person guilty of a felony. Penalties that may be imposed. 3. a Smoking opium aboard a foreign vessel in Philippine waters constitutes a breach of public order because it causes such drug to produce its pernicious effects within our territory. When the steamer anchored in the port of Cebu. should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions. Held: Gen. Art. If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the new law.21. Also. The maritime zone extends to three miles from the outermost coastline. The Port area is merely a temporary quarters. 2381 a.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 4 4. a When the new law and the old law penalize the same offense. the accused cannot be convicted under the new law. being a limitation on the rights of the people. Retroactive effect of penal laws. Philippines-Ryukus command and an appointed General Court Martial found him guilty and sentenced him to 15 years imprisonment. a Disorders which disturb only the peace of the ship or those on board are to be dealt with exclusively by the sovereignty of the home of the ship. the law in force at the time of the commission of the offense shall be applied. and should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations defined in Title I. but those which disturb the public peace may be suppressed. ¤ RPC. Book II of the Code. a A person erroneously accused and convicted under a repealed statute may be punished under the repealing statute. no waiver of jurisdiction can be made either b the prosecuting attorney or by the Secretary of Justice. a Philippine courts have no jurisdiction over offenses committed on board foreign warships in territorial waters. English rule – Such crimes are triable in that country unless they merely affect things within the vessel or they refer to the internal management thereof. Art. Director of Prisons (1971) Facts: Petitioners who were serving their sentence of life imprisonment for the complex crime of rebellion with murder and other crimes seek the retroactive application of the Hernandez doctrine which was promulgated after their conviction. as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code. The Hernandez ruling negated the existence of the crime charged a The RPC has therefore territorial and extraterritorial application. or to make a certain crime graver or prescribe a heavier penalty for it. No. Under the said law. Lastly. and. although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same. Beyond that is the “high seas” which is outside the territorial waters of the Philippines. Warships are always reputed to be the territory of the country to which they belong and cannot be subjected to the laws of another state. ¤ Civil Code. Ah Sing (1917) Facts: Defendant is a subject of China who bought eight cans of opium in Saigon and brought them on board the steamship Shun Chang during the trip to Cebu. civilian employee cannot be considered a member of the US Army as stated in the agreement. . If the new law imposes a heavier penalty. 3. 2. a The law does not have any retroactive effect EXCEPT if it favors the offender unless he is a habitual delinquent or the law otherwise provides. a There are two rules as to jurisdiction over crimes committed aboard merchant vessels while in the territorial waters of another country. 1.No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission. Art. 5. Opium Law. Philippines-Ryukus command (1948) Facts: Petitioner is a Filipino citizen and a civilian employee of the US army.

Board of Medical Examiners (1969) Facts: Pascual was charged in an administrative case for immorality and was announced by counsel of complainants to be their first witness. Held: Both RPC and the Civil Code allow for the retroactive application of judicial decisions. Art. ♣ Characteristics of the positivist theory LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. POSITIVIST a The RPC is based mainly on principles of old or classical school. As such. Bernardo v. People (1983) Facts: The accused were charged and convicted for violating PD No. RA 7636 totally repealed RA 1700 making subversion no longer a crime. The Civil Code provides that judicial decisions applying or interpreting the constitution. The Court convicted Tujan with simple illegal possession of firearm and ammunition but since Tujan’s length of detention is greater than the penalty prescribed. . Penalties that may be imposed. PD No. as well as legislation form part of our legal system. GENERAL PROVISIONS Art. it would be merely an exaltation of the literal to deny its application to a case like the present. Held: Tujan was not placed in double jeopardy because the issue had not yet arisen for he had not yet been actually convicted. nineteen hundred and thirty. — No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission. Rules of Construction of Penal Laws 1. the accused in the Hernandez case was sentenced only to 10 years of imprisonment. a There is no crime when where is no law punishing it. A proceeding for malpractice possesses a criminal or penal aspect in the sense that the respondent would suffer the revocation of his license as a medical practitioner which is even a greater form of deprivation than forfeiture of property. The basis of criminal liability is human free will and the purpose of the penalty is retribution. Held: The Board of Medical examiners cannot. 5. CLASSICAL b. Based on Art. It is a basic principle of criminal law that no person should be brought within the terms of a penal statute who is not clearly within them nor should any act be pronounced criminal which is not clearly made so by the statute. Article III. While reference in Art. There is a scant regard to the human element. Pimentel (1998) Facts: Respondent Tujan was charged with subversion under RA 1700. 772 for possessing and squatting on a parcel of land owned by Cruz. he was also charged with Illegal Possession of Firearms under PD 1866.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 5 stating that rebellion cannot be complexed with other crimes. When he was arrested 7 years after he was charged. such desirable objective should not be accomplished according to means offensive to high sense of respect accorded to human personality. Interpretation by analogy has no place in criminal matters. nor should any act be pronounced criminal which is not clearly made so by statute. the RPC. 14(2) In all criminal prosecutions. 3. 4. this law should be given retroactive effect since the law is favorable to the accused and since he is not a habitual delinquent. This code shall take effect on the first day of January. Definitions. Book Two defines felonies with the corresponding penalties. Sec. Held: Conviction is null and void. People v. 21. Thus. compel the person proceeded against to take the witness stand without his consent. . the court ordered immediate release. 2. 1 Time when Act takes effect. Virtvs. 2. Hence. 4. Criminal statutes are liberally construed in favor of the offender. While crime should not go unpunished and that the truth must be revealed. ♣ Characteristics of the classical theory 1. More and more in line with the democratic creed. 22 of the Civil Code is made to legislative acts. an unlicensed revolver and ammunition was found in his possession. ♣ The RPC consists of two books: Book One consists of 1) basic principles affecting criminal liability and 2) the provisions on penalties including criminal and civil liability. consistently with the self-incriminating clause. D. — Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos). the criminal himself. STRICT CONSTRUCTION of penal laws against the State ¤ 1987 Constitution. 22 of RPC. a The phrase “punished by law” should be understood to mean “punished by the Revised Penal Code”. is controlling over its English translation. Nullum Crimen Nulla Poena Sine Lege Art. Vnitas. the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved…. 3. This means that no person shall be brought within their terms of the law who is not clearly within them. which was approved in Spanish text. ♣ Two theories in criminal law a. 3.reasoning by analogy is applied only when similarities are limited and it is admitted that significant differences also exist. the deference accorded to an individual even those suspected of the most heinous crimes is given due weight. It has endeavored to establish a mechanical and direct proportion between crime and penalty. The original text in which a penal law is approved will govern in case of a conflict with an official translation. Pascual v. That man is essentially a moral creature with an absolutely free will to choose between good and evil thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result of the felonious act than upon the man. and not by special law. 772 does not apply to pasture lands because its preamble shows that it was intended to apply to squatting in urban communities.

against those who: 1. .e. That man is subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid phenomenon which constrains him to do wrong. 3 is not the proper translation of the word “dolo”. ♣ Elements of Felonies 1. 4. The reason for the exception regarding crimes against national security and the law of nations is to safeguard the existence of the state. Piracy and mutiny are crimes against the law ♣ Classification of felonies according to the means by which they are committed (IN GENERAL ONLY) 1. or lack of skill. and as such. — Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship 2. negligence. 3. 4. the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago. ♣ Explanation of the exceptions 1. Dolus is actually equivalent to malice which is the intent to do an injury to another.lack of precaution to avoid injury. 2. That the act or omission must be punishable by the RPC 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding number. Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa). but also outside of its jurisdiction. That the act is performed or the omission incurred by means of dolo or culpa. usually involves lack of skill negligence . personal and individual investigation conducted by a competent body of psychiatrists and social scientists. defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code. bribery. its interior waters and maritime zone. including its atmosphere. freedom – that the act or omission was voluntary and without external compulsion. 2. has the intention to cause an injury to another . failure to issue receipt. 2. INTENTIONAL / DOLO (by means of deceit. The Philippine ship or airship must be duly registered under the Philippine laws with the Philippine Bureau of Customs. There must be an act or omission 2. 3. Piracy is triable anywhere. Such vessel when beyond the 3mile limit is considered and extension of Philippine national territory. the laws of that country will apply as a rule. or 5. malice) . of nations while treason and espionage are crimes against national security. 2. inspite of or contrary to his volition. 166 of the RPC. but rather through the enforcement of individual measures in each particular case after a thorough. II. — Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos). Failure to render assistance. Virtvs. 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. must refer to the discharge of his functions i. DOLO REQUISITES OF DOLO OR MALICE 1. ♣ Definition of terms ACT – must be overt or external (mere criminal thought or intent is not punishable) OMISSION – failure to perform a duty required by law ex. The offense committed by a public officer abroad. A. 163 or Art. 2. non-disclosure of knowledge of conspiracy against the government. usually involves lack of foresight 1. malversation or falsification. FELONIES Art. Vnitas. 2 of Art.an act performed without malice but at the same time punishable though in a lesser degree and with an equal result imprudence . The Philippine court has no jurisdiction over the crime of theft committed on the high seas on board a vessel not registered or licensed in the Philippines. The reason for the exceptions in paragraph (b) and (c) is to maintain and preserve the financial credit and stability of the state.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 6 1. CULPABLE (by means of fault or culpa) . Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations. There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence. 5. Any person who makes false or counterfeit coins or forges treasury or bank notes or other obligations and securities in a foreign country may be prosecuted before our civil courts for violation of Art. ♣ Felonies are acts and omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code. Application of its provisions. should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions.the word “deceit” in par. it cannot be treated and checked by the application of abstract principles of law and jurisprudence nor by the imposition of a punishment which is fixed and determined a priori. intelligence – knowledge needed to determine the morality and consequences LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Definitions. ♣ This has been discussed in the Territoriality principle of criminal law.the offender in performing the act or incurring the omission. 3.failure to foresee impending danger. While being public officers or employees. lack of foresight. That crime is essentially a social and natural phenomenon. BUT if said Philippine vessel or aircraft is within the territory of a foreign country when the crime is committed. HOW COMMITTED Art. like a consular official.

cannot be held criminally liable for homicide. Galano. Their group is prevalent not only in Agusan del Norte but elsewhere in the country. Months after. That the intention of the accused in performing the act should be lawful 3. 15-year-old pushcart cargador. criminally liable. hence need not be proved for purposes of conviction. shot Cagampang and demanded the wife to bring out her husband’s firearm. People v. the court ruled that in the crime of murder. it follows that no motive to kill can be attributed to him. an illiterate. insane and minors have no criminal liability. motive is not an element of the offense. Held: The testimony of witness was weak. It is immaterial when the accused has been positively identified. the lack of motive on the part of the accused plays a pivotal role towards his acquittal. ♣ Motive is not an essential element of a crime. ♣ Requisites: 1. was convicted of the crime of murder for the death of Ramon. of an act. The accused’s defense was alibi and lack of motive. It conflicted with the findings of the Medico-legal officer who identified 2 stab wounds which were inflicted while assailant was in front of the victim. the court finds that no such doubt exits as witnesses. it becomes material only when the evidence is circumstantial or inconclusive and there is some doubt on whether the accused had committed it. motive is not essential for purposes of complying with the requirement that a judgment of guilty must stem from proof beyond reasonable doubt. Delos Santos (2003) Facts: Delos Santos stab Flores with a kitchen knife hitting him on the different parts of his body. He identified the accused alone at the funeral parlor without being placed in a police line-up. ♣ Intent presupposes the exercise of freedom and the use of intelligence ♣ The existence of intent is shown by the overt acts of a person ♣ Criminal intent is presumed from the commission of an unlawful act BUT the presumption of criminal intent does not arise from the proof of the commission of an act which is not unlawful. Moreover. intent – intent to commit the act with malice. honestly mistaking the latter to be a robber responsible for a series of break-ins in the area. 2. . The imbecile. People v. Held: The court held that the argument of Delos Santos is inconsequential. Hassan (1988) Facts: The accused. The method of identification became just a confrontation and was made in violation of the constitutional right of the accused. proof of motive is not essential when the culprit has been positively identified. because he did not act with criminal intent. being purely a mental process. While as a general rule. is presumed and the presumption arises from the proof of the commission of the unlawful act. ♣ Proof of motive alone is not sufficient to support a conviction but lack of motive may be an aid in showing the innocence of the accused. The manner by which the witness was made to identify the accused was pointedly suggestive and activated visual imagination when there was none. INTENT is the purpose to use a particular means to effect such result. ♣ Motive is essential only when there is doubt as to the identity of the assailant. This is especially true where there is doubt as to the identity of the culprit as when the identification is extremely tenuous as in this case. The court noted the total absence of motive ascribed to the accused for stabbing Ramon who is a complete stranger to him. Ah Chong (1910) A houseboy who stabs his roommate in the dark. People v. Delos Santos then argues that since the prosecution witnesses testified that there was no altercation between him and Flores. Temblor (1988) Facts: Cagampang and his wife were conversing in the store adjacent to their house when Temblor arrived and asked to buy cigarettes. Temblor. nisi mens sit rea “the act itself does not make a man guilty unless his intention were so” A crime is not committed if the mind of the person performing to act complained be innocent. however. and. Actus non facit reum. then. ♣ There is no felony by dolo if there is no intent People v. That the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them to be. Vnitas. and after crying out sufficient warnings and believing himself to be under attack.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 7 3. It must be borne in mind that the act from which the presumption of existence of criminal intent springs must be a criminal act. particularly where the accused is positively identified by an eyewitness and his participation is adequately established. De Leon and Tablate positively identified Delos Santos. inflicting upon him mortal wounds which directly caused his death. Held: The knowledge of the accused that Cagampang possessed a firearm was enough motive to kill him as killings were perpetrated by members of the NPA for the sole purpose of acquiring more arms and ammunition. Actus me invito factus non est meus actus “an act done by me against my will is not my act” INTENT V. Virtvs. In People vs. In this case. MISTAKE OF FACT It is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who caused injury to another. the wife was summoned to the police station and there she identified the accused. He is not. MOTIVE MOTIVE is the moving power which impels one to action for a define result. Proof of motive is not indispensable for a conviction. The lone eyewitness claimed he saw the accused stab Ramon only once at the back. Stabbing the victim whom the accused LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. That the mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused. It is known as the NPA’s “agaw armas” campaign.

Held: Plunder is a malum in se which requires proof of criminal of criminal intent. Dizon (1988) Facts: Padilla filed an administrative complaint against RTC Judge Dizon for rendering a manifestly erroneous decision acquitting Lo Chi Fai of the offense charged for smuggling foreign currency out of the country in violation of Central Bank Circular No. It is enough that the prohibited act was voluntarily committed and need not be committed with malice or criminal intent to be punishable. The RPC defines and penalizes the first two classes: 1) intentional and 2) culpable felonies. it being simply the incident of another act performed without malice. ♣ Dolo is not required in crimes punished by special laws because these crimes are mala prohibita. Sandiganbayan (2001) Facts: Estrada is challenging the plunder law. Estrada v. could still be held liable for the killing since they did not take reasonable precautionary measures. People v. Oanis (1988) Police officers who shot a sleeping man in the back mistaking him for a notorious escaped convict wanted dead or alive. Judge Dizon acquitted accused or lack of ♣ in culpable felonies. intelligence 3. Prior to his acquittal. 2. ♣ Good faith and absence of criminal intent are not valid defenses in crimes punished by special laws MALA IN SE and MALA PROHIBITA Mala in se . RELATION OF RPC TO SPECIAL LAWS RPC. A. CULPA RPC. unless the latter should specially provide the contrary. It does not qualify the substance of the offense. time and place. the Code can give suppletory effect. unlawfully and criminally.an act. Requisites of culpa: 1. People v. Padilla v. 960. Held: The second case must be dismissed. but without malice. The law penalizes the negligent act and not the result. . It is noteworthy that the amended information alleges that the crime of plunder was committed “willfully. is inherently and morally wrong. unless the latter should specially provide the contrary. 1883. 10. a case for serious physical injuries and damage to property through reckless imprudence was filed. 365 par 7 Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily. This Code shall be supplementary to such laws. Art. Buan (1968) Facts: The accused was driving a passenger bus. the act alone irrespective of its motives. and the application of penalties. — Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable under special laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code. imprudence. For the essence of the quasi-offense under Art. The gravity of the consequences is only taken into account to determine the penalty.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 8 believed to be an intruder showed a mistake of fact on his part which led him to take the facts as they appear to him and was pressed to take immediate action. 365 of the RPC lies in the execution of an imprudent act which would be punishable as a felony. by its very nature. This Code shall be supplementary to such laws. freedom 2. Art. The Circular prohibits transmission of foreign currency out of the Philippines without authorization from the Central Bank. the injury caused to another should be unintentional. negligence foresight and skill Art. There are 3 classes of crimes. 10. ♣ In those crimes punished by special laws. CRIMES DEFINED AND PENALIZED BY SPECIAL LAWS LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. The third class of crimes is those defined and penalized by special laws which include crimes punished by municipal or city ordinances. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code. Virtvs. Once convicted or acquitted of a specific act of reckless imprudence. self-defense is not tenable as a defense as there was no unlawful aggression but they may avail of the defense of fulfillment of duty as a mitigating circumstance. Precisely because the constitutive crimes are mala in se the element of mens rea must be proven in a prosecution for plunder. One of the issues he raised is whether plunder is a malum prohibitum or malum in se. Accused claimed that he was placed in twice in jeopardy.” It thus alleges guilt knowledge on the part of the petitioner. the stages of commission. Vnitas. when the special law is silent. The third requisite of mistake of fact is lacking. ♣ The provisions of this Code are not applicable to offenses punished by special laws especially those relating to the requisite of criminal intent. Allegedly because of his recklessness. the bus collided with a jeep injuring the passengers of the latter. In this case. ♣ Criminal intent is replaced by negligence and imprudence in felonies committed by means of culpa. ♣ However. Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution displayed in those cases in which the damage impending to be cause is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifest. constitutes the offense. degree of intelligence physical condition and other circumstances regarding persons. — Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable under special laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code. the accused may not be prosecuted again for the same act. Penal sanction for such violation is provided in PD No. A case was filed against the accused for slight physical injuries through reckless imprudence for which he was tried and acquitted. doing or failing to do an act from which material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing or failing to perform such act. Police officers are still liable because they are not justified in killing a man whose identity they did not ascertain. taking into consideration his employment or occupation. it should be done with criminal intent Malum prohibitum – an act is wrong only because there is a law punishing it. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code.

hit a balot vendor. There is no double jeopardy in this case. Blg. Blg. Saley (1998) Facts: Saley was convicted of 16 cases of illegal recruitment. and the precise extent or modality of participation of each of them becomes secondary.P. for the application of penalties under the said Code or by other relevant statutory provisions are based on or applicable only to said rules for felonies under the Code. cannot be invoked when there is a legal impossibility of application. The Court in this case however ruled in favor of Ladonga(wife) as the prosecution failed to prove that she performed any overt act in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy. the act of one is the act of all the conspirators. Simon doctrine as to the penalties to be imposed although PD 1866 is a special law. 64 of the RPC. Blg. She was also convicted of 11 counts of estafa. vs. The suppletory application of the principle of conspiracy in this case is analogous to the application of the provision on principals under Article 17 in U. Held: The unlawful taking of motor vehicles is now covered by the anti-carnapping law (RA No.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 9 because of lack of intent to violate and benefit from the act alone. He ought to know that proof of malice or mens rea is not essential in offense punished by special laws which are mala prohibita. The court cited the case of Yu vs. in the absence of contrary provision in B. the same cannot be appreciated as the suppletory effect of the Revised Penal Code to special laws. While the information alleges that the crime was attended with grave abuse of confidence. The husband applied for probation while the wife appealed arguing that the RTC erred in finding her criminally liable for conspiring with her husband as the principle of conspiracy is inapplicable to BP Blg. Thus. when the penalties under the special law are different from and are without reference or relation to those under the Revised Penal Code. by their nature. Virtvs. there must be a clear breach of the constitution. since all the conspirators are principals. Held: To sustain a conviction for selling prohibited drugs under the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972. 22 was applied suppletorily. A chase took place and eventually. People v. He admitted possession claiming he used them for shooting but was not able to produce any permit to carry. the sale must be clearly established. may be applied suppletorily. the mere use by a special law of a penalty found in the RPC can by no means make an offense thereunder an offense “punished or punishable” by the RPC. People v. Moreover. there being no aggravating and mitigating circumstance. The trial court having convicted Bustinera of qualified theft instead of carnapping. as provided in Article 10 of said Code.S. either by express provision or by necessary implication. The severity of a penalty does not ipso facto make the same cruel and excessive. Padilla v. PD 1866 is constitutional. Conviction under the Labor Code for illegal recruitment is malum prohibita while estafa under the RPC is malum in se. Ladonga v People (2005) Facts: Spouses Ladonga were convicted by the RTC for violation of BP. Padilla’s vehicle was stopped. People. Simon (1994) Facts: The accused was arrested after a buybust operation conducted by the police wherein the accused sold 2 tea-bags of marijuana to a poseur buyer for P40. 22 does not expressly prescribe the suppletory application of the provisions of the RPC. Held: B. People v. She has no valid license or authority to engage in placement of workers. The judge did not take into consideration the admission of the accused that he was a “carrier” of foreign currency for other people but chose to give credence to the fantastic tale of the accused that he and his alleged business associate were using the money for a particular investment. 22 (3 counts). 22 which is a special law. the general provisions of the RPC which. The court cited People v. erred in the imposition of the penalty. The contention that the penalty of simple illegal possession is cruel and excessive in contravention of the constitution does not merit serious consideration. She claims that she was not engaged in recruitment but is merely acting as an agent. there can be no suppletory effect of the rules. Vnitas. The court held that in the instant case the imposable penalty under RA 6425 as amended by RA 7659 is prison correccional to be taken from the medium period thereof pursuant to Art. Held: Saley is guilty of illegal recruitment and estafa. hence the rules in the said code for graduating by degrees or determining the proper period should be applied.P. Dissent: It is thus clear that an offense is punished by the RPC if both its definition and the penalty therefore are found in the special law. Either the testimony of a representative of or a certification from the PNP Firearms and explosives office would suffice to prove beyond reasonable doubt the second element of illegal possession. Held: Pd 1886 provides only 2 requisites to establish crimes involving illegal possession of firearm: (1) existence of subject firearm and (2) the fact that the accused who owned or possessed the firearm does not have the corresponding permit to possess. one of which was on the large scale. driving his Pajero at high speed despite the bad weather. are necessarily applicable. Held: Judge showed gross ignorance of the law. CA (1997) Facts: Padilla. Panida which involved the crime of carnapping and the penalty LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. In short. 6539) and not by the provisions on qualified theft or robbery. The court cited the case of People v. She also claimed that she was merely aiding the processing of the complainant’s visas. 22.P. That the latter imports or borrows from the RPC its nomenclature of penalties. He was arrested and several firearms were found inside his vehicle. Bustinera (2004) Facts: Bustinera was convicted by the trial Court for qualified theft under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code for the unlawful taking of the taxi cab driven by him which is owned and operated by Cipriano and was sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. the penalties therein were taken from the RPC. For once conspiracy or action in concert to achieve a criminal design is shown. The commission of the offense of illegal sale of prohibited drugs requires merely the consummation of the selling transaction. To justify nullification. where the provisions on subsidiary imprisonment under Article 39 of the RPC to B. Blg. . Ponte.

unbroken by any efficient intervening cause. WRONGFUL INTENDED PUNISHABLE CONDUCT ACT DIFFERENT FROM THAT a. PRAETER INTENTIONEM – the act exceeds the intent. fired towards the vehicles killing 2 of the passengers and seriously injuring 3 others. Art. That the victim at the time the physical injuries were inflicted was in normal health. — Every person owing allegiance to (the United States) the Government of the Philippine Islands. al. ♠ The causes which may produce a result different from that which the offender intended are: a. 49) b. and having knowledge of any conspiracy against them. Bustinera was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 14 years and 8 months as minimum. shall be punished: 1. 116. in dereliction of the duties of his office. the fact that they were mistaken does not diminish their culpability. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property. and the active force is a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the accused. conceals or does not disclose and make known the same. shall maliciously refrain from instituting prosecution for the punishment of violators of the law. In any event. 223. — The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period and suspension shall be imposed upon any public officer. without being a foreigner. ♠ The felony committed must be the proximate cause of the resulting injury. People v. The resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the victim. this Court did not apply the provisions of the Revised Penal Code suppletorily as the anticarnapping law provides for its own penalties which are distinct and without reference to the said Code. Nonetheless. shall be punished as an accessory to the crime of treason. — Criminal liability shall be incurred: 1. when the offender intending to do an injury to one person actually inflicts it on another. as amended. The lower court convicted the accused. as maximum. the injurious result is greater than that intended. to 17 years and 4 months. Conniving with or consenting to evasion. 2. There is an active force that intervened between the felony committed and the resulting injury. 2. Mistake in the identity of the victim carries the same gravity as when the accused zeroes in on his intended victim. produces the injury. Appellants accuse the trial court of engaging in conjecture in ruling that there was aberratio ictus in this case. 3. that is. were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. as minimum. if the fugitive shall have been sentenced by final judgment to any penalty. — Any public officer who shall consent to the escape of a prisoner in his custody or charge. 2. or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which he resides.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 10 imposed was the indeterminate sentence of 14 years and 8 months. he is not criminally liable for the result which is not intended. or shall tolerate the commission of offenses. ♠ The felony committed is not the proximate cause of the resulting injury when: Art. Art. that is. and without which the result would not have occurred. as the case may be. ♠ Rationale: el que es causa de la causa es causa del mal causado “He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused” ♠ When a person has not committed a felony. whether foreseen or intended or not. or officer of the law. ♠ When death is presumed to be the natural consequence of physical injuries inflicted: 1. OMISSION ♠ One who commits an intentional felony is responsible for all the consequences which may naturally and logically result therefrom. Misprision of treason. . 4. By prision correccional in its minimum period and temporary special disqualification. or b. That the death may be expected from the physical injuries inflicted. injuring one person mistaken for another (this is a complex crime under Art. ERROR IN PERSONAE – mistake in the identity of the victim. Art. Disloyalty of public officers or employees. Held: The allegation does not advance the cause of the appellants. 208. to 17 years and 4 months. 137. Virtvs. in natural and continuous sequence. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. the lower court was not engaging in conjecture because the conclusion that the appellants killed the wrong persons was based on the extrajudicial statement of appellant Beronga and the testimony of one witness. That death ensued within a reasonable time. not to prove that appellants did in fact commit the crimes. or shall continue to discharge the duties of their offices under the control of the rebels or shall accept appointment to office under them. Sabalones (1988) Facts: Two vehicles proceeded to the house of Stephen Lim when Sabalones et. and c. negligence and tolerance. ABERRATIO ICTUS – mistake in the blow. PROXIMATE CAUSE – the cause. which. in case the fugitive shall not have been finally convicted but only LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Prosecution of offenses. 2. It must be stressed that the trial court relied on the concept of aberratio ictus to explain why the appellants staged the ambush. Criminal liability. By prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and temporary special disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual special disqualification. as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of the province. 1. who. B. Art. Vnitas. — The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon public officers or employees who have failed to resist a rebellion by all the means in their power. as maximum for the crime of carnapping under RA 6539.

to LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Art. rebellion or sedition must not actually be committed or else conspiracy shall no longer be punishable because it is not a separate offense from the felony itself. Art. CONSPIRACY . PROPOSAL AND CONSPIRACY Art. GENERAL RULE: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony are not punishable EXCEPTION: They are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefore. — Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution or corruption of persons underage to satisfy the lust of another. — The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 6.the agreement must refer to the commission of a crime. ♠ The RPC specially provides a penalty for mere conspiracy in treason.agreement presupposes meeting of the minds of two or more persons b.000 pesos. and prision correccional and a fine not exceeding P5. That the agreement concerned the commission of a felony. 3. and in case of convictions the penalty shall be imposed in the maximum period. — The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon: 1. Art. Art. 306.for a collective responsibility among the accused to be established. Any one who shall fail to render assistance to any person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying. having been elected by popular election to a public office. — The conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat shall be punished by prision mayor in minimum period and a fine which shall not exceed eight thousand pesos (P8. and if the culprit is a pubic officer or employee. Refusal to discharge elective office. or both. coup d’etat. shall fail to deliver said child to the authorities or to his family. 234. . including those in government-owned or controlled corporations. If any of the arms carried by any of said persons be an unlicensed firearm. in which case. ♠INDICATIONS OF CONSPIRACY . RATIONALE: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a crime are only preparatory acts and the law regards them as innocent or at least permissible except in rare and exceptional cases. 186. 275. Conspiracy to commit sedition. Persons found guilty of this offense shall be punished by prision mayor in its medium period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period if the act or acts committed by them are not punishable by higher penalties. There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or persons. they shall suffer such high penalties. Corruption of minors. — The conspiracy or proposal to commit the crime of treason shall be punished respectively. having found an abandoned child under seven years of age. shall be imposed upon any person who. Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim.000 pesos. or kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom or for any other purpose to be attained by means of force and violence. when he can render such assistance without detriment to himself. and (2) proposal to commit a felony. each doing his part to fulfill their common design to commit the felony. or shall fail to take him to a safe place. Any person who shall enter into any contract or agreement or shall take part in any conspiracy or combination in the form of a trust or otherwise. Penalty. 141. Anyone who. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat. coup d’etat. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. — Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefore. 136. rebellion or sedition. all of them acted in concert. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance to another whom he has accidentally wounded or injured. Who are brigands. — Persons conspiring to commit the crime of sedition shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium period and a fine not exceeding 2. Virtvs. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade. 2. he shall also suffer the penalty of temporary absolute disqualification. rebellion or insurrection. — The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding 1.000 pesos. they shall be deemed highway robbers or brigands. it is sufficient that at the time of the aggression. Vnitas. shall be punished by prision mayor. in restraint of trade or commerce or to prevent by artificial means free competition in the market. 115. 3. Penalty. or both.000 pesos Art. Art. ♠ REQUISITES OF CONSPIRACY a. Art. shall refuse without legal motive to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office. A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felon and decide to commit it. 340. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason. ♠ Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony are two different acts or felonies: (1) conspiracy to commit a felony. It must be an agreement to act. — When more than three armed persons form a band of robbers for the purpose of committing robbery in the highway. Art. and . Treason. unless such omission shall constitute a more serious offense.000 pesos.000. shall be imposed upon: 1. 8.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 11 held as a detention prisoner for any crime or violation of law or municipal ordinance. it shall be presumed that said persons are highway robbers or brigands. That two or more persons came to an agreement: .00). by prision mayor and a fine not exceeding P10.

and as can be inferred from their acts. who was also present stabbed Arugay several times which resulted to the latter’s death. direct proof is not essential to establish it. the demand that it be established by positive evidence. She requested that the currency conversion be made in her room as she did not want to carry around a huge sum of money. distributing and transporting of dangerous drugs. From the mode and manner in which the offense was perpetrated. not on mere inferences and presumption. Conspiracy is predominantly a state of mind as it involves the meeting of the minds and intent of the malefactors. delivering. Thereupon. The existence of the assent of minds of the co-conspirators may be inferred from proof of facts and circumstances which. Calling the moneychanger from a motel room. She alleged that her mere presence in the crime scene is not per se a sufficient indiqium of conspiracy. While it is true that it was Martin who took the money. People v. Conspiracy as crime should be distinguished from conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability the latter being applicable to the case. During the occasion of the robbery.A. retaliated by hacking Li on the head causing the bat to fall from his hand and leaving him unconscious or semi-unconsious. Virtvs. In fact. . Consequently. It is clear that Section 21 (b) of R. Li v. to pursue it. a finding of conspiracy cannot arise. as opposed to instances wherein the participants would have the opportunity to orchestrate a more deliberate plan. Held: Fabro’s contention that Martin was the real curlprit being the source of the contraband does not in any way absolve her of the crime of selling marijuana. Bagano (2002) Facts: Jeremias and his wife Merlinda were sleeping in their home when they were awakened by someone repeatedly calling Jeremias' name. it is sufficient that at the time of the commission of the offense the accused had the same purpose and were united in its execution. mapped out a plan to rob a moneychanger. The chain of events and the conduct of Bello lead to no other conclusion than that she conspired with her co-accused to commit the crime. rebellion or sedition. Fabro (2000) Facts: Petitioner Fabro together with her common-law husband Pilay and Irene Martin was charged with the crime of "violation of Section 21 (b) Art. al.the conspirators have made up their minds to commit the crime. the exception is when such is specifically penalized by law. Jeremias struggled to free himself from Cañete's clasp and ran. There must be a determination to commit the crime of treason. but Bagano gave chase. taken together. Arugay armed with a bolo. expressly or impliedly. Sangalang was the main actor in stabbing Arugay to death. Spontaneity alone does not preclude the establishment of conspiracy. II of Republic Act No. Conspiracy herein refers to the mere agreement to commit the said acts and not the actual execution thereof. Bagano with ice pick in hand stabbed Jeremias on the chest. From such a spontaneous reaction. IV. fetched her co-accused. At this point in time. the real possessor of the confiscated properties was her co-accused Martin. in relation to Section 4. in accordance with the principle that in conspiracy the act People v. effect. who acted as poseur buyer. Fabro contends that her guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt as based on the testimony of the NBI. one kilo of dried marijuana leaves. as in the case of Section 21 of Republic Act 6425. hence. it was Fabro who negotiated with the poseur buyers. the messenger who brought the money to Bello was killed. Yet it is more difficult to presume conspiracy in extemporaneous outbursts of violence. Art. Jeremias died upon arrival at the hospital. She insists that she acted against her will due to the irresistible force employed by her co-accused. Proving conspiracy is a dicey matter. much more in coordination with each other. Bello. As Li was incapacitated or probably unconscious at the time Sangalang stabbed Arugay. but peering through the window. especially difficult in cases such as the present wherein the criminal acts arose spontaneously. For conspiracy to exist. A conviction premised on a finding of conspiracy must be founded on facts. it cannot be assumed that Sangalang did what he has done with the knowledge or assent of Li. it is evident that Bagano and Cañete were one in their intention to kill Jeremias. Conspiracy exists where the plotters agree. Andasan. Held: The Court held that Bello conspired with her co-accused to commit the crime. The acts of Martin and Fabro clearly show a unity of purpose in the consummation of the sale of marijuana. and carried and handed over the marijuana to Apduhan. Bello (2004) Facts: Accused Bello et. the Court is hard put to conclude that Sangalang and Li had acted in concert to commit the offense. Merlinda remained in their room. Based on the circumstances. indicate that they are parts of the complete plan to commit the crime. While the rule is that a mere conspiracy to commit a crime without doing any overt act is not punishable. 6425 punishes the mere conspiracy to commit the offense of selling. argued that her alleged conspiracy with the other accused was not sufficiently established by circumstantial evidence as there was no showing that she had the same purpose and united with the other accused in the execution of the crime. People v. The trial court ruled that Bello conspired with the other accused and was found guilty as principal for the crime of robbery with homicide. the stabbing of Arugay could very well be construed as a spur-of-the-moment reaction by Sangalang upon seeing that his friend Li was struck on the head by Arugay. The lower court held that there was conspiracy in the present case Held: The existence of conspiracy should be ruled out. to commit the crime and decide LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. she saw Cañete suddenly embrace Jeremias as the latter was opening the gate. Bello misrepresented that she came from Japan and would like to convert her 40 pieces of yen to pesos. . Records clearly reveal that Bello was part of the plan to rob the moneychanger. Sangalang. 6425 as amended. the latter armed himself with a baseball bat and used the same to hit Arugay on the arm. Jeremias went to the window to see who it was and thereafter left their room to go outside. to bring about what has already been conceived and determined That the execution of the felony be decided upon. People (2001) Facts: Because of an altercation between Arugay and Li. Proof of an actual planning of the perpetuation of the crime is not a condition precedent. Hence. for selling to PO2 Apduhan. Held: Conspiracy is attendant in the commission of the crime. Vnitas. can be consummated in a moment’s notice — through a single word of assent to a proposal or an unambiguous handshake.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 12 c. which after all.

The above circumstances clearly show the common purpose and concerted efforts on the part of appellant and her co-accused. Ramos (2004) Facts: The trial court found appellant Eulalia San Roque guilty for conspiring and confederating with her co-accused for the murder of her live-in-partner Lomida. although apparently independent. US v. It is clear that neither the victims nor Banisa could have anticipated Bangcado's act of shooting the victims since the attack was sudden and without any reason or purpose. hence. . While her co-accused dragged the helpless victim. Bangcado (2000) Facts: SPO1 Bangcado together with SPO1 Banisa frisked and searched Cogasi. The lower court convicted both Bangcado and Banisa for 2 counts of murder and 2 counts of frustrated murder. PROPOSAL Requisites: a. either morally.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 13 of one is the act of all. she fled with the other accused. There is no decided. People v. Held: In determining the existence of conspiracy. the act of one becomes the act of all. People v. a conspiracy may be inferred though no actual meeting among them is proven. indicating a closeness of personal association and concurrence of sentiment. Cogasi and his friends did as they were told and were caught unaware when they were shot by Bangcado. c. Bangcado directed the victims to form a line against a Ford Fierra. b. Valdez (1988) Facts: Eleno was about to stand up to accompany a relative to a prayer meeting when he was shot at the back. Adawan and Lino to see if they were concealing any weapons. Vengco (1984) The conspiracy between Constantino Leneses and Leon David is discernible from the way in which the assaulted Celaderna and their conduct sometime before and immediately after the stabbing that clearly show that they had agreed to kill him. encouragement or agreement or materially through external acts indicating a manifest intent of supplying aid in the perpetration of the crime in an efficacious way. The series of events in this case convincingly show that appellant and her co-accused acted in unison and cooperated with each other in killing Lomida. It is not the execution of a felony that is proposed. Appellant argues that the fact of such conspiracy has not been satisfactorily proven during the trial of the case. Conspiracy bestows upon them equal liability. appellant merely watched intensely. and each of the accused will thereby be deemed equally guilty of the crime committed. Clemente. Defendant Bautista was an intimate friend of Ricarte and was present in several meetings. Held: There being no finding of Conspiracy with Bangcado. The brother of the victim also testified that he LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. In the absence of any previous plan or agreement to commit a crime. And after attaining their purpose. Because Bangcado and Banisa were holding handguns. Appellant was the one who opened the door and allowed the other accused to enter the house. People v. Adawan and Lino died of gunshot wounds in the head. Virtvs. Lomida was stabbed. each doing a part that their acts. concrete and formal proposal. tied him to a santol tree. Thus. Defendant Ricarte was recognized as chief of military forces to be organized in the Philippines. Held: The fact that one accused of conspiracy to overthrow the government has actually and voluntarily accepted appointment by the conspirators as an officer of armed forces raised or to be raised in furtherance of the designs of the conspirators may be taken into consideration as evidence of the criminal connection of the accused with the conspiracy. and shot him 5 to 7 times. Banisa must be absolved from criminal responsibility for the assault on the victims. In such case. People v. The mother looked at the direction from where the gunshot came from and was able to identify the 2 defendants as they turned and ran down the hill from the bamboo grove from which the two hid behind. She vigorously contends that she did not participate in the killing of the victim. the criminal design of Bangcado had not yet been revealed prior to the killings. and b. That he proposes its execution to some other person or persons. during or after the commission of the crime showing that they acted in unison with each other. ♠ It is not necessary that the person to whom the proposal is made agrees to commit treason or rebellion. She even “turned her back” as the lifeless body of the victim was being burned. they shall suffer the same fate for their acts. the criminal responsibility arising from different acts directed against one and the same person is individual and not collective. She joined them in bringing the victim to the residence of Ramos. evincing a common purpose or design. The presence of conspiracy among the accused can be proven by their conduct before. The rule is that “if it is proven that two or more persons aimed by their acts towards the accomplishment of the same unlawful object. it is not necessary to show that all the conspirators actually hit and killed the victim. There must be a showing that appellant cooperated in the commission of the offense. shot and burned resulting to his death. and that each of the participants is liable only for his own acts. Bautista (1906) Facts: During the latter part of 1903. through advice. That a person has decided to commit a felony. Defendant Puzon admitted that he accepted employment as chief of signal corps of such junta. while Cogasi and Clemente sustained head wounds. were in fact connected and cooperative. stabbed him twice by a bladed knife. the Court acquitted Banisa of all the charges against him. ♠ There is no criminal proposal when: a. Vnitas. her brother-in-law. the fact that it was Bagano who delivered the fatal blow on Jeremias and Cañete's participation was limited to a mere embrace is immaterial. After making sure that the victims were unarmed. Consequently. The person who proposes is not determined to commit the felony. a junta was organized and a conspiracy entered into by a number of Filipino residents in HK for the purpose of overthrowing the government of the US in the Philippines and replacing it with Republica Universal Democratica Filipinas.

A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present. they would constitute a crime external acts – cover a) preparatory and b) acts of execution preparatory – acts tending toward the crime. which if carried to its complete termination following its natural curse. Frustrated – it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which nevertheless. Stabbed Hierro at the back with a knife resulting to his death. on the other hand. Escober (1988) Facts: Alorte. Held: Escober was acquitted. Elijorde (2003) Facts: Hierro and Visbal went to the sari-sari store where they encountered Elijorde. 2) such external acts have direct connection with the crime intended to be committed. 3. Another confrontation ensued. To hold the accused as co-principal in the crime charged. frustrated. d. There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly or over acts. he cannot evade responsibility for the crime. Virtvs. Thus. The non-performance of all acts of execution was due to cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. Elijorde and Punzalan were charged with murder. DEVELOPMENT OF A CRIME a. The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts. Consummated. 3. do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by voluntary desistance of the perpetrator. usually overt acts with a logical relation to a particular concrete offense b. do not produce it by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. each of the accused is liable only for his own acts. these acts do not yet constitute even the first stage of the acts of execution. STAGES OF COMMISSION OF A CRIME Art. Mere kicking does not necessarily prove intent to kill. c. Elijorde. and Punzalan who kicked him in the back. 6. The two victims ran away. had they been carried out. ordinarily not punishable unless specifically provided for. 4. nevertheless. Held: If conspiracy is proved to exist in the commission of the felony. 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. Punzalan. People v. ♠ Drawing or trying to draw a pistol or raising a bolo as if to strike the offended party with it is not an overt act of homicide. 2. indicating the intention to commit a particular crime. However. internal acts – such as mere ideas in the mind of a person. Punzalan and Menes. 2. are not punishable even if. Held: No conspiracy between the 2 because there is no evidence to show unity of purpose and design in the execution of the killing. Punzalan is acquitted. Punzalan kicked Hierro at the back and the latter ran away but pursued by Elijorde. . do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. OVERT ACT – some physical activity or deed. People v. more than a mere planning or preparation. The offender’s act is not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance. Attempted – there is an attempt when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which. His participation is to act as a look-out and even if he did not participate in the actual killing. Escober and Punzalan were convicted of having killed the children of spouses Chua while robbing Bee Seng Electrical Supply owned by the spouses. Escober being on duty that fateful night and opening the gate to persons who turned out to be robbers and killers make him an easy suspect. He does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony. Consummated – a felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present. then. it is not necessary to prove that participation of each conspirator of all are liable as any act of a co-conspirator becomes the act of the other regardless of the precise degree of participation in the act. ♠ The commission of the felony is deemed commenced directly by overt acts when 1) there be external acts. the act of one is the act of all. Punzalan is a friend of Abuyen. intent not yet disclosed acts of execution – acts directly connected to the intended crime. are punishable. Menes reacted to a comment made by Hierro by punching him in the face followed by Elijorde who also boxed him. Escober and Punzalan were charged as principals by indispensable cooperation. and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which. is guilty as principal. nevertheless. — Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated and attempted.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 14 positively identified Valdez as the one carrying the gun and that it was Orodio who was running with him. Abuyen was the former security guard of the store while Escober was the present one. the existence of conspiracy between the accused and the actual killers must be shown and the same degree of proof required for establishing the crime is required to support a finding of the presence of the conspiracy. and attempted felonies. varies with the crime and is punishable under the code. ATTEMPTED FELONY Elements: 1. Punzalan only kicked Hierro twice after which he did not cooperate with Elijorde in pursuing and killing the victim. the fact that accused was at the scene of the crime is not by itself sufficient to establish his criminal liability. Vnitas. STAGES OF COMMISSION 1. will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. The evidence is more than adequate to show conspiracy between two accused even if prosecution failed to show who actually pulled the trigger of the shotgun.

If the subjective and objective phases are present. one hitting him on his thigh. Lamahang (1935) Facts: The accused was caught in the act of making an opening with an iron bar on the wall of a store where the owner was sleeping. ♠ The intention of the accused must be viewed from the nature of the acts executed by him. Held: The SC held that the crime is a frustrated felony not an attempted offense considering that after being stabbed and clubbed twice in the head as a result of which he lost consciousness and fell. Dio (1984) Facts: The appellant and his companion tried to divest Crispulo of his Seiko wrist watch but Crispulo resisted their attempt and fought the robbers.the result of the acts of execution. The killing may be considered as merely incidental to the plan to carry out the robbery. concrete offense. The victim’s wound in the right thigh was not fatal and the doctrinal rule is that where the wound is inflicted on the victim is not sufficient to cause his death. The accused had only succeeded in breaking one board and in unfastening another from the wall. The lower court convicted him of frustrated murder. People v. Muntinlupa when a group composed of Agapito Listerio. entry into labia is considered rape even without rupture of hymen and full penetration is not necessary. touching should be understood as inherently part of entry of penis into labia and not mere touching of the pudendum. Its nature in relation to its objective is ambiguous. that. who instantly arrested him. Tan got off the Fierra and rode a jeepney which just passed by. question arises whether what transpired was attempted or consummated rape. When he saw the accused riding at the back of the jeep. for the purpose of imposing penal sanction to make an assumption that the act was in preparation for the commission of robbery. There was only a shelling of the castle but no bombardment of the drawbridge yet. he saw that Jeonito was already dead. he should be guilty of attempted trespass to dwelling. George. passing through the opening which he had started to make on the wall. A crime cannot be held to be attempted unless the offender. against his will.If it is already passed but the felony is not produced. is prevented. Marlon and George. which is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts of the perpetrator. was hit on the head by Samson and Bancaya with lead pipes and momentarily lost consciousness. it is frustrated. Listerio (2000) Facts: Brothers Jeonito and Marlon were passing by Tramo. Thus. and not from his admission. Mere touching of external genitalia by penis is already rape. The hymen of the victim was still intact but since in previous Orita ruling. was thereafter brought to a hospital for treatment. Vnitas. Marlon. People v. The trial court convicted him of attempted robbery. Samson. Jeonito’s brother. by some outside cause from performing all of the acts LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. SUBJECTIVE PHASE . Some degree of penetration beneath the surface must be achieved and the labia major must be entered. The Seiko watch was still strapped to his wrist. after beginning the commission of the crime by overt acts. but it is not sufficient. the crime is only attempted murder. The lower court found Listerio guilty for the “attempt” to kill Marlon. Trinidad (1989) Facts: Deceased Soriano and Laroa together with Tan were inside a Ford Fierra Trinidad asked for a ride. Held: The conviction is erroneous. Marlon who sustained injuries in the arm and back. There is no doubt that it was the intention of the accused to enter the store by means of violence. 2. he clung to its side. The testimony of the victim herself claimed that penis grazed but did not penetrate her organ. . stabbed Jeonito from behind. The accused must be convicted of attempted robbery with homicide. The lower court convicted the appellant of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide. Their assailants then fled after the incident. When he regained his senses. there is consummated felony. OBJECTIVE PHASE . . Virtvs. What we have here is an attempt to commit an indeterminate offense. . he tried to run but when the jeep started driving away. People v. The accused fired two shots at Tan.If the offender reaches the point where he has no more control over is acts. and Marlon. However. Listerio. who were armed with bladed weapons. Campuhan (2000) Facts: The mother of the 4-year-old victim caught the houseboy Campuhan in the act of almost raping her daughter. People v. Prosecution did not prove that the Campuhan’s penis was able to penetrate victim’s vagina because the kneeling position of the accused obstructed the mother’s view of the alleged sexual contact. leading directly to its realization and consummation.That portion of the execution of the crime starting from the point where the offender still has control over his acts. all surnamed Dela Torre and Bonifacio Bancaya blocked their path and attacked them with lead pipes and bladed weapons. The accused were unsuccessful in their criminal venture since the watch was still securely strapped to the victim’s wrist. There is no logical and natural relation between the act of entering and robbery. that is. when the policeman showed up. The victim was stabbed and later died. Held: Attempted rape only. . There must be clear and convincing proof that the penis indeed touched the labia and slid into the female organ and NOT MERELY STROKED THE EXTERNAL SURFACE. SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE PHASES OF A FELONY 1. Marlon's attackers apparently thought he was already dead and fled. It is the opinion of the SC that the attempt to commit an offense which the Penal code punishes is that which has a logical relation to a particular. The accused shot the two deceased.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 15 INDETERMINATE OFFENSE – It is one where the purpose of the offender in performing an act is not certain. The crime of robbery was therefore not consummated. Held: The decision of the lower court was erroneous. Held: The accused can only be convicted of Attempted Murder because the accused was unable to perform all acts of execution which would have produced the murder. the accomplishment of the crime. the subjective phase is passed. People v.

penetration of the labia is sufficient. the offender has not accomplished his criminal purpose. Because of their position. Thus. Caballero (2003) Facts: As Eugene walked by the gate of the Mondragon Compound. the accused cannot fully penetrate her. saw the Caballero brothers assaulting Eugene and shouted for help. The guards apprehended him at the store parking lot while trying to board a taxi. Held: Though complete penetration is not necessary. testified that the stab wound sustained by Arnold on the left side of his body was FRUSTRATED FELONY Elements: 1. People v. Dino and Empelis rulings. ATTEMPTED OR IMPOSSIBLE CRIME FRUSTRATED The evil intent of the offender is not accomplished The evil intent of the The evil intent of the offender is possible of offender cannot be accomplishment accomplished The evil intent cannot be The evil intent of the accomplished because of offender cannot be the intervention of certain accomplished because it is cause or accident in which inherently impossible of the offender had no part accomplishment or because the means LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. The offender performs all the acts of execution. Held: The Revised Penal Code provisions on theft have not been designed in such fashion as to accommodate the Adiao. Armando Caballero suddenly grabbed Eugene towards the compound. Ricardo accosted Arnold and stabbed the latter on the left side of his body. since there is no sufficient evidence of such penetration. . Only a small part of his penis inserted her vagina. Spontaneously. Vnitas. 3. it cannot be an attempt. because he has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime. Dr. Armando’s brothers Ricardo. We thus conclude that under the Revised Penal Code. the felony is consummated rape. In both. Marciano. which acts it is his intention to perform. he actually attains his purpose and. Jr. it is hardly conceivable how the frustrated stage in rape can ever be consummated. there is no crime of frustrated theft.. She arrived at her boarding house early morning coming from a late-night party. Eugene resisted. FRUSTRATED FELONY VS. If he has performed all the acts which should result in the consummation of the crime and voluntarily desists from proceeding further. The accused made the victim hold his penis and insert it in her vagina. Held: Perfect penetration is not essential for the consummation of rape.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 16 which should produce the crime. Virtvs. Armando took the wooden pole supporting the clothesline and hit Eugene with it. Taking into account the nature. Leonilo. who likewise rushed to the scene was stabbed by Robito. By reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. the offender has performed all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence. While in frustrated felony. But the felony is not produced. Arnold saw the commotion and rushed to the scene to pacify the protagonists. employed by the offender is inadequate or ineffectual People v. Eugene and Leonilo eventually died from the stab wounds they sustained. the offender must perform all the acts of execution. People (2007) Facts: A grocery boy was caught trying to abscond a box of Tide Ultrabar laundry soap from the Super Sale Club. Robito. However. Eriña (1927) Facts: The victim of the crime was a child of 3 years and 11 months. from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction. indicating an effort had been made to enter the vagina but it is doubtful whether the entry had been effected. People v. the act is merely frustrated. Clearly. because he has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime. Jr. They entered a room and the victim was ordered to lie down. In other words. 2. in attempted felony. in the crime of rape. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender. The accused suddenly held her and poked a knife to her neck. there is no language in Article 308 that expressly or impliedly allows that the “free disposition of the items stolen” is in any way determinative of whether the crime of theft has been produced. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender. ATTEMPTED FELONY 1. 2. The lower court convicted the accused of frustrated rape. Orita (1990) Facts: The victim was a 19-year old college student. the offender merely commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of execution. All the acts performed would produce the felony as a consequence. from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim. Arnold fled for his life and hid under the house of a neighbor. ♠ In frustrated felony. There are doubts whether the accused succeeded in penetrating the vagina before being disturbed in the timely intervention of the mother and sister. Forthwith. Marciano. Again. The victim was able to escape and report to the police what happened. The physician found a slight inflammation of the exterior parts of the organ. to be an attempted crime the purpose of the offender must be thwarted by a foreign force or agency which intervenes and compels him to stop prior to the moment when he has performed all of the acts which should produce the crime as a consequence. Quisumbing. Dissent: It is consummated rape. 4. Two of them stabbed Arnold on his forearm. and Robito joined Armando and assaulted Eugene. ] Valenzuela v. He claimed the theft was merely frustrated for he was not able to dispose of the goods. Eugene’s sister. Myrna. who attended to and operated on Arnold. and Armando ganged up on Arnold. However. elements and manner of execution of the crime of rape and jurisprudence on the matter.

the crime is not consummated by reason of the intervention of causes independent of the will of the offender. 25 of this code are: reclusion perpetua reclusion temporal perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification perpetual or temporary special disqualification prision mayor b. . Held: Finding the hymen intact is not always proof that no rape has been committed. a. . ♠ Art. 25 of this Code. In homicide cases. it would seem that there is no frustrated bribery but in People v. the physician found the labia and the opening of the vagina inflamed together with an abundance of semen. In theft. treason) • There is not ATTEMPTED crime because the overt act in itself consummates the crime. the elements constituting the felony ex. US v. the offender is said to have performed all the acts of execution if the wound inflicted on the victim is mortal and could cause the death of the victim barring medical intervention or attendance. GRAVE FELONIES – those in which the law attaches a capital punishment or afflictive penalty. The offender has passed the subjective phase in the commission of the crime. (Adiao case vs. Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum period are correctional. c. he is guilty of consummated crime of theft. the CONSUMMATED FELONY Requisites: 1. The crime of arson is therefore consummated even if only a portion of the wall or any other part of the house is burned. the mere removal of the personal property belonging to another with intent to gain is sufficient to consummate the offense. Hernandez (1925) Facts: The accused. crimes committed by mere agreement . ♠ Every crime has its own elements which must all be present to constitute a culpable violation of a precept of law. b. frustrated and consummated.There are three stages of consummation: attempted. a 70-year-old man was convicted by the trial court of frustrated rape for having intercourse with his granddaughter who was at that time only 9 years of age.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 17 mortal and could have caused his death were it not for the timely and effective medical intervention: Held: A crime is frustrated when the offender has performed all the acts of execution which should result in the consummation of the crime. in accordance with Art. The accused is guilty of consummated rape.In view of this rule. . He omits to perform an act which the law requires him to do. all the elements of the completed crime of theft are present. adultery) • There can be no ATTEMPT in a formal crime. In estafa. if the offer is rejected. People v. d. in accordance with the abovementioned Art. CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES Art. How to determine whether the felony is attempted. The result is achieved. Diego Quin. In the present case. crimes consummated by mere attempt (ex. He did all that is necessary to consummate the crime. However. 9 classifies felonies according to their gravity.The offer made by one of the parties to the other constitutes attempted felony. 9. Vnitas. Nothing interrupted the offender while passing through the subjective phase. Child even testified that defendant succeeded partial penetration. there is frustrated bribery. The lower court claimed that there can be no consummated rape without a complete penetration of the hymen. the manner of committing the crime a. Domiguez case) 3. The law may now indeed be considered as settled that while the rupturing of the hymen is not indispensable to a conviction. Attempt to flee to an enemy country. material crimes LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. frustrated or consummated? 1. formal crimes – those which are consummated by a single act (ex. 2. Held: Since the defendant performed all the acts of execution necessary for the accomplishment of the felony. the nature of the offense ex. Virtvs. e. Adiao was convicted of frustrated theft. ♠ Capital punishment is death penalty ♠ The afflictive penalties in accordance with Art. Slander. SC ruled that if the public officer returned the money given by the defendant. there must be proof of some degree of entrance of the male organ within the labia of pudendum. LESS GRAVE FELONIES – those in which their maximum period are correctional ♠ When the penalty prescribed for the offense is composed of two or more distinct penalties. less grave felonies and light felonies. the offended party must actually be prejudiced or damaged. Subjectively. Grave felonies. it is not necessary that the property is totally destroyed by fire. Adiao (1955) Facts: Adiao is a customs inspector. All the acts of execution are present 2. He abstracted a leather belt from the luggage of a Japanese and secreted the belt under his desk in the Customs House where it was found by other customs employees. D. The fact that he was under observation during the entire transaction and was unable to get the merchandise out of the Customs House is not decisive. In arson. felonies by omission • There can be no attempted stage because the offender does not execute acts. the crime is complete. — Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive.

That an intentional felony has been committed. like arresto menor. By any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended REQUISITES: a. Andres and Quinto. who was about 11 yrs old saw Andres and Pacheco who invited them to go fishing inside a drainage culvert. but would have healed in so many days and where it is shown beyond all doubt that the death was due to the malicious or careless acts of the injured person or a third person. and b. Art. PRAETER INTENTIONEM – the act exceeds the intent. because public censure. The manner incurring criminal liability under the RPC is stated under Art.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 18 higher or highest of the penalties must be a correctional penalty. After a while. . ♣ Wrong done must be the direct. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. that is. and emerged again. ABERRATIO ICTUS . HOW INCURRED Art. CRIMINAL LIABILITY A. natural and logical consequence of the felony committed. 7.where it clearly appears that the injury would not have cased death. 2. Wilson Quinto. and c. — Criminal liability shall be incurred: 1. respondent Pacheco. ♣ The felony committed must be the proximate cause of the resulting injury. ♣ The offended party is not obliged to submit to a surgical operation to relieve the accused from the natural and ordinary results of his crime. Criminal liability. Andres also came out. — Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated. the accessories are not. who was holding a fish. that is. and his playmate. carrying Wilson who was already dead. ♣ Any person who creates in another’s mind an immediate sense of danger. every stage of execution is punishable but only the principals and accomplices are liable in light felonies.mistake in the identity of the victim. that is. 4 merely states that criminal liability is incurred by those mentioned by the said article. . Art. by means of deceit or fault. When light felonies are punishable. For his part. Wilson assented but Garcia seeing that it was dark inside opted to remain seated in a grassy area about 2meters from the entrance of the drainage system. came out of the drainage system and left without saying a word. ♠ Rationale: Light felonies produce such slight or insignificant moral and material injuries that public conscience is assuaged b not providing for penalty for light felonies which are not consummated and to mere accomplices. ♠ A felony punishable by a fine not exceeding P200 and censure is a light felony. ♣ Art. That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct and natural and logical consequence of the felony. ♠ However. with the exception of those committed against person or property. Pacheco. with water about a foot deep. were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. ♣ This article has no reference to the manner criminal liability is incurred. 3.mistake in the blow. the injurious result is greater than that intended. when the offender intending to do an injury to one person actually inflicts it on another. * RPC. ♠ This should be seen in the light of articles prescribing penalties for crimes in their different stages of commission. III. Andres (2005) Facts: Garcia. is provided. ♠ The following are correctional penalties prision correccional arresto mayor suspension destierro c. 1. ♠ The causes which may produce a result different from that which the offender intended are: a. the accused is not liable for homicide. Garcia fled from the scene. Quinto v. performing or failing to do an act. Virtvs. LIGHT FELONIES – those infractions of law in which the penalty is arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P200 or both. 13 Mitigating circumstance – 3) That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. is a light felony. Andres went to the house LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. which causes the latter to do something resulting in the latter’s injuries. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property. Vnitas. went back inside. a Grade 4 elementary school pupil. entered the drainage system which was covered by concrete culvert about a meter high and a meter wide. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property. this time. 49) b. Andres laid the boy's lifeless body down in the grassy area. in the commission of crimes against persons and property. 2. in the ordinary course of events. ERROR IN PERSONAE . is liable for the resulting injuries. 4. Shocked at the sudden turn of events. when either is punished b law. injuring one person mistaken for another (this is a complex crime under Art. Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which a penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both. This means that light felonies which are only attempted or frustrated are not punishable by law. were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.

When the petitioner's son died inside the drainage culvert. Antonio noticed a commotion and saw that Ricardo. On their way out. People (2006) Held: General criminal intent is an element of all crimes but malice is properly applied only to deliberate acts done on purpose and with design. the act performed by the offender cannot produce an offense against persons or property because: a. That the act was done with evil intent. All of a sudden. Murder c. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. but Valledor went for the victims. the petitioner testified that respondent Andres used to go to their house and play with her son before the latter's death. "Ako akabales den. . the medical findings showing that Valledor was suffering from a mental disorder after the commission of the crime. such absence must be proved by the accused. Valledor invoked the defense of insanity. Roger on the other hand was treated for the 5-centimeter wound sustained by him on his right forearm. leaving Simplicio and Antonio unharmed. Infanticide e.example: when one tries to poison another but the quantity of arsenic added in his substance was not sufficient to kill a person . The offender must have intent to do injury to another. Valledor (2002) Facts: Roger was in his house working on a lettering job inside his bedroom together with his first cousin. Then. the petitioner failed to adduce proof of any ill-motive on the part of either respondent to kill the deceased before or after the latter was invited to join them in fishing. by the nature of the act. As consistently held by this Court. Culpable Insolvency f. Chattel Mortgage h. a specific intent is not presumed. Physical Injuries h. Finally. the circumstances under which it was committed. must be proved by the State just as any other essential element.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 19 of petitioner Melba Quinto. and informed her that her son had died. In this case. specific intent is a definite and actual purpose to accomplish some particular thing. his act of immediately fleeing from the scene after the incident indicates that he was aware of the wrong he has done and the consequence thereof.The act intended by the offender is by its nature one of impossible accomplishment. or 2) PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY . Rape FELONIES AGAINST PROPERTY ARE: a. He then informed the petitioner of her son's death." (I had my revenge. "A man may act crazy but it does not necessarily and conclusively prove that he is legally so. a neighbor of the victim. Wilson's mother. Generally. Robbery b. Theft d. Brigandage c. too. Held: The court ruled that respondents cannot be held criminally nor civilly liable for the death of Wilson. Roger and Elsa were immediately brought to the hospital. Usurpation e. Vnitas. Elsa was declared dead on arrival. Failing to discharge the burden of proving that he was legally insane when he stabbed the victims. Its existence. On the other hand. however. Intent Recuerdo v. has no bearing on his liability. as a matter of fact. That the act performed would be an offense against persons or property. Valledor then stabbed Elsa on the chest and said. A deliberate and unlawful act gives rise to a presumption of malice by intent. Judging from his acts. it is not an impossible crime. 3. the means employed and the motive of the accused IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES REQUISITES: 1. Two other people were also inside the room. Valledor was clearly aware and in control of what he was doing as he in fact purposely chose to stab only the two victims. Elsa. he should be held liable for his felonious acts. Thereafter. it was respondent Andres who brought out the deceased. In impossible crime. People v. Swindling and other deceits g. respondent Andres followed the petitioner on her way to the grassy area where the deceased was.but where the means employed is adequate and the result expected is not produced. FELONIES AGAINST PERSONS ARE: a. the commission of the offense is inherently impossible of accomplishment . Elsa and his friends. Homicide d. Melba Quinto rushed to the drainage culvert while respondent Andres followed her. What is decisive is his mental condition at the time of the perpetration of the offense. Valledor entered the room. Virtvs. the means employed is either inadequate or ineffectual .There must either 1) LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY. Malicious Mischief 2. His obvious motive of revenge against the victims was accentuated by calling out their names and uttering the words. or that the means employed is either inadequate or ineffectual. b. Duel g. Elsa). but a frustrated felony. This may be shown. The general criminal intent is presumed from the criminal act and in the absence of any general intent is relied upon as a defense.examples: 1) when one tries to kill another by putting in his substance which he believes to be arsenic when in fact it is common salt. 2) when one tries to murder a corpse. uttered Roger's nickname ("Jer") and immediately attacked him with a knife. Evil intent must unite with an unlawful act for there to be a felony. That its accomplishment is inherently impossible. Held: Valledor failed to discharge the burden of overcoming the presumption of sanity at the time of the commission of the crime. Indeed. Simplicio and Antonio. Valledor fled. Even after informing the petitioner of the death of her son. Abortion f. . Parricide b. "I had my revenge" after stabbing them. Arson and other crimes involving destruction i. who was likewise stabbed by Valledor was wounded.

those rights the enjoyment of which is protected by law. provided that the first and second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are present. IAC (1988) Facts: Urbano went to his rice field and found his palay flooded with water. 4. in case the revocation was given by the person attacked. The wound was treated and incapacitation was diagnosed to be from 7-9 days. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it. Virtvs. No one was in the room when the accused fired their weapons. The proximate cause of Javier’s death was due to his own negligence as he went back to work even if his wound had not yet healed properly. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Palangpangan was in another city and her home was occupied by her son-in-law and his family. but subjectively. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger. That the evil sought t be avoided actually exists. so that such person is deemed not to have transgressed the law and is free from both criminal and civil liability. Implies that the person must take the consequence of such deed. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it. he is a criminal. Intod v. as there is no crime committed Par. • Article 11 recognizes the acts of such persons as justified. 11 that the person therein mentioned “DO NOT INCUR CRIMINAL LIABILITY. REQUISITES: a. CA (1992) Facts: Intod et al. and the further requisite. Javier was rushed to the hospital in a very serious condition caused by tetanus toxin. 11. Vnitas. ascendants. Third.example: A pointed a gun at B to rob the latter of a watch but B was not wearing a watch. The evidence on record also shows that the wound inflicted by Urbano did not exhibit any signs of being infected with tetanus. the offender has not committed a felony. it was only infected with a mild form of tetanus and not the severe form that killed him. CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING CRIMINAL LIABILITY • The law recognizes the non-existence of a crime by expressly stating in the opening sentence of Art. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose. That the act performed should not constitute a violation of another provision of the RPC . Third. .” Art. natural or adopted brothers or sisters. They went the bedroom and began firing their weapons. First. resentment. Javier died the next day. a two-inch incised wound was inflicted on the right palm of Javier’s hand.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 20 4. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse. Any person who. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES • Those where the act of a person is said to be in accordance with law. Unlawful aggression Second. provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of this Article are present and that the person defending be not induced by revenge. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it. B. 22 days after. 1 – SELF-DEFENSE • Self-defense includes not only the defense of the person or body of the one assaulted but also that of his rights. or legitimate. Implies that a deed may be imputed to a person. Second. 3. Urbano found out that it was Javier who was responsible for the opening of the irrigation canal. Justifying circumstances. or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those consanguinity within the fourth civil degree. Any person who acts in fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office. Objectively. 6. RTC convicted the accused of attempted murder. Why is an impossible crime punishable? It is punishable in order to suppress criminal tendencies. He got angry and tried to hack Javier but the latter tried to parry the attack and in the process. 2. at most. 5. that the one making defense had not part therein. IMPUTABILITY Quality by which an act may be ascribed to a person as its author or owner. provided that the following requisites are present: First. However. Such persons are not criminals. in order to avoid an evil or injury. Held: Urbano is acquitted because the infection was distinct and foreign to the crime. descendants. went to Palangpangan’s house. that is. — The following do not incur any criminal liability: 1. RESPONSIBILITY Obligation of suffering the consequences of the crime. The factual situation in the case presents a physical impossibility which rendered the intended crime impossible of performance. 1. It is not an impossible crime because A’s pointing his gun at B already constituted at least the crime of grave threats. provided that the following circumstances concur. Urbano v. There must be unlawful aggression • This is an indispensable requisite. does not act which causes damage. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. Urbano was convicted of homicide. or other evil motive. Held: The accused is guilty of an impossible crime. all armed with firearms.

and the peril sought to be avoided must be imminent and actual. even if a provocation was giver. the couple must go through the battering cycle at least twice. In retaliation. the law does not require him to retreat when his assailant is rapidly advancing upon him with a deadly weapon. 2) DEFENSE OF A RELATIVE AND 3) DEFENSE OF A STRANGER. • When there is no peril to one’s life. sudden LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Any woman may find herself in an abusive relationship with a man once. actually in existence. he may claim selfdefense. • The reasonableness of the means used will depend upon the NATURE and QUALITY of the weapon used by the aggressor. it is unlawful.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 21 • If there is no unlawful aggression. and she remains in the situation.” Held: Battered woman has been defined as a woman "who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical or psychological behavior by a man in order to coerce her to do something he wants her to do without concern for her rights. and also the place and occasion of the assault. When. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself • The third requisite of self-defense is present: 1. But when the aggression is ahead of the stipulated time and place. she is defined as a battered woman. Crucial to the BWS defense is the state of mind of the battered woman at the time of the offense — she must have actually feared imminent harm from her batterer and honestly believed in the need to kill him in order to save her life. The one who resorts to self-defense must face a real threat on one's life." In any event. or 2. Marivic raised the theory of the “battered woman syndrome (BWS). • Unlawful aggression is equivalent to assault or at least threatened assault of an immediate and imminent kind. for it may be too late. Vnitas.that the danger is on the point of happening. 2. but even the person who tries to prevent an aggression that is expected (meaning imminent). the existence of BWS in a relationship does not in itself establish the legal right of the woman to kill her abusive partner. • There is no unlawful aggression when there is agreement to fight because where the fight has been agreed upon. in order to be classified as a battered woman. IMMINENT. or at least a THREAT to inflict real injury. PERIL TO ONE’S LIFE 1. or 3. BATTERED WOMAN DEFENSE (RA 9262) • The unlawful aggression must come from the person who was attacked by the accused. not merely imaginary. It presupposes actual. b. In claiming self defense. People v. SIZE and other circumstances. even if the provocation was sufficient. there is no unlawful aggression. . it was not given by the person defending himself. even if a provocation was given by the person defending himself. Furthermore. the person must have no time nor occasion for deliberation and cool thinking. the aggression was still existing when the aggressor was injured or disabled by the person making a defense. his PHYSICAL CONDITION. • The means employed by the person making a defense must be rationally necessary to prevent or repel an unlawful aggression. Ex. the aggression that was begun by the injured party already ceased to exist when the accused attacked him. When. Evidence must still be considered in the context of self-defense. • The rule now is STAND GROUND WHEN IN THE RIGHT. ACTUAL – that the danger must be present. or 4. It is not required that the attack already begins. where the accused is where he has the right to be. • A slap on the face constitutes unlawful aggression since the face represents a person and his dignity. each of the protagonists is at once assailant and assaulted. Unlawful aggression is the most essential element of self-defense. She confessed hitting Ben’s nape with a metal pipe and of shooting him at the back of his head when the latter went to bed after attacking her. • The law protects not only the person who repels an aggression (meaning actual). Battered women include wives or women in any form of intimate relationship with men. it was not sufficient. limb or right. When. The trial court found Marivic guilty of parricide. If it occurs a second time. • There must be an ACTUAL PHYSICAL assault upon a person. it was not proximate and immediate to the act of aggression. and those of the person defending himself. • In self-defense. • Retaliation is different from an act of self-defense. In self-defense. So. that is. Genosa. 419 SCRA 537 (2004) Facts: Ben was found dead in a rented apartment he shared with his pregnant wife Marivic and their two children. If the aggressor used a toy pistol but the accused believed it was a real gun. *** THE FIRST TWO REQUISITES ARE COMMON TO THREE KINDS OF LEGITIMATE DEFENSE: 1) SELFDEFENSE. When no provocation at all was given to the aggressor by the person defending himself. Virtvs. She now invokes. • The belief of the person may be considered in determining the existence of unlawful aggression. • The reasonableness of the necessity depends upon the circumstances particularly the time and location where the aggression took place. Marivic admitted in court having killed her husband. Slapping it is a serious personal attack. c. there is nothing to prevent or repel. self defense and/or defense of her unborn child. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it • The second requisite presupposes the existence of unlawful aggression.

Toledo did not answer but met Ricky at the doorstep of his house and without warning stabbed Ricky on the abdomen with a bolo which resulted to his death. Ricky arrived at Toledo’s house unarmed. During the scuffle. they were sideswiped by a tricycle driven by appellant Erwin with Efren both surnamed Enfectana as passenger. She had already been able to withdraw from his violent behavior and escape to their children's bedroom. The reality or even the imminence of the danger he posed had ended altogether. overwhelmed her and put her in the aforesaid emotional and mental state. complete or incomplete. selfdefense may be appreciated. In the lower courts. there can be no selfdefense. He ordered them not to make loud noises. Unfortunately. The court further ruled that Toledo was not justified in stabbing Ricky. Marivic's killing of Ben was not completely justified under the circumstances. The condition of unlawful aggression is a sine qua non. a condition sine qua non for the justifying circumstance of self defense. Condrado borrowed the permit of the deceased and had it photocopied without the latter’s permission. there can be no self-defense — complete or incomplete — on the part of the victim. which overcame her reason and impelled her to vindicate her life and her unborn child's.'" Still. During that time. Ricky saw Toledo stoning their house and asked him why he was doing the same. Threatening behavior or communication can satisfy the required imminence of danger. There was no imminent threat in his life necessitating his assault. and pursuant to the rule on the burden of evidence imposed by law on the party invoking self-defense. at least. With no weapon to attack Toledo or defend himself. Enfectana(2002) Facts: While Adelaida and her husband Leo were on their way home. and (3) that there be lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person claiming self-defense or. the burden of proving the elements of the claim shifts to him who invokes it. and the latter's friends about 5 m away from his house. her husband fell in a crouching position. People (2003) Facts: Conrado and his deceased brother were rivals in the Rush ID Photo business and had booths along the sidewalk of Rizal Avenue. Sta. according to the testimony of Marivic herself. In the absence of such aggression. he apparently ceased his attack and went to bed. having a drinking spree. the scissors which Orlando was able to grab fell from his hands. the admission of Eusebio that he killed Leo made it incumbent upon appellant to convincingly prove that there was unlawful aggression on the part of the victim which necessitated the use of deadly force by Eusebio.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 22 and unexpected attack — or an imminent danger thereof — on the life or safety of a person. He then grabbed the knife of the deceased who in turn picked the scissors. unless the victim has committed unlawful aggression against the person defending himself. Marivic was also credited with the extenuating circumstance of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as to have naturally produced passion and obfuscation. Ricky. There is no such defense as accidental self-defense in the realm of criminal law. When he was about to get up. The deceased confonted Conrado and tried to stab him with a fan knife. however. Eusebio Enfectana admitted that he killed Leo. on the part of Ricky. Cano v. there was a great probability that he would still have pursued her and inflicted graver harm — then. He died as a result. Cruz. if not continuous. He. that any provocation executed by the person claiming self-defense be not the proximate and immediate cause of the victim's aggression. Where the brutalized person is already suffering from BWS. Virtvs. however. Had Ben still been awaiting Marivic when she came out of their children's bedroom — and based on past violent incidents. in spite of the fact that she was eight months pregnant with their child. does not warrant selfdefense. there was a sufficient time interval between the unlawful aggression of Ben and her fatal attack upon him. no sign of hostility may be deduced from him. deadly attack before she can defend her life "would amount to sentencing her to 'murder by installment. This "psychological paralysis" she suffered diminished her will power. Toledo defended himself by alleging that his bolo accidentaly hit the stomach of the victim and that he was able to prove all the essential elements of self defense. The acute battering she suffered that fatal night in the hands of her batterer-spouse. Held: The Court ruled that it is an aberration for Toledo to invoke the two defenses at the same time because the said defenses are intrinsically antithetical. otherwise stated. People v. Thus. (2) that there be reasonable necessity in the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression. Ricky and his friends also went to sleep. In the present case. alleged that he acted in self-defense Held: It is an established principle that once this justifying circumstance is raised. As a result. impending danger (based on the conduct of the victim in previous battering episodes) prior to the defendant's use of deadly force must be shown. They again attacked each other which resulted to the death of the other. and they obliged. thereby entitling her to the mitigating factor under paragraphs 9 and 10 of Article 13 of the RPC In addition. Eusebio miserably failed to prove the existence of unlawful aggression on the part of the victim. The elements of self-defense are: (1) that the victim has committed unlawful aggression amounting to actual or imminent threat to the life and limb of the person claiming self-defense. They had not laid down for long when he heard stones being hurled at the roof of the house. Given the fact that the relationship between the parties had been marred by ill will and animosities. further evidence of actual physical assault at the time of the killing is not required. The Court futher however held that the severe beatings repeatedly inflicted on Marivic constituted a form of cumulative provocation that broke down her psychological resistance and self-control. To require the battered person to await an obvious. He then went to his house and went to sleep. Incidents of domestic battery usually have a predictable pattern. After some time. In court. Eusebio also surnamed Enfectana came from behind to stab him. the imminence of the real threat upon her life would not have ceased yet. Records reveal that there is no unlawful agression. Vnitas. The latter locked himself in the dark room of his booth to protect himself but was followed by the deceased and they ended up attacking each other. The Court reiterated the principle that aggression. . People (2004) Facts: Toledo saw his nephew. Then Erwin and Efren took turns in stabbing Leo. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Eusebio is guilty of murder. Considering such circumstances and the existence of BWS. Manila. Toledo v. He was no longer in a position that presented an actual threat on her life or safety.

or even just wounding. At one point. Dijan (2002) Facts Silvestre and Hilario were at a store to buy some cigarettes when they saw the group of Dijan. In order to consider that an unlawful aggression was actually committed. Senando instinctively fled towards the fields but he was met by Armando who hit him with a stone. Ricardo. Vnitas. the former aggressor. Ascendants 3. • Relatives by affinity. With the exception of his self-serving allegations. his father Juanito. • Death of the spouse terminates the relationship by affinity. because of marriage. who was walking slightly ahead of Silvestre. he had acted in defense of his relatives. Servando scampered into the safety of Amelia's house. the nature and number of wounds inflicted by an accused on the victim should be significant indicia in determining the plausibility of the defense plea. uncle and niece or aunt and nephew are within the third civil LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Spouse 2. who was then cooking supper. in which case the relationship of affinity continues. unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua non. Upon seeing Senando. Legitimate. son or daughter-in-law. are parentsin-law. Amelia was also hit on the leg. Dijan invoked the justifying circumstance of “defense of a stranger. Armando placed a can on top of Senando's head and Ricardo repeatedly struck Senando with an ax on the head. The unlawful aggression must be a continuing circumstance or must have been existing at the time the defense is made. Hilario was found to have sustained several stab wounds. all surnamed Balunueco. While Silvestre and Hilario were walking. ganged up on. passing by the store.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 23 Held: Conrado’s act of killilng his brother was attended by a justifying circumstance of self-defense. Ricardo lost his hold on the ax. but somebody tossed him a bolo and then he continued hacking the victim who fell on his knees. From the defense account. The act of a person armed with a bladed weapon pursuing another constitutes unlawful agression because it signifies the pursuers intent to commit an assault with his weapon. Hilario. and Armando cornered their quarry near a canal and ganged up on him. natural or adopted brothers and sisters. and one Flores chasing her brother-in-law Servando. It was the deceased who purposely sought and initially attacked Orlando with a knife.. the natural impulse of any person who has killed someone in defense of his person or relative is to bring himself to the authorities and try to dispel any suspicion of guilt that the authorities might have against him. Meanwhile. an incised wound and an abrasion. Ricardo failed to do the same. He now imputes errors to the CA in not taking into consideration the fact that if indeed he participated. and brothers or sistersin-law. Hilario. It was he and his kin who had inititated the unlawful agression and not Senando. With the 5 individuals in hot pursuit. or relatives by affinity in the same degrees. and abrasion in various parts of the body which caused his death. 2 – DEFENSE OF RELATIVES RELATIVES THAT CAN BE DEFENDED 1. and allow a claim of exemption from liability on the ground that it was committed in self-defense or defense of a relative. His act of photocopying the permit of his brother without the latters permission can hardly be conidered as provocation to merit so deadly an assault with a bladed weapon. Paglinawan suddenly confronted Hilario for purportedly giving him a "bad stare. Descendants 4. cried out and told the latter to flee. there is nothing on record that would justify his killing of Senando. causing Senando to feel dizzy. an offensive act positively determining the intent of the aggressor to cause an injury shall have been made. a mere threatening or intimidating attitude is not sufficient to justify the commission of an act which is punishable per se. Dijan. • Consanguinity refers to blood relatives. when Dijan still delivered the fatal thrusts on the victim. 3 punctured wounds. The RTC and CA convicted Ricardo of Homicide. shoulder. In the case at bar. Virtvs. Amelia put her arms around her husband but it was not enough to detract Ricardo from his murderous frenzy. Reynaldo turned his attention on him and gave chase. it is necessary that an attack or material aggression. Par. it would appear that Hilario was already disarmed and the unlawful aggression by Hilario (if indeed he was the aggressor) to have by then been abated. Paglinawan and Lizardo then left the place while Silvestre and Hilario proceeded home. There was also lack of sufficient provocation on the part of Condrado. The autopsy conducted on the corpse would show that the deceased sustained 14 injuries consisting of 9 stab wounds. Senando. People (2006) Held: As the Court previously held. . Marzonia v. and took turns in stabbing. for without it any defense is not possible or justified. the 3 accused. and hand. unless the marriage has resulted in issue who is still living." Silvestre apologized and explained that it was the natural way Hilario gazed at people. The number of wounds sustained by the victim would itself likewise negate Dijan’s claim of defense of a stranger. went out of the house unaware of the commotion going on outside. Paglinawan and Lizardo. brothers Ricardo and Ramon. Reynaldo.” Held: In order to successfully put up this defense an accused must show the existence of unlawful aggression on the part of the victim. People v. Once unlawful aggression is found to have ceased. mortally wounding an assailant with a penknife is not a reasonably necessary means to repel fist blows. Appealing his conviction in court. petitioner Ricardo utterly failed to adduce sufficient proof of the existence of a positively strong act of real aggression on the part of the deceased Senando. Held: Of the three (3) requisites of defense of relatives. 5. Silvestre ran away until he was able to cling to a passing passenger jeepney. Brothers and sisters are within the second civil degree. punctured and incised wounds. Balunueco v. At that point. the one making the defense of a stranger would likewise cease to have any justification for killing. Certainly. Further. To shield him from further violence. CA (2003) Facts: Amelia was coddling her youngest child in front of her house when she saw accused Reynaldo. Relatives by consanguinity within the fourth civil degree.

Thus.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 24 degree. Raposo played the game while the accused posted himself behind the Barion acting as a spotter of the cards of the latter and communicating it to his partner Raposo. Narvaez (1983) Facts: Narvaez was taking his rest inside his house when he heard that the wall of his house was being chiseled. He was able to crawl out of the guardhouse and a hand-to-hand fight ensued. when Alconga was in the guardhouse. an exchange of words ensued. etc. the one making a defense had no part therein. . and first cousins are within the fourth civil degree. The ordinary man would not stand idly by and see his companion killed without attempting to save his life. BASIS: What one may do in his defense. The person defending be not induced by revenge. People v. • Reason for the rule: Although the provocation prejudices the person who gave it. If the fencing would go on. One evening. bolo. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked. Narvaez would be prevented from getting into his house and the bodega of his ricemill so he asked the group to stop but they refused. Having sustained several wounds. there is no evidence that an attack was attempted. There was aggression on the part of the victims not on the person of the accused but on his property rights when Fleischer angrily ordered the continuance of the fencing. Barion ran away but was followed by the accused and another fight took place. it can be made to depend upon the honest belief of the one making a defense. its effects do not reach the defender who took no part therein. together with their laborers. she ran home. “no. He saw that Fleischer and Rubia. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it. choked her and at the same time continuously saying that he will kill her. 3. Barion arrived and swung his pingahan but the former the accused was able to avoid the blow. resentment or other evil motive. Alconga (1947) Facts: The deceased Barion was the banker in the game of black jack. Held: The court took into consideration the fact that the 2 deceased were accompanied with three laborers and that the were using tools which could be lethal weapons such as nail and hammer. The utterance. Held: The wife who being strangled and choked by a furious aggressor had no other recourse but to get hold of any weapon within her reach to save herself. Shooting the victims from the window of his house is disproportionate to the physical aggression by the victims. When she was released. But since their marriage was an unhappy one. He. then. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it. The third element of self-defense is also present because there was no sufficient provocation on the part of Narvaez since he was sleeping when the deceased where fencing. • Unlawful aggression may not exist as a matter of fact. She accused her of prostituting and threatened to kill her as he held her by the hair. gaddemit. Alconga avoided the following blows and was able to draw his revolver and shoot Barion. there is incomplete self-defense and the accused is entitled to a penalty lower by one or two degrees. The wife then pulled out the knife of her husband tucked inside the belt line and stabbed him. People v. Who are deemed strangers? Any person not included in the enumeration of relatives mentioned in paragraph 2 of this article. because the latter was prompted by some noble or generous sentiment in protecting and saving a relative. Rubia ran towards the jeep and knowing there is a gun on the jeep. slapped her face until her nose bled. In a crawling position. The accused got mad so he got his shotgun and shot Fleischer. REQUISITES OF DEFENSE OF RELATIVES: 1. Boholst-Caballero (1974) Facts: Boholst (wife) and Caballero (husband) are married to each other. 2. • There is still legitimate defense of relative even if the relative being defended has given provocation. the second element was lacking. People v. When Barion learned about what Raposo and Alconga. Vnitas. The claim that it was not proper for the wife to be standing in the middle of the night outside a yard giving the impression that she is prostituting herself. Unlawful aggression. 2. Par. they are justified. Unlawful aggression. Dissent: Defense of property is not of such importance as the right to life and defense of property can only be invoked when it is coupled with some form of attack on the person of one entrusted with said property. Held: An accused was no longer acting in selfdefense when he pursued and killed a fleeing adversary. The sons of A honestly believed that their father was the victim of an unlawful aggression when in fact it was their father who attacked B. 3. • The gauge of reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel the aggression as against one’s self or in defense of a relative is to be found in the situation as IT APPEARS TO THE PERSON REPELLING THE AGGRESSION (the defender). However. go ahead” is not unlawful aggression which entitles him neither to a plea of self-defense nor to a mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense. Narvaez claimed he acted in defense of his person and rights. is not sufficient provocation. Virtvs. they separated. Ex. another may do for him. the accused fired at Rubia as well. The accused pleaded self-defense. All that the accused did was to provoke an imaginary commission of a wrong in the mind of her husband which is not a sufficient provocation under the law of self-defense. If they killed B under such circumstance. One morning. In this case before us. provided that the one defending such relative has no part in the provocation. Alconga then slashed Barion’s head with a bolo which caused the latter’s death. 3 – DEFENSE OF STRANGER REQUISITES: 1. and that the jeep the deceased used contained a gun leaning near the steering wheel. The wife is claiming self-defense. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. the wife went caroling with her friends and she was seen by her husband standing in a corner of the yard of Barabad. were fencing the land of the father of the deceased Fleischer. is considered stranger for the purpose of paragraph 3. proceed.

People v. he realized that he had to ask assistance from his friends. there being no more aggression to defend against. Ribis died. As a result. it must be proved that there is actual danger of being raped. Thereafter. However. . On the day of the crime. 4 – AVOIDANCE OF A GREATER EVIL ♣ Any person who. Rivera followed her. People v. in order to avoid an evil or injury. With the imminence of danger to his life. Virtvs. Sumicad drew out his bolo and struck him. Not only was there unlawful aggression against Bumanglag. Separate Opinion: A man who ambushed one he suspects to be a thief can claim defense of property. considering Ribis’ criminal record. the same having ceased from the moment the deceased took to his heels. the latter struck him again twice which broke his Cubol’s cranium resulting to his death. It was a dark night and she could not have identified Rivera. Thus. Vnitas. Bumanglang et al were convicted of homicide. This rule applies only when the contending parties are in the open and the person assaulted can escape. he placed the knife on the floor and so the accused took advantage of the situation by getting the knife and stabbing the deceased with it. Exception: There is CIVIL LIABILITY under this paragraph. character and unusual strength. Par. accompanied by his co-defendants. Dela Cruz claimed. Avelina took out her knife and stabbed Amado in the neck. including the father of the accused and other town officials. 1. causing the death of Amado. There being no other means of selfdefense. The means employed in defense of her honor was evidently excessive. Luague (1935) Facts: The deceased tried to rape the accused while her husband was away. Avelina and Amado were in Church. there can be no claim of self-defense. It is borne by the persons benefited by the act. . As Cubol advanced towards him. a man is not justified in killing an assailant who is not armed with any dangerous weapon. The deceased here is a bull of known violent character and although unarmed. Held: Although the defense of one’s honor exempts one from criminal liability. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. As the deceased was preparing to lie down with her. She didn’t know that it was Rivera and that she was unable to resist the strength of Rivera so she got a knife from her pocket and stabbed him in defense of her honor. Note: The instinct of self-preservation will always make one feel that his own safety is of greater importance than that of another.The evil must actually exist and not merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the future. Held: An attempt to rape is a sufficient aggression for a legitimate claim of self-defense. he awaited the culprit and caught Ribis so they confronted him assaulted him with sticks and other cutting and stabbing weapons. DAMAGE TO ANOTHER – the term covers injury to persons and damage to property. People v. Cubol tried to wrest the bolo from Sumicad and to prevent this. They shall be liable in proportion to the benefit which they may have been received. Woman’s honor is a right as precious as her very existence because chastity once defiled cannot be restored. accused could not have possibly been raped. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it. It would have been an act of suicide on the part of the accused to allow the bolo to pass into the hands of his antagonist. Later. 1) the church was well-lit. We have the right to HONOR. 2. The deceased threatened the accused with a knife to compel her to have sex with him. Held: The bolo of the deceased was sheathed when the body was discovered. Sumicad receded until he found himself cornered by a pile of logs which prevented him from further retreat. Sumicad tried to escape but Cubol continued to strike him with his fists. Defendants declared that during the fight they only beat the deceased with sticks and Ribis unsheathed his bolo.The evil which brought about the greater evil must not result from a violation of law by the actor. Held: As a general rule. REQUISITES: That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists. Sumicad (1932) Facts: Sumicad was hauling logs when Cubol suddenly struck him with his fist. US v. Held: She is justified in using the pocketknife in repelling what she believed to be an attack upon her honor.The greater evil should not be brought about by the negligence or imprudence of the actor. Dela Cruz (1935) Facts: Accused was found guilty of homicide for stabbing and killing Rivera. Bumaglang (1909) Facts: Bumanglang was missing 40 bundles of palay. . Prosecution claimed that Dela Cruz and Rivera had a relationship and that the accused was madly in love with the deceased and was extremely jealous of another woman with whom Rivera also had a relationship. does an act which causes damage to another. he attempted to take from the accused a bolo which is the only means of defense possessed by the latter. on the other hand. the one who is assaulted can use a weapon in any way reasonably necessary to his protection against the aggressor. Amado sat beside Avelina and placed his hand on her thigh. that on her way home one evening. Juarigue (1946) Facts: Amado (deceased) has been courting the accused Avelina in vain.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 25 though originally the unlawful aggressor. 3. General rule: No liability in justifying circumstances because there is no crime. where one has no means of escaping. 2) there were several people in the church. There was no unlawful aggression on the part of Ribis. there was also a wrongful invasion of his habitat and attempt to commit a felony against his property. In this case. . That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it. People v. embraced and kissed her and touched her private parts. In light of these circumstances.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 26 People v. Fats Police sergeant Pomoy. People (2004) Facts: Ty's mother Chua Lao So Un was confined at the Manila Doctors' Hospital from October 1990 until June 1992. People (2004) LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. prevent his escape. The gun was fully embedded in its holster. Juan (son of Severo) suddenly embraced Marianito (son of Geminiano). ♣ Shooting an offender who refused to surrender is justified but shooting a thief who refused to be arrested is not justified. Delima fired his revolver to impose his authority but the bullet did not hit him. Ty's sister. The criminal ran away and Delima went after him and fired again his revolver this time hitting and killing him.45 caliber pistol. yet he is never justified in using unnecessary force or in treating him with wanton violence or in resorting to dangerous means when the arrest could be effected otherwise. Balboa : Pomoy v. after evading service of his sentence. armed with a pointed piece of bamboo in the shape of a lance. Delima demanded the surrender of the weapon but Napilon refused. 5 – FULFILLMENT OF A DUTY OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF RIGHT OR OFFICE. Ty v. she had the choice to give jewelry or other forms of security instead of postdated checks to secure her obligation. Some days afterwards the policeman. recapture him if he escapes. the latter was hacked on the back by Severo. Oanis (1943) Although an officer in making a lawful arrest is justified in using such force as is reasonably necessary to secure and detain the offender. Geminiano died later. the issuance of the bounced checks was brought about by Ty's own failure to pay her mother's hospital bills. Delima. 2. They grappled and rolled downhill towards the camote patch.075. the defense of an uncontrollable fear of a greater injury” is not applicable. Ty was found guilty by the lower courts of 7 counts of violation of BP22. which compelled the policeman to resort to such extreme means. Juan invoked the justifying circumstance of greater necessity in explaining his act of preventing Marianito from shooting Rico and Severo. she drew 7 postdated checks against Metrobank payable to the hospital which were all dishonored by the drawee bank and returned unpaid to the hospital due to insufficiency of funds. Virtvs. purportedly for tactical interrogation at the investigation room. from behind. Civil Code. although it proved to be fatal. That the accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office Art. Delima (1922) Facts: Napilon escaped from the jail where he was serving sentence. The deceased was under the obligation to surrender and had no right. ♣ The actual invasion of property may consist of a mere disturbance of possession or of a real dispossession. . he may use such force as may be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his property. he is justified. more so. Par. Ricohermoso (1974) Facts: The land Ricohermoso cultivated belonged to Geminiano. At that same place and time while the killing of Geminiano was taking place. (doctrine of self-help) ♣ If in protecting his possession of the property he injured (not seriously) the one trying to get it from him. the willful inaction of the actor. If the evil sought to be avoided is merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the future. Held:The court sustained the findings of the lower courts. Rico stabbed Geminiano first and while in a helpless position. Vnitas. who was looking for him found him in the house of Alegria. was justified by the circumstance. overcome his resistance. the greater injury feared should not have been brought about by the negligence or imprudence. People v. who had a gun slung on his shoulder. Held: The act of Juan was designed to insure the killing of Geminiano without any risk to his assailants. For her defense. tucked in a holster which was hanging by the side of his belt. 429. Ty could have taken advantage of an available option to avoid committing a crime. Judy Chua. He walked uphill and saw his father. Marianito passed out and when he regained consciousness.95. Held: The killing was done in the performance of a duty. for the defense of state of necessity to be availing. At that time. a . with only the handle of the gun protruding from the holster. Ty signed the "Acknowledgment of Responsibility for Payment" in the Contract of Admission. He acted in conspiracy with Rico and Severo. She alleged that her mother has comtemplated suicide if she would not be discharged from the hospital. to commit assault and disobedience with a weapon in his hand. The total hospital bills of the two patients amounted to P1. as if by prearrangement. his rifle was gone. Ty claimed that she issued the checks because of “an uncontrollable fear of a greater injury” She averred that she was forced to issue the checks to obtain release for her mother who was being inhumanely and harshly treated by the hospital. Ricohermoso unsheathed his bolo and approached Geminiano from the left while Severo (Rico’s father-inlaw) got an axe and approached from the right. petitioner had a gun. To assure payment of the obligation. went near the door of the jail where Balboa was detained for robbery and directed the latter to come out.592. which. People v. Moreover. The evil sought to be avoided is merely expected or anticipated. In this case. The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and disposal thereof. For this purpose. By her own admission. Juan was not avoiding any evil but his malicious intention was to forestall any interference in the felonious assault. Ty executed a promissory note wherein she assumed payment of the obligation in installments. was also confined at the same hospital. That the injury caused or the offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due performance of duty or the lawful exercise of such right or office. and protect himself from bodily harm. REQUISITES: 1. When the latter went to the house of the former. Being the patient's daughter.

Petitioner could have first fired a warning shot before pulling the trigger against Contreras who was one of the residents chasing the suspected robber. At the very least. Where the accused acted upon orders of superior officers that the. as military subordinates. Up to that point. and abuse of authority against him. under the instructions of his superior. The law does not clothe police officers with authority to arbitrarily judge the necessity to kill. Ulep (2000) Accused-appellant and the other police officers involved originally set out to perform a legal duty: to render police assistance. 2. However. aiding the enemy. together with a priest.45 caliber pistol. notwithstanding accused-appellant's previous warning shot and verbal admonition to the victim to lay down his weapon or he would be shot. Beronilla. pursuant to his instructions. Virtvs. who was lying in a pool of blood. Abra at the outbreak of war and continued to serve as Mayor during Japanese occupation.it must be stressed that their judgment and discretion as police officers in the performance of their duties must be excercised neither capriciously nor oppressively. petitioner was a member — specifically. graver digger. Sandiganbayan (1997) Facts: Pres. placed Borjal in his custody and asked the residents to file charges of espionage. People v. do not completely justify the petitioner’s firing the fatal gunshot at the victim. in the absence of the equally necessary justifying circumstance that the injury or offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due performance of such duty. Pomoy invoked the defense of accident for his defense. Volkmann transmitted a radiogram message stating that the jury system organized by the municipality is illegal and cannot order execution of Borjal. in the victim's death was limited only to acts committed in the course of the lawful performance of his duties as an enforcer of the law. facing Balboa. Beronilla. was performing his duty as a police officer as well as when he was trying to effect the arrest of the suspected robber and in the process. The records are ample to sustain the claim of the accused that the arrest. even after the latter slumped to the ground due to multiple gunshot wounds sustained while charging at the police officers. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. That the means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is lawful. etc. A crime is not committed if the mind of the person performing the ac be innocent. When the source of the shots was verified. these factual circumstances create serious doubt on the Pomoy’s culpability. ♣ When the order is not for a lawful purpose. The prosecution claimed that Col. a privileged mitigating circumstance under Articles 13 and 69 of the Revised Penal Code. if he is not aware of the illegality of the order and he is not negligent. There can be no quibbling that there was no rational necessity for the killing of Contreras. The victim at that point no longer posed a threat and was already incapable of mounting an aggression against the police officers.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 27 tried to remove Pomoy’s gun and the two grappled for possession of the gun. True. the victim threatened the safety of the police officers by menacingly advancing towards them. As a police officer. At the time of the incident. and obeyed in good faith. People v. 3. Later. the act is not accompanied by criminal intent. The removal of the gun from its holster. and the firing of the two successive shots — all of which led to the death of the victim — were sufficiently demonstrated to have been consequences of circumstances beyond the control of petitioner. petitioner. Neither is he expected – when hard pressed and in the heat of such an encounter at close quarters – to pause for a long moment and reflect coolly at his peril. That an order has been issued by a superior. the subordinate who obeyed it is criminally liable. Mamagun v. However. there can only be incomplete justification. That such order must be for some lawful purpose. 6 – OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE REQUISITES: 1. without any fault or negligence on their part. or to wait after each blow to determine the effects thereof. ♣ The subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order of his superior. one of the investigators — of the Philippine National Police (PNP) stationed at the Iloilo Provincial Mobile Force Company. Held: Pomoy is acquitted. Tabuena v. Thus. it is to be expected that accused-appellant would stand his ground. Beronilla (1955) Facts: Borjal was the elected mayor of La Paz. Beronilla was appointed later as Military Mayor. the release of the safety lock. Vnitas. albeit the wrong man. his decision to respond with a barrage of gunfire to halt the victim's further advance was justified under the circumstances. while the operations for the liberation of Abra was in progress. executioner. should have ceased firing at the victim the moment he saw the latter fall to the ground. if any. he cannot be exonerated from overdoing his duty during the second stage of the incident — when he fatally shot the victim in the head. fatally shoot said suspect. 2 gunshots were heard. and restore peace and order at Mundog Subdivision where the victim was then running amuck. were indicted for murder. he fetched the victim from the latter's cell for a routine interrogation. After trial. Borjal’s execution took place. prosecution and trial were done pursuant to express orders of the 15th Infantry HQ. National Construction Corporation (PNCC) which later was reiterated in writing. a police officer is not required to afford the victim the opportunity to fight back. People (2007) Facts: A policeman in pursuit of a snatcher accidentally shot one of the bystanders who was actually helping him chase the robber. acts in the fulfillment of a duty. Held: There is no proof that Beronilla was able to receive the radiogram message. a veteran policeman. it was in the lawful performance of his duties as investigating officer that. During the first stage. The participation of petitioner. Shooting him in the head was obviously unnecessary. Par. could not question. without being aware of their illegality. After all. without more. petitioner was seen still holding a . There were two (2) stages of the incident at Mundog Subdivision. Thereafter. as one of the policemen responding to a reported robbery then in progress. Marcos instructed Tabuena over the phone to pay directly to the Office of the President in cash what MIAA owes the Phil. . Sound discretion and restraint dictated that accused-appellant. Held: To be sure. Later. but within reasonable limits.

When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act which the law defines as a felony (delito). there were no vouchers supporting it and no receipt from PNCC. unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval. Kleptomania – if found by a competent psychiatrist as irresistible c. 12. the subordinate is not liable. 3. Vnitas. Malignant malaria – which affects the nervous system LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. If the evidence points to insanity subsequent to the commission of the crime.exempt in all cases from criminal liability INSANE .there is a complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act but capable of having lucid intervals. causes an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it. Art. Virtvs. the disbursement was not in the normal procedure since it is paid in cold case. it will not affect Tabuena’s good faith as to make him criminally liable. such minor shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. the court shall order his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established for persons thus afflicted. – one who is deprived completely of reason or discernment and freedom of the will at the time of committing the crime. 2. According to the accused. Held: The accused are acquitted. although by the complete absence of any of the conditions which constitute free will or voluntariness of the act. the court. . which he shall not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the permission of the court. The money withdrawn were placed in peerless boxes and duffle bags and delivered to the private secretary of Marcos also in 3 separate days. the accused cannot be acquitted. has a mental development comparable to that of children between 2 and 7 years of age. freedom of action. he shall be committed to the care of some institution or person mentioned in said Art. 217. Granting this to be true. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen. The accused is entitled to the justifying circumstance of obedience to an order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose. 6. UNLESS THE LATTER HAS ACTED DURING A LUCID INTERVAL IMBECILE . in which case. which he shall not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the permission of the same court.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 28 The Marcos’ memo indicated the amount of P55m for partial payment of the obligation to PNCC as mentioned in Ongpin’s memo. Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES ♣ Exempting circumstances (non-imputability) are those grounds for exemption from punishment because there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the condition which make the act voluntary or negligent. 80. Epilepsy d. even if the order is illegal if it is patently legal and subordinate is not aware of its illegality. the insane acts with intelligence and thus. Par. shall commit him to the care and custody of his family who shall be charged with his surveillance and education otherwise. A person under nine years of age. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability. the accused withdrew the amount by means of 3 separate issuances of manager’s check and encashment in 3 separate dates as well. Somnambulism – sleep-walking e. The trial.one who.The court shall order his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established for persons afflicted. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law. 7. or intent. 2. while performing a lawful act with due care. • When the person is sane at the time of the commission of the crime but he becomes insane at the time of the trial. 5. shall be suspended until mental capacity of the accused be restored to afford him a fair trial. 80 of this Code. — the following are exempt from criminal liability: 1. in conformably with the provisions of this and the preceding paragraph.5M. unless he has acted with discernment. however. not exempt from criminal liability. ♣ The exemption from punishment is based on the COMPLETE ABSENCE of intelligence. when prevented by some lawful insuperable cause. • Cases covered under this article: a. When such minor is adjudged to be criminally irresponsible. no criminal liability arise. while advanced in age. or on the absence of negligence on the part of the accused. During a lucid interval. • Evidence of insanity must refer to the time preceding the act under prosecution or to the very moment of its execution. • Feeblemindedness is not imbecility because a feebleminded person can distinguish right from wrong. In obedience to Marcos’ instruction. • One who acts by virtue of any of the exempting circumstances commits a crime. Dementia praecox b. RPC for misappropriating funds of Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) worth P55M. Thus. Sandiganbayan claimed that Marcos’ memo was unlawful because it orders disbursement of P55M when the Ongpin memo reveals that the liability is only 34. The court must obtain the opinion of the Director of Health before permitting his release. Any person who. 1 – AN IMBECILE OR INSANE PERSON. he is liable criminally. . 4. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury. PROCEDURE WHEN AN IMBECILE OR INSANE COMMITTED A FELONY . An imbecile or an insane person. for then there would only be a mistake of fact committed in good faith. Tabuena and Peralta were convicted by the Sandiganbayan of malversation as defined in Art.

the accused stabbed his wife causing her death. the accused behaved like an insane person. Valledor invoked the defense of insanity. Antonio noticed a commotion and saw that Ricardo. Held: The law presumes every man to be sane. Formigones (1950) Held: One day. When their grandmother found out about the incident. Roger on the other hand was treated for the 5-centimeter wound sustained by him on his right forearm. He wounded his wife who was pregnant at that time in the abdomen when she tried to stop him. People v. would go stark naked in the presence of his inmates. Elsa. People v. Madarang (2000) Facts: Fernando and his wife quarreled. with which he is charged. who was likewise stabbed by Valledor was wounded. The accused claim that he cannot remember anything because he often drinks liquor at home. schizos have lucid intervals. Held: The accused acted while in a dream and his acts. Madarang (2000) Facts: Fernando and his wife quarreled. The accused declared that he had no recollection of the stabbing incident. Elsa and his friends. A was under a defect of reason that he did not know the nature of act or if he did know what he was doing. after which. Virtvs. he alleges that he did not know where he was that day. Court ordered the accused’s confinement in a mental institution where it was found that he was inflicted with schizophrenia. He was submitted to treatment for 2 years. homicide attacks are common because of delusions that they are being interfered with sexually or that their property is being taken. he wounded himself. One night. Also. he did not know he was wrong. the crime is usually preceded by much complaining and planning. Held: The accused failed to prove that he was completely deprived of intelligence in committing the act. In dementia praecox. Vnitas. Two other people were also inside the room. He was charged of parricide. together with her sisters. During period of excitement. Valledor was clearly aware and in control of what he was doing as he in fact purposely chose to stab only the two victims. Valledor fled. schizos have lucid intervals. Finally. People v. Failure to remember is in itself no proof of the mental condition of the accused when the crime was performed. Held: The accused failed to prove that he was completely deprived of intelligence in committing the act. lived with their father after their mother died. he alleges that he did not know where he was that day. People v. Court ordered the accused’s confinement in a mental institution where it was found that he was inflicted with schizophrenia. All of a sudden. were not voluntary in the sense of entailing criminal liability. such person has no control whatever of his acts. "Ako akabales den. she was roused by her father who asked her to scratch his back but later she was forced to have intercourse with him. Valledor entered the room. Simplicio and Antonio.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 29 In Re M’Naghten (1843) Guidelines A man who shot someone claimed insanity. a neighbor of the victim. Also. the accused stabbed his wife from the back who was sitting at the top of the stairs in their house. Further. The accused admitted to his motive for the killing which is jealousy so he must know what he was doing at that time. Tubogoca (1998) Facts: Jacqueline. Elsa). People v. Held: Every man is presumed to be sane. Her sister Jinky also experienced the same with his father 2 years after. "I had my revenge" after stabbing them. In the heat of the fight. the accused stabbed his wife causing her death. he faced the charges against him. Judging from his acts. his act of immediately fleeing from the LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. The question to be asked is whether the accused at the time of doing the act knew the differences between right and wrong? The emphasis is on reason or cognition. He did not show any signs of insanity prior to and immediately after the act. He was only diagnosed of schizophrenia months after the incident. His obvious motive of revenge against the victims was accentuated by calling out their names and uttering the words. they filed charges against the accused. On their way out. leaving Simplicio and Antonio unharmed. In the heat of the fight. An irresistible homicide impulse was considered embraced in the terms of “insanity”. he faced the charges against him. Valledor (supra) Facts: Roger was in his house working on a lettering job inside his bedroom together with his first cousin. in these people. Valledor then stabbed Elsa on the chest and said. The accused declared that he had no recollection of the stabbing incident. He was submitted to treatment for 2 years." (I had my revenge. People v. left the room with a bolo in his hand. he suddenly got up. Counsel for accused interposed the defense of insanity stating that in prison. He was only diagnosed of schizophrenia months after the incident. uttered Roger's nickname ("Jer") and immediately attacked him with a knife. People v. . his wife died because of the wound. He attacked two of his visitors and his father. the accused is found to be feeble-minded but this does not exempt him from liability but may serve as a mitigating circumstance. Elsa was declared dead on arrival. Accused admitted the killing and that he was jealous and had suspicions that his wife and his brother were having a relationship. His charade of amnesia is a desperate gambit for exculpation. It must be clearly proved that at the time of committing the act. Thereafter. remain indifferent to his surroundings and sang chorus with inmates or by himself. after which. after which. but Valledor went for the victims. Taneo (1933) Facts: A fiesta was being celebrated in the barrio and visitors were being entertained at the house of Taneo and his wife. Further. The accused failed to overthrow the presumption of sanity. He did not show any signs of insanity prior to and immediately after the act. Bonoan (1937) A person suffering from dementia praecox pleaded insanity as a defense for committing murder. Roger and Elsa were immediately brought to the hospital. Held: At most. 5 days later. That afternoon. Taneo went to sleep and while sleeping. Held: Valledor failed to discharge the burden of overcoming the presumption of sanity at the time of the commission of the crime. His actions immediately after he struck his wife and his behavior in prison may only be due to remorse at having killed his wife or his feeblemindedness.

On the other hand. and such capacity may be known by taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances afforded by LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. with methodical fashion. DISCERNMENT Moral significance that a person ascribes to the said act INTENT Desired act of the person the records in each case. NO. is accused thereof. 3. There is no evidence that Jose knew what was inside the plastic and soft white paper before and at the time he handed the same to Zarraga. People (2005) Facts: Jose. Par. When caught. leadership qualities and demeanor while testifying in court. has no bearing on his liability. Such circumstance includes the gruesome nature of the crime and the minor’s cunning and shrewdness. Held: Jose is acquitted. The prosecution is burdened to prove that the accused acted with discernment by evidence of physical appearance. The basic reason behind the exempting circumstance is complete absence of intelligence. Jose handed over the plastic containing the shabu to Zarraga who handed the same to Guevarra. 15 years and below – AGE OF ABSOLUTE IRRESPONSIBILITY b. 13 yrs old was in a car with his cousin Zarraga. the medical findings showing that Valledor was suffering from a mental disorder after the commission of the crime. Then. is only mitigating. Jose merely sat in the car and had no other participation in the transaction between his cousin and the poseur buyer. Vnitas. Intelligence is the power necessary to determine the morality of human acts to distinguish a licit from an illicit act. – A PERSON OVER 9 YEARS OF AGE AND UNDER 15 UNLESS HE HAS ACTED WITH DISCERNMENT.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 30 scene after the incident indicates that he was aware of the wrong he has done and the consequence thereof. the accused ran away and hid for a few days at his grandparent’s house. Failing to discharge the burden of proving that he was legally insane when he stabbed the victims. shall suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such minor to the • Discernment may be shown by 1) the manner the crime was committed or 2) the conduct of the offender after its commission. after hearing the evidence in the proper proceedings. The trial court rendered judgment convicting both Jose and Zarraga. 80. Llave v. the court. Suspension of sentence of minor delinquents.A. the petitioner hastily fled from the scene to escape arrest. (R. is his mental capacity to understand the difference between right and wrong. and is convicted for having shown discernment through his responsible demeanor and school performance. paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code provides that a person over nine years of age and under fifteen is exempt from criminal liability. People (2006) Facts: A 12 year old honor student was charged with raping his seven year old neighbor. although said to be the second childhood. Doquena (1939) A 13-year old student stabs the school bully. over 70 years of age – AGE OF MITIGATED RESPONSIBILITY. Upon the prodding of his father and her mother. . the petitioner. Jose v. he hid in his grandmother’s house to avoid being arrested by policemen and remained thereat until barangay tanods arrived and took him into custody. the very attitude of said minor not only before and during the commission of the act but also after and even during trial. Aside from bringing out and handing over the plastic bag to Zarraga. but also after and during the trial. People v. 2. "A man may act crazy but it does not necessarily and conclusively prove that he is legally so. dragged the resisting victim behind the pile of hollow blocks near the vacant house to insure that passersby would not be able to discover his dastardly acts. the very appearance. – A PERSON UNDER NINE YEARS OF AGE • FIFTEEN YEARS OR LESS – presumed to be incapable of committing a crime. In the present case. The discernment that constitutes an exception to the exemption from criminal liability of a minor under fifteen years of age but over nine. He claimed that he acted without discernment. instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction. Art. As consistently held by this Court. IN WHICH CASE. Guevarra replied in the affirmative afterwhich Zarraga called the petitioner to bring out and hand over the shabu wrapped in plastic and white soft paper. SUCH MINOR SHALL BE PROCEEDED AGAINST IN COORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 80 OF THIS CODE. under sixteen years of age at the date of the commission of a grave or less grave felony. he should be held liable for his felonious acts. attitude or deportment not only before and during the commission of the act. Doquena’s discernment is gleaned from his academic records. When he was discovered by Teofisto Bucud who shouted at him. between 15 and 18 years AGE OF CONDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITY c. freedom of action of the offender which is an essential element of a felony either by dolus or by culpa. unless he acted with discernment. Held: Article 12. 18 or over to 70 years AGE OF FULL RESPONSIBILITY d. 4 PERIODS OF THE LIFE OF A HUMAN BEING a. when the latter inquired from the poseur buyer SPO1 Guevarra if he could afford to buy shabu. Par. What is decisive is his mental condition at the time of the perpetration of the offense. discernment is the mental capacity to understand the difference between right and wrong. The surrounding circumstances must demonstrate that the minor knew what he was doing and that it was wrong. 9334) • Senility. • A minor over 15 and under 18 years of age must have acted without discernment to be exempted from criminal liability. and this presumption is an absolute one which cannot be overcome by any evidence. Virtvs. too. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he acted with discernment relative to the sale of shabu. — Whenever a minor of either sex. DISCERNMENT – means the mental capacity of a minor between 15 and 18 years of age to fully appreciate the consequences of his lawful act.

A youthful offender held for physical and mental examination or trial or pending appeal. Whenever treatment for any physical or mental defect is indicated. Article 192. Physical and Mental Examination.It shall be the duty of the law-enforcement agency concerned to take the youthful offender. in its discretion. That whenever the Secretary of Finance certifies that a municipality is not able to pay its share in the expenses above mentioned. correction or education of orphaned. established under the law of the care.A youthful offender is one who is over nine years but under twenty-one years of age at the time of the commission of the offense. In case the minor fails to behave properly or to comply with the regulations of the institution to which he has been committed or with the conditions imposed upon him when he was committed to the care of a responsible person. including any civil liability chargeable against him. benevolent or charitable institution. or the superintendent of public schools or his representatives. Article 191. if they are able to do so. The provisions of Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code shall be deemed modified by the provisions of this Chapter. defective. to the custody of his parents or other suitable person who shall be responsible for his appearance whenever required. or nearest relative or family friend in the discretion of the court and subject to its supervision. subject to such conditions as are prescribed herein below until such minor shall have reached his majority age or for such less period as the court may deem proper. Vnitas. be affected by those contained herein. If the minor has behaved properly and has complied with the conditions imposed upon him during his confinement. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. The court may. . and the remaining one-third shall be borne by the National Government: Provided. the superintendent of public schools or his representatives. Youthful Offender Defined. The suspension of the proceedings against a minor may be extended or shortened by the court on the recommendation of the Director of Public Welfare or his authorized representative or agents. in order to avoid his commitment to any private institution not under the control and supervision of the religious sect or denomination to which they belong. shall take into consideration the religion of such minor. if unable to furnish bail. Chartered cities shall pay two-thirds of said expenses. the provincial. shall be borne totally or partially by his parents or relatives or those persons liable to support him. in which case he shall be proceeded against in accordance with Article 192. or otherwise by the superintendent of public schools or his representatives. in committing said minor as provided above. Care of Youthful Offender Held for Examination or Trial. Virtvs. shall from the time of his arrest be committed to the care of the Department of Social Welfare or the local rehabilitation center or a detention home in the province or city which shall be responsible for his appearance in court whenever required: Provided. The expenses for the maintenance of a minor delinquent confined in the institution to which he has been committed. However. the internal revenue allotments which may be due to said city shall be withheld and applied in settlement of said indebtedness in accordance with section five hundred and eighty-eight of the Administrative Code. or in case he should be found incorrigible or his continued stay in such institution should be inadvisable. The provisions of the first paragraph of this article shall not. release a youthful offender on recognizance. he shall be returned to the court in order that the same may order his final release. upon recommendation of the Department of Social Welfare or other agency or agencies authorized by the Court. or the person to whose custody or care the minor has been committed. The court.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 31 custody or care of a public or private. Provided. in the discretion of the court. That in case his parents or relatives or those persons liable to support him have not been ordered to pay said expenses or are found indigent and cannot pay said expenses. shall submit to the court every four months and as often as required in special cases. the court should find that the youthful offender has committed the acts charged against him the court shall determine the imposable penalty. homeless. steps shall be immediately undertaken to provide the same. or to the custody or care of any other responsible person in any other place subject to visitation and supervision by the Director of Public Welfare or any of his agents or representatives. in accordance with the provisions of this article. The same shall be done for a child over nine years and under fifteen years of age at the time of the commission of the offense. and in case a chartered city cannot pay said expenses. according as to whether the conduct of such minor has been good or not and whether he has complied with the conditions imposed upon him. if there be any. such minor may be allowed to stay elsewhere under the care of a responsible person. . . The Director of Public Welfare or his duly authorized representatives or agents. and delinquent children. with the approval of the Director of Public Welfare and subject to such conditions as this official in accordance with law may deem proper to impose. such share which is not paid by said municipality shall be borne by the National Government. • When the minor is adjudged criminally irresponsible – duty of court is to commit him to custody of his family or some institution. A child nine years of age or under at the time of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability and shall be committed to the care of his or her father or mother. . a written report on the good or bad conduct of said minor and the moral and intellectual progress made by him. the municipality in which the offense was committed shall pay one-third of said expenses.If after hearing the evidence in the proper proceedings. • The allegation of “with intent to kill” in the information is sufficient allegation of discernment. he shall be returned to the court in order that the same may render the judgment corresponding to the crime committed by him. If the minor has been committed to the custody or care of any of the institutions mentioned in the first paragraph of this article. PD 603 THE CHILD AND YOUTH WELFARE CODE Article 189. . Suspension of Sentence and Commitment of Youthful Offender. or not. The examination and treatment papers shall form part of the record of the case of the youthful offender. to the proper medical or health officer for a thorough physical and mental examination. Article 190. however. immediately after his apprehension. That in the absence of any such center or agency within a reasonable distance from the venue of the trial. the province to which the municipality belongs shall pay one-third. however. his parents or next of kin. unless he acted with discernment. city and municipal jail shall provide quarters for youthful offenders separate from other detainees.

.The final release of a child pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter shall not obliterate his civil liability for damages.The Department of Social Welfare shall establish regional rehabilitation centers for youthful offenders. until he shall have reached twenty-one years of age or. In any case covered by this article. Aids. Civil liability may also be voluntarily assumed by a relative or family friend of the youthful offender. the youthful offender shall be credited in the service of his sentence with the full time spent in actual commitment and detention effected under the provisions of this Chapter.If it is shown to the satisfaction of the court that the youthful offender whose sentence has been suspended. in case of his death or incapacity.A person whether the parent or guardian of the child or not. further. a written report on the conduct of said youthful offender as well as the intellectual. has behaved properly and has shown his capability to be a useful member of the community. . he shall be returned to the committing court for the pronouncement of judgment. he shall be committed to the proper penal institution to serve the remaining period of his sentence: Provided. Civil Liability of Youthful Offenders. part of the internal revenue allotments applicable to the unpaid portion shall be withheld and applied to the settlement of said indebtedness. the province to which the municipality belongs shall pay one-third.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 32 instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction. . The youthful offender concerned shall not be held under any provision of law. the municipality in which the offense was committed shall pay one-third of said expenses or part thereof. Liability of Parents or Guardian or Any Person in the Commission of Delinquent Acts by Their Children or Wards. shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five hundred pesos or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding two years. abets or connives with the commission by a child of a delinquency. Article 198. . Dismissal of the Case. group them according to appropriate age levels or other criteria as will insure their speedy rehabilitation: Provided. Virtvs. after considering the reports and recommendations of the Department of Social Welfare or the agency or responsible individual under whose care he has been committed. Where a youthful offender has been charged and the court acquits him. and in case a chartered city cannot pay said expenses. The local government and other non-governmental entities shall collaborate and contribute their support for the establishment and maintenance of these facilities. for a shorter period as the court may deem proper. Return of the Youth Offender to Court. or any other government agency which may have been involved in the case. Article 201.The Department of Social Welfare or its representative or duly licensed agency or individual under whose care the youthful offender has been committed shall submit to the court every four months or oftener as may be required in special cases. upon recommendation of the Department of Social Welfare. Article 196. or duly licensed agencies or any other responsible person. . and at the time of said pronouncement the youthful offender is still under twenty-one. Article 197. even before reaching the age of majority. 1. All city and provincial governments must exert efforts for the immediate establishment of local detention homes for youthful offenders. . Article 202. moral. Report on Conduct of Child. or both such fine and imprisonment. When the youthful offender has reached the age of twenty-one while in commitment. dismissal or release. Does any act producing. Living Quarters for Youthful Offenders Sentence. Appeal. the court shall suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such minor to the custody or care of the Department of Social Welfare. Article 199. or 2. or in case of her death or incapacity. . and the remaining one-third shall be borne by the National Government. Rehabilitation Centers. physical.Whenever the youthful offender has been found incorrigible or has wilfully failed to comply with the conditions of his rehabilitation programs. Records of Proceedings. Care and Maintenance of Youthful Offender. Chartered cities shall pay two-thirds of said expenses. in which case such records shall be destroyed after satisfaction of such civil liability. That in case his parents or those persons liable to support him can not pay all or part of said expenses. The youthful offender shall be subject to visitation and supervision by a representative of the Department of Social Welfare or any duly licensed agency or such other officer as the Court may designate subject to such conditions as it may prescribe. Detention Homes. social and emotional progress made by him. Effect of Release of Child Based on Good Conduct. .The Department of Local Government and Community Development shall establish detention homes in cities and provinces distinct and separate from jails pending the disposition of cases of juvenile offenders. Vnitas. . Article 194. at the discretion of the court. Article 204. it shall dismiss the case and order his final discharge. all the records of his case shall be destroyed immediately after such acquittal. Such release shall be without prejudice to the right for a writ of execution for the recovery of civil damages. Article 203. unless civil liability has also been imposed in the criminal action. That the Bureau of Prisons shall maintain agricultural and forestry camps where youthful offenders may serve their sentence in lieu of confinement in regular penitentiaries.When a judgment of conviction is pronounced in accordance with the provisions of Article 197. "Records" within the meaning of this article shall include those which may be in the files of the National Bureau of Investigation and with any police department. the court shall determine whether to dismiss the case in accordance with the next preceding article or to pronounce the judgment of conviction. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. to be guilty of perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation by reason of his failure to acknowledge the case or recite any fact related thereto in response to any inquiry made of him for any purpose. . who knowingly or wilfully. upon the guardian.The youthful offender whose sentence is suspended can appeal from the order of the court in the same manner as appeals in criminal cases. Article 193.The civil liability for acts committed by a youthful offender shall devolve upon the offender's father and. as far as practicable. all the records of the case shall be destroyed immediately thereafter.The expenses for the care and maintenance of the youthful offender whose sentence has been suspended shall be borne by his parents or those persons liable to support him: Provided.Where a youthful offender has been charged before any city or provincial fiscal or before any municipal judge and the charges have been ordered dropped. or contributing to a child's being or becoming a juvenile delinquent. . upon the mother. That penal institutions shall provide youthful offenders with separate quarters and. Article 195. . Article 200. . promoting. or to any training institution operated by the government. or should his continued stay in the training institution be inadvisable. causes. or dismisses the case or commits him to an institution and subsequently releases him pursuant to this Chapter.

made to beg in the streets or public places. February 28. continuous. deaf-mute. RULE ON COMMITMENT OF CHILDREN SECTION 1. (4) retarded at maturity. (o) "Voluntarily committed child" is one whose parents knowingly and willingly relinquished parental authority to the Department or any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual in accordance with Section 3 herein. parent or guardian or any interested party. Definition of Terms. or repeated neglect. blind. (s) "Case Study Report" is a written report of the result of an investigation conducted by a social worker as to the socio-cultural. children with cerebral palsy and those with similar afflictions. exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to his development . and is dependent upon the public for support. February 28. SECTION 3. educational attainment. The Rule shall take effect on April 15. Interpretation. which is of such a degree of severity as to require professional help or hospitalization. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. evaluation of whether the child ought to be committed to the care of the Department or any duly licensed childplacement or child-caring agency or individual.] RE: PROPOSED RULE ON COMMITMENT OF CHILDREN RESOLUTION Acting on the letter of the Chairman of the Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court submitting for this Court's consideration and approval the Proposed Rule on Commitment Of Children. (i) "Mentally retarded child" is one who is (1) socially incompetent. 02-1-19-SC. guardian or custodian. (h) "Disabled child" includes mentally retarded. and accredited by the Department to provide comprehensive child welfare services. involuntarily or voluntarily committed children. prostitution and other vices. — (a) "Child" is a person below eighteen years of age. exploited. the quality of his peer group. cruelty. administrative authorities and legislative bodies consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. the Court Resolved to APPROVE the same. (r) "Guardian ad litem" is a person appointed by the court where the case is pending for a child sought to be committed to protect his best interests. The report is submitted to the Family Court to aid it in its.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 33 EN BANC [A. economic and legal status or condition of the child sought to be committed. by his parents or guardian. . orphaned. or one whose parents. occupationally incompetent and unable to manage his own affairs. SECTION 2. whether functional or organic. although not afflicted with insanity or mental defect. (j) "Physically handicapped child" is one who is crippled. Virtvs. physically handicapped. 2002. abuse. (g) "Emotional neglect" occurs when a child is raped. his family's strengths and weaknesses and parental control over him. — The best interests of the child shall be the paramount consideration in all actions concerning him. family and social relationships. alcohol. It shall include among others his developmental age. No. (b) "Department" refers to the Department of Social Welfare and Development. (d) "Abandoned child" is one who has no proper parental care or guardianship. 2002. physically or emotionally. socially inadequate. Vnitas. substantial. (q) "Child-caring agency" refers to a private non-profit or charitable institution or government agency duly licensed and accredited by the Department that provides twenty-four hour residential care services for abandoned. (c) "Dependent child" is one who is without a parent. 2002. receiving applications for adoption or foster care. including but not limited to. (l) "Mentally ill child" is one with any behavioral disorder. or exposed to drugs. Toward this end. or otherwise suffers from a defect which restricts his means of action or communication with others. or when placed in moral danger. evaluating the prospective adoptive or foster parents and preparing the home study report. (n) "Involuntarily committed child" is one whose parents have been permanently and judicially deprived of parental authority due to abandonment. (p) "Child-placing or child-placement agency" refers to a private non-profit or charitable institution or government agency duly licensed. (k) "Emotionally disturbed child" is one who. this Rule seeks to protect the child from all forms of neglect. (3) intellectually retarded from birth or early age. gambling. maltreated. neglected. guardian or other custodian for good cause desires to be relieved of his care and custody. 2002 following its publication in a newspaper of general circulation not later than March 15. or incompetence to discharge parental responsibilities in accordance with Section 4 herein.M. abuse. whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions. (2) mentally subnormal. overworked or made to work under conditions not conducive to good health. that is. or whose parents or guardian has deserted him for a period of at least six (6) continuous months. ill-clad and without proper shelter. seduced. courts of law. (f) "Physical neglect" occurs when the child is malnourished. (m) "Commitment" or "surrender of a child" is the legal act of entrusting a child to the care of the Department or any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual by the court. Objective. (5) mentally deficient as a result of constitutional origin through heredity or diseases or (6) essentially incurable. — The objective of this Rule is to ensure that every effort is exerted to promote the child's welfare and enhance his opportunities for a useful and happy life. emotionally disturbed and mentally ill children. (e) "Neglected child" is one whose basic needs have been deliberately unattended to or inadequately attended to. is unable to maintain normal social relations with others and the community in general due to emotional problems or complexes.

The judgment shall likewise make proper provisions for the custody of the property or money belonging to the committed. — Any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual to whom a child has been committed by judicial order may at any time be required by the court to submit a report. (h) Duty of Public Prosecutor. (3) The facts showing who has custody of the child at the time of the filing of the petition. — (a) Who may file. the court shall find the child to be dependent. (j) Judgment. as the case may be or of both. shall appoint a lawyer to represent him in the proceedings. In making the appointment. A member of the Philippine Bar may be appointed guardian ad litem. after the hearing. subject to supervision and direction of the Department. or if the court finds them incompetent to protect the best interests of the child. abandoned or neglected. it shall notify the court within thirty (30) days from the order of commitment. containing all necessary information for determining whether the welfare of the child is being served. social service programs and child development. (2) The facts showing that the child is dependent. abandoned. — After the court sets the petition for hearing in accordance with Sub-section (d) above. and (4) The name. The report shall bear the signature of the social worker on every page. (l) Report of Person or Institution. summons may not be issued and the court shall thereupon appoint a guardian ad litem pursuant to Sub-section (f) below and proceed with the hearing of the case with due notice to the provincial or city prosecutor. child. petitioner shall attach a certified true copy of their death certificate. it shall direct the social worker to submit. Court to Set Time for Hearing. upon the parents or guardian of the child and the office of the public prosecutor not less than five (5) days before the date of the hearing. — The petition must state: (1) The names of the parents or guardian and their place of residence. if the court finds that the abandonment or neglect of the child may be remedied. — The duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual to whom a child has been committed may LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. (i) Hearing. (c) Contents of Verified Petition. — The provincial or city prosecutor shall appear for the State and ascertain if there has been due notice to all parties concerned and that there is justification for the declaration of dependency. abandoned. (e) Social Worker. or neglected. If said parents are deceased. abandoned. it shall be the duty of the court to appoint a suitable person as guardian ad litem to represent the child. Petition for Involuntary Commitment of a Child. the cause and circumstances of such condition. However. address and written consent of the Department or duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual to whose care the commitment of the child is sought to be entrusted. — The petition shall be filed with the Family Court of the province or city in which the parent or guardian resides or where the child is found. abandonment or neglect. (g) Child's Right to Counsel. — The Secretary of the Department or his authorized representative or any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency having knowledge of a child who appears to be dependent. the child may be allowed to stay in his own home under the care and control of his parents or guardian. — If the court is satisfied that the petition is sufficient in form and substance. may file a verified petition for involuntary commitment of said child to the care of any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual. (k) Visitation or Inspection. (f) Guardian Ad Litem of Child. (d) Summons. and if so. it shall render judgment committing him to the care and custody of the Department or any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual until he reaches the age of eighteen (18). If the child is committed to the Department. (b) Venue. — If. before the hearing. petitioner must allege that diligent efforts have been exerted to locate them. the name and address of the duly licensed and accredited child-placement or child-caring agency or individual where the child shall be placed. Vnitas. — The court. Virtvs. — If neither of the parents nor the guardian of the child can be located or does not appear in court despite due notice. If the child's parents are unknown. to determine whether the welfare and interests of the child are being served.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 34 SECTION 4. If it appears from the petition that both parents of the child are dead or that neither parent can be found in the province or city where the court is located and the child has no guardian residing therein. The office of the public prosecutor shall be directed to immediately transmit the summons to the prosecutor assigned to the Family Court concerned. a case study report of the child to aid it in evaluating whether said child should be committed to the care of the Department or any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual. it shall direct the clerk of court to immediately issue summons which shall be served together with a copy of the petition and a notice of hearing. . — The court shall direct the person or agency which has custody of the child to bring the latter to the court on the date of the hearing of the petition and shall ascertain the facts and determine whether the child is dependent. upon request of the child capable of forming his own views or upon request of his guardian ad litem. or neglected. — Any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual to whom a child has been committed by the court shall be subject to visitation or inspection by a representative of the court or of the Department. or neglected. the court shall consider the background of the guardian ad litem and his familiarity with the judicial process. (m) Temporary Custody of Child.

for a period not exceeding one month at a time. the public prosecutor and the court-designated social worker. — If the child is committed to the Department. (o) Removal of Custody. shall issue a resolution terminating the parental authority of the person. SECTION 5. provided. When conflicting interests arise among childplacement or child-caring agencies. In the same proceeding.D. The court may order the social worker to submit a case study report to aid it in evaluating whether such temporary custody shall be for the best interests of the child. except in case of actual or imminent grave physical or moral danger to the child. — The parents or guardian of a child committed to the care of a person. agency. however. motu proprio. upon motion of the Department or any of the agencies concerned. as the case may be. at least five (5) days before the date of hearing. . or upon request of the child assisted by his guardian ad litem. HDATSI (ii) Notice of Hearing. 603 and Sections 9. 7610. 10 and 31 of R. The court. (n) Change of Custody. the court which granted the involuntary commitment of the child. The Family Court which granted the involuntary commitment shall also have jurisdiction over the prosecution of parents or guardians of the child who may be held liable under Articles 59 and 60 of P. after due notice and hearing. — A motion to remove custody of a child may be filed by an authorized representative of the Department with knowledge of the facts against a child-placement or child-caring agency or individual to whose custody a child has been committed by the court on the ground of neglect of such child as defined in Section 3 (e) of this Rule. no child shall be committed unless he is surrendered in writing by his parents or guardian stating such voluntary commitment and specifically naming the office. upon the latter's request. q) Jurisdiction for Prosecution of Punishable Acts. abandoned or neglected child may voluntarily commit him to the Department or any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual subject to the rules of the Department. after taking into consideration the best interests and the welfare of the child. — At the hearing. — The court shall fix the time and date for the hearing of the motion. The period of temporary custody of the child may be extended by the court for a period not exceeding one month at a time upon motion of the duly licensed childplacement or child-caring agency or individual to which the child has been committed. No. It shall likewise have jurisdiction over the person who induced the child to leave such person or institution. No. If the court finds after hearing that the allegations of the motion have been established and that it is for the best interests and welfare of the child. Virtvs. The Department shall notify the court of any change in custody of the child. Witnesses may be called and examined by the parties or by the court motu proprio. (iv) Resolution. any person may be allowed to intervene at the discretion of the court to contest the right to the relief demanded. that the child has not yet been adopted. agency or institution to whom the child was committed by judicial order and restoring parental authority to the movant.A. it shall have the authority to change the custody of a child it had placed with any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual if it appears that such change is for the best interests of the child. However. Voluntary Commitment of a Child to an Institution or Individual. Such written instrument should be notarized and signed in the presence of an authorized representative of the Department after counseling and other services have been made LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. (p) Restoration of Parental Authority After Involuntary Commitment. shall order the change of commitment of the child.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 35 file a verified motion with the court which granted the petition for involuntary commitment of a child to place him in the care of any suitable person. (iii) Hearing. the court may suspend or revoke the license of the agency or individual found guilty of such neglect depending upon the gravity or frequency of the offense. After one month from the date temporary custody of the child was given to another suitable person. or at the instance of the agency or person to whom the child was committed. shall discontinue the temporary custody of the child if it appears that he is not being given proper care. the agency or individual shall submit to the court a verified report on whether the temporary custody of the child has promoted his best interests. agency or institution to which the child has been committed. and committing him to the custody of another duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual. Ground. Vnitas. or individual to whose custody the child is to be committed. The court shall set the motion for hearing with notice to the public prosecutor and the courtdesignated social worker. — (i) Who may file. agency or institution by judicial order may file a verified motion for the restoration of his rights over the child with the court which granted the involuntary commitment on the ground that he is now able to take proper care and custody of said child. which shall not be earlier than thirty (30) days nor later than sixty (60) days from the date of the filing of said motion and cause notice of the hearing to be sent to the person. — The parent or guardian of a dependent. — The Family Court which granted the involuntary commitment shall have jurisdiction over the prosecution of a child who left without prior permission from the person or institution to which he has been judicially committed or the person under whose custody he has been judicially committed in accordance with Subsection (m) of Section 4 of this Rule. the court shall issue an order removing him from the custody of the person or agency. — If it is found that the cause for the commitment of the child no longer exists and that the movant is already able to take proper care and custody of the child. the court.

AEHTIC (b) Venue. it shall issue an order removing the child from the custody of the person or agency concerned. — (a) Who may file. the Department. any person with knowledge of the facts. physically handicapped. No. — If the petition is sufficient in form and substance. The same Family Court shall also have jurisdiction over the prosecution of parents or guardians of the child who may be held liable under Articles 59 and 60 of P. (iv) Notice of Hearing. that the petition for restoration is filed within six (6) months from the date of voluntary commitment.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 36 available to encourage the child's parents to keep the child. the court shall set the same for hearing with notice to the Department. if known. in the same proceeding may. In case the Department refuses to grant legal custody and parental authority to the parent or guardian over the child who has been voluntarily committed to an agency or individual. IADCES (2) The name of the parents and their residence. to the child. the name and residence of the guardian. that the parents of the child are actually capable of taking care and custody of the child. with cerebral palsy or with similar afflictions and needs institutional care but his parents or guardians are opposed thereto. suspend or revoke the license of the agency or individual found guilty of such neglect depending upon the gravity or frequency of the offense.D. except in case of grave actual or imminent physical or moral danger. — The petition shall be filed with the Family Court of the province or city where the child-placement or child-caring agency to which the child has been voluntarily committed is located or where the child may be found. (v) Judgment. the parent or guardian may file a petition in court for restoration of parental authority in accordance with Section 4 (p) of this Rule. the public prosecutor. . physically handicapped. the parents of the child. (c) Jurisdiction for Prosecution of Punishable Acts. address and written consent of the duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual to whose care the child may be transferred. Ground. after hearing the comment or recommendation of the Department. — (i) Who may file. or in their absence or failure. — The Family Court of the place where the child may be found or where the duly licensed childplacement or child-caring agency or individual is located shall have jurisdiction over the prosecution of a child who left without prior permission from the person or institution to which he has been voluntarily committed.A. if any. — Where a child appears to be mentally retarded. The parents or guardian of the child may file a similar petition in case no immediate placement can be arranged for the disabled child when his welfare and interests are at stake. the agency or individual to whom the child has been committed and in appropriate cases. with cerebral palsy or with similar afflictions and needs institutional care. (iii) Contents of Verified Petition — The petition must state: (1) The name and address of the childplacement or child-caring agency or individual to whose custody the child has been voluntarily committed. The court. — The petition for commitment must state the following: (1) The facts showing that the child appears to be mentally retarded. 603 and Sections 9. emotionally disturbed. (ii) Venue. the courtdesignated social worker. (3) The name. No. (b) Restoration of Parental Authority After Voluntary Commitment. SEIDAC (2) The facts showing that the child has been neglected by the agency or in cases where the voluntary commitment was unjustified. or any duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual may file a verified petition for commitment of the said child to any reputable institution providing care. It shall likewise have jurisdiction over the person who induced the child to leave such person or institution. however. SECTION 6. — The petition for commitment of a disabled child shall be filed with the Family Court of the place where the parent or guardian resides or where the child is found. 10 and 31 of R. (c) Contents of Verified Petition. (4) The facts showing that petitioner has exhausted the administrative remedies available to him. or if the child has no living parent. provided. training and rehabilitation for disabled children. — The parents or guardian who voluntarily committed the child. A child may also be removed from the custody of the child-placement or childcaring agency or individual on the ground that the voluntary commitment of the child was unjustified. mentally ill. and (3) The fact that the parents or guardian or any duly licensed disabled childplacement or child-caring agency. (a) Petition for removal of Custody. and committing him to the custody of another duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or individual. mentally ill. Vnitas. emotionally disturbed. Virtvs. Petition for Commitment of a Disabled Child. as the case LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. — The restoration of rights of the parent or guardian over the child who has been voluntarily committed shall be governed by the rules of the Department. may file a verified petition to remove custody of the child against the child-placement or child-caring agency or individual to whose custody the child has been voluntarily committed on the ground of neglect of such child as defined in Section 3 (e) of this Rule. 7610. — If after hearing the court finds that the allegations of the petition have been established and that it is for the best interests and welfare of the child.

and instills in him respect for the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. 2002. Applicability of the Rule. Notice. mentally ill. is already fit to engage in gainful occupation. 02-1-18-SC. shall order the discharge of such child if it is established and certified by the Department that: (1) He is no longer a danger to himself and the community. To attain this objective. if necessary. emotionally disturbed. 2002 after its publication in a newspaper of general circulation not later than March 15. The verified petition shall be sufficient if based upon the personal knowledge of the petitioner. 2002 following its publication in a newspaper of general circulation not later than March 15. (5) An estimate of the costs and other expenses of maintaining the child in the institution. 38 and 39 of this Rule. physically handicapped. 2002. guardian or institution to which the child has been judicially committed under this rule. or guardian or relatives are unable for any reason whatsoever to take proper care of him. The order shall also direct the sheriff or any other officer of the court to produce. 37.M. Virtvs. and physical development of juveniles in conflict with the law. the Court Resolved to APPROVE the same. (f) Discharge of Judicially Committed Disabled Child. d) To remove from juveniles in conflict with the law the stigma of criminality and the consequences of criminal behavior. (n) SECTION 2. the Rule seeks: a) To provide a procedure in the adjudication of juveniles in conflict with the law that takes into account their distinct circumstances and assures the parties of a fair hearing with their constitutional and statutory rights recognized and respected. together with all the reports and other data pertinent to the case.] RE: PROPOSED RULE ON JUVENILES IN CONFLICT WITH THE LAW RESOLUTION Acting on the letter of the Chairman of the Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court submitting for this Court's consideration and approval the Proposed Rule on Juveniles In Conflict With The Law. The court shall likewise make proper provisions for the custody of the property or money belonging to the committed child. by an order reciting the purpose of the petition. The Rule shall take effect on April 15. or such part thereof as may remain unpaid. b) To divert from the justice system juveniles who can be cared for or placed under communitybased alternative programs of treatment. and a copy of such order shall be served on the child alleged to be mentally retarded. from his physical handicap or if of working age. the court. The court shall furnish the institution to which the child has been committed with a copy of its judgment. SECTION 7. February 28. No. (4) The name and written conformity of the institution where the child is to be committed. SECTION 1. This Rule shall not apply to an accused who at the time of initial contact as defined in Section 4(p) of this Rule. (d) Order of Hearing. The expense of maintaining a disabled child in the institution to which he has been committed shall be borne primarily by the parents or guardian and secondarily. the court shall order his commitment to the proper institution for disabled children. after hearing. the alleged disabled child on the date of the hearing. In all cases where the expenses for the maintenance of the disabled child cannot be paid in accordance with the immediately preceding paragraph. — This Rule shall apply to all criminal cases involving juveniles in conflict with the law. [A. in which case the regular rules on criminal procedure shall apply without prejudice to the rights granted under Sections 36. shall fix the date of the hearing thereof. and e) To provide for the care. Vnitas. if he has property of his own. mental and emotional problems and is ready to assume normal social relations. protection and wholesome moral. mental. with cerebral palsy or with similar afflictions and on the person having charge of him or any of his relatives residing in the province or city as the court may deem proper. The Rule considers his developmental age and the desirability of his reintegration into and assumption of a constructive role in society in accordance with the principle of restorative justice. or at any time thereafter. Objective. — If the petition filed is sufficient in form and substance. the Department shall bear the expenses.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 37 may be. 2002. has opposed the commitment of such child. 2002. A juvenile in conflict with the law is a person who at the time of the commission of the offense is below eighteen (18) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. by such disabled child. (e) Hearing and Judgment. — Upon motion of the parent. February 28. the court. . separate him from his parents only when necessary for his welfare or in the interest of public safety. (2) He has been sufficiently rehabilitated. training and rehabilitation in conformity with the principle of restorative justice. — The objective of this Rule is to ensure that the justice system treats every juvenile in conflict with the law in a manner that recognizes and upholds his human dignity and worth. — This rule shall take effect on April 15. or (3) He has been sufficiently relieved of his psychological. c) To deal with the juvenile in a family environment whenever possible. Effectivity. shall have reached the age of eighteen (18). — If the court finds that the allegations of the petition have been established and that institutional care of the child is for his best interests or the public welfare and that his parents.

(h) Disposition conference is a meeting held by the court with the social worker who prepared the case study report together with the juvenile in conflict with the law and his parents or guardian ad litem. par. the offender. It includes. (q) Corporal punishment is any kind of physical punishment inflicted on the body as distinguished from pecuniary punishment or fine. the offended and the community and reassurance to the offender that he can be reintegrated into society. (b) Serious offense refers to any offense not covered by Section 1. to wit: (1) violations of traffic laws. Vnitas. (4) all other offenses punished with imprisonment not exceeding six months. (l) Community continuum is a communitybased group therapy process that provides continuous guidance and support to the juvenile in conflict with the law upon his release from rehabilitation and his reintegration into society. if any. his developmental age.00). It includes the time when the juvenile receives a subpoena under Section 3 (b) of Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure or summons under Section 6 (a) or Sec. Interpretation. however. his attitude toward the offense. that in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence. irrespective of other imposable penalties. educational attainment. the strengths and weaknesses of his family. and the community. the imposable fine is not in excess of ten thousand pesos (P10. Exemption from Criminal Liability. provided. including violations of traffic laws. SECTION 4. (f) Diversion refers to an alternative childappropriate process of determining the responsibility and treatment of a juvenile in conflict with the law on the basis of his social. or a fine not exceeding one thousand pesos (P1. economic and legal status or condition of the juvenile in conflict with the law. (o) Restorative Justice is a principle which requires a process of resolving conflicts with the maximum involvement of the victim. the victim and the community in prevention strategies. The juvenile is subject to conditions imposed in the sentence and to supervision by the court and a probation officer who has the duty to return the juvenile to the court in case of violation of a condition of his probation. or of the civil liability arising therefrom. (d) Intake report is a preliminary written report containing the personal and other circumstances of the juvenile in conflict with the law and prepared by the social worker assigned by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) or local government unit to assist him as soon as he enters the justice system. also enhances public safety by activating the offender. — As used in this Rule. in the sound discretion of the court and subject to its supervision. among others. the harm or damage done to others resulting from the offense. (2) violations of the rental law. However. cultural. he shall be proceeded against in LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. economic. 9 (b) of the same Rule in cases that do not require preliminary investigation or where there is no necessity to place the juvenile under immediate custody. cultural. A minor nine (9) years and above but under fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the commission of the offense shall be committed to the care of his father or mother. (i) Recognizance is an undertaking in lieu of a bond assumed by a parent or custodian who shall be responsible for the appearance in court by the juvenile in conflict with the law when required. (n) Discernment means the mental capacity to understand the difference between right and wrong and its consequences. reconciliation of the offender. of the Rule on Summary Procedure. (j) Probation is a disposition alternative under which a juvenile in conflict with the law is released and permitted to remain in his home after conviction and sentence. B. (k) Suspended sentence is the holding in abeyance of the service of the sentence imposed by the court upon a finding of guilt of the juvenile in conflict with the law who will undergo rehabilitation. accessory or otherwise. and ordinances of local government units. and the attitude of his parents towards his responsibility for the offense. or both. rules and regulations. (3) violations of municipal or city ordinances. Definitions. (g) Diversion programs refer to programs that the juvenile in conflict with the law is required to undergo in lieu of formal court proceedings. Criminal Cases. or nearest relative or family friend. — This Rule shall be interpreted liberally to promote the best interests of the child in conformity with Philippine laws and the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of the Child. his record of prior offenses.00). (e) Case study report is a written report of the result of an investigation conducted by the social worker designated by the Family Court on the social. parental control over him. .000. It. the quality of his peer group. family and social relationships. — A minor under nine (9) years of age at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. psychological or educational background without resorting to formal court adjudication. SECTION 5. Virtvs.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 38 SECTION 3. (a) To be in conflict with the law means being charged with the commission of an act defined and punished as a crime or offense under the law. It seeks to obtain reparation for the victim. if the prosecution proves that he has acted with discernment. for the purpose of determining the disposition measures appropriate to the personal and peculiar circumstances of the juvenile.000. (m) Age of criminal responsibility is the age when a juvenile who is nine (9) years or over but under fifteen (15) years commits an offense with discernment. (p) Initial contact is the apprehension or taking into custody of a juvenile in conflict with the law by law enforcement officers or private citizens. rules and regulations. (c) Youth detention center refers to a government-owned or operated agency providing habilitating and rehabilitative facilities where a juvenile in conflict with the law may be physically restricted pending court disposition of the charge against him.

8 and 9 of Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure and shall forthwith deliver him to the nearest police station. Fingerprinting and Photographing of the Juvenile. in the absence of both parents. no juvenile in conflict with the law shall be fingerprinted or photographed in a humiliating and degrading manner. as the case may be. Preliminary Investigation. and the local social welfare officer as soon as the apprehension is made. Virtvs. SECTION 9. the guardian or the nearest relative. the juvenile shall be informed of his constitutional rights during custodial investigation. The following guidelines shall be observed when fingerprinting or photographing the juvenile: (a) His fingerprint and photograph files shall be kept separate from those of adults and shall be kept confidential. a report on his findings to the Family Court in which the case may be filed. Article 2180 of the Civil Code shall apply. It may also be filed directly with the Family Court if no preliminary investigation is required under Section 1 of Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. — A peace officer or a private person taking into custody a juvenile in conflict with the law without a warrant shall likewise follow the provisions of Sections 5. Filing of Criminal Action. — Upon the taking into custody of a juvenile in conflict with the law. TADCSE (b) His fingerprints and photographs shall be removed from the files and destroyed: (1) if the case against him is not filed. SECTION 11. the complaint shall be filed with the Office of the Prosecutor. SECTION 10.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 39 accordance with Sections 24 to 28. the social welfare officer assigned to him by the DSWD shall immediately under take a preliminary background investigation of the juvenile and submit. . prior to arraignment of the juvenile. and subjected to a delinquency prevention program as determined by the court. if any. Taking Custody of a Juvenile Without a Warrant. The right of the juvenile to privacy shall be protected at all times. (c) Refrain from using vulgar or profane words and from sexually harassing or abusing. SECTION 6. SECTION 12. Vnitas. The juvenile shall be proceeded against in accordance with Section 7 of Rule 112. or making sexual advances on the juvenile. (b) Inform the juvenile of the reason for such custody and advise him of his constitutional rights in a language or dialect understood by him. In their presence. All criminal actions commenced by complaint or information shall be prosecuted under the direction and control of the public prosecutor assigned to the Family Court. The examination results shall be kept confidential unless otherwise ordered by the Family Court. — When a criminal action is instituted against a juvenile in conflict with the law. Conduct of Initial Investigation by the Police. They may be inspected by law enforcement officers only when necessary for the discharge of their duties and upon prior authority of the Family Court. (f) Avoid violence or unnecessary force. or 36 to 40 of this Rule. SECTION 8. including the exclusion of the media. All measures necessary to promote this right shall be taken. or (2) when the juvenile reaches twenty one (21) years of age and there is no record that he committed an offense after reaching eighteen (18) years of age. SECTION 7. Intake Report by the Social Welfare Officer. In case the act or omission of the juvenile involves a quasi-delict. (d) Avoid displaying or using any firearm. the preliminary investigation of a juvenile in LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Whenever treatment for any physical or mental defect is necessary. steps shall be immediately taken by the said officer to provide the juvenile with the necessary and proper treatment. In Manila and other chartered cities. or a social welfare officer. (g) Notify the parents of the juvenile or his nearest relative or guardian. handcuffs or other instruments of force or restraint. (e) Refrain from subjecting the juvenile to greater restraint than is necessary for his apprehension. (h) Take the juvenile immediately to an available government medical or health officer for a physical and mental examination. — A criminal action may be instituted against a juvenile in conflict with the law by filing a complaint with the prosecutor or the municipal trial court in cases where a preliminary investigation is required. Prosecution of Civil Action. the action for recovery of civil liability arising from the offense charged shall be governed by Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. Exemption from criminal liability does not include exemption from civil liability which shall be enforced in accordance with the provisions of Article 221 of the Family Code in relation to Article 101 of the Revised Penal Code and Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. SECTION 13. or is dismissed. — Any person taking into custody a juvenile in conflict with the law shall: (a) Identify himself and present proper identification to the juvenile. — The police officer conducting the initial investigation of a juvenile in conflict with the law shall do so in the presence of either of the parents of the juvenile. Procedure in Taking a Juvenile into Custody. — As far as consistent with this Rule. weapon. — While under investigation. and the counsel of his own choice. if their charters so provide. and (i) Hold the juvenile in secure quarters separate from that of the opposite sex and adult offenders. unless absolutely necessary and only after all other methods of control have been exhausted and have failed.

SECTION 19. — Where the maximum penalty imposed by law for the offense with which the juvenile in conflict with the law is charged is imprisonment of not more than six (6) months. reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. a youth detention center. and the prosecutor. and recommend to the Family Court whether the juvenile should be diverted to a diversion program or undergo formal court proceedings. regardless of amount. SECTION 14. the Family Court shall commit the juvenile pursuant to Section 18 of this Rule. to aid it in the proper disposition of the case. a lawyer of the Public Attorney's Office and the social worker assigned to the said Family Court as members. his parents/nearest relative/guardian and his counsel shall be furnished forthwith a copy of the approved resolution. it shall forthwith be referred to the Diversion Committee which shall determine whether the juvenile can be diverted and referred to alternative measures or services offered by non-court institutions. In the absence of any such center or agency within a reasonable distance from the venue of the trial. he shall prepare the corresponding resolution and information for approval by the provincial or city prosecutor. Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. as the case may be. SECTION 16. reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment shall be admitted to bail when evidence of guilt is strong. from the time of his being taken into custody. the Family Court may. SECTION 20. The center or agency concerned shall be responsible for the juvenile's appearance in court whenever required. the juvenile shall be detained in the provincial. . and the corresponding complaint or information is filed with the Family Court. the case shall not be set for arraignment. b) Whether the imposable maximum penalty of the offense is more than six (6) months. the Committee shall consider the following factors: a) The record of the juvenile on his conflict with the law. The juvenile. If clarificatory questions become necessary. Diversion Committee. SECTION 15. preferably before arraignment. city or municipal jail which shall provide adequate quarters for the juvenile separate from adult detainees and detainees of the opposite sex. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. In making its recommendation. SECTION 21. If the investigating prosecutor finds probable cause to hold the juvenile for trial. His report shall be submitted within the period fixed by the Family Court. Virtvs. When Bail Not A Matter of Right. Vnitas. the court shall deliver the juvenile on recognizance to the custody of his parents or legal guardian who shall be responsible for the presence of the juvenile during the diversion proceedings. his environment and such other matters relevant to the proper disposition of the case. Care of Juveniles in Conflict with the Law. it shall submit the diversion program for the juvenile for the consideration and approval of the court. Diversion Proceedings Before Arraignment. any criminal or civil action involving a juvenile in conflict with the law shall be instituted and tried in the Family Court of or nearest the place where the offense was committed or where any of its essential elements occurred. regardless of fine. regardless of fine or fine alone regardless of amount. — In each Family Court. his parents/legal guardian and his counsel. and the private complainant and his counsel. where the juvenile does not pose a threat to public safety. When Bail a Matter of Right. motu proprio or upon motion and recommendation of the DSWD. and Whether the juvenile's relationships with his peers increase the possibility of delinquent behavior. e) Whether the juvenile or his parents are indifferent or hostile. all juveniles charged with offenses falling under the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure shall be released on recognizance to the custody of their parents or other suitable person who shall be responsible for the juveniles' appearance in court whenever required. there shall be a Diversion Committee to be composed of its branch clerk of court as chairperson. or a local rehabilitation center recognized by the government in the province. If a preliminary investigation is required before the filing of a complaint or information. the same shall be conducted by the judge of the Municipal Trial Court or the public prosecutor in accordance with the pertinent provisions of Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. In the event the juvenile cannot post bail for lack of financial resources. Recognizance. If the Committee recommends diversion. — After the institution of the criminal action. — Before final conviction. — No juvenile charged with an offense punishable by death. — Subject to the provisions of Section 15. held for trial or while the case is pending appeal. be committed by the Family Court to the care of the DSWD. city or municipality within the jurisdiction of the said court. c) Whether the juvenile is an obvious threat to himself and/or the community. d) Whether the juvenile is unrepentant. or only a fine. — All juveniles in conflict with the law shall be admitted to bail as a matter of right before final conviction of an offense not punishable by death. SECTION 18. Venue. if unable to furnish bail or is denied bail.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 40 conflict with the law shall be governed by Section 3 of Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. However. instead. the social worker of the Family Court shall immediately undertake a case study of the juvenile and his family. Case Study Report. — The juvenile charged with having committed a delinquent act. shall. the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness shall apply. SECTION 17. The chairperson of the Committee shall call for a conference with notice to the juvenile. Pending determination by the Committee. release the juvenile on recognizance to the custody of his parents or other responsible person.

the judge shall ensure the protection of the following rights of the juvenile in conflict with the law: a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt. The report and recommendation shall be heard by the Family Court within fifteen (15) days from its receipt thereof. Vnitas. the court shall include the case in its calendar for formal proceedings. — In all criminal proceedings in the Family Court. Undertaking. At any time before or at the end of the diversion period. the Family Court to which jurisdiction over the juvenile is transferred shall have the power with respect to the latter that was previously possessed by the Family Court that approved the diversion and such other conditions as the Committee may deem just and proper under the circumstances. from arraignment to promulgation of judgment. (iii) values formation. a report recommending closure or extension of diversion. waive his presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail. f) Counseling for the juvenile and his family. e) Guidance and supervision orders. In the event the court finds that the diversion program will no longer serve its. Thereafter. and approved by the Family Court. i) Institutional care and custody. c) Payment of the damage caused. When the juvenile under custody escapes. and if appropriate. through his parents or legal guardian. a copy of the undertaking. b) Return of property. it shall include the case of the juvenile in its calendar for formal proceedings. he shall be deemed to have waived his right to be present in all subsequent hearings until custody over him is regained. shall contain the following terms and conditions: a) The juvenile shall present himself to the social worker of the Family Court that approved the diversion program at least once a month for evaluation of its effectiveness. control and supervision over him shall be transferred to the Family Court of that place. — The diversion program designed by the Committee shall be distinct to each juvenile in conflict with the law limited for a specific period. His non- compliance shall be referred by the Committee to the Family Court where the case has been transferred for a show-cause hearing with notice to the juvenile and private complainant. SECTION 22. The program. and (iv) other skills that will aid the juvenile to properly deal with situations that can lead to a repetition of the offense. or j) Work-detail program in the community. It may. Consent to diversion by the juvenile or payment by him of civil indemnity shall not in any way be construed as admission of guilt and used as evidence against him in the event that his case is included in the court calendar for formal proceedings. — The juvenile subject of diversion proceedings shall be visited periodically by the Family Court social worker who shall submit to the Committee his reports thereon. — The Family Court shall set the recommendation and diversion program for hearing within ten (10) days from receipt thereof. SECTION 26. (ii) problem-solving and/or conflict resolution skills. Whenever the juvenile is permitted to reside in a place under the jurisdiction of another Family Court. the intake and case study reports and other pertinent records shall be furnished the said court. g) Training. b) The juvenile shall faithfully comply with the terms and conditions in the undertaking. Diversion Programs. SECTION 25. SECTION 24. . as the case may be.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 41 The Committee cannot recommend diversion should the juvenile or the private complainant object thereto. unless his presence at the trial is specifically ordered by the court for purposes of identification. provided that the LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Hearing of Diversion Program. inability to pay the said liability shall not by itself be a ground to discontinue the diversion program of the juvenile. seminars and lectures on (i) anger management skills. Duty of the Family Court to Protect the Rights of the Juvenile. SECTION 23. the juvenile and his parents or legal guardian and counsel and the complainant to determine whether the undertaking has been fully and satisfactorily complied with. purpose. however. However. If the juvenile has complied with his undertaking. Virtvs. The juvenile may. extend the period of diversion to give the juvenile a further chance to be rehabilitated. Closure Order. however. b) To be informed promptly and directly of the nature and cause of the charge against him. shall be filed by the Committee with the Family Court. — In all cases where a juvenile in conflict with the law is given the benefit of a diversion program. his parents or legal guardian and the complainant. an undertaking describing the program shall be signed by him. d) Written or oral apology. with notice to the members of the Committee. h) Participation in available community-based programs. e) To testify as a witness in his own behalf and subject to cross-examination only on matters covered by direct examination. The absence of the juvenile without justifiable cause at the trial of which he had notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to be present thereat. If no diversion program is recommended. d) To have legal and other appropriate assistance in the preparation and presentation of his defense. c) To be present at every stage of the proceedings. the Family Court shall issue the corresponding closure order terminating the diversion program. It may include any or a combination of the following: a) Written or oral reprimand or citation. The Family Court shall exert its best efforts to secure satisfaction of the civil liability of the juvenile and his parents or guardian. and in such case. The court shall determine whether the juvenile should continue with the diversion program or his case returned to the original court for formal proceedings. which shall be enforced under the supervision and control of the Family Court.

and his parents or guardian ad litem. Discharge of Juvenile Subject of Disposition Measure. and supervision orders. the Family Court shall explore all possibilities of settlement of the case. the imposition of the latter should be preferred as the more appropriate penalty. Automatic Suspension of Sentence and Disposition Orders. as amended. The benefits of suspended sentence shall not apply to a juvenile in conflict with the law who has once enjoyed suspension of sentence. Virtvs. SECTION 27. — The sentence shall be suspended without need of application by the juvenile in conflict with the law. Arraignment and Plea. The Family Court may set a conference for the evaluation of such report in the presence. SECTION 29.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 42 Rule on the Examination of a Child Witness shall be observed whenever convenient and practicable. SECTION 30. — Upon the recommendation of the SSCD and a duly authorized LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. j) To be accorded all the rights under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness. f) To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him. Community service orders. of the juvenile. or to one who is convicted of an offense punishable by death. The arraignment shall be scheduled within seven (7) days from the date of the filing of the complaint or information with the Family Court. reading the same in a language or dialect known to and understood by him. or when at the time of promulgation of judgment the juvenile is already eighteen (18) years of age or over. Restrictions on the personal liberty of the juvenile shall be limited to the minimum. Commitment to the Youth Rehabilitation Center of the DSWD or other centers for juveniles in conflict with the law authorized by the Secretary of the DSWD. it shall impose the proper penalty. including any civil liability which the juvenile may have incurred. — If after trial the Family Court should find the juvenile in conflict with the law guilty. guidance. except its criminal aspect. SECTION 32. — The provisions of Rules 116 and 117 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure shall apply to the arraignment of the juvenile in conflict with the law. 3. if practicable. Arraignment shall be held in chambers and conducted by the judge by furnishing the juvenile a copy of the complaint or information. SECTION 31. and k) To have his privacy fully respected in all stages of the proceedings. the rights of the victim. It shall be in proportion to the gravity of the offense. h) To have speedy and impartial trial. the juvenile. — All hearings shall be conducted in a manner conducive to the best interests of the juvenile and in an environment that will allow him to participate fully and freely in accordance with the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness. 4. his parents or guardian and his counsel. explaining the nature and consequences of a plea of guilty or not guilty and asking him what his plea is. Guiding Principles in Judging the Juvenile. Care. Whenever possible and practicable. and shall consider the circumstances and the best interests of the juvenile. (i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law. SECTION 28. otherwise. Plea bargaining shall be resorted to only as a last measure when it will serve the best interests of the juvenile and the demands of restorative justice. Participation in group counseling and similar activities. unless such presence is considered not to be in the best interests of the juvenile taking into account his age or other peculiar circumstances. Promulgation of Sentence. Vnitas. — The provisions of Rule 118 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure shall govern the pre-trial of the juvenile in conflict with the law. his parents or guardian. No corporal punishment shall be imposed. The court shall set the case for disposition conference within fifteen (15) days from the promulgation of sentence which shall be attended by the social worker of the Family Court. Rule 120 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. 5. the needs of society in line with the demands of restorative justice. g) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and production of other evidence in his behalf. and other persons whose presence may be deemed necessary. reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. and other special laws. the judgment against a juvenile in conflict with the law shall be guided by the following principles: 1. Where discretion is given by law to the judge to determine whether the penalty to be imposed is fine or imprisonment. Agreements or admissions made during the pre trial conference shall be in writing and signed by the juvenile. The juvenile shall not be compelled to be a witness against himself and his silence shall not in any manner prejudice him. SECTION 33. It shall proceed to issue any or a combination of the following disposition measures best suited to the rehabilitation and welfare of the juvenile: 1. they cannot be used against him. with legal or other appropriate assistance and preferably in the presence of his parents or legal guardian. . Drug and alcohol treatment. 2. unless a shorter period is provided for by law. 3. and promulgate the sentence in accordance with Section 6. Trial. 2. Pre-trial. — Subject to the provisions of the Revised Penal Code. The Social Services and Counseling Division (SSCD) of the DSWD shall monitor the compliance by the juvenile in conflict with the law with the disposition measure and shall submit regularly to the Family Court a status and progress report on the matter.

The final release of the juvenile shall not extinguish his civil liability. . SECTION 35. he may apply for probation if qualified under the provisions of the Probation Law. or should his continued stay in the training institution where he has been assigned be not in his best interests. — After promulgation of sentence and upon application at any time by the juvenile in conflict with the law within the period to appeal. even before he has reached eighteen (18) years of age. In the latter case. after due notice to all parties and hearing. Virtvs. the Family Court shall determine whether to dismiss the case in accordance with the first paragraph of this Section or to execute the judgment of conviction. When upon being summoned for execution of sentence. or if still a minor. he failed to surrender voluntarily. including community service and commitment to a rehabilitation center.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 43 officer of the DSWD. or from the date of the closure order and he has no pending case of an offense or a crime involving moral turpitude. SECTION 36. If the Family Court. 603 or other similar laws. the maintenance of a separate police blotter for cases involving juveniles in conflict with the law and the adoption of a system of coding to conceal material information. he shall be brought before the court for execution of his judgment. — The Family Court motu proprio. SECTION 37. he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal. has been incorrigible. In case the maximum penalty to which the juvenile may be sentenced is destierro. Records of juveniles in conflict with the law shall not be used in subsequent proceedings or cases involving the same offender as an adult. the head of an appropriate center or the duly accredited child-caring agency which has custody over the juvenile. or 2. SECTION 34. — All proceedings and records involving juveniles in conflict with the law from initial contact until final disposition of the case by the Family Court shall be considered privileged and confidential. if the same is under review. finds that the juvenile has not behaved properly. has not shown the capability of becoming a useful member of society. Confidentiality of Proceedings and Records. on motion of his parents or legal guardian. or to enforce the civil liability imposed in the criminal action. The public may be excluded from the proceedings and. Credit in Service of Sentence. If the juvenile does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners. If the juvenile in conflict with the law has reached the age of eighteen (18) years while in commitment. the records shall not be disclosed directly or indirectly to anyone by any of the parties or the participants in the proceedings for any purpose whatsoever. the Family Court shall. if he is qualified under the Probation Law. SECTION 38. he shall be credited in the service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment. Upon entry of the order. with the full time during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment. order the sealing of the records of the case if it finds that two (2) years have elapsed since the final discharge of the juvenile after suspension of sentence or probation. The Family Court shall take other measures to protect this confidentiality of proceedings including non-disclosure of records to the media. unless the juvenile has already availed of probation under Presidential Decree No. the Family Court may place the juvenile on probation. Whenever the juvenile 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. When the juvenile is a recidivist or has been convicted previously twice or more times of any crime. he shall be released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment. Non-liability for perjury or concealment or misrepresentation. however. All index references LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. except in any of the following cases: 1. which will lead to the juvenile's identity. Vnitas. The parents and other persons exercising parental authority over the juvenile shall be civilly liable for the injuries and damages caused by the acts or omissions of the juvenile living in their company and under their parental authority subject to the appropriate defenses provided by law. shall be considered preventive imprisonment. Sealing of Records. — Any person who has been in conflict with the law as a juvenile shall not be held guilty of perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation by reason of his failure to acknowledge the case or recite any fact related thereto in response to any inquiry made to him for any purpose. — The juvenile in conflict with the law who has undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of his sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty. pursuant to the provisions of Section 31 of the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness. the case shall be treated as if it never occurred. shall. and order a final discharge if it finds that the juvenile has behaved properly and has shown the capability to be a useful member of the community. if he agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same or similar disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners. except to determine if the juvenile may have his sentence suspended under Section 25 of this Rule or if he may be granted probation under the Probation Law. Any form of physical restraint imposed on the juvenile in conflict with the law. Probation as an Alternative to Imprisonment. has willfully failed to comply with the conditions of his disposition or rehabilitation program. dismiss the case against the juvenile who has been issued disposition measures. or on application of a person who has been adjudged a juvenile in conflict with the law. upon notice to the prosecution and after hearing.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

44

shall be deleted and in case of inquiry, the Family Court, prosecution, law enforcement officers and all other offices and agencies that dealt with the case shall reply that no record exists with respect to the juvenile concerned. Copies of the order shall be sent to these officials and agencies named in the order. Inspection of the sealed records thereafter may be permitted only by order of the Family Court upon petition. of the juvenile who is the subject of the records or of other proper parties. This procedure shall be without prejudice to the rule on destruction of video or audio tapes under Section 31 of the Rule on the Examination of a Child Witness. SECTION 39. Prohibition Against Labeling. — In the conduct of proceedings from initial contact with the juvenile in conflict with the law to the final disposition of the case, there shall be no branding or labeling of the latter as a young criminal, juvenile delinquent, prostitute, vagrant, or attaching to him in any manner any derogatory name. Likewise, no discriminatory remarks and practices shall be allowed, particularly with respect to the juvenile's social or economic status, physical disability or ethnic origin. SECTION 40. Contempt Powers. — A person who directly or indirectly disobeys any order of the Family Court or obstructs or interferes with its proceedings or the enforcement of its orders issued under this Rule shall be liable for contempt of court. SECTION 41. Effectivity. — This rule shall take effect on April 15, 2002 after its publication in a newspaper of general circulation not later than March 15, 2002.
Par. 4. – ANY PERSON WHO, WHILE PERFORMING A LAWFUL ACT WITH DUE CARE, CAUSES AN INJURY BY MERE ACCIDENT WITHOUT FAULT OR INTENTION OF CAUSING IT. ELEMENTS: 1. A person performing a lawful act; 2. With due care; 3. He causes an injury to another by mere accident; 4. Without fault or intention of causing it. • Striking another with a gun in self-defense, even if it fired and seriously injured the assailant is a lawful act. ACCIDENT – something that happen outside the sway of our will and although it comes about through some act of our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable consequences. - If the consequences are plainly foreseeable, it will be a case of negligence. People v. Agliday (2001) Facts: The wife of the accused was washing dishes in the kitchen when her son was shot with a shotgun by her husband. Conchita claimed that she and her husband quarreled before the incident and then her husband left the kitchen got his shotgun and went back to the kitchen to shoot his son.

Accused claimed that it was only an accident. He was merely cleaning his gun and the gun accidentally went off and his son’s buttock was hit. Held: The exemption from criminal liability under the circumstance showing accident is based on the lack of criminal intent. In the case at bar, accused got his shotgun and returned to the kitchen to shoot his son who had intervened in the quarrel between the former and his wife. There was clear intent to fire and not mere accident. US v. Tanedo (1910) Facts: The accused, while hunting, saw wild chickens and fired a shot. The slug, after hitting a wild chicken, recoiled and struck the tenant who was a relative of the accused. The man who was injured died. Held: If life is taken by misfortune or accident while the actor is in the performance of a lawful act executed with due care and without intention of doing harm, there is no criminal liability. People v. Bindoy (1931) Facts: The accused, while in a drinking session, offered some tuba to Pacas’ wife but she refused so the accused threatened to injure her if she didn’t accept. Pacas stepped into defend his wife, attempting to take away from the accused the bolo he carried. In the course of the struggle, accused succeeded in disengaging himself from Pacas, wrenching the bolo from the latter’s hand towards the left behind the accused, with such violence that the point of the bolo reached Emigdio’s chest who was then behind the accused. Held: The accused, in his effort to free himself hit Emigdio in the chest. There is no evidence that this was done deliberately. It is merely accidental. People v. Agliday (2001) Facts: The wife of the accused was washing dishes in the kitchen when her son was shot with a shotgun by her husband. Conchita claimed that she and her husband quarreled before the incident and then her husband left the kitchen got his shotgun and went back to the kitchen to shoot his son. Accused claimed that it was only an accident. He was merely cleaning his gun and the gun accidentally went off and his son’s buttock was hit. Held: The exemption from criminal liability under the circumstance showing accident is based on the lack of criminal intent. In the case at bar, accused got his shotgun and returned to the kitchen to shoot his son who had intervened in the quarrel between the former and his wife. There was clear intent to fire and not mere accident. People v. Concepcion (2002) Facts: Galang got involved in a quarrel at the town plaza. He was brought to the barangay hall for questioning by Brgy Captain Capitli. Shortly after, Concepcion arrived and fired his rifle twice or thrice past the ears of Galang, who was then sitting, but without injuring him. After that, however, Concepcion thrust the barrel of the gun against the abdomen of Galang. Then there was an explosion. Galang was shot in the thigh. At least 3 more shots were fired, hitting him in the chest. Lorenzo died instantly. In his defense Concepcion claimed that the shooting was only accidental. Held: There was no accident. By Concepcion’s own testimony, the victim was unarmed. In contrast, he had an armalite and a handgun. It is highly

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

45

inconceivable that an unarmed man could pose bodily harm to another who is heavily armed. Concepcion’s gun discharged several shots that hit vital parts of the victim's body. As observed by the trial court, recklessly appellant had put his finger on the trigger of his cocked and loaded rifle. In that state, with the slightest movement of his finger, the rifle would fire readily. And it did not just once but several fires. Concepcion is guilty of homicide. Par 5. – ANY PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER THE COMPULSION OF AN IRRESISTIBLE FORCE. ELEMENTS: 1. That the compulsion is by means of physical force. 2. That the physical force must be irresistible. 3. That the physical force must come from a third person • Before force can be considered to be an irresistible one, it must produce such an effect upon the individual that, in spite of all resistance, it reduces him to a mere instrument and, as such, incapable of committing a crime. • The irresistible force can never consist in an impulse or passion or obfuscation. It must consist of an extraneous force coming from a third person. • A person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force, like one who acts under the impulse of uncontrollable fear of equal or greater injury is exempt from criminal liability because he does not act with freedom. People v. Lising (1998) Facts: Manalili asked Garcia if he could find someone who could effect the arrest of Robert Herrera, the suspect of the killing of his brother. Garcia introduced Lising and they came up with an agreement. Lising’s surveillance group was at the Castanos’ residence in the hope of spotting Herrera. The group saw a man and a woman (the victims) leave the residence and followed them. Alighting from the car, the two were accosted. The abduction of the 2 hit the front pages and two guards told the police that their friends who were employees of Lising informed them that Lising killed the 2 victims. Later, the bodies of the 2 were found. Lower court found that since there was an agreement among Manalili, Garcia and Lising, they were all co-conspirators of the crime and therefore liable principally. Garcia claimed that he acted under compulsion of irresistible force. Held: To be exempt from criminal liability, a person invoking irresistible force must show that the force exerted was such that it reduced him to a mere instrument who acted not only without will but against his will. Garcia’s participation and presence from the time the abduction was hatched upto the killing of the victims is undisputed. Conspiracy has been established. US v. Elicanal (1916) Facts: The accused was a member of the crew of a lorcha and Guiloresa was the chief mate. The latter mentioned that he was going to kill the captain because he was very angry with him and asked him to assist him. The accused took this statement as a joke and he was smiling only when he made the statement. The

following morning, Guillermo assaulted the captain and with the help of the crew (except the accused) seized the captain and tied him with a rope. Guillermo then struck the captain at the back of the neck with an iron bar and then, delivering the weapon to the accused ordered him to come forward and assist. The accused struck the captain on the head which caused the latter’s death. Held: Before one uses the defense of acting under uncontrollable fear, it must appear that the threat which caused the fear was an evil greater than or at least equal to that which he required to commit and that it promised an evil of such gravity and imminence that it might be said that the ordinary man would have succumbed to it. Evidence fails to establish that the threat directed to the accused by the chiefmate, if any, was of such character as to deprive him of all volition and to make him a mere instrument without will. The fear was not insuperable. US v. Caballeros (1905) Facts: The defendants have been sentenced as accessories in the crime of assassination of 4 American school teachers. The defendants took part in the burial of the corpses of the victims. Held: The defendant Baculi is exempt from criminal liability because he only assisted in the burial because he was compelled to do so by the murderers. As to defendant Caballeros, there is no proof that he took part in any way in the execution of the crime. His confession cannot be accepted as proof on a trial because it was not done voluntarily. US v. Exaltation (1905) Facts: Exaltation and Tanchico were convicted with rebellion based on documents found in the house of a certain Contreras, a so-called general of bandits, which contained the signatures of defendants swearing allegiance to the Katipunan. Defendants aver that these documents were signed under duress and fear of death. They allege further that they were abducted by thieves and that these men forced the defendants to sign the documents Held: The duress under which the defendants acted relieved them from criminal liability. Prosecution was unable to prove the guilt of the accused and testimonies of witnesses for the accused further corroborated their defense. People v. Fronda (1993) Facts: Balaan brothers were taken by 7 armed NPA members accompanied by accused Fronda and Padua. The accused are both residents of the same place. The two were convicted of murder. Fronda appealed claiming he was merely taken by the armed men as a “pointer”. Held: Records show that appellant’s participation in the commission of the crime consisted of: 1) leading the members of the armed group to the house where the victims were found, 2) tying the victims’ hands and 3) digging the grave where the victims were buried. He is not a principal by indispensable cooperation but only an accomplice. The defense of uncontrollable fear cannot be accepted because the fact that the accused was seen being handed by and receiving a hunting knife from one of the armed men, as well as, his inexplicable failure to report the incident to the authorities for more than 3 years negates the existence of uncontrollable fear, such acts being indicative of his conscious concurrence with the acts of the assailants.

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

46

Ty v. People (supra) Facts: Ty's mother Chua Lao So Un was confined at the Manila Doctors' Hospital from October 1990 until June 1992. Being the patient's daughter, Ty signed the "Acknowledgment of Responsibility for Payment" in the Contract of Admission. Ty's sister, Judy Chua, was also confined at the same hospital. The total hospital bills of the two patients amounted to P1,075,592.95. Ty executed a promissory note wherein she assumed payment of the obligation in installments. To assure payment of the obligation, she drew 7 postdated checks against Metrobank payable to the hospital which were all dishonored by the drawee bank and returned unpaid to the hospital due to insufficiency of funds. For her defense, Ty claimed that she issued the checks because of “an uncontrollable fear of a greater injury” She averred that she was forced to issue the checks to obtain release for her mother who was being inhumanely and harshly treated by the hospital. She alleged that her mother has comtemplated suicide if she would not be discharged from the hospital. Ty was found guilty by the lower courts of 7 counts of violation of BP22. Held:The court sustained the findings of the lower courts. The evil sought to be avoided is merely expected or anticipated. If the evil sought to be avoided is merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the future, the defense of an uncontrollable fear of a greater injury” is not applicable. Ty could have taken advantage of an available option to avoid committing a crime. By her own admission, she had the choice to give jewelry or other forms of security instead of postdated checks to secure her obligation. Moreover, for the defense of state of necessity to be availing, the greater injury feared should not have been brought about by the negligence or imprudence, more so, the willful inaction of the actor. In this case, the issuance of the bounced checks was brought about by Ty's own failure to pay her mother's hospital bills. Par 6. – ANY PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER THE IMPULSE OF AN UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR OF AN EQUAL OR GREATER INJURY. ELEMENTS: 1. That the threat which causes the fear is of an evil greater than or at least equal to, that which he is required to commit; 2. That it promises an evil of such gravity and imminence that the ordinary man would have succumbed to it. • REQUISITES: a. existence of an uncontrollable fear; b. the fear must be real and imminent; and c. the fear of an injury is greater than or at least equal to that committed. • Duress as a valid defense should be based on real, imminent or reasonable fear for one’s life or limb and should not be speculative, fanciful or remote fear. • A threat of future injury is not enough. The compulsion must be of such a character as to leave no opportunity to the accused for escape or self-defense in equal combat. • Speculative, fanciful uncontrollable fear. and remote fear is not

• The case of US v. Exaltation is also an example were there is real, imminent or reasonable fear. IRRESISTIBLE FORCE The offender uses violence or physical force to compel another person to commit the crime. JUSTIFYING There is neither a crime nor a criminal. UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR The offender employs intimidation or threat in compelling another to commit a crime. EXEMPTING There is a crime but no criminal. The act is not justified but the actor is not criminally liable. There is civil liability except no. 4 and 7.

No civil liability except in no. 4

Par. 7 – ANY PERSON WHO FAILS TO PERFORM AN ACT REQUIRED BY LAW, WHEN PREVENTED BY SOME LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE. ELEMENTS: That an act is required by law to be done; That a person fails to perform such act; That his failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or insuperable cause.

1. 2. 3.

US v. Vicentillo (1911) A policeman charged cannot be held liable for illegal detention when after arresting his victims, it took him three days to reach the nearest judge. The distance which required a journey for three days was considered to be an insuperable cause. People v. Bandian (1936) A woman cannot be held liable for infanticide when she left her newborn child in the bushes without being aware that she had given birth at all. Severe dizziness and extreme debility made it physically impossible for Bandian to take home the child plus the assertion that she didn’t know that she had given birth.

3. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES Mitigating circumstances are those which, if present in the commission of the crime, do not entirely free the actor from criminal liability, but serve only to reduce the penalty. They are based on the diminution of either freedom of action, intelligence or intent or on the lesser perversity of the offender. CLASSES OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES 1. ORDINARY MITIGATING Those mentioned in subsections 1 to 10 of Art. 13. 2. PRIVILEGED MITIGATING

Art. 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen years of age. — 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, the following rules shall be observed:

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

or comm4unications with his fellow beings. Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed. finally. are the ff: 1. 6. provided that the majority of such conditions be present. State of necessity 5. 3. 1. Abandonment without justification of the spouse who committed adultery. ♣ Ex. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party immediately preceded the act.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 47 1. he shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. Defense of Relatives 3. The courts shall impose the penalty in the period which may be deemed proper. Self-defense 2. or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution. In the case of the minor. 9. WHEN ALL THE REQUISITES NECESSARY TO JUSTIFY OR TO EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN THE RESPECTIVE CASES ARE NOT ATTENDANT. 4 of Art. par. when all the requisites necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective cases are not attendant. 2. Defense of Strangers 4. ascendants. 13 is applicable only when unlawful aggression is present but the other 2 requisites are not present in any of the cases referred to in circumstances number 1. Art. or relatives by affinity within the same degrees. The penalty is one degree lower. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense to the one committing the felony (delito). Those mentioned in the preceding chapter. par. The circumstances of justification or exemption which may give place to mitigation. Par. Art. Performance of duty 6. ORDINARY MC Susceptible of being offset by any aggravating circumstance If not offset by aggravating circumstance. 11. Causing injury by mere accident 9. 4. he is entitled to a privileged mitigating circumstance. of REQUISITES under par. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it. 2. 11 are present. And. Incomplete justifying circumstance avoidance of greater evil or injury. • Privileged mitigating circumstances which are applicable only to particular crimes: 1. blind or otherwise suffering some physical defect which thus restricts his means of action. ♣ Par. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority or his agents. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it. who is not exempted from liability by reason of the court having declared that he acted with discernment. 1 of Art. because not all the requisites necessary to justify the act or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective cases are attendant. Uncontrollable fear INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE 1. That the offender is deaf and dumb. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. 2 and 3 or Art. defense relatives. b. defense. ♣ Avoidance of greater evil or injury is a justifying circumstance if all the three requisites mentioned in par. 8. . produces the effect of applying the penalty provided by law for the crime in its min period in case of divisible penalty PRIVILEDGED MC Cannot be offset by aggravating circumstance The effect of imposing upon the offender the penalty lower by one or two degrees than that provided by law for the crime. 10. — The following are mitigating circumstances. 1. Art. 11: a. That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over seventy years. Art. a discretionary penalty shall be imposed. Incomplete self-defense. Virtvs. 7. Minority over 9 and under 15 years of age 8. 3. Voluntary release of the person illegally detained within 3 days without the offender attaining his purpose and before the institution of criminal action. — 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. Vnitas. Mitigating circumstances. 5. The penalty is one degree lower. but always in the proper period. 80. 268. It is an indispensable requisite. 3. c. 4 of Art. but always lower by two degrees at least than that prescribed by law for the crime which he committed. 333. his spouse. ♣ In these 3 classes of defense. 69. But if any of the last two LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. 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 of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion or obfuscation. UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION must always be present. in view of the number and nature of the conditions of exemption present or lacking. 2. 2.THOSE MENTIONED IN THE PRECEDING CHAPTER. 13. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists. Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of age. any other circumstances of a similar nature and analogous to those above mentioned. Obedience to order of superior 7. defense of stranger of •• NOTE: Mitigating circumstances only reduce the penalty but do not change the nature of the crime. When the one making defense against unlawful aggression used unreasonable means to prevent or repel it.

he shall be returned to the court in order that the same may order his final release. and b. HE SHALL BE PROCEEDED AGAINST IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ART. That he does not act with discernment. . That it promised an evil of such gravity and imminence that an ordinary person would have succumbed to it. defective. or not. 4 of Art. He causes an injury to another by mere accident. With due care. circumstance REQUISITES under par. be affected by those contained herein. there is only a mitigating of Par. Oanis. That the offender is over 9 and under 15 years old.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 48 requisites is lacking. 12: a. If the minor has behaved properly and has complied with the conditions imposed upon him during his confinement. In People v. it will be an intentional felony. 13 par. If the 2nd requisite and 1st part of the 4th requisite are absent. A person is performing a lawful act. under sixteen years of age at the date of the commission of a grave or less grave felony. or the person to whose custody or care the minor has been committed. 12 : a. Suspension of sentence of minor delinquents. or in case he should be found incorrigible or his continued stay in such institution Incomplete justifying performance of duty. If the 1st requisite and 2nd part of the 4th requisite are absent. after hearing the evidence in the proper proceedings. Incomplete exempting circumstance of uncontrollable fear. and delinquent children. Virtvs. and b. according as to whether the conduct of such minor has been good or not and whether he has complied with the conditions imposed upon him. An offender over 70 years old. An offender fifteen or over but under 18 years of age. a written report on the good or bad conduct of said minor and the moral and intellectual progress made by him. 2. or at least equal to. 80. 3. 3. Incomplete exempting circumstance of minority over 9 and under 15 years of age. 3 of Art. An offender over 9 but under 15 of age who acted with discernment. or otherwise by the superintendent of public schools or his representatives. there is only a mitigating circumstance. the SC considered one of the 2 requisites as constituting the majority. Art. 80. if there be any. subject to such conditions as are prescribed herein below until such minor shall have reached his majority age or for such less period as the court may deem proper. In case the minor fails to behave properly or to comply with the regulations of the institution to which he has been committed or with the conditions imposed upon him when he was committed to the care of a responsible person. c. If the minor has been committed to the custody or care of any of the institutions mentioned in the first paragraph of this article. instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction. correction or education of orphaned. and d. If only one of these requisites is present. however. Par. b. That the accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office. The Director of Public Welfare or his duly authorized representatives or agents. That the injury caused or offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due performance of such duty or the lawful exercise of such right or office. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. b. 3. such minor may be allowed to stay elsewhere under the care of a responsible person. shall submit to the court every four months and as often as required in special cases. INCOMPLETE EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE 1. the superintendent of public schools or his representatives. The suspension of the proceedings against a minor may be extended or shortened by the court on the recommendation of the Director of Public Welfare or his authorized representative or agents. REQUISITES under par. If the minor over 9 and under 15 years of age acted with discernment. shall suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such minor to the custody or care of a public or private. that which he was required to commit. he is entitled only to a mitigating circumstance. in committing said minor as provided above. Without fault or intention of causing it. It seems that there is no ordinary mitigating circumstance under Art. because not all the requisites to exempt from criminal liability are present. 12: a. 6 of Art. is accused thereof. Incomplete exempting circumstance of accident. The court. Vnitas. the court. — Whenever a minor of either sex. or to the custody or care of any other responsible person in any other place subject to visitation and supervision by the Director of Public Welfare or any of his agents or representatives. established under the law of the care. his parents or next of kin. the case will fall under Art. 2. benevolent or charitable institution. 2 contemplates the ff: 1. shall take into consideration the religion of such minor. in order to avoid his commitment to any private institution not under the control and supervision of the religious sect or denomination to which they belong. 5 of Art. 365 which punishes reckless imprudence. homeless. 1 when the justifying or exempting circumstance has 2 requisites only. 11: a. in accordance with the provisions of this article. with the approval of the Director of Public Welfare and subject to such conditions as this official in accordance with law may deem proper to impose. REQUISITES under par. circumstance. REQUISITES under par. 2 – THAT THE OFFENDER IS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE OR OVER 70 YEARS. That the threat which caused the fear was of an evil greater than. or the superintendent of public schools or his representatives. The provisions of the first paragraph of this article shall not. IN THE CASE OF THE MINOR.

Over 9 and under 15 years of age. 3) 3. Death penalty should be imposed. 12. He poured the contents to the dress of Napola and set it on fire. Ural (1974) Facts: Witness Alberto saw policeman Ural inside the jail boxing detention prisoner Napola. 12. It is not applicable to defamation or slander. an exempting circumstance. 192. Ramirez shot Victor and the three rushed out of the house. the province to which the municipality belongs shall pay one-third. PD No. The TC failed to appreciate the mitigating circumstance that the offender has no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. The robbers found the money in a place different from where Victor revealed to them. Otherwise. “you robbers!”. The expenses for the maintenance of a minor delinquent confined in the institution to which he has been committed. 4 of the RPC. also an exempting circumstance. and the remaining one-third shall be borne by the National Government: Provided. Victor retorted. 68) 5. especially when records of the present case evince the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and abuse of superior strength. ♠ Intention must be judged by considering the weapon used. par. (Art. It is manifest from the facts that the accused had no intent to kill the victim. Amit appeals claiming that there are 3 mitigating circumstances including lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong. the mitigating circumstance could not be considered. It is a single indivisible penalty applied regardless of mitigating circumstance. Instead. shall be borne totally or partially by his parents or relatives or those persons liable to support him. People v. there is no intent on the part of the offender which may be considered diminished. the internal revenue allotments which may be due to said city shall be withheld and applied in settlement of said indebtedness in accordance with section five hundred and eighty-eight of the Administrative Code. 2) 2. People v. That whenever the Secretary of Finance certifies that a municipality is not able to pay its share in the expenses above mentioned. must first be shown. if they are able to do so. As Napola collapsed on the floor. What men do is the LEGAL EFFECTS OF VARIOUS AGES OF OFFENDER: 1. This is covered by Art. . he allowed the victim to secure medical treatment. 3 is only applicable to offense resulting in physical injuries or material harm. Napola died later because of the burns. His only design was only to maltreat him maybe because of his drunken condition. ♠ This mitigating circumstance is not applicable when the offender employed brute force. and in case a chartered city cannot pay said expenses. Provided. he shall be returned to the court in order that the same may render the judgment corresponding to the crime committed by him. Under 9 years of age. the absence of the intent to kill reduces the felony to mere physical injuries. Ural became frightened and he and Siton helped put out the fire. privileged mitigating circumstance (Art. the sentence may be suspended. Minor delinquent under 18 years of age. People v. ♠ The intention. ♠ Lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong is not appreciated where the offense committed is characterized by treachery. and considering moreover that the victim was 57 years old while the accused was only 32. 18 years or over. 603 as amended by PD 1179) 4. The intention must be judged by the ACTION.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 49 should be inadvisable. Intention is a mental process and is an internal state of mind. but it does not constitute a mitigating circumstance under Art. such share which is not paid by said municipality shall be borne by the National Government. Vnitas. Held: Offender is criminally liable although consequence of his felonious act was not intended by him. but also by the fact that the blow was or was not aimed at a vital part of the body. 3 – THAT THE OFFENDER HAD NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GR A WRONG AS THAT COMMITTED. Par. the injury inflicted and his attitude of the mind when the accused attacked the deceased. ♠ This circumstance can be taken into account only when the facts proven show that there is a notable and evident disproportion between the means employed to execute the criminal act and its consequences. in the discretion of the court. Chartered cities shall pay two-thirds of said expenses. Ramirez got mad and called Victor a liar. however. unless he acted with discernment (Art. the municipality in which the offense was committed shall pay one-third of said expenses. Held: A great disproportion between means employed to accomplish the criminal act on the one hand. as an internal act. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. ♠ It is not applicable to felonies by negligence because in these kinds of felonies. the court held that the means employed by the accused was sufficient to have caused the death of the victim. is judged not only by the proportion of the means employed by him to the evil produced by his act. With this remark. Virtvs. full criminal responsibility. ♠ In crimes against persons who do not die as a result of the assault. Regato (1984) Facts: Regato. Ramirez and Salceda robbed the store of Victor Flores. Ural went out to get a bottle. That in case his parents or relatives or those persons liable to support him have not been ordered to pay said expenses or are found indigent and cannot pay said expenses. Victor was maltreated to force him to reveal where their money was. 13 par 3. ♣ Par. When the accused realized the fearful consequences of his act. Amit (1970) Facts: Amit pleads guilty to rape with homicide and sentenced to death. Napola got burned and he asked mercy from Ural. (Art. Based on the narration given by the accused where he said that he held victim’s neck down as he boxed her in the face. and its consequences on the other. Held: The SC did not find merit in the contention that there was lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. Under 18 years of age. Ural locked him up and threatened the witness not to tell anyone or else he will burn also. par. CONDUCT and EXTERNAL ACTS of the accused. When Napola was already suffering much from the burns.

People v. without the benefit of this mitigating circumstance. it was months ago when the incident of alleged maltreatment took place. REQUISITES: a. Out of nowhere. Par. 4. and hacking the bamboo walls of his house are sufficient provocation to enrage any man.Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party. with his buttocks resting on his right foot. Roy begged petitioner for forgiveness. In the case at bar. LEGITIMATE.281. they should be treated together as one mitigating circumstance. People v. In this case. appeared behind Alfredo and stabbed the latter on the left shoulder near the base of the neck with a 9-inch hunting knife. When he fell on the ground. Roy asked for Romera but when the latter's wife told him that he was already asleep. Romera went down the house and asked who was at the door. Thrusting his bolo at Romera. so he pushed the door shut. Callet (2002) Facts: Alfredo. Lecpoy and Eduardo were beside each other as they watched a cara y cruz game. That the felony is committed in vindication of such grave offense. Roy rushed to him and hacked him. threatening to kill him. to the commission of the crime by the person who is provoked. capable of exciting. provocation in order to be mitigating must be sufficient and immediately preceding the act. Romera tried to prevent Roy from entering. the accused. That the provocation must be sufficient b. From the facts established in this case. People (2004) Facts: While lying in bed. Calleto voluntary surrendered. – THAT THE ACT WAS COMMITTED IN THE IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE TO THE ONE COMMITTING THE FELONY (DELITO). Romera v. Par. Romera ceased harming Roy for fear he might kill him. Held: The lack of "intent" to commit a wrong so grave is an internal state. He did not answer Roy because he knew that Roy was already drunk. natural or adopted brothers or sisters. descendants. Alfredo sat close to the ground. Romera’s wife held the door to allow Romera to exit in another door to face Roy. b. or stir his rage and obfuscate his thinking. Well-settled is the rule that if these 2 circumstances are based on the same facts. The fact that the accused used a 9-inch hunting knife in attacking the victim from behind. Petitioner grappled for the bolo and stabbed Roy in the stomach. It is weighed based on the weapon used. The court however stressed that provocation and passion or obfuscation are not 2 separate mitigating circumstances. they claimed that they are entitled to 2 mitigating circumstances: sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party and having acted upon an impulse so powerful as to produce passion and obfuscation. The two accused were charged with the crime of robbery with homicide. OR RELATIVES BY AFFINITY WITHIN THE SAME DEGREE. Just as he opened the door for Roy. without giving him an opportunity to defend himself. A lapse of time is allowed between the vindication and the doing of the grave offense. Roy told her to wake her husband up. The offended party must have done a grave offense a. i. Virtvs. On appeal. The circumstance of passion and obfuscation cannot be mitigating in a crime which is planned and calmly meditated before its execution. He hurled a stone at Roy. ascendants. the aforesaid mitigating circumstance cannot be appreciated considering that the acts employed by the accused were reasonably sufficient to produce the result that they actually made – the death of the victim. the injury inflicted and the manner it is inflicted. Alfredo died shortly thereafter. his spouse. and while Romera was still in a fit of rage. Lecpoy and Eduardo rushed to help him but to no avail. Pagal (1977) Facts: Pagal and Torcelino. Hence. He successfully parried the bolo and asked Roy what it was all about. That it must originate from the offended party c. Romera heard the victim Roy call him and his wife. asking if they had beer and a fighter for sale.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 50 best index of their intention. Vnitas. or irritating anyone. Roy answered he would kill Romera. respectively. Wounded. and he must be held responsible therefor. NATURAL OR ADOPTED BROTHERS OR SISTERS. Also. That the provocation must be immediate to the act. – THAT SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR THREAT ON THE PART OF THE OFFENDED PARTY IMMEDIATELY PRECEDED THE ACT PROVOCATION . DESCENDANTS. PROVOCATION It is made directly only to the person committing the offense The cause that brought about the provocation LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Lecpoy and Eduardo sat on a piece of wood and on a stone. VINDICATION The grave offense may be committed also against the offender’s relatives mentioned in the law. As Roy was hacking at the wall. Held: There was sufficient provocation and the circumstance of passion or obfuscation attended the commission of the offense. they stabbed him with an icepick and clubbed him with an iron pipe which resulted to his death. REQUISITES: That there be a grave offense done to the one committing the felony. He claims that his liabiity should be mitigated by the fact that he had no intention to commit so grave a wrong. conspired together to take away from their employer P1. legitimate. Roy thrust his bolo at him. it is clear that both circumstances arose from the same set of facts aforementioned. they should not be treated as two separate mitigating circumstances. Callet. Romera stabbed the victim as a result of those provocations. Alfredo stood up and managed to walk a few meters. Instinctively. inciting.. the part of the body injured.e. 5. . When Gau Guan refused to open the kaha de yero. but he parried the blow. Held: The 2 mitigating circumstances cannot be considered as 2 distinct and separate circumstances but should only be treated as one because they both arose from the same incident – the alleged maltreatment of Pagal and Torcelino by Gau Guan. more so when the lives of his wife and children are in danger. or relatives by affinity within the same degree. employees of Gau Guan. who dodged it. clearly shows that he intended to do what he actually did. ASCENDANTS. HIS SPOUSE.

Patobo replied. ♠ Vindication of a grave offense and passion or obfuscation cannot be counted separately and independently. “There is no more. he got a knife. The deceased. Basis to determine the gravity of offense in vindication The question whether or not a certain personal offense is grave must be decided by the court. Anthony bathed Dennis with gin and mauled him several times. i. The TC appreciated the mitigating circumstance of immediate vindication of a grave offense. was certainly a stimulus strong enough to produce in their mind a fit of passion which blinded them and led them to commit that crime. Peope v. Dennis was humiliated. Par. The vindication of the grave offense may be proximate. In the morning. they stabbed him several times until he died. Pelonia v. REQUISITES: a. Ampar (1917) Facts: A fiesta was in progress and the accused Ampar went to the kitchen and asked from Patobo some of the roast pig. likewise. When he was hit. Parana was about to surprise the deceased and stab him from behind when the chauffeur shouted to warn the deceased. Held: The offense which the defendant was endeavoring to vindicate would be to the average person considered as a mere trifle. which admits of an interval of time between the grace offense done by the offended party and the commission of the crime. a police officer to whom he voluntarily surrendered. while Patobo was squatting down. Although the unlawful aggression had ceased when Dennis stabbed Anthony.. 6. It is settled. Dennis then mounted on him and continued stabbing him resulting to the latters death. Virtvs. b. Diokno (1936) Facts: The deceased and the daughter of accused Epifanio eloped. the mitigating circumstance of sufficient provocation cannot be considered apart from the circumstance of vindication of a grave offense. Vnitas. Petitioner was humiliated in front of his guests and kin in his own house. Torpio (2004) Facts: While having a drinking spree in a cottage. The accused refused so the deceased slapped him and ordered him to leave. Held: The mitigating circumstance that he had acted in the immediate vindication of a grave offense committed against him a few hours before. Epifanio and his son. mauled and almost stabbed by the Anthony. Come here and I will make roast pig of you. The TC was correct. an old man. properly appreciated. Anthony avoided Dennis and ran by passing the shore towards the creek but Dennis met him. he went to Estrera. blocked him and stabbed him. People v. The deceased was first brought to the hospital but expired 6 days after. These two circumstances arose from one and the same incident. Upon seeing Dennis. Held: The presence of the 5th mitigating circumstance must be taken into consideration. be a grave It is necessary that the provocation or threat immediately preceded the act. the place and the time when the insult was made.e.” Later. so that they should be considered as only one mitigating circumstance. These two circumstances arose from one and the same incident so that they should be considered as only one mitigating circumstance. The appellant mounted astride of the deceased and continued to stab him with the dagger. Anthony tried to let Dennis Torpio drink gin and as the latter refused. the court believes that the influence thereof. as if he refused to deal with them after having gravely offended them. The morning after. by reason of its gravity and the circumstances under which it was inflicted. Thereafter. The herein accused belong to a family of old customs to whom the elopement of a daughter with a man constitutes a grave offense to their honor and causes disturbance of the peace of the home. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Dennis left and slept at a grassy meadow near a Camp. when he was slapped by the deceased in the presence of many persons. it evidently was a serious matter to be made the butt of a joke in the presence of so many guests. Roman went to look for them. . Dennis crawled beneath the table and Anthony tried to stab him with a 22 fan knife but did not hit him. that the mitigating circumstance of sufficient provocation cannot be considered apart from the circumstance of vindication of a grave offense. Upon reaching home. The accused acted upon an impulse. the attack on the appellant by Anthony. causing his death the following day. Ampar struck him on the head with an ax. But to this defendant. However. Parana (1937) Facts: The preceding night. defending himself retreated until he fell into a ditch. however. to the offender or his relatives mentioned in the law.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 51 need not offense. The impulse must be so powerful that it naturally produce passion or obfuscation in him. Parana and Lamay were at the house of the deceased’s brother playing cards when the two had an exchange of words so the deceased asked them to leave. Although this offense (slapping) was not so immediate. it was nonetheless a grave offense for which the Dennis may be given the benefit of a mitigating circumstance. He went back to the cottage by another route and upon arrival Anthony was still there. Held: The mitigating circumstance of having acted in the immediate vindication of a grave offense is properly appreciated. People v. People (2006) Held: The mitigating circumstance of having acted in the immediate vindication of a grave offense was. People v. lasted until the moment the crime was committed. – THAT OF HAVING ACTED UPON AN IMPULSE SO POWERFUL AS NATURALLY TO HAVE PRODUCED PASSION OR OBFUSCATION. The fact that the accused saw the deceased run upstairs when he became aware of their presence. must likewise be taken into consideration. There was no interruption from the time the offense was committed to the vindication thereof. having in mind the social standing of the person. When they were able to find the deceased. Anthony ran but got entangled with a fishing net beside the creek and fell on his back. Dennis got up and ran towards their home.

the mitigating circumstance cannot be considered in his favor because the causes which mitigate criminal responsibility for the loss of self-control are such which originate from legitimate feelings and not those which arise from vicious. The accused was driven strongly by jealousy. He did not answer Roy because he knew that Roy was already drunk. Passion cannot coexist with treachery because in passion. Romera ceased harming Roy for fear he might kill him. Roy answered he would kill Romera. It means that it is cohabitation without a valid marriage. Hicks and Sola lived together as husband and wife when they separated. it doesn’t mean that it is an illegitimate or bigamous relationship. Romera tried to prevent Roy from entering. Roy begged petitioner for forgiveness. the accused spotted him and shot him. Roy told her to wake her husband up. ♠ The accused who raped a woman is not entitled to the mitigating circumstance of “having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion” just because he finds himself in a secluded place with that young ravishing woman. Wounded. Hicks went to Wallace’s house and asked the latter to go out. asking if they had beer and a fighter for sale. Delfin. Rafael. Roy asked for Romera but when the latter's wife told him that he was already asleep. A few days later. They used to meet frequently because they were having an affair which eventually reached the husband of Rosario. Romera went down the house and asked who was at the door. the act is committed in a spirit of REVENGE. He hurled a stone at Roy. unworthy and immoral passions. and his discovery of her in flagrante in the arms of another. Romera heard the victim Roy call him and his wife. Romera’s wife held the door to allow Romera to exit in another door to face Roy. HICKS (1909) Facts: For about 5 years. ♠ Passion and obfuscation may lawfully arise from causes existing only in the honest belief of the offender. • note: when the court used the word “illicit”. “liable to succumb to the uncontrollable passion of his bestial instinct. Sola contracted new relations with LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Zone President and Torrero was the zone auditor. PASSION OR OBFUSCATION Mitigating circumstance Cannot give rise to an irresistible force because the latter requires physical force Passion or obfuscation is in the offender himself Must arise from lawful sentiments IRRESISTIBLE FORCE Exempting circumstance another negro named Wallace. As Roy was hacking at the wall. It is not applicable when: a. It Must immediately precede is only required that the the commission of the influence thereof lasts crime until the moment the crime is committed The effect is the loss of reason and self-control on the part of the offender. Roy rushed to him and hacked him. Virtvs. Petitioner grappled for the bolo and stabbed Roy in the stomach. The accused committed the crime due to the maltreatment inflicted by the victim on his mentally retarded brother. Just as he opened the door for Roy. who dodged it. The feeling of resentment resulting from the rivalry in amorous relations with a woman is a powerful stimulant to jealousy and prone to produce anger and obfuscation. Raymund was not yet at home and the moment he arrived. Romera v. Roy thrust his bolo at him. US v. He successfully parried the bolo and asked Roy what it was all about. DE LA CRUZ (1912) Facts: The evidence clearly discloses that the convict. They talked for awhile and then Hicks shot Wallace Held: Even if it is true that the accused acted with obfuscation because of jealousy. so he pushed the door shut. Vnitas. People v. Irresistible force must come from a third person The irresistible force is unlawful PASSION PROVOCATION Produced by an impulse Comes form the injured which may be caused by party provocation Need not be immediate. but he parried the blow. the accused went to the Angeles residence to look for Raymund. Delfin surrendered himself and turned in the pistol he had used. killed the deceased. People v. who had theretofore been his lover upon discovering her in flagrante in carnal communication with a mutual acquaintance. Germina (1998) Facts: One night. almost naked and therefore. People (2004) Facts: While lying in bed. ♠ The crime committed must be the result of a sudden impulse of natural and uncontrollable fury. He went to verifiy the news that the latter mauled and stabbed the accused’s mentally retarded brother. US v. in the heat of passion. Held: The accused was entitled to the mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation because the impulse was caused by the sudden revelation that she was untrue to him. The cause of the passion of the accused was his vexation engendered by the refusal of the woman to continue to live in illicit relations with him. Held: There is no treachery. Held: Muit is guilty of murder with mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and passion and obsfuscation. The act committed in a spirit of LAWLESSNESS. the offender loses his control and reason while in treachery the means employed are consciously adopted. One who loses his reason and self-control could not deliberately employ a particular method or form of attack in the execution of the crime. . b. which she had a perfect right to do. Muit (1982) Facts: Rosario Muit was the Brgy. Delfin shot Torrero 3 times at the front yard of the Muits. Passion existed in this case because it clearly arose from lawful sentiments or legitimate feelings.” ♠ The mitigating circumstance of obfuscation arising from jealousy cannot be invoked in favor of the accused whose relationship with the woman was illegitimate.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 52 ♠ Passion or obfuscation may constitute as a mitigating circumstance only when the same arose from LAWFUL SENTIMENTS.

That the offender had not been actually arrested. their two vehicles almost collided. the gun fired. ♠ Other examples: LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. in his favor. Heated exchange of remarks followed. passion or obfuscation must arise from lawful sentiments and not from a spirit of lawlessness or revenge or from anger and resentment. his nephew Kevin and his sister-in-law. Voluntary confession of guilt before the court prior to the presentation of evidence for the prosecution. Bates (2003) Facts: While Edgar. There is passional obfuscation when the crime is committed due to an uncontrollable burst of passion provoked by prior unjust or improper acts. Carlito. or due to a legitimate stimulus so powerful as to overcome reason. Jose grabbed Carlito's right hand and elbow and tried to wrest possession of the firearm. hitting Carlito who immediately fell to the ground. while Andres was driving with his pregnant wife. The court however stressed that provocation and passion or obfuscation are not 2 separate mitigating circumstances. Nor was it shown that the victim made that remark in an insulting and repugnant manner. Romera stabbed the victim as a result of those provocations. hacking Jose again was a clear case of someone acting out of anger in the spirit of revenge. who by then was already prostrate on the ground and hardly moving. Well-settled is the rule that if these 2 circumstances are based on the same facts. It was not a case wherein Gonzales son appeared helpless and oppressed that Gonzales lost his reason and shot at the vehicle of Andres. ♠ Merely requesting a policeman to accompany the accused to the police HQ is not equivalent to voluntary surrender. Hence. respectively. threatening to kill him. That the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the latter’s agent. Held: For a person to be motivated by passion and obfuscation. There is an absolute lack of proof that the Lab-eo was utterly humiliated by the victim's utterance. 7. Virtvs.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 53 Held: There was sufficient provocation and the circumstance of passion or obfuscation attended the commission of the offense. is not sufficient to produce passion and obfuscation. When Marcelo hacked Jose right after seeing the latter shoot at Carlito. The same holds true for Gonzales’ claim of provocation on the part of Andres. Held: The mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation is not obtaining. the victim did not do anything unlawful. it is clear that both circumstances arose from the same set of facts aforementioned. Marcelo was infuriated upon seeing his brother. Gonzales continued driving while Andres tailed Gonzales’ vehicle and cut him off when he found the opportunity to do so. who was then a nurse and of legal age. more so when the lives of his wife and children are in danger. they should be treated together as one mitigating circumstance. or stir his rage and obfuscate his thinking. Held: Passion and obfuscation may not be properly appreciated in favor of the appellant. clearly. Gonzales then alighted from his car and fired a single shot at the last window on the left side of Andres' vehicle at an angle away from Andres. While the 2 were grappling for possession. b. The sufficiency of provocation varies according to the circumstances of the case. Andres had a shouting match this time with Dino. In asking Lab—eo to leave. That the surrender was voluntary. Provocation must be sufficient to excite a person to commit the wrong committed and that the provocation must be commensurate to the crime committed. and if appellant refrained from doing anything else fter that. In the present case. To be considered as a mitigating circumstance. Feliber. aiming his firearm at Jose who was then walking ahead of his companions. Thrusting his bolo at Romera. At that instant. On his way back to his vehicle. he could have validly invoked the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation. brother and nephew of Carlito. emerged from the banana plantation. then got out of his vehicle and knocked on the appellant's car window. Gonzales was with his grandson and 3 housemaids. But when. his 2yr old son. Kenneth. Andres' act of shouting at Gonzales’ son. c. Dino. At an intersection. – THAT THE OFFENDER HAD VOLUNTARILY SURRENDERED HIMSELF TO A PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR HIS AGENTS. People v. Gonzalez (2001) Facts: Both of the families of Andres and that of Gonzalez were on their way to the exit of the Loyola Memorial Park. Voluntary surrender to a person in authority or his agents. as well as of sufficient provocation. Simon. Thereafter. Dino was shouting back at Andres. The aggressive behavior of Andres towards Gonzales and his son may be demeaning or humiliating but it is not sufficient provocation to shoot at Gonzales’ vehicle. there must first exist an unlawful act that would naturally produce an impulse sufficient to overcome reason and self-control. and Jose are along a trail leading to the house of Carlito Bates. REQUISITES OF VOLUNTARY SURRENDER: a.. he met Gonzales son. Lab-eo (2002) Facts: After being told to go away by the victim. he surrendered to the Chief of Police. each brandishing a bolo. . Vnitas. Lab-eo argues for the appreciation of the mitigating circumstances of passion and obfuscation. They immediately attacked Jose hacking him several times. Jr. 2 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH: 1. The single bullet fired hit Kenneth. and while Romera was still in a fit of rage. Jose fell to the ground and rolled but Marcelo and his son kept on hacking him. From the facts established in this case. the latter suddenly emerged from the thick banana plantation surrounding the trail. Marcelo went back to Jose. upon seeing his brother Carlito dead. they should not be treated as two separate mitigating circumstances. The victim's utterance was not the stimulus required by jurisprudence to be so overwhelming as to overcome reason and self-restraint. People v. Par. However. People v. Lab-eo left and returned to where the victim was selling clothes and then and there stabbed her at the back with a knife. and hacking the bamboo walls of his house are sufficient provocation to enrage any man. a distinction must be made between the first time that Marcelo hacked Jose and the second time that the former hacked the latter. shot by Jose. Marcelo Bates and his son Marcelo Bates. OR THAT HE HAD VOLUNTARILY CONFESSED HIS GUILT BEFORE THE COURT PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE EVIDENCE FOR THE PROSECUTION. Kevin and Feliber which caused the latters death. 2.

the accused chased them and asked for the amount paid to Susan by one of his guests. Here. the accused readily went with them and proceeded to tell his story that he was innocent and that it was Abenir who killed the man. The warrant of arrest showed that the accused was in fact arrested. Virtvs. That the offender spontaneously confessed his guilt. b. while the accused was passing near the house of Romeo. Romeo declined and suddenly. That the confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of evidence for the prosecution. which. He went on to try and “clear his name. While it may have taken both Willie and Gildo a week before turning themselves in. the eldest of the Amaguins. When she went home with her boyfriend. after drinking at a bakeshop.” And just as they were about to finish off the Oro brothers. would raise the penalty to death. Willie. The accused surrendered only after the warrant of arrest was served. and it matters not that the LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. together with others. if proved. Susan denied this. People v. including the aggravating circumstances. Susan’s boyfriend was shot by the accused which resulted to his death. Jose et al (1971) Facts: The Maggie De la Riva story. Held: Pineda contends that because the charge against him and his co-appellants is a capital offense and the amended complaints cited aggravating circumstances. appeared with a revolver and delivered the coup de grace. 3 requisites should be present: 1) the offender has not been actually arrested. Pinca (1999) Facts: Pinca and Abenir. . the accused hit him at the back of his head which led to his death. The accused went into hiding and surrendered only when they realized that the forces of the law were closing in on them. Dulos (1994) Facts: The accused hired two professional entertainers to entertain his guests. REQUISITES OF PLEA OF GUILTY a. The contention is untenable.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 54 a. that is. c. the accused asked the driver to drop them off already. He surrendered 1) because he acknowledges his guilty or 2) because he wishes to save them the trouble and expenses necessarily incurred in his search and capture. the accused signified his intention to withdraw his plea of not guilty to a lesser charge of homicide and prayed that he be allowed to prove the mitigating circumstances.” There is no voluntary surrender. People v. Gildo was armed with a knife and an “Indian target. accepted an offer to check in with the accused guests but later on changed her mind and rejected the offer. Pinca told Abenir that that was the guy who spilled a drink on him earlier that day. People v. together with his 3 companions took Maggie with them leaving the maid behind. attacked the Oros. Maggie was driving her car with her maid inside when they were stopped by another car. The confession must be made in open court. it was the duty of the court to insist on his presence during all stages of the trial. the accused rushed towards Romeo from behind and shot him with a revolver. Susan. The accused picked up a long piece of wood and waited for the man to pass by. One of the entertainers. Amaguin (1994) Facts: Celso and Gildo. ♠ A conditional plea of guilty is not mitigating * Plea of guilty is mitigating because it indicates a moral disposition in the accused. Then. Such confession was made outside the court. before the competent court that is to try the case. People v. ♠ Surrender must be SPONTANEOUS. He actually DENIED having committed the crimes. Pineda. hitched a ride with a tricycle driver on their way home. the appellants raped her. Inside the room. the fact is. there was no conscious effort on the part of the accused to VS to the military authorities when he went to Camp Siongco after the fateful incidents. While a plea of guilty is mitigating. Vnitas. As he himself admitted. It is an act of repentance and respect for the law. Held: The appellant offered to enter a plea of guilty to the lesser offense of homicide only after some evidence of the prosecution had been presented. After the arraignment wherein accused entered a plea of not guilty and again during the trial. without surrendering his person to the authorities. b. he met the latter and invited him to go drinking. ♠ The change of plea should be made at the first opportunity when his arraignment was first set. The accused was convicted of the crime of murder. at the same time it constitutes an admission of all the material facts alleged in the information. There is no VS also where an accused merely surrendered the gun he used in the killing. After passing a man who was apparently drunk because he was swaying while he walked. ♠ The surrender must be by reason of the commission of the crime for which he is prosecuted. he was not placed under custody by the military authorities as he was free to roam around as he pleased. He reiterated his offer after the prosecution rested its case. Held: For voluntary surrender to be appreciated. favorable to his reform. c. they voluntarily surrendered to the police before arrest could be effected. When the latter did. That the confession of guilty was made in open court. Held: SC agrees with the accused-appellants’ view that voluntary surrender should be appreciated in their favor. During the fray. The actions of the accused belied this claim. and ♠ The extrajudicial confession made by the accused is not voluntary confession. When the police came. Maggie who was blindfolded was brought to a hotel. ♠Plea of guilty on appeal is not mitigating. 2) the offender surrendered to a person of authority and 3) the surrender was voluntary. her blindfold was removed and she was asked to strip for them. This is certainly not mitigating. The appellant. Crisostomo (1988) Facts: On Christmas day. People v. Held: VS cannot be appreciated where there was no conscious effort on the part of the accused to voluntarily surrender.

for under Art. made in such a manner that it shows the interest of the accused to surrender unconditionally to the authorities. ♣ When the offender completely lost the exercise of willpower. 9. – AND FINALLY. Par. During trial. the time. 5. ♣ Physical defect referred to in this paragraph is such as being armless. b. ♣ This paragraph does not distinguish between educated and uneducated deaf-mute or blind persons. the accused is criminally liable even if the wrong done is different from that which is intended. it was not incumbent upon the trial court to receive his evidence. the surrender was not spontaneous. Vnitas. GENERIC – Those that can generally apply to all crimes. if attendant in the commission of the crime. OR COMMUNICATION WITH HIS FELLOW BEINGS. and 20 except “by means of motor vehicles”. ♣ Ex. Ugerio. ♣ Voluntary restitution of the property stolen by the accused or immediately reimbursing the amount malversed is a mitigating circumstance as analogous to voluntary surrender. it may be an exempting circumstance. he heard Cpl. Andrada approached and scolded Cpl. after attacking the victim. 16. For voluntary surrender to be appreciated. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. d. Andrada v. cripple. 4. the personal circumstances of the offender. CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH ARE NEITHER EXEMPTING NOR MITIGATING 1. identifying himself as a PC noncommissioned officer. his age is neither exempting nor mitigating. whereby his means to act. 2. 15. Par. similar to over 70 years of age mentioned in paragraph 2. 4. ANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCE OF A SIMILAR NATURE AND ANALOGOUS OF THOSE ABOVEMENTIONED. That the illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of his will-power. REQUISITES: a. however. Ugerio sprawled on the floor. FOUR KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES 1. Held: Andrada. the place of commission. Andrada paid his bill and left the restaurant with his companions. he saw Cpl.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 55 offense is capital. 19. Nos. Virtvs. DEFENSE. BLIND OR OTHERWISE SUFFERING FROM SOME PHYSICAL DEFECT WHICH THUS RESTRICTS HIS MEANS OF ACTION. 9. c. Mistake in the blow or aberratio ictus. Sumabong approached them but Andrada ran away. People (2005) Facts: Inside a restaurant. When Sgt. or e. The penalty is even higher. for the admission covers both the crime and its attendant circumstances qualifying and/or aggravating the crime. 10. 8. 18. ♣ Testifying for the prosecution is analogous to plea of guilty. he offered to return the amount and pleaded that the same is analogous to voluntary surrender. Sumabong. Sgt. While Sgt. par. Petitioner has not advanced a plausible reason why he could not liquidate his cash advance which was in his possession for several years. 48. 6. 1. ♣ It is said that this paragraph refers only to diseases of pathological state that trouble the conscience or will. ran away. AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES ¤ Aggravating circumstances are those which. 3. Andrada was hacking him on the head with a bolo. killed her child the day following her delivery. for under Art. Par. 2. moaning in pain. 1. under the influence of a puerperal fever. 5. A mother who. 2. 3 (dwelling). there is a complex crime committed. 14. seated about a meter away. advised Andrada to pay his bill and go home as he was apparently drunk. He was eventually arrested at a waiting shed and was brought back to the restaurant where they recovered the bolo used in hacking the victim. much less to require his presence in court. . SPECIFIC – Those that apply only to particular crimes. He was apprehended by responding officers at a waiting shed. 3 (except dwelling). Held: The return of the said amount cannot be considered a mitigating circumstance analogous to voluntary surrender considering that it took petitioner almost seven (7) years to return the amount. If the offender is over 18 years old. or a stutterer. followed by a companion. – SUCH ILLNESS OF THE OFFENDER AS WOULD DIMINISH THE EXERCISE OF THE WILLPOWER OF THE OFFENDER WITHOUT HOWEVER DEPRIVING HIM OF CONSCIOUSNESS OF HIS ACTS. Nos. exceeding the maximum of the penalty provided by law for the offense. People (2006) Facts: The accused was charged with misappropriation of public funds. the surrender must be spontaneous. or of the offended party. The accused is over 18 years of age. ♣ Not resisting arrest is not analogous to voluntary surrender. Andrada invoked the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. 10. Performance of righteous action. either because he acknowledges his guilt or wishes to save them the trouble and expenses that would be necessarily incurred in his search and capture. 4. defend himself or communicate with his fellow beings are limited. the means and ways employed. motivating power itself. ♣ Over 60 years old with failing sight. serve to increase the penalty without. Mistake in the identity of the victim. Here. 4. Because of the aforesaid legal effect of Pineda’s plea of guilty. ¤ They are based on the greater perversity of the offender manifested in the commission of the felony as shown by: a. Sumabong was paying his bill. That such illness should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his acts. 17 and 21. Sumabong turned around. Ugerio while the latter was talking to a woman who passed by their table. Entrapment of the accused. b. Sgt. – THAT THE OFFENDER IS DEAF AND DUMB. Davalos vs.

door. Wilson hurriedly left the room. 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. fraud or disguise be employed. or b) which are included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefore shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty (Art. 17. Art. Kevin saw Wilson Antonio carrying a shotgun. 1) ¤ AC which arise: a) from the moral attributes of the offender or b) from his private relations with the offended party. 16. The trial court convicted him of murder qualified by treachery and aggravated by the circumstance of evident premeditation. That the act be committed with evidence premeditation. 18. or c) from any other personal cause. . There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person. 12. 3. every Complaint or Information must state not only the qualifying but also the aggravating circumstances. or promise. or by a band. This rule may be given retroactive effect in the light of the well-established rule that statutes regulating the procedure of the courts will be construed as applicable to actions pending and LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. 19. The above agrravating circumstances were not alleged in the Information. 5. shipwreck. 15. 20. Held: Pursuant to the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. Wilson surrendered to the police after eluding arrest for more than 1 yr. A qualifying AC cannot be offset by a mitigating circumstance. Wilson aimed his gun at Sergio who was asleep on the bed and fired hitting Sergio on the chest. 2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public authorities. According to the new rules. Vnitas. There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall. A recidivist is one who. Then someone kicked open the door to the bedroom. floor. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commissions. 4. or sex. QUALIFYING –Those that change the nature of the crime. or in a place dedicated to religious worship. methods. it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry. 14. Sergio was already dead. When the police arrived. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity. not offset by any mitigating circumstance. or where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties. 7. That the crime be committed by means of inundation. 4. He was also hit on his left thigh. That the craft. or in an uninhabited place. poison. QUALIFYING AC The effect of a qualifying AC is not only to give the crime its proper and exclusive name but also to place the author thereof in such a situation as to deserve no other penalty than that specially prescribed by law for said crime. or window be broken. 10. That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act. AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH DO NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF INCREASING THE PENALTY AC 1) which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law. 8. stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto. at the time of his trial for one crime. fire. or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution. Immediately after firing his gun. age. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect due the offended party on account of his rank. and accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant. airships. shall only serve to aggravate the liability of the principals. Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together in the commission of an offense. Art. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration. A generic aggravating circumstance may be compensated by a mitigating circumstance. earthquake. shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of this Code. People v. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness. That the accused is a recidivist. dwelling and unlawful entry. reward. motorized watercraft. Virtvs. employing means. or means be employed to weaken the defense.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 56 3. INHERENT – Those that must accompany the commission of the crime. 21. That the crime be committed in the night time. roof. 7 yr old son of the victim Sergio was lying on the bed beside his father Sergio in the bedroom when he heard a window being opened and the sound of feet stepping on the floor. Antonio (2002) Facts: Kevin Paul. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in his presence. if the latter has not given provocation. 14. 9. (As amended by RA 5438). whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense. GENERIC AC The effect of a generic AC. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position. Aggravating circumstances. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price. 62. or other similar means. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles. par. 248 enumerates the qualifying AC which qualify the killing of person to murder. — The following are aggravating circumstances: 1. or by the use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin. epidemic or other calamity or misfortune. or that is be committed in the dwelling of the offended party. shoulder and back. accomplices. derailment of a locomotive. explosion. is to increase the penalty which should be imposed upon the accused to the MAXIMUM PERIOD. 6. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia). 11. 13. generic and qualifying aggravating circumstances must be alleged in order to be appreciated. without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make. That advantage be taken of superior strength.

it cannot offset voluntary surrender. been alleged in appreciated to ¤ The mere fact that he was in fatigue uniform and had army rifle at the time is not sufficient to established that he misused his public position in the commission of the crimes (People v. he committed the crime with an armalite which was issued to him when he received his order. That he was a policeman is of no relevance. Jerry saw PO3 Villamor and Maghilom on board the motorcycle behind them. Appellant voluntary surrendere. Thus. Suela (2002) Facts: Brothers Edgar and Nerio Suela. Held: There was no showing that Villamor took advantage of his being a policeman to shoot Jelord Velez or that he used his "influence. Jerry was driving. Virtvs. instinctively. which prompted Marianito to flee out of fear for his life. ¤ Taking advantage of public position. It is a cardinal rule that rules of criminal procedure are given retroactive application insofar as they benefit the accused. The trial court ruled that voluntary surrender was "offset by the aggravating circumstance of treachery. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Mario proceeded to pistol-whip Magaso and after he had fallen. and Edgardo Batocan sporting ski masks. prestige or ascendancy which his office gives him as the means by which he realizes his purpose.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 57 undetermined at the time of their aggravating circumstances of evident dwelling and unlawful entry. however. Mendoza (2000) Facts: Anchito and Marianito passed by appellant's house and asked for a drink from appellant's wife. seeing that he was cornered. not having the Information. Jesus stabs him. passage. bonnets and gloves. Capalac (1982) Facts: Magaso stabbed Moises in a cockpit. People v. People v. Batocan stabbed Gabilo 5 times which caused the latter’s death . Par. he should be punished as a private individual without this AC. They threatened Rosas.THAT –ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN BY THE OFFENDER OF HIS PUBLIC POSITION. the aggravating circumstance of disguise cannot be appreciated against appellants. Pantoja) ¤ Even if defendant did not abuse his office. died on the spot during the first gunburst. Anchito began talking with Emily and they were about 4 rms-length from Marianito when appellant suddenly appeared. He pistol-whipped the deceased because he had a pistol with him. may not now be enhance the liability of Wilson. this circumstance would warrant the aggravation of his penalty. Magaso. brandishing handguns and knife barged into the room of Director Rosas who was watching television together with his adopted son. Appellant hacked Anchito on the nape. cannot be taken into consideration in offenses where it is made by law an integral element of the crime such as in malversation or in falsification of documents committed by public officers. Held: The trial court erred in ruling that voluntary surrender was "offset by the aggravating circumstance of treachery. People v. Gapasin was convicted of murder. Emily. Jelord. gunshots rang out from behind them. Norman and his friend Gabilo. Villamor (2002) Facts: Brothers Jerry and Jelord Velez were on their way home on board a motorcycle. not a generic aggravating circumstance. “did the accused abuse his office in order to commit the crime?” ¤ When a public officer commits a common crime independent of his official functions and does acts that are not connected with the duties of his office. He shot Calpito with the use of an armalite after seeing the latter walking along the road. They abruptly turned the motorcycle around towards the direction of the gunfire. and current jurisprudence. Maghilom was driving the motorcycle while Villamor was holding a short gun pointed at them. which caught up with them. it cannot at the same time be considered as a generic aggravating circumstance to warrant the imposition of the maximum penalty. The LC convicted the accused of murder and took into consideration the AC of taking advantage of public office because the accused is a police officer. Anchito died in a kneeling position with hack wounds at the back of the neck and body. . The light of their motorcycle's headlamp fell on their attackers aboard the second motorcycle. ¤ The public officer must use the influence. Nerio and Batocan to suffer the penalty of death appreciating the aggravating circumstance of disguise which was not alleged in the Information against the three. Gapasin (1994) Facts: Gapasin was a member of the Phil. The essence of the matter is presented in the inquiry. As they were about to cross the bridge leading to their home. It came in handy and so he acted accordingly. The brothers ignored the other motorcycle. Treachery in the present case is a qualifying. 1. Norman and Gabilo to give the location of their money and valuables. they heard a speeding motorcycle fast approaching from behind. if it is proven that he has failed in his duties as such public officer. Upon Nerio’s instructions. Its presence served to characterize the killing as murder. Jesus (deceased) and appellant Mario Capalac. They dragged Gabilo downstairs with them. The assailants fired at them a second time and fled. The premeditation. The trial court sentenced Edgar. Constabulary. He was informed that a certain Calpito had an unlicensed firearm. He acted like a brother. which they eventually took. The brothers were not appeased. Held: On the AC that the accused used his public position as a policeman. . Jerry sustained gunshot wounds but survived. raised his hands as a sign of surrender. As they neared a junction. the aggravating circumstance of disguise cannot now be appreciated to increase the penalty to death notwithstanding the fact that the new rule requiring such allegation was promulgated only after the crime was committed and after the trial court has already rendered its Decision. The aggressor attempting to escape was confronted by 2 brothers of Moises. He was issued a mission order to investigate a report regarding the presence of unidentified armed men in one barrio. People v. Held: The accused took advantage of his public position because as a member of the PC. it was held that the mere fact that he was a member of the police force was insignificant to the attack. Vnitas. Held: Following current Rules on Criminal Procedure particularly Section 9 of the new Rule 110. prestige or ascendancy" People v. Inasmuch as the same was not alleged in the Information.

AGENT A subordinate public officer charged with the maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life and property. d. IF THE LATTER HAS NOT GIVEN PROVOCATION. b. (b) AGE. the law accords to human abode. dwelling may be considered as an AC. EXCLUSIVELY USED FOR REST AND COMFORT. town municipal health officer. (2) THAT BE COMMITTED DWELLING OF THE OFFENDED PARTY IN THE a. ¤ Dwelling is aggravating in abduction or illegal detention. barangay captain etc. If all the 4 circumstances are present. which can be considered single or together. they have the weight of one aggravating circumstance only. that is. In other words. The councilor. (b) OF THE AGE OF THE OFFENDED PARTY ex. Par. REQUISITES: That the public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions. the accused deliberately intended to offend or insult the sex or age of the offended party. PUBLIC AUTHORITY / PERSON IN AUTHORITY A public officer who is directly vested with jurisdiction. DWELLING – BUILDING OR STRUCTURE. a public officer who has the power to govern and execute the laws. governor. but shot from under the house. are persons in authority.THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED (1) WITH INSULT OR IN DISREGARD OF THE RESPECT DUE THE OFFENDED PARTY ON ACCOUNT OF HIS (a) RANK. and any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority. Par. When the offender acted with passion and obfuscation. councilmen. ¤ Dwelling is aggravating. ¤ Lack of knowledge on the part of the offender that a public authority is present indicates lack of intention to insult the public authority. ¤ a “combination house and store” or a market stall where the victim slept is not a dwelling. When the condition of being a woman is indispensable in the commission of the crime i. ¤ THIS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FOLLOWING: 1. the AC of dwelling will not be applicable. age or sex) may be taken into account only in crimes against person or honor. rape. . Vnitas. 2. are now considered a person in authority. ¤ There must be evidence that in the commission of the crime. Villamor could have shot Velez even without being a policeman. Virtvs. . ¤ Par. ¤ The offended party must not give provocation. (c) OF THE SEX OF THE OFFENDED PARTY ¤ This refers to the female sex. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. etc. mayor. When the aggressor is 45 years old and the victim was an octogenarian. ¤ This is considered an AC primarily because of the sanctity of privacy. parricide.38 caliber revolver to kill is not sufficient to establish that he misused his public position in the commission of the crime. 3. ¤ Dwelling includes dependencies. it is aggravating provided that the commission of the crime was begun in the dwelling. 2. (1) WITH INSULT OR IN DISREGARD OF THE REPECT DUE THE OFFENDED PARTY ON ACCOUNT: (a) OF THE RANK OF THE OFFENDED PARTY ex. there is no abuse of public position. An attempt upon the life of a general of the Philippine Army is committed in disregard of his rank. chief of police. Robbery with homicide is primarily a crime against property. 2 is not applicable if committee din the presence of an agent only such as a police officer. That he who is thus engaged in the exercise of his functions is not the person against whom the crime is committed. such as barrio policemen. the foot of the staircase and the enclosure under the house. Also. If the deceased was only about to step on the first rung of the ladder when he was assaulted. OR (2) THAT IS BE COMMITTED IN THE DWELLING OF THE OFFENDED PARTY. ¤ It is not proper to consider disregard of old age in crimes against property. A school teacher. ¤ This circumstance (rank. ¤ It is not aggravating where the deceased was called down from his house and he was murdered in the vicinity of his house. When there exists a relationship between the offended party and the offender. The offender knows him to be a public authority. ¤ The crime should not be committed against the public authority or else it becomes direct assault. 3.e. The Court cited the case of People v. where the Court emphatically said that the mere fact that accused-appellant is a policeman and used his government issued . ¤ Disregard of sex absorbed in treachery. in certain cases. OR (c) SEX.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 58 in killing the victim. Herrera. If the provocation did not take place in the house. ¤ Four circumstances are enumerated in this paragraph. there is an abuse of confidence which the offended party reposed in the offender by opening the door to him. not to the male sex (Reyes) ¤ Killing a woman is not attended by this AC if the offender did not manifest any specific insult or disrespect towards her sex.THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN CONTEMPT OR WITH INSULT TO THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES. etc. even if the offender did not enter the upper part of the house where the victim was. . His presence has not prevented the offender from committing the criminal act. ¤ Even if the killing took place outside the dwelling. ¤ The evidence must show clearly that the defendant entered the house of the deceased to attack him. agent of the BIR. if the accused could have perpetrated the crime even without occupying his position. c.

6. 5. People v. dwelling is not aggravating because it is inherent to the crime. People v. Be he a lessee. the four circumstances enumerated in Article 14. and the appellant who is a young man. Virtvs. who is a 70-year old woman. The requisites of this circumstance are: (1) the public authority is engaged in the discharge of his duties and (2) he is not the person against whom the crime is committed. The trial court. The father died. Appellant Barleso. Banez (1999) Facts: The accused was living with his parents. in convicting De Mesa for murder. She ran to the jeepney stop and rode the jeep. Daniel (1978) Facts: 13-year-old Margarita was at the bus station when the accused. there must be a showing that the malefactor deliberately intended to offend or insult the age of the victim. Held: The trial court also erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance that the commission of the crime was in contempt of or with assault to public authorities. When the dwelling where the crime was committed did not belong to the offended party. at the time of the commission of the offense. a widowed septuagenarian. appreciated the aggravating circumstance of commission of the crime in contempt of or with assault to public authorities. ¤ A victim raped in the boarding house where she was a bedspacer. De Mesa (2001) Facts: Motas. When the rape was committed in the ground floor of the 2-storey structure. In the case at bar. In the first place. Held: Although Margarita was merely renting a bedspace in a boarding house. The rationale for considering dwelling an AC is the violation by the offender of the sanctity of the home of the victim by trespassing therein to commit the crime. Rodil (1981) Facts: Lt. Cruz Putol. He asked Rodil whether or not the gun which the latter possessed had a license. Held: The AC of dwelling cannot be considered aggravating where the accused and the victim were living in the same house where the crime was committed. That night while they were discussing the plans for the accused. 4. ¤ Note: The Code speaks of dwelling. asking her name and trying to get her bag to carry it for her. 2. the AC of disregard of sex and age cannot be similarly absorbed. a boarder. His sisters complained to their father that the accused made trouble whenever he was drunk. he drew a dagger and managed to stab Mesana in the chest repeatedly. People v. 14(3) of the RPC. Held: Anent the circumstance of age. Daniel followed her to the boarding house and he raped her. While it may be true that nighttime is absorbed in the AC of treachery. People v. In other words. as amended. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. who looked drunk. Treachery refers to the manner of the commission of the crime. her room constituted for all intents and purposes a “dwelling” as the term is used in Art. Disregard of sex and age pertains to the relationship of the victim. while their father went to his room. When the robbery is committed by the use of force upon things. However. When both offender and offended party are occupants of the same house. . ¤ Dwelling may be temporary dwelling. Held: The AC of disregard of rank should be appreciated because it is obvious that Mesana identified himself as a PC officer to the accused who is merely a member of the Anti-Smuggling Unit and therefore inferior both in rank and social status to the victim. can be considered singly or together. People v. Mesana approached Rodil and identifies himself as a PC officer. Barangay Chairman of Barangay Sta. he was not engaged in the discharge of his duties as he was in fact playing a card game with his neighbors. not domicile. the accused. Her room constituted a “dwelling”. They wanted to put up the accuse in another house. Instead. People v. the place is his home the sanctity of which the law seeks to protect and uphold. ¤ Dwelling is not included in treachery. Rodil was asked to sign a document attesting to the confiscation of the gun but he refused. None of these circumstances are present in this case. was beaten to death by 3 men. the crime was committed against the barangay chairman himself. ¤ Dwelling is not aggravating in adultery when paramour also lives in the conjugal home. stabbed and burned beyond recognition the latter’s house. started molesting her. it is also inherent or included by law in defining the crime. At the time that he was killed. She refused and asked the help of the conductor and driver but they did not help her. Vnitas. This reason is entirely absent in this case. Rodil attempted to draw his gun but was prevented by Mesana’s companions. 27 years old. there is absolutely no showing that Taboga deliberately intended to offend or insult the victim. ran to the kitchen and got 2 knives and then stabbed the father. Lapaz (1989) Facts: Eulalia Cabunag. Montinola (Supra) People v. Lapaz and Cristoto agreed to kill Eulalia because there was one incident when the victim called Barleso a thief in front of many people. the lower floor being used as a video rental store and not as a private place of abode or residence. San Pablo City. killing a woman is not attended by the aggravating circumstance if the offender did not manifest any specific insult or disrespect towards the offended party's sex. a 70-year-old woman who was living alone. paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code. Neither could disregard of respect due to sex be appreciated if the offender did not manifest any intention to offend or disregard the sex of the victim. was shot by De Mesa while playing a card game with some townmates at a neighborhood store resulting to his death. When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and immediate provocation. even if disrespect or disregard of age or sex were not appreciated. or a bedspacer. Held: The presence of treachery is clear as Barleso invited two companions to help him execute his plan to beat the victim to death with pieces of wood in the middle of the night insuring the killing of the victim without risk to himself arising from the defense with the offended party might make. robbed. 3. Daniel.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 59 DWELLING NOT APPLICABLE: 1. In the crime of trespass to dwelling. Taboga (2002) Facts: Taboga entered the house of Tubon.

"which doubles as a video rental shop. dwelling may be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance. Held: Dwelling cannot be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance in this case because the rape was committed in the ground floor of a two-story structure. then on the toilet bowl. 32 Provocation in the aggravating circumstance of dwelling must be: (a) given by the offended party. ¤ The confidence between the offender and the offended party must be immediate and personal. The two accused shot the victims to death. disabled Laurencio and Jimmy by tying their hands before dragging them out of the house to be killed. such as trespass to dwelling and robbery in an inhabited place. Virtvs. Thereafter. pulled her towards the kitchen where he forced her to undress.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 60 Facts: Montinola boarded a passenger jeepney driven by Hibinioda. Arizobal (2000) Facts: Arizobal and two others entered the house of spouses Clementina and Laurencio Gimenez. However. That the offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the offended party. poked a knife at the left side of her neck. strangled Amy. intimidated and coerced their inhabitants into submission. and (c) immediate to the commission of the crime. They got to know each other and had a drinking session at the bus terminal. Erlinda was ordered to produce P100. which is primarily a crime against property. As a result Reteracion slumped dead. A few minutes later. The trial court appreciated the aggravating circumstance of dwelling. estafa by conversion or misappropriation and qualified seduction. he suddenly pulled Amy down and started mauling her until she lost consciousness. 4. first on the wall. In order that abuse of confidence be deemed as aggravating. Montinola was charged with robbery with homicide and illegal possession of firearm. . Ambrocio went to the terrace of their house. Appellant suddenly approached Ambrocio and stabbed his right stomach. Taño (2000) Facts: Amy was tending a video rental shop owned by Marina. They consumed the food and cigarettes Jimmy’s wife Erlinda. . Rios (2000) Facts: Rios hurled stones at the house of Ambrocio and Anacita Benedicto. the lower floor being used as a video rental store and not as a private place of abode or residence. ¤ It is inherent in malversation. an unlicensed firearm. Ambrocio died before he was brought to the hospital. That the abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the crime. its terrace.380 cal pistol and directed Reteracion to hand over his money or else he would be killed. Leaving Amy for dead after repeatedly banging her head. b. Mesa intervened and requested the 2 to part ways and escorted them to their respective residences. Par. and while the Benedicto spouses were tending their store. Vnitas. People v. ring and wristwatch. Held: There is no AC of abuse of confidence. The 3 then dragged Jimmy outside the house together with Laurencio. Generally. then he freely ransacked the place.THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH (1) ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR (2) OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS. Before they could reach the upper floor. with Erinada and Simon are trainees/draftees of the AFP. People v. Ambrocio confronted Rios about the stoning incident and an altercation ensued between them. he suddenly jumped over the counter. One of the culprits returned and told Erlinda that Jimmy and Laurencio had been killed for trying to escape. qualified theft. (1) ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE a. Taño kept going in and out of the shop and on the last time he went inside said shop. . Mandolado (1983) Facts: Mandolado and Ortillano. The trial court appreciated the aggravating circumstance of dwelling. He then proceeded upstairs where he took as well the jewelry box containing other valuables belonging to his victim's employer. Mesa and his group saw Anacita weeping while Ambrocio was lying lifeless in the terrace of their house. it is necessary that “there exists a relation LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. c. he took her bracelet. they tied the latter and one Francisco also surnamed Gimenez. appellant went back to the store. as the homicide is regarded as merely incidental to the robbery. All of a sudden. appellant drew his gun. Rios bought cigarettes. Held: The trial court correctly appreciated the aggravating circumstance of dwelling or morada in this case. sex or rank is not aggravating in robbery with homicide. They proceeded to ransacked the household in search of valuables. In the case at bar. the robbers demonstrated an impudent disregard of the inviolability of the victims' abode when they forced their way in. The trial court appreciated dwelling as an aggravating circumstance because the incident took place supposedly at the residence of private complainant's employer. They then ransacked the house and ordered Laurencio to go with them to his son Jimmy’s house. Montinola aimed the firearm at the neck of Reteracion and fired successive shots at the latter. When a crime is committed in the dwelling of the offended party and the latter has not given provocation. in robbery with homicide the authors thereof can commit the heinous crime without transgressing the sanctity of the victim's domicile. REQUISITES: That the offended party had trusted the offender. Held: DIsregard of age. looted their houses. Among the passengers was Reteracion. (2) OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS ¤ The ungratefulness must be obvious – manifest and clear. dwelling is considered inherent in the crimes which can only be committed in the abode of the victim. (b) sufficient. Erlinda offered to give a certificate of large cattle but the document was thrown back at her. The accused was drunk. was selling. Upon reaching the house of Jimmy. People v. He got his gun and started firing. Held: The trial court is correct in appreciating dwelling as an aggravating circumstance. and gained carnal knowledge of her against her will and consent. Erinada and Simon rode a jeep and tried to escape from Mandolado and Ortillano but the two eventually caught up with them. A few minutes later.00 in exchange for Jimmy’s life. The word dwelling includes every dependency of the house that forms an integral part thereof and therefore it includes the staircase of the house and much more. People v. Having heard the appellant shout at Ambrocio.

000 monthly salary. .ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 61 of trust and confidence between the accused and one against whom the crime was committed and that the accused made use of such a relationship to commit the crime. Par. OR (2) IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE. ¤ These 3 circumstances may be considered separately when their elements are distinctly perceived and can subsist independently. Vnitas. Virtvs.All the armed men. . When it facilitated the commission of the crime. Par. . a place at a considerable distance from town. they do not form a band. For this aggravating circumstance to exist. regardless of whether State or official or religious functions are being held. Mary Ann and lived with her and her father. IT SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED BY A BAND. . their office. . People v. OR IN A PLACE DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. ¤ The President need not be in the palace. Arrojado killed Mary Ann by stabbing her with a knife. there must be some performance of public functions. or where the houses are scattered at a great distance from each other. . Arrojado (2001) Facts: Arrojado is the first cousin of the victim. (2) UNINHABITED PLACE . Thereafter he claimed that the latter committed suicide. .THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN THE PALACE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OR IN HIS PRESENCE. in order to better attain his purpose. Arrojado helped care for the victim’s father for which he was paid a P1. It is the nature of the place which is decisive. .Whenever more than 3 armed malefactors shall have acted together in the commission of an offense. 5) The public authorities are in the performance of their duties. Held: The aggravating circumstance of abuse of confidence is present in this case.Considered in crimes against property and persons and not to crimes against chastity. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas.The offense must be actually committed in the darkness of the night. ¤ Offender must have the intention to commit a crime when he entered the place. revealing a greater degree of perversity. WHENEVER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES MAY FACILITATE THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE. . it is essential to show that the confidence between the parties must be immediate and personal such as would give the accused some advantage or make it easier for him to commit the criminal act. or 2. The public authorities who The public authorities are are in the performance of performing their duties their duties must be in outside of their offices. must take direct part in the execution of the act constituting the crime. it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. nighttime is not aggravating.One where there are no houses at all. OR WHERE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES ARE ENGAGED IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR DUTIES. uninhabited place or band is aggravating: 1. .It is inherent in brigandage. ¤ If it is the Malacañang palace or a church. When the offender took advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity. . should not be the offended party.TEST: WON in the place of the commission of the offense. or 3. (1) NIGHTTIME . 2) DUTIES (par. OR (3) BY A BAND. Nighttime. at least four in number.The fact that persons occasionally passed in the uninhabited place and that on the night of the murder another hunting party was not a great distance away.If one of the four armed persons is a principal by inducement.The commission of the crime must begin and be accomplished in the nighttime. ¤ But as regards the place where the public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties. His presence alone in any place where the crime is committed is enough to constitute the AC.It must appear that the accused SOUGHT THE SOLITUDE of the place where the crime was committed. . When especially sought for by the offender to insure the commission of the crime or for the purpose of impunity. It is obvious that the accused and the victims only met for the first time so there is no personal or immediate relationship upon which confidence might rest between them. 5. When the place is illuminated by light.The offenders must choose the place as an aid either (1) to an easy and uninterrupted accomplishment of their criminal designs or (2) to insure concealment of the offense. PLACE WHER PUBLIC CONTEMPT OR INSULT AUTHORITIES ARE TO PUBLIC ENGAGED IN THE AUTHORITIES DISCHARGE OF THEIR (par.THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED (1) IN THE NIGHT TIME. The confidence must be a means of facilitating the commission of the crime.The armed men must act together in the commission of the crime. does not matter. 6. The public authority may The public authority be the offended party. it is aggravating. ¤ Cemeteries are not places dedicated for religious worship. It is also essential that the confidence between the parties must be immediate and personal such as would give the accused some advantage to commit the crime. the culprit taking advantage of the offended party's belief that the former would not abuse said confidence. It also applies even if he is not engaged in the discharge of his duties in the place where the crime was committed. WHENEVER MORE THAN THREE ARMED MALEFACTORS SHALL HAVE ACTED TOGETHER IN THE COMMISSION OF AN OFFENSE. there was a reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some help. . (3) BAND .

Librando (2000) Facts: Edwin and his daughter Aileen. Edmund Ceriales was able to escape while the accused were about to kill his brother. however. Raelito inquired from Edwin the whereabouts of Fernando and without any warning hit Edwin with a piece of wood. a bolo. Valero (1973) Facts: Petition for certiorari and prohibition was filed impugning the order of the judge of the lower court to forward the records of the case to the Military Tribunal. adds to their suffering by taking advantage of their misfortune to despoil them. be seen from the couple’s house because of the many fruit trees and shrubs prevalent in the area. robbed Alfredo Roca of 35 sacks of Palay after killing his son. however. With rape as the more serious crime. The couple lived on a small nipa house on a hill. however. in the midst of a great calamity. or (3) it facilitates the commission of the crime by ensuring the offender's immunity from capture. Thereafter. . In this case. Held: SC found that there was committed forcible abduction with rape. armed with a sharp pointed instrument. Edwin ran but he was chased by Raelito. The uninhabitedness of a place is determined not by the distance of the nearest house to the scene of the crime but whether or not in the place of the commission. the extreme penalty of death was imposed. Virtvs. Eddie followed suit and delivered another blow to Edwin. Vnitas. Desalisa (1994) Facts: Moved by hatred and jealousy. Jose (supra) Facts: The Maggie Dela Riva story. which undoubtedly connotes that he had no direct participation in the perpetration thereof. Thereafter. or (2) it is taken advantage of by him. Held: By and of itself. when she was stopped by another car boarded by 4 men. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Santos where it has been held that if the aggravating circumstances of nighttime. What is more. People v. the penalty to be imposed is the maximum in accordance with Art. Held: The offense was proven to have been executed by a band. Accused Pineda pulled her out of the car and forced her inside the assailants’ car. People v. They tied both their hands and feet with a rope and they brought the brothers at an isolated place. Ancheta (2004) Facts: Appellant Ulep and his group. The court cited the case of People vs. instead of lending aid to the afflicted. a rope and a flashlight abducted brothers Edmund and Manuel Ceriales while the two were playing a game of cards inside their house in the middle of the night. nighttime is not an aggravating circumstance. the house of Norma’s parents and house of Carlito. Silva (2002) Facts: Accused armed with a gun. He was found guilty of the complex crime of parricide with unintentional abortion and was sentenced to life imprisonment by the LC. Thereafter. Edmund was stabbed and beheaded causing his instantaneous death. attacked and inflicted physical injuries on the vagina of his wife who was about 5 months pregnant. the accused hanged his wife to a jackfruit tree. 48 of the RPC. the supposed participation of petitioner Gamara was that of principal by inducement.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 62 People v. Held: The AC of uninhabited place is present. the three men took turns hitting Edwin with pieces of wood until the latter fell and died. The fact that they brought with them a flashlight clearly shows that they intended to commit the crime in darkness. There are 2 other houses in the neighborhood which are 150 meters away. the 4 raped her. While the SC found no necessity of considering the AC’s. . EARTHQUAKE. These cannot. the killing of Manuel and the attempt to kill Edmund. the trial court correctly appreciated nighttime as aggravating considering that nighttime facilitated the abduction of the Ceriales brothers. they boarded their jeep and left. Gamara v. Edwin was carrying a torch at that time as it was already dark. and a relative. The court claimed that there was an AC of nighttime because of appellants have purposely sought such circumstance to facilitate the commission of these crimes. causing her death and that of her fetus. there was no reasonable possibility for the victim to receive any assistance. She was brought to a hotel and there. the Court still considered the AC’s for the purpose of determining the proper penalty to be imposed in each of the other 3 crimes of simple rape. 7. EPIDEMIC OR OTHER CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE. The trial court considered nighttime and uninhabited place as just one aggravating circumstance. Fernando. ¤ The reason for the existence of this AC is found in the debased form of criminality met in one who. This is claimed to be in accordance with General Orders No. Clearly. all will constitute one aggravating circumstance only as a general rule although they can be considered separately if their elements are distinctly perceived and can subsist independently. were traversing a hilly portion of a trail on their way home when they met Raelito Librando. 12 that those involving crimes against persons and property when committed by a syndicate or a band falls under the jurisdiction of the Military Tribunal. Larry and Eddie. all six accused were armed with guns which they used on their victims. all the armed assailants took direct part in the execution of the robbery with homicide. uninhabited place or band concur in the commission of the crime. In this case. it becomes aggravating only when: (1) it is especially sought by the offender. there was reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some help. driving her car accompanied by her maid. shown that all of them were armed when they allegedly acted in concert in the commission of the crime. A crime is committed by a band when at least four armed malefactors act together in the commission thereof. the accused. Maggie was on her was home. Par. People v. Evidence shows that accusedappellants took advantage of the darkness to successfully consummate their plans. Considering that the killing was done during nighttime and many fruit trees obstruct the view of neighbors and passersby. With this finding. Held: The court did not err in considering nighttime and uninhabited place as just one aggravating circumstance. revealing a greater degree of perversity. Held: While the information charges four persons. ¤ The offender must take advantage of the calamity or misfortune. SHIPWRECK. People v.THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED ON THE OCCASION OF A CONFLAGRATION. it was not. his wife and his mother with their guns. The trial court appreciated nighttime as an aggravating circumstance.

7 of Rule 120 . shipwreck. People v. REQUISITES: a. ¤ What is controlling is the time of trial. earthquake or epidemic. a hunchback. . ¤ The armed men must take part directly or indirectly in the offense. 160. shall be pardoned at the age of seventy years if he shall have already served out his original sentence. 2. 8. shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law for the new felony. Held: To prove recidivism. the trial court may still give such AC credence if the accused does not object to the presentation of evidence on the fact of recidivism. ¤ Pardon does not obliterate the fact that the accused was a recidivist. . d. any person who shall commit a felony after having been convicted by final judgment. the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the 1. before beginning to serve such sentence. In the case at bar. Danny were on their way home when they heard somebody shout “kuba”. for actual aid is not necessary.” Par. or (3) the defendant has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal. at the time of his trial for one crime. c. Recidivism must be taken into account no mater how many years have intervened between the 1st and 2nd felonies. Art. or (4) the accused has applied for probation. unless by reason of his conduct or other circumstances he shall not be worthy of such clemency. They asked who said that but no one admitted. 9.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. (b) Upon a fourth conviction.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 63 ¤ “OR OTHER CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE” – refers to other conditions of distress similar to “conflagration. Effect of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency.THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED WITH THE AID OF ARMED MEN OR PERSONS WHO INSURE OR AFFORD IMPUNITY. acted under the same plan and for the same purpose. Molina delivered a strong stabbing blow at the back of Joseph. . provides that a judgment in a criminal case becomes final (1) after the lapse of the [period for perfecting an appeal. Penalty. shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of the RPC. WITH AID OF ARMED MEN (par. 10. ¤ This AC shall not be considered when both the attacking party and the party attacked were equally armed. 62. along with their cousin. Rules of Court. Commission of another crime during service of penalty imposed for another offense. 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. — 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: 5. or when he shall complete it after reaching the said age. and (c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction. but amnesty extinguishes the penalty and its effects. the accused never voiced out any objection when confronted with the fact of his previous conviction for attempted homicide. ¤ There is recidivism even if the lapse of time between two felonies is more than 10 years. REQUISITES: That the armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime. ¤ There is no recidivism if the subsequent conviction is for an offense committed before the offense involved in the prior conviction. Joseph was dead on arrival at the clinic. referring to Joseph. That the accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the crime was committed. directly or indirectly. Any convict of the class referred to in this article. Nonetheless. ¤ This AC is not present when the accused as well as those who cooperated with him in the commission of the crime.THAT THE ACCUSED IS A RECIDIVIST. Virtvs. not the time of the commission of the crime. 8) Aid of armed men is present even if one of the offenders merely relied on their aid. Vnitas. ¤ Sec. it is necessary to allege the same in the information and to attach thereto certified copies of the sentences rendered against the accused. Molina (2000) Facts: Brothers Joseph and Angelito. That both the first and the second offenses are embraced in the same title of the Code. 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. Art. ¤ If there are 4 armed men. who is not a habitual criminal. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. ¤ A recidivist is one who. Par. or while serving the same. That the offender is convicted of the new offense. That the offender is on trial for an offense. That he was previously convicted by final judgment of another crime. Angelito came to aid his brother but Molina also stabbed him at the back. 6) More than 3 armed malefactors that have acted together in the commission of an offense. “aid of armed men” is absorbed by “employment of a band” ¤ “Aid of armed men” includes “armed women” Par. b. — Besides the provisions of Rule 5 of Article 62. BY A BAND (par. or (2) when the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served. As the 3 were about to go. .

like recidivism and reiteracion. a person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent. People v. REITERACION/ HABITUALITY It is necessary that the offender shall have served out his sentence for the first offense. Angelito came to aid his brother but Molina also stabbed him at the back. and c. hurto. For the purpose of this article. along with their cousin. necessitates the presentation of a certified copy of the sentence convicting an accused. for an offense in which the law attaches. In habituality. The two men stopped only when they were sure that the victim was already dead. in which the law attaches a lighter penalty. The previous and subsequent offenses must not be embraced in the same title of the Code. The fact that appellant was an inmate of DAPECOL does not prove that final judgment had been rendered against him. it is necessary to allege the same in the information and to attach thereto certified copies of the sentences rendered against the accused. The second incident of rape occurred while Marivel was sleeping in the sala with her LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. That he is convicted of the new offense. During the trial. In habitual delinquency. 3. brother and sister. Dacillo (2004) Facts: Pacot stabbed and strangled Rosemarie leading to the latters death. As the 3 were about to go. Danny were on their way home when they heard somebody shout “kuba”. Vnitas. RECIDIVISM It is enough that a final judgment has been rendered in the first offense. Marivel was asked to come it and Rowena stood up to urinate. a hunchback. People v. Dacillo then encase her corpse in a cement. the offender is either a recidivist or one who has been previously punished for two or more offenses (habituality). or for two or ore offenses. . and rightly so. Dacillo for his part. robo. They asked who said that but no one admitted. The fact that Dacillo was a recidivist was appreciated by the trial court as a generic aggravating circumstance which increased the imposable penalty from reclusion perpetua to death FOUR FORMS OR REPETITION: 1. People v. the prosecution manifested that appellant had been convicted by the RTC and was serving sentence for the crime of homicide. The TC made no express ruling that the appellant was a quasi-recidivist. is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. or provides for an equal or greater penalty than that attached by law to the second offense. the prosecution failed or neglected to present in evidence the record of appellant’s previous conviction. upon instruction of Rowena (common-law wife of the accused) went to the house of Gaorana and saw the couple lying down. Gaorana covered her mouth and pointed a hunting knife to her neck and raped her. 14. Reiteracion is not always an aggravating circumstance. hold down Rosemarie’s legs to prevent her from struggling. QUASI-RECIDIVISM . RECIDIVISM 2. the accused never voiced out any objection when confronted with the fact of his previous conviction for attempted homicide. Notwithstanding the provisions of this article. or for 2 or more crimes to which it attaches lighter penalty han that for the new offense. the total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender. robbery. Held: The court does not agree that reiteracion or habituality should be appreciated in this case. REQUISITES: a. Molina (2000) Facts: Brothers Joseph and Angelito. Recidivism is not always to be taken into consideration in fixing the penalty to be imposed upon the accused. he has served the sentence. That the accused is on trial for an offense. However. REITERACTION OR HABITUALITY MULTI-RECIDIVISM OR HABITUAL DELINQUENCY . The appellant was found by the trial court to have committed offenses prior to and after the incident of Jan.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 64 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. People v. Quasi-recidivism. Gaorana (1998) Facts: Marivel. Joseph was dead on arrival at the clinic. he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. before beginning to serve such sentence or while serving the same. Marivel did not shout because she was afraid of the accused who was a prisoner and had already killed somebody. that is. Molina delivered a strong stabbing blow at the back of Joseph. The trial court imposed the death penalty on the ground that Dacillo admitted during re-cross examination that he had a prior conviction for the death of his former live-in partner. 1979. the records do not disclose that the appellant has been previously punished by an offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater or penalty or for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty. In the case at bar. That he previously served sentence for another offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty. Villapando (1989) Facts: The accused was charged before the RTC with the crimes of murder and of attempted homicide. 4. theft. Nonetheless. Held: The 2 Information alleged that both instances of rape were attended by the aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism.when a person. within a period of 10 years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries. shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law for the new felony. 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. Virtvs. He shall suffer an additional penalty for being a habitual delinquent. It is the requirement that the offenses be included in the same title of the Code. estafa or falsification. b. it is essential that the offender be previously punished.Any person who shall commit a felony after having been convicted by final judgment. Held: To prove recidivism. the trial court may still give such AC credence if the accused does not object to the presentation of evidence on the fact of recidivism. in conformity herewith. Here. shall in no case exceed 30 years. estafa or falsification. referring to Joseph.

• When this AC is present.000. par. • Evident premeditation may not be appreciated absent any proof as to how and when the plan was hatched or what time elapsed before it was carried out. they do not serve to increase the penalty. par. 3. 14. The trial court convicted him as charged and sentenced him to death. 11. Par. — The complaint or information shall state the designation of the offense given by the statute. 14. REQUISITIES: The time when the offender determined to commit the crime. 26 This is in accord with Rule 110. because he directly induces the latter to commit the crime. . • When this AC is present. it is necessary to allege it in the information and to attach certified true copies of the sentences previously meted out to the accused. EXPLOSION. REWARD. poison or explosion qualifies the offense to murder. 8.” and “derailment of a locomotive” may be a part of the definition of particular crime. both of whom are principals – to the former. and damages and obstruction to means of communication. • Evident premeditation. . Par. and the latter because he commits it. When the offenders previously prepared the means which they considered adequate to carry it out. If there is no designation of the offense. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination. frustrated homicide. In these cases. it being absorbed. it shall be applied regardless of the mitigating or aggravating circumstances attendant to the crime. any of the circumstances in paragraph 12 cannot be considered to increase the penalty or to change the nature of the offense. reference shall be made to the section or subsection of the statute punishing it. and specify its qualifying and aggravating circumstances. 10. • The killing of the victim by means of such circumstances as inundation. OR PROMISE. POISON. an interval long enough for his conscience and better judgment to overcome his evil desire and scheme. may be aggravating in robbery with homicide if the premeditation included the killing of the victim. A sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution. the one who gives or offers the price or promise and the one who accepts it. • Conspiracy generally presupposes premeditation. and When the crime was carefully planned by the offenders. DERAILMENT OF A LOCOMOTIVE. • Unless used by the offender as a means to accomplish a criminal purpose. Section 8 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure which states: SEC. Where the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty. “explosion. The offender must have an opportunity to coolly and serenely think and deliberate on the meaning and the consequences of what he planned to do. is present when the accused has been previously punished for an offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty than that attached by law to the second offense or for two or more offenses to which it attaches a lighter penalty. • When the crime intended to be committed is arson and somebody dies as a result thereof. • When another AC already qualifies the crime.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 65 Held: The aggravating circumstance of recidivism was not alleged in the information and therefore cannot be appreciated against appellant. herein accused can be convicted only of simple rape and the imposable penalty therefor is reclusion perpetua. STRANDING OF A VESSEL OR INTERNATIONAL DAMAGE THERETO. People v. there must be 2 or more principals. such as in the instant case. because they are already included by the law in defining the crimes. of The Revised Penal Code. Vnitas. . aver the acts or omissions constituting the offense. to allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act and to allow is conscience to overcome the resolution of his will. As already discussed.00. arson. He was granted conditional pardon by the President of the Philippines on 8 November 1991. 2. Virtvs.THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE. In order to appreciate recidivism as an aggravating circumstance. fire. People v. while inherent in robbery. 1. the accused having been convicted of frustrated murder in 1975 and of homicide. but also the person who gave it. Par. OR BY THE USE OF ANY OTHER ARTIFICE INVOLVING GREAT WASTE AND RUIN. • The essence of premeditation is that the execution of the criminal act must be preceded by cool thought and reflection upon the resolution to carry out the criminal intent during the space of time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment.THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH EVIDENCE PREMEDITATION. FIRE. Designation of the offense. • Evident premeditation implies a deliberate planning of the act before executing it. 10. crime involving destruction. Reiteracion or habituality under Art. • It will be noted that each of the circumstances of “fire”. Held: The records show that the crime was aggravated by reiteracion under Art. trespass to dwelling. 13. the crime is simply arson and the act resulting in the death of that person is not even an independent crime of homicide. 12.THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED BY MEANS OF INUNDATION. herein cited. any of these AC’s shall be considered as generic aggravating circumstance only. it affects not only the person who received the price or reward. illegal possession of firearms and murder sometime in 1989 where his sentences were later commuted to imprisonment for 23 years and a fine of P200. such as. Bibat (1998) LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. . Cajara (2000) Facts: Accused Cajara raped 16-year old Marita in front of his common-law wife who is the half-sister of the victim and his two small children. • The evidence must show that one of the accused used money or other valuable consideration for the purpose of inducing another to perform the deed.

Indeed. Accompanied by some of his guests. a deaf-mute boy arrived crying and while making signals. The records are bereft of evidence that the crime was committed with evident premeditation. nor is there proof to show that such killing was the result of meditation. He went back to the cottage by another route and upon arrival Anthony was still there. A month after. Anthony bathed Dennis with gin and mauled him several times. she went uphill and just as a second gun shot resounded. or when the attack was made in the heat of anger. There was no sufficient interregnum from the time Dennis was stabbed by the victim. the accused and his companions hid some guns and “tusok” in the house. calculation or resolution on his part. People v. the prosecution must present clear and positive evidence of the planning and preparation undertaken by the offender prior to the commission of the crime. when Dennis fled to their house and his arming himself with a knife. In the morning. the victim was suddenly stabbed by the accused in the stomach with a long knife. she saw Bannay and Lugaw from a distance and that her father was bout to draw his bolo when Lug-aw shot him. Anthony avoided Dennis and ran by passing the shore towards the creek but Dennis met him. a police officer to whom he voluntarily surrendered. He first brought Pedrito out of the pub and had him seated at the passengers seat inside the LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. saw Lug-aw shooting her father with the shot reverberating as the second gun report. Rey and appellant went inside while Fernando and Felix waited outside. People v. Pedrito. Ilaoa (1994) Facts: The 5 accused were charged for the gruesome murder of Nestor de Loyola. Anthony tried to let Dennis Torpio drink gin and as the latter refused. Aplacador had stabbed Mondijar. People v. Bibat stabbed to death one Lloyd del Rosario as the latter was on his way to school waiting for a ride. Held: No evident premeditation exist in this case. Thereafter. Fernando. In the present case. she heard the first whot. blocked him and stabbed him. as he himself stated to the police. Settled is the rule that evident premeditation. no evidence was presented by the prosecution as to when and how appellant planned and prepared for the killing of the victim. Felix. When he was hit. climbed a tree and from ther. must be established beyond reasonable doubt as conclusively and indubitably as the killing itself. he went to Estrera. Also. Held: The SC ruled that there was no evident premeditation because no one witnessed the initial attack. . Upon reaching home. As Sonia herself testified. heard a shot. the evidence tends to show that the series of circumstances which culminated in the killing constitutes an unbroken chain of events with no interval of time separating them for calculation and meditation. resolved to kill Nestor. Virtvs. Although the facts tend to show that Camilet might have harbored ill-feelings towards the Camanchos after they took a portion of the land he was farming and. A witness testified that the accused and several others often met in Robles’ house. Nearing the place. Mondiijar stabbed and hacked his son-inlaw with the use of a sharp and pointed bolo which resulted to his death. On the contrary. and when he stabbed the victim. Held: There was no evident premeditation. There is nothing in the records to show that appellant. Fernando later went inside and saw the three in a sleeping position. there is no proof that Camilet conceived of killing the victim. In one of their meetings. 2) an act manifestly indicating that he has clung to his determination and execution to allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the resolution of his will had he desired to hearken to its warnings. There was evident premeditation where 2 hours had elapsed from the time the accused clung to his determination to kill the victim up to the actual perpetration of the crime. other witnesses saw the accused at around 11:30 am with some companions and heard the plan to kill someone. Held: Evident premeditation cannot be considered.. Sonia. not of a deliberate plan but of rising tempers. the victim proceeded to go to the place where the boy said he was accosted. 2) The drunken voices accused Ruben and Nestor were later heard and Nestor was then seen being kicked and mauled by the 5 accused. Vnitas. In a previous incident. What she did see was her father trying to repel the assault with a bolo but he failed because a second shot hit him. he got a knife. 4) blood was found in Ruben’s shirt. Mondijar (2002) Facts:. Anthony ran but got entangled with a fishing net beside the creek and fell on his back. In a case of fairly recent vintage. Dennis then mounted on him and continued stabbing him resulting to the latters death. People v. The conviction was based on the following circumstances: a) The deceased was seen on the night before the killing in a drinking session with some of the accused. 3) some of the accused borrowed the tricycle of Alex at about 2 a. For the circumstance of evident premeditation to be appreciated. Rey all surnamed Bernal and the victim Pedrito went to a pubhouse. there is no evidence of 1) the time when he determined to commit the crime. Upon seeing Dennis.m. People v. Fernando then asked Felix to start the tricycle as they would bring home the three. Held: Evident premeditation was not established by the prosecution. Held: There is evident premeditation determination because the 3 requisites are present. Lug-aw (1994) Facts: Pal-loy was fencing the boundary limits of the land he was faming when his daughter. prior to the night in question. Bernal (2002) Facts: Appellant. There is no showing of any notorious act evidencing a determination to commit the crime which could prove appellant's criminal intent. People v. The suspect fled while the victim was brought to the hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival. Camilet (1986) Facts: After a prayer meeting was held at the place of the victim. Dennis got up and ran towards their home. went up a hill. Torpio (supra) Facts: While having a drinking spree in a cottage. his father in law on the knee. Immediately. Dennis crawled beneath the table and Anthony tried to stab him with a 22 fan knife but did not hit him. like any other circumstance that qualifies a killing to murder. it was ruled that there is no evident premeditation when the fracas was the result. was able to convey that he was strangled and spanked.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 66 Facts: At around 1:30 pm. Dennis left and slept at a grassy meadow near a Camp. they also took the produce from his cornfield.

The two rode on the victiim’s motorcycle and Labuguen lured him to where he could divest the victim of his money with the least danger of being caught. By saying that he would accompany the victim to see the cows which the latter intended to buy.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 67 tricycle. As Fidel was about to give the money. The 2 others held Dario's right hand and hair. whom he had not seen for a while after he changed residence. with his right hand. e. The prosecution failed to prove that the four intended to kill Dario and if they did intend to kill him. 14. The victim’s dead body was found on the middle of a rice field. Held: Langomes and Empacis pretended to be bona fide customers of the victim’s store and on this pretext gained entry into the latter’s store and into another part of his dwelling. to have a drinking spree. • There is a hairline distinction between craft and fraud. Eduardo held. it would be erroneous to declare that the killing of the victim was premeditated. FRAUD OR DISGUISE BE EMPLOYED. entered an eatery. Except for the fact that the appellant and his three companions waited in an alley for Dario to return to his house. The probability is that the decision to shoot the victim was made only right there and then. the mere existence of illfeeling or grudge between the parties is not sufficient to establish premeditated killing. he was arrested. Eduardo and Pio. and 2 others decided to confront Dario. He then boarded a bus leaving the motorcycle of the victim on the side of the road. They positioned themselves in the alley near the house of Dario. Biso (2003) Facts: Dario. Further. Marquez (1982) Facts: Francisca was in their house together with her children and main when somebody called in front of their window who identified themselves as PC soldiers looking for contraband. Labuguen (2000) Facts: Under the pretext of selling 3 cows to the victim. constituted craft.THAT THE CRAFT. accused positioned himself at the back of Pedrito who was still asleep and discharged his firearm twice hitting the latter on the head. that is by pretending to be PC officers. FRAUD – insidious words or machinations used to induce the victim to act in a manner which would enable the offender to carry out his design. 4) disguise. the prosecution failed to prove how the malefactors intended to consummate the crime. Eduardo. When Dario arrived on board a taxicab. Held: There was no evident premeditation. when they were not so in fact. he decided to fight. Par. 50 meters from the service drop of an irrigation canal.000 with him. ex. Where the defendants pretended to be constabulary soldiers to gain entry into the place of the victims. and related to him what Dario had done to Teresita. there AC of craft was taken into consideration. Held: The following AC’s were proved a) nighttime. Held: The generic aggravating circumstances of fraud and craft is present in this case. Craft involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of the offender. Vnitas. and then killing him. Thus. People v. Empacis (1993) Facts: Empacis et al. People v. Leticia (daughter of Francisca) and Rufina (maid). . People v. an ex-convict and a known toughie in the area.x. They took some of their belongings and one of them even raped Francisca. Labuguen convinced the victim to see the cows and bring P40. 3) dwelling of the offended parties. the four assaulted Dario. e. a black belt in karate. one of the accused shouted from the outside that they wanted to buy cigarettes. Accused-appellant did not go to Barangay Dangdangla. Empacis was stabbed by the son of Fidel. CRAFT – involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of the accused. It is employed as a scheme in the execution of the crime. Fernado then got appellant who was roused when they reached the tricycle. the wrist of Dario and covered the mouth of Dario with his left hand. He was stabbed several times which resulted to his death. Pio then stabbed Dario near the breast with a fan knife. Accused-appellant was just invited by his relatives. Eduardo stabbed Dario and fled with his three companions from the scene. and 5) by utter disregard due to victims’ age and sex. DISGUISE – resorting to any device to conceal identity. in order not to arouse his suspicion. Held: The Court ruled that there was no evidence directly showing any pre-conceived plan or devise employed by accused-appellant to kill the victim. fraud is present. Hence. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. the same may not be appreciated independently for the purpose of aggravation. 2) unlawful entry. Wearing of masks • The purpose of the offender in using any device must be to conceal his identity. Then accused Marquez went inside together with other armed companions. fraud is present. When he went to a clinic for treatment. Eduardo contacted his cousin. People v. otherwise. To enter the house. While Fernado was fetching Rey. appellant was able to lure the victim to go with him. Virtvs. The men ordered her to open up otherwise they will shoot up their house. This should at least cast reasonable doubt on the existence of a premeditated plan to kill the victim.x. held-up the store of Fidel and his wife. . the act of the accused done in order NOT TO AROUSE THE SUSPICION of the victim constitutes craft. • Where craft partakes of an element of the offense. • DISTINCTION: When there is a DIRECT INDUCEMENT by insidious words or machinations. The act of the accused in pretending to be bona fide passengers of the taxicab driven by the deceased. the prosecution failed to prove any overt acts on the part of the appellant and his cohorts showing that that they had clung to any plan to kill the victim. Bangued to kill the victim but to attend to some important matters. seated himself beside Teresita and made sexual advances to her in the presence of her brother. When there is a direct inducement by insidious words or machinations. Biso.

entered the dwelling of the victim. while fighting with another. both surnamed Lobrigas and Mante mauled and box Taylaran who was already 76 years old. • Abuse of superior strength is aggravating in coercion and forcible abduction. who was able to scratch the face of the masked man. • Ex. accused strangled and stabbed the victim with a knife. Held: The killing was qualified by the AC of abuse of superior strength which was alleged in the information and proved during trial.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 68 Par. Held: The crime committed was murder qualified by the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength. They proceeded to the place where they saw 3 men and a woman. this was not pleaded in the information. but also when the offender uses a powerful weapon which is out of proportion to the defense available to the victim as in this case. The abuse of superior strength is present not only when the offenders enjoy numerical superiority. He surrendered to the police after 2 days. People v. the two unknown robbers hit the victim with stone at the back of his head and the accused did the same to the wife which caused her death. hence. (1) SUPERIOR STRENGTH • To TAKE ADVANTAGE of superior strength means to use purposely excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked. Not satisfied with the money given by the couple. armed with firearms and stones and using face masks. The latter was stripped of his service revolver. They must have notoriously selected and made use of superior strength in the commission of the crime. Held: The prosecution failed to prove that there was indeed a notorious inequality between the ages. The prosecution argued that since the attack was by a robust man of 29 years with a huge stone against LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Padilla. It is generally accepted that the husband is physically stronger than the wife. • There must be evidence that the accused was physically stronger and that they abused such superiority. and from which the woman was unable to defend herself. Lobrigas (2002) Facts: Frank. causing her to fall face down. People v. When they were about to leave the premises. sizes and strength of the antagonists and that these notorious advantages were purposely sought for or used by the accused to achieve his ends. They held the victim tight as well as the wife. evidently employs means which weaken the defense of his opponent. The former. OR (2) MEANS BE EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN THE DEFENSE. offense is more than 3 malefactors of the strength of ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH The gravamen of abuse of superiority is the taking advantage by the culprits of their collective strength to overpower their weaker victims. The victim died caused by severe beating and mauling on the chest portion on the victim’s body. One who. 15. • There is abuse of superior strength when weapon used is out of proportion to the defense available to the offended party. Barcelon (2002) Facts: Barcelon went inside the house of Amador. with only a piece of plywood as a defense. • Abuse of superior strength is absorbed in treachery. . Ruelan pleaded her to stop but Rosa did not so Ruelan struck her behind her right ear. the house dog got loose and went towards the street. At the time (2) MEANS EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN DEFENSE • This circumstance is applicable only to crimes against persons and sometimes against person and property. thus. He left her to a grassy portion beside the street and fled. People v. People v. Omega left but returned when he saw that the 3 men were ganging up on Ontuca. there must be a deliberate intent on the part of the malefactors to take advantage of their greater number. Rosa got angry and scolded Ruelan. Vnitas.THAT (1) ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH. one of which was Sgt. Rosa asked Ruelan to accompany her. Thereafter. or there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor. Padilla (1994) Facts: Pat. the prosecution must clearly show the offenders' deliberate intent to do so. • This AC is absorbed in treachery. Amador died as a result. • An attack made by a man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed and defenseless woman constitutes the circumstance of abuse of that superiority which his SEX and the WEAPON used in the act afforded him. Held: Although abuse of superior strength was proven since Ruelan was only 20 years old whereas his victim was 76 years old already. in opening their store in the public market. . it shall only be considered as a generic circumstance in the imposition of the correct penalty. as a result was able to identify the accused. Cabato (1988) Facts: The accused with 2 other men who are still at large. People v. BY A BAND When the committed by armed regardless comparative the victim. suddenly casts sand or dirt upon the latter’s eyes and then wound or kills him. • One who attacks another with passion and obfuscation dos not take advantage of his superior strength. when greatly in excess of that required to commit the offense. Omega was on duty when Ontuca approached him asking for help claiming he was being maltreated by strangers. One day. To appreciate abuse of superior strength. The mere fact of there being a superiority in numbers is not sufficient to bring the case within the aggravating circumstance. an ageing defenseless human. she also ordered him to bring a sack and an axe. An argument ensued between Ontuca and the 3 men. abuse of superior strength should aggravate the crime. Virtvs. • No abuse of superior strength in parricide against the wife because it is inherent in the crime. Marlito. was shot by the latter in the head. To take advantage of superior strength is to use excessive force that is out of proportion to the means for self-defense available to the person attacked. Ruelan (1994) Facts: Ruelan (20 yrs old) was hired by the spouses Ricardo and Rosa (76 yrs old) to help them sell and deliver rice to their customers. such as robbery with physical injuries or homicide. Ontuca was pursued by Padilla.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 69 the crime was committed. ADDITIONAL RULES: 1. and b. Vnitas. verbal exchanges ensued. aged 29 and 69. ATTACKS SHOWN INTENTION TO ELIMITNATE RISK: a. REQUISITES: That at the time of the attack. When the assault WAS NOT CONTINUOUS. 16. the victim was not in a position to defend himself. Ventura announced a hold-up and hit Jaime on the head and asked for the keys. in that there was an interruption. Victim asleep b. Silverio and Leopolo positioned themselves behind the victim and also hacked him. There was no evidence to show that the accused-appellants purposely sought and took advantage of their number to subdue the victim. Rogelio and Uldarico started hacking each other with bolos. sex and weapon gave him over his unarmed victim. • The qualifying circumstance of treachery may not be simply deduced from presumption as it is necessary that the existence of this qualifying or aggravating circumstance should be proven as fully as the crime itself in order to aggravate the liability or penalty incurred by the culprit. Flores also stabbed Jaime’s wife Aileen who had been awakened. The disparity in age between the assailant and the victim. To take advantage of superior strength means to purposely use excessive force out of proportion to the means available to the person attacked to defend himself. Applicable only to crimes against persons. • In treachery. People v. Held: Abuse of superior strength was present in the commission of the crime. Rogelio then hacked Uldarico a 2nd time. entered the house of the Bocatejas by cutting a hole in the kitchen door. The fact that Aileen attempted to fend off the attack on her and her husband by throwing nearby objects. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Flores then stabbed Jaime 3 times. methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution. Because of a bad joke that cropped up. . where an attack by a man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed woman constitutes the circumstance of abuse of that superiority which his sex and the weapon used in the act afforded him. the victim Uldarico de Castro was the one who picked a fight with the accusedappellants because he did not like the joke by one of the accused-appellants. The prosecution should still prove that the assailants purposely used excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the persons attacked. ." What mattered was that the malefactor was male and armed with a lethal weapon that he used to slay the victim. Thereafter. When the aggression is CONTINUOUS. treachery must be present in the BEGINNING of the assault. without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make. • There is no treachery when the attack is preceded by a warning or the accused gave the deceased a chance to prepare. People v. It did not matter that appellant was "dark" with a "slim body build" or "medyo mataba. Means. respectively. Held: "Mere superiority in number. Leopoldo and Rogelio continued hacking Uldarico when the latter fell. RULES REGARDING TREACHERY a. Uldarico retaliated wounding Silverio.38 Caliber Homemade Revolver and Flores armed with a bladed weapon. Such method or form of attack must be deliberately chosen by the accused. c. and from which the woman was unable to defend herself.THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH TREACHERY (ALEVOSIA). • When it is NOT SHOWN that the principal by induction directed the killer of the deceased to adopt the means or methods actually used by the latter in accomplishing the murder. would not necessarily indicate the attendance of abuse of superior strength. d." "Finally. it is sufficient that treachery was present AT THE MOMENT THE FATAL BLOW WAS GIVEN. to appreciate the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength. Aileen died on the hospital on the same day. That the offender consciously adopted the particular means. The mode of attack must be consciously adopted. Flores took advantage of the superiority which his strength. Rogelio. The court cited the case of People vs. Ventura (2004) Facts: Ventura armed with a . • Treachery does not connote the element of surprise alone. Aileen tried to defend herself with an elecrtric cord to no avail. indicates physical superiority on appellant's part over the deceased. b. Attacked from behind • There is treachery in killing a child because the weakness of the victim due to his tender age results in the absence of any danger to the accused. it makes no difference whether or not the victim was the same person whom the accused intended to kill. • TREACHERY means that the offended party was not given opportunity to make a defense. Ocumen. method or form of attack employed by him. methods or forms need not insure accomplishment of crime. what should be considered is whether the aggressors took advantage of their combined strength in order to consummate the offense. 2. Leopoldo and Silverio. • There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person. even assuming it to be a fact. Amador was a 69 year-old woman and Barcelon was only 29 years old." In the case at bar. a. Held: By deliberately employing a deadly weapon against Aileen. Victim grappling or being held. They then dragged Uldarico towards the river and there they each twice hacked Uldarico resulting to his death. Jaime called out for help and tried to wrestle the gun away from Ventura. Virtvs. Victim half-awake or just awakened c. • Mere suddenness of the attack is not enough to constitute treachery. treachery cannot be taken into consideration as to the principal by induction. because the former left to the latter the details as to how it was to be accomplished. such as an electric cord. at appellant Flores does not automatically negate the possibility that the latter was able to take advantage of his superior strength Par. employing means. Sansaet (2002) Facts Uldarico was drinking with 15 other men that include the Sansaet brothers.

These requisites were evidently present in this case when the accused appeared from nowhere and swiftly stabbed the victim just as he was bidding goodbye to his friend. • Nighttime and craft are absorbed in treachery except if treachery rests upon an independent factual basis. Sgt. People v. he then inflicted 8 stab wounds. and (2) the offender's deliberate or conscious choice of the means. they were met with heavy gunfire. the first stab. Matuano’s son intervened asking the accused to calm down and the latter seemingly acceded. that the person attacked had no opportunity to defend himself and that such means. Neither is there any showing that they intended to ambush the lawmen. Castillo suddenly appeared and. without warning. unarmed and defenseless. The presence of “defense wounds” does not negate treachery because. The injuries established the manner in • When there is conspiracy. the accused started cursing Matuano and challenged him 2 or 3 times while at the office where the two worked. Vnitas. Velasco. Held: The killing was qualified by treachery. Held: The victim was shot while he was gathering tuba on top of a coconut tree. Among them was Verchez. namely. methods or forms of attack are employed to make it impossible or hard for the offended party to defend himself. People v. As soon as the son resumed work. evident premeditation and use of superior strength are. by their nature. The men inside the house later surrendered. by a band and means to weaken the defense. Balane was prevailed upon into accompanying the agents into the house. from behind and with the victim unarmed without any chance to defend himself against the initial assault. As such the attack was sudden and unexpected. knowing that they were dealing with a gang of bank robbers. were prepared to deal with any resistance that may possibly be put up. Held: Treachery qualified the killing to murder. aid of armed men. He was LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. The means. was 23 years old and in the prime of his strength. treachery is considered against all the offenders. 5 of which were fatal on the victim’s back.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 70 TREACHERY ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH The offender does not employ means. He did not give immediate provocation. People v. It eloquently speaks for itself. MEANS EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN DEFENSE The offender. No one has positively testified on how Lennie was killed but the victim’s body shows the manner in which she was attacked by her assailant. The lawmen. Thus. . Sangalang (1974) Facts: Cortez left his nipa hut to gather tuba from a coconut tree nearby. method or manner of execution. Held: The two requisites of treachery were not proven. methods or forms of attack. Castillo (1998) Facts: Velasco was sitting outside the pubhouse talking with his co-worker. People v. Treachery is committed when two conditions concur. surprise attack shows that Sangalang and his companions employed a mode of execution which insured the killing without any risk to them arising from any defense which the victim could have made. A firefight ensued. He was not expecting to be assaulted. • Treachery is inherent in murder by poisoning. They proceeded to the house in 4 cars and when the 1st car approached. Said action rendered it difficult for the victim to defend himself. To constitute treachery. • Treachery. two conditions must concur: (1) the employment of means. when one of the customers named Tony went out of the pubhouse. fatal as it was. Also. on the other hand. stabbed Tony with a fan knife on his left chest. The deliberate. Rendaje. he only takes advantage of his superior strength. Dorie. was inflicted on the chest. While he was on top of the tree. Velasco placed a chair between Tony and the accused to stop the latter. Lennie died as a result. The killing can be categorized as murder because of the qualifying circumstance of treachery. the accused lunged towards Matuano whose back was turned and stabbed him. method. Held: The claim that the challenging words of the victim precluded the circumstance of treachery because it put him on his guard is untenable. It was driven by Balane. With the use of a knife. Rendaje (2000) Facts: Lennie was a 15-year old deaf-mute. methods or manner of execution that would ensure the offender's safety from any defense or retaliatory act on the part of the offended party. there is no showing that appellants deliberately and consciously adopted their mode of attack. like in treachery. Then. employs means but the means employed only materially weakens the resisting power of the offended party. The fact that the accused seemed to be pacified by the son of the victim made it clear that the victim had no reason to expect an attack. • Treachery absorbs abuse of superior strength. The incised wounds in the arms were inflicted when the victim was already rendered defenseless. Tony died and his body was found outside the fence of Iglesia ni Cristo Compound. inherent in the offense of treason. The accused and his companions shot Cortez several times which resulted to his death. Gutierrez (1988) Facts: While drunk. as testified to by Velasco. Verchez (1994) Facts: A team of government agents of the PC conducted a surveillance on a house reported to be the hideout of a gang of suspected robbers. • Treachery obfuscation. Tony ran away but was pursued by the accused. 3 of the agents were hit. The accused was holding a balisong. The agents stopped a car coming out of the house. Her body was found in a sugar cane plantation. one died and two were injured. Norcio was killed during the gun battle and not during the first volley of shots fired by the robbers. cannot co-exist with passion and People v. he was struck by a volley of shots and he fell to the ground at the base of the coconut tree. Virtvs. Tony pleaded for help but accused stabbed him once more. clearly show that treachery was present. and forms of execution were deliberately and consciously adopted by the accused without danger to his person. Rendaje followed Lennie when the latter was on her way home alone.

The trial court found Umayam guilty of murder. whether frontally or from behind. is treachery if such mode of attack was deliberately adopted by him with the purpose of depriving the victim of a chance to either fight or retreat. contusions on her arms and legs. and in the manner dogs perform sexual intercourse). 1 of whom is Dumadag are having some drinks. Thus. Mateo could not have actually anticipated the sudden landing of a large concrete stone on his head. cannot be expected to put up a defense. Mateo did not have any chance of defending himself from the accused-appellant's concerted assault. method or form of attack to ensure the commission of the crime without affording the victim any means to defend herself. even if he was forewarned of the attack. indicating that there may have been a quarrel prior to the stabbing. the decomposing body of Mendoza was found inside. Lito's act of stabbing the victim with a knife. Held: As a general rule. Velasquez would notice them frequently quarelling and Mendoza on occasions would run to Velasquez for help for the beatings inflicted on her by her husband. • The means employed or the circumstances brought about must tend to make the effects of the crime MORE HUMILIATING or TO PUT THE OFFENDED PARTY TO SHAME. Minor children. The rule does not apply if the attack was not preconceived but merely triggered by infuriation of the appellant on an act made by the victim. Mendoza were living as husband and wife in a shanty erected inside a compound owned by Velasquez. The number of stab wounds. their houseboy. Dumadag followed Prudente and stabbed the victim on his breast with a knife which resulted to his death. • When the accused raped a woman after winding cogon grass around his genital organ. a sudden attack by the assailant. The circumstantial evidence on record does not clearly show that there was any conscious and deliberate effort on the part of the accused to adopt any particular means. But the trial court overlooked and did not take into account the aggravating circumstance of ignominy and sentenced accused to the single indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua. While it is true that the victim herein may have been warned of a possible danger to his person. On their way home. in treachery. . Mateo clearly had no chance to defend himself. This reasonably negates treachery. In the case at bar. Notably. De Guzman (2007) Held: d It should be made clear that the essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack on an unsuspecting victim without the slightest provocation on his part. People v. When the accused raped a married woman in the presence of her husband. ganged up and mauled him. It was triggered by the appellant's anger because of the victim's refusal to have a drink with the appellant and his companions. The conclusion that there was treachery can hardly be gleaned because the victim and Umayam were inside their shanty and no one witnessed how the killing took place. • This AC is applicable to crimes against chastity and persons. More importantly. Umayam (2002) Facts: Umayam and the victim. Luz came to Mateo's succor by embracing him and pacifying his aggressors. Held: The accused was held guilty of rape with the use of a deadly weapon. which is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. there was heavy downpour so they decided to take a shelter at a store where 2 men. Rene forced Reylan to have sex with Estrella (oral sex. People v. Virtvs. it is apparent that the attack was not preconceived. affording the hapless. unarmed and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or to escape. Siao (2000) Facts: Estrella worked as a housemaid of Rene Siao’s family. missionary position. the medical findings of the victim's cadaver show. the suddenness and the unexpectedness of the attack. since the victim and his companion headed towards their residence when they saw the group of accusedappellants coming back for them after an earlier quarrel just minutes before. Vnitas. 17. who by reason of their tender years.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 71 which the killing was cruelly carried out with little or no risk to the assailant. Velasquez then noticed a foul odor emanating from the couple’s shanty which he at first thought to be that of a poultry feed or kaning baboy. One day. Held: The qualifying circumstance of treachery was not established with concrete evidence. With the assistance of the police who broke the shanty’s walls. People v. inflicting a 15-cm deep wound shows deliberate intent of using a particular means of attack. most of which were inflicted at the back of the child — unarmed and alone — shows the deliberateness. This is even more true if the assailant is an adult and the victim is a minor. when an adult person illegally attacks a minor. John. Par. which thus deprived her of the opportunity to run or fight back. . Dumadag (2004) Facts: Prudente with his friends including Meliston agreed to meet at a swimming pool to celebrate the feast of St. ex. Neither could the victim have been aware that Lito came up beside him to stab his back as persons were beating him from every direction. Rene ordered Reylan. In the present case. Dumadag offered Prudente a drink of Tanduay but the latter refused then left. People v. but accused-appellants were unrelenting. It has been held that where the accused in committing the rape used not only the missionary LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Considering the location of the injuries sustained by the victim and the absence of defense wounds. The stone was thus treacherously struck. this is not ignominy but cruelty. Piedad (2002) The essence of treachery is a deliberate and sudden attack. which adds disgrace ad obloquy to the material injury caused by the crime. While holding a gun. to bring Estrella to a room. Mateo was obviously overpowered and helpless when accused-appellants' group numbering around eight. Torrefiel). what is decisive is that the attack was executed in such a manner as to make it impossible for the victim to retaliate. IGNOMINY – it is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order.THAT MEANS BE EMPLOYED OR CIRCUMSTANCES BROUGHT ABOUT WHICH ADD IGNOMINY TO THE NATURAL EFFECTS OF THE ACT. People v. he thereby augmented the wrong done by increasing its pain and adding ignominy there to (People v. * NOTE: According to Professor Ambion. treachery exists. During the couple’s stay in the compound.

He and his wife saw their dead daughter lying in bed. Bumidang (2000) Facts: Baliwang Bumidang raped Gloria in front of her 80 year old father. “or other similar means” – the expression should be understood as referring to MOTORIZED vehicles or other efficient means of transportation similar to automobile or airplane. cannot be committed by means of motor vehicle. Before raping the victim. The TV set was recovered by the police at the house of Tadifo. People v. • Dwelling and unlawful entry is taken separately in murders committed in a dwelling. OR OTHER SIMILAR MEANS. Cachola (2004) Facts: Jessie was about to leave their house to watch cartoons in his uncle's house next door when accused suddenly entered the front door of their house. . a way not intended for ingress. the AC of ignominy attended the commission thereof. The men entered the kitchen and continued shooting. hence. and then hit him in the back with the butt of a long gun. • Unlawful entry must be a means to effect entrance and not for escape. a greater audacity.THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED (1) WITH THE AID OF PERSONS UNDER FIFTEEN YEARS OF AGE OR (2) BY MEANS OF MOTOR VEHICLES. These facts clearly show that Baliwang deliberately wanted to further humiliate Gloria. Jessie came out of his hiding place and proceeded to the kitchen. • Unlawful entry is not aggravating in trespass to dwelling. OR WINDOW BE BROKEN. • To be considered as an AC. There he saw his mother. OR WINDOW BE BROKEN. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. RATIONALE FOR PAR. It was established that Baliwang used the flashlight and examined the genital of Gloria before he ravished her. We cannot. Melecio. Virtvs. or if the crime was committed in a manner that tends to make its effects more humiliating to the victim. and his cousin Rubenson — all slaughtered. 19 .ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 72 position. 18: One who acts. Baello’s brother-in-law. thereby aggravating and compounding her moral sufferings. add to her moral suffering. AIRSHIPS. Jessie forthwith crawled and hid under a bed. consider ignominy as an aggravating circumstance. his brother Felix. DOOR. The death certificate of Victorino reveals that his penis was excised. • If the motor vehicle was used only in facilitating the escape. People v. Jerry. Where the victim was already dead when his body or a part thereof was dismembered. it is not aggravating. had entered the Borja residence through the second floor window. shows a greater perversity. • This AC is inherent in robbery with force upon things. Victorino who was then in the living room. it should not be an aggravating circumstance. FLOOR. Held: The aggravating circumstance of ignominy shall be taken into account if means are employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the offense. that is. 20. They ordered Jessie to drop to the floor. . DOOR. Melecio helplessly saw the accused rape her daughter but did not move because he was too afraid and weak. Vnitas. Without much ado. 18. Held: the AC of unlawful entry was properly appreciated against the accused as he and his companion. Par. FLOOR. not respecting the walls erected by men to guard their property and provide for their personal safety. Captain Borja awoke one night to find out that their front door was open and that their TV set was missing. and if facilitating their escape. is broken in order to get out of the place. which is committed by means of deceit or abuse of confidence. or was made to exhibit to the rapists her complete nakedness before they raped her. • Theft. thus adding to the victim's moral suffering. the information states that Victorino's sexual organ was severed after he was shot and there is no allegation that it was done to add ignominy to the natural effects of the act. therefore. If the wall. For ignominy to be appreciated. cannot be committed by means of motor vehicles. Ignominy was appreciated in a case where a woman was raped in the presence of her betrothed. MOTORIZED WATERCRAFT.. in carrying away the effects thereof. He committed his bestial deed in the presence of Gloria's old father. • There is unlawful entry when an entrance is effected by a way not intended for the purpose. Baliwang examined the genitals of Gloria with a flashlight. Carmelita. ROOF. People v. The breaking of the door is covered by paragraph 19. It was Jerry who killed Borja’s daughter because it was he who was left inside the house. Tadifo claimed that Baello and Jerry had an agreement to rob the house of Borja. ROOF. • It is only aggravating in cases where the offender resorted to any of said means TO ENTER the house. etc. Baello (1993) Facts: Brgy.THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED AFTER AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY. ignominy cannot be taken against the accused. it is required that the offense be committed in a manner that tends to make its effect more humiliating. THERE IS AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY WHEN AN ENTRANCE OF A CRIME A WALL. (1) WITH THE AID OF PERSONS UNDER 15 YEARS OF AGE (2) BY MEANS OF A MOTOR VEHICLE • It is aggravating where the accused used the motor vehicle in going to the place of the crime. In this case. or of her husband. Held: Ignominy cannot be appreciated in this case. breaking the door must be utilized as a means to the commission of the crime. When the rampage was over and after the malefactors had already departed. Par. (AS AMENDED BY RA 5438).THERE IS AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY WHEN AN ENTRANCE OF A CRIME A WALL. Par. which is committed by merely taking personal property which need not be carried away. from where he saw the feet of a third man who had also entered the house. . the intruders shot to death Jessie's uncle. • Estafa. the law punishes him with more severity. • There is no unlawful entry when the door is broken and thereafter the accused made an entry thru the broken door.

Lacao (1974) Facts: Gallardo. As testified to by Dr. Vnitas. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas.Rape is Committed1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: a) Through force. and carried Willy to a place where they burned Willy. When the latter reached the bamboo grove.The crime of rape shall hereafter be classified as a Crime Against Persons under Title Eight of Act 3815. coming from a gathering. IGNOMINY Involves moral suffering. or any instrument or object.This Act shall be known as "The Anti-Rape Law of 1997". was found dumped in the street is not sufficient for a finding of cruelty where there is no showing that appellant Ilaoa. . causing him unnecessary physical pain in the consummation of the criminal act. for his pleasure and satisfaction. amending for the purpose act no. causing him unnecessary physical and moral pain in the consummation of the criminal act. His assailants dragged him to the field. The test is whether the 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. Neither can it be inferred from the mere fact that the victim’s dead body was dismembered. he was assaulted by David and his son. This being the sequence of events. there shall be incorporated into Title Eight of the same Code a new chapter to be known as Chapter Three on Rape. No proof was presented that would show that accused-appellants deliberately and wantonly augmented the suffering of their victim. SECTION 2. • For cruelty to exist. there must be proof showing that the accused delighted in making their victim suffer slowly and gradually. It was found that each of the 9 wounds could have caused his death if there were no timely medical assistance. SPECIAL AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES Republic Act 8353 An act expanding the definition of the crime of rape. . or inhumanely increasing the victim's suffering. That the injury caused be deliberately increased by causing other wrong. Held: The numerousness of wound is not the criterion for appreciating cruelty. Gallardo sustained 14 wounds by different bladed instruments. and reflected in her medical certificate. People v. Jose and Federico. under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof. otherwise known as the revised penal code. otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code. threat. causing Willy to fall on his knees. c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority. Guerrero (2002) Appellant first severed the victim's head before his penis was cut-off. Rape: When and How Committed. People v. That the other wrong be unnecessary for the execution of the purpose of the offender. 21. Baltazar tried to pull out the knife. Catian (2002) Facts: Catian repeatedly strike Willy with a "chako" on the head. to read as follows: "Chapter Three Rape" Article 266-A. • There is no cruelty when other wrong was done after the victim was dead. carried him over his shoulder. 2. 24 of which were fatal. People v. b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious. CRUELTY Refers to physical suffering. Calunod seconded by striking the victim with a piece of wood on the face. Salvador. . He died later. into the genital or anal orifice of another person. decided to go home. it must be shown that the accused enjoyed and delighted in making his victim suffer. • Plurality of wounds alone does not show cruelty. caused Nestor to suffer slowly and painfully and inflicted on him unnecessary physical and moral pain. When Willy finally collapsed. No cruelty is to be appreciated where the act constituting the alleged cruelty in the killing was perpetrated when the victim was already dead. Number of wounds alone is not the criterion for the appreciation of cruelty as an aggravating circumstance. . 3815. as amended. Sanglay. Virtvs. reclassifying the same as a crime against persons. or intimidation. Sumalpong picked him up. . shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into other person's mouth or anal orifice.THAT THE WRONG DONE IN THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME BE DELIBERATELY AUGMENTED BY CAUSING OTHER WRONG NOT NECESSARY FOR ITS COMMISSIONS. as amended. cruelty has to be ruled out for it connotes an act of deliberately and sadistically augmenting the wrong by causing another wrong not necessary for its commission. REQUISITES: 1. Gallrado ran. Ernesto in fact died as a result of his head being severed. 2) By any person who. d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented. Rape as a Crime Against Persons. Short Title. • Cruelty refers to physical suffering of victim purposely intended by offender. even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present. Ilaoa (supra) The fact that Nestor’s decapitated body bearing 43 stab wounds. People v. For cruelty to exist. Accordingly.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 73 Par. CRUELTY • There is cruelty when the culprit enjoys and delights in making his victim suffer slowly and gradually. As he was descending the stairs Balatazar followed him and stabbed him with a knife at the right side of his body. The latter’s skeletal remains were discovered by a child who was pasturing his cow near a peanut plantation. Held: The circumstance of cruelty may not be considered as there is no showing that the victim was burned while he was still alive. and for other purposes SECTION 1.

any of the children or other relatives within the third civil degree of consanguinity. Separability Clause. Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons. or provision of this Act is declared invalid or unconstitutional. (6) When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Human Immune-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim. parent. modified or repealed accordingly. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape. illegal possession of firearms cannot be deemed an aggravating circumstance. Under Art. the accused asked his nieces to go outside and buy cheese curls. 3815. homicide is committed. Accordingly.. he locked the door and had carnal knowledge with Criselle. . Held: The trial court was correct. there can be no separate offense of simple illegal possession of firearms. Verily. SECTION 4. the victim has become insane. The accused cannot penetrate the victim’s organ. When they left. Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding article shall be punished by prision mayor. appellant cannot be convicted of 2 separate offenses of illegal possession of firearms and direct assault with attempted homicide. Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons. rules and regulations. Vnitas. administrative orders. In this case. . . That the crime shall be extinguish or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio. may be accepted as evidence in the prosecution of the acts punished under Article 266-A. Reclusion temporal shall also be imposed if the rape is committed by any of the ten aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in this article.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 74 Article 266-B. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape. 2) When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement of penal institution. homicide is committed. emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime. 335 of the RPC as amended by RA 7659 and further amended by RA 8353. the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. the accused opened his zipper and made Criselle hold his penis. step-parent. the penalty shall be reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua. guardian..If any part. Hence. section. Since the crime committed was direct assault and not homicide or murder. There is no dispute that the victim was 6 years of age when the accused had carnal knowledge with her. (10) When the offender knew of the mental disability. Article 266-D. the other parts thereof not affected thereby shall remain valid.Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua. Penalties. 4) When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling and is personally known to be such by the offender before or at the time of the commission of the crime. the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua. (5) When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old. People v. The lower court convicted the accused of qualified rape. penal laws are construed liberally in favor of the accused. Moreover. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape. the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. ascendant. Virtvs. and all laws.Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act of rape in any degree from the offended party. no other interpretation is justified. or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim.The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed. the victim has become insane. the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree. illegal possession of firearms becomes merely an aggravating circumstance. When they left. executive orders. When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof. Effect of Pardon . as amended. or where the offended party is so situated as to render her/him incapable of giving valid consent. the penalty of death shall be imposed if the crime of rape is committed against a child below 7 years of age. The 2 girls came back and he asked them to go out and buy more cheese curls. People v. if the "other crime" is murder or homicide. Article 266-C. While the victim was playing. not a separate offense. the plain meaning of RA 8294's simple language is most favorable to herein appellant. the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty. the penalty shall be reclusion temporal. SECTION 5. The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances: 1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent. (9) When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape. When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof. for the language of the new law demonstrates the legislative intent to favor the accused.Article 335 of Act No. acts presidential decrees. the penalty shall be death. Presumptions.This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after completion of its publication in two (2) newspapers of general circulation. Balgos (2000) Facts: Balgos was accused of raping a 6-year old child named Criselle. Ladjaalam (2000) Facts: Accused who is maintaining a drug den fired an unlicensed M-14 rifle at the policemen who were about to enter his house to serve a search warrant. appellant can no longer be held liable for illegal possession of firearms. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Held: If an unlicensed firearm is used in the commission of any crime. the victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability. Repealing Clause. inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of this Act are deemed amended. Since direct assault with multiple attempted homicide was committed in this case." SECTION 3. . the penalty shall be prision mayor to reclusion temporal. (8) When by reason or on the occasion of the rape. when the offender took advantage of his position to facilitate the commission of the crime. 3) When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse. In case it is the legal husband who is the offender. Effectivity. Provided. (7) When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or paramilitary units thereof or the Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency or penal institution.

Because of the nature and effect of the crime committed. ascendant c. — 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. . Virgilio is the elder brother of Cesar. but only civil. legitimate. or relatives by affinity in the same line. relationship is MITIGATING if the offended party is a relative of lower degree and AGGRAVATING if the offended party is a relative of a higher degree than the offender. Atop (1998) Facts: 11-year-old Regina lives with her grandmother. . INTOXICATION c. Their concept. it shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance. liability shall result from commission of the crime of theft. or adopted brother or sister. That the victim is the elder brother of Cesar is likewise alleged in the Information. • Relationship is neither mitigating nor aggravating. Virgilio was hit on the nape of the neck which caused him to fall to the ground. 332 of the RPC. AND People v. The rule is that relationship is aggravating in crimes against persons as when the offender and the offended party are relatives of the same level such as killing a brother. relationship is always aggravating. or relative by affinity in the same degrees of the offender. . a half-brother or adopted brother. . Vnitas. of the offender. if living together. Held: In order that the alternative circumstance of relationship may be taken into consideration in the imposition of the proper penalty. natural or adopted brother or sister.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 75 5. and descendants. legitimate. Cesar and Virgilio Marcos are brothers. 332. Held: The law cannot be stretched to include persons attached by common-law relations. . the offended party must either be the (a) spouse. if the same is not habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit said felony but when the intoxication is habitual or intentional. The alternative circumstances are: a. ♣ When the CRIME AGAINST PERSONS is any of the SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES (Art. Virtvs. Atop is the common-law husband of her grandmother. People v. intoxication and the degree of instruction and education of the offender. Cesar then came out of the kitchen door with a bolo in hand and suddenly hacked Virgilio from behind. (b) ascendant. Thus. or (e) relative by affinity in the same degree. ordinary rule applies. it is considered AGGRAVATING although the offended party is a relative of lower degree. 1994 and 1995. ♣ When the crime is less serious physical injuries or slight physical injuries. Art. 15. natural or adopted brother or sister e. The lower court took into account the AC of relationship. • In crimes against chastity. relative by affinity in the same degree of the offender • As a rule. The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be taken into consideration when the offended party in the spouse. descendant. swindling or malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by spouses. (c) descendant. relationship was correctly appreciated as an aggravating circumstance. there is no blood relationship or legal bond that links Atop to his victim. or when the offender and the offended party are relatives of the same level.Under Art.But the serious physical injuries must not be inflicted by a parent upon his child by excessive chastisement. spouse b. INTOXICATION LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. (d) legitimate. a brother-in-law. Atop was found guilty of 4 counts of rape which was committed in 1993 (2x). when relationship is an element of the offense. no criminal. ♣ When the crime against persons is homicide or murder. relationship is an AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE. RELATIONSHIP b. They are the relationship. descendant d. In the case at bar. DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION EDUCATION OF THE OFFENDER a. ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES • 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. Marcos (2001) Facts: Virgilio arrived at the house of the Marcoses and proceeded to the artesian well (jetmatic) located just at the back of the house. ascendant. 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. even if the offended party is a descendant of the offender. relationship is aggravating even if the victim of the crime is a relative of lower degree. 263). ♣ It is aggravating in CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS in cases where the offended party is a relative of a higher degree than the offender.Relationship becomes actually an exempting circumstance since there is no occasion to consider a mitigating or an aggravating circumstance because there is no criminal liability. ascendants. as killing a brother. In this case. Accused likewise declared that Virgilio is his brother. natural. Virgilio bent down to put on the ground the tools he was carrying. brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law. relationship is MITIGATING in crimes against property by analogy to the provisions of Art. b. Then Cesar hacked him again and this time Virgilio was hit on the right side of the head. RELATIONSHIP This is taken into consideration when the offended party is the: a. • Relationship is mitigating in trespass to dwelling.

robbery arson except theft of large cattle and robbery with homicide. DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION OF THE OFFENDER Low degree of instruction and education or lack of it is generally mitigating. The fact that the accused drank liquor prior to the commission of the crime did not necessarily qualify such action as an aggravating circumstance. WHEN THE INTOXICATION IS HABITUAL . Held: Intoxication is mitigating if accidental. It is unnecessary that it be a matter of daily occurrence. LOW DEGREE OR LACK OF INSTRUCTION IS MITIGATING IN ALL CRIMES. The intoxication of the appellant not being habitual and considering that the said appellant was in a state of intoxication at the time of the commission of the felony. It is aggravating if habitual or intentional. the alternative circumstance of intoxication should be considered mitigating. It was also found that the policeman apprehended Renejane a month before the incident of illegal possession of marijuana. if it is intentional (subsequent to the plan to commit a felony) . AS MITIGATING . High degree of instruction and education is aggravating. The habit should be actual and confirmed. or b. the determination of which is left to the trial court. The law enforcer conceives the commission of the crime and suggests to the accused who adopts the ENTRAPMENT Ways and means are resorted to for the purpose of trapping and capturing the lawbreaker in the execution of his criminal plan The means originate from the mind of the criminal. • Lack of sufficient instruction is not mitigating when the offender is a city resident who knows how to sign his name. no subsequent to the plan to commit the crime. Neither can this be considered as a mitigating circumstance in the absence of proof that the intake of alcoholic drinks was of such quantity as to blur the appellant’s reason and deprive him of a certain degree of control. theft.This clause means that the offender’s mental faculties must be affected by drunkenness. A habitual drunkard is one given to intoxication by excessive use of intoxicating drinks. a. It lessens individual resistance to evil thought and undermines will-power making its victim a potential evil doer. It was found that Renejane was with these 2 persons and some other people and they were having a drinking session when the incident took place. it must be indubitably proved. but also lack of sufficient intelligence are necessary to invoke the benefit of the alternative circumstance of lack of instruction. ENTRAPMENT AND INSTIGATION INSTIGATION The instigator practically induces the would-be accused into the commission of the offense and himself becomes a coprincipal. People v. not habitual nor intentional. • When the offender has committed a felony in a state of intoxication. the accused proceeded to the seashore and on finding Buenaflor hacked the latter with the same bolo. he stabbed twice the victim Pascua with a bolo while the latter was walking along the barrio street.Lack of instruction cannot be taken into account where the defendant admitted that he studied in the first grade in a public elementary school. however unlettered or uncultured he may be (4) murder – because to kill is forbidden by natural law which every rational being is endowed to know and feel. (2) crimes against chastity (3) treason – because love of country should be a natural feeling of every citizen. . . Art. Exceptions: (1) crimes against property such as estafa. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas.It is intentional when the offender drinks liquor fully knowing its effects. Vnitas. if intoxication is habitual. • Lack of instruction must be proved positively and directly and cannot be based on mere deduction or inference. LACK OF INSTRUCTION. if intoxication is not subsequent to the plan to commit a felony. but it is not necessary that it be continuous or by daily occurrence. AGGRAVATING a. Camano (1982) Facts: After the accused had been drinking liquor. ABSOLUTORY CAUSES AND OTHER SPECIAL SITUATIONS Absolutory causes are those where the act committed is a crime but for reasons of public policy and sentiment there is no penalty imposed. when the offender avails himself of his learning in committing the crime. if intoxication is not habitual. 15 applies only to him who really has not received any instruction. . The habit should be actual and confirmed. Renejane (1988) Facts: The accused was convicted for the crime of murder of 1 policeman and his companion. Virtvs. • Ordinarily. or b. Intoxication is aggravating if it is habitual or intentional. • Not illiteracy alone. There is no finding of either by the lower court. HIGH DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 76 MITIGATING a. To be mitigating. After hacking and stabbing to death the victim. that is. AS AGGRAVATING Degree of instruction is aggravating when the offender availed himself or took advantage of it in committing the crime. • The question of lack of instruction cannot be raised for the first time in appellate court. Held: Drunkenness is not necessarily an aggravating circumstance. c.A habitual drunkard is one given to intoxication by excessive use of intoxicating drinks. The affair was an ordinary drinking party. to find in the liquor a stimulant to commit a crime or a means to suffocate any remorse.The accused’s state of intoxication must be proved. People v.

In instigation on the other hand. . Art.. Yap found a R. Vnitas.both offenders must be pardoned by the offended party. the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty. Effect of pardon by the offended party. Article 266-C. ways and means are resorted to for the purpose of trapping and capturing lawbreakers in the execution of their criminal plan. as continued inaction of the offended party after learning the offense. the mens rea originates from the mind of the criminal. Lua Chu and Uy Se Ting (1931) Facts: Samson was the chief of customs secret service in Cebu and Natividad was the former collector of customs. No. There is instigation when the accused was induced to commit the crime. He was instructed to make sure that the shipment containing opium shall be unloaded in the country. if he shall have consented or pardoned the offenders. Held: The operation that led to the arrest of appellant was an entrapment. Held: Entrapment is not a defense in a criminal case. People v. EFFECT OF PARDON RPC. The accused must be acquitted. It was agreed that payment and delivery of shabu would be made on the following day. — A pardon of the offended party does not extinguish criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of this Code. . A public officer or a private detective induces an innocent person to commit a crime and would arrest him upon or after the commission of the crime by the latter. the NBI agents and the informant went to Pacis's house as agreed. It is different from instigation. not an instigation. Araneta was the hearing officer of the Dept. received information that Pacis was offering to sell ½ kg of "shabu. The entrapment was successful and Atty. While examining it. . Araneta was charged for violating the anti-graft law. In criminal cases. ♣ The offended party in crimes of adultery and concubinage cannot institute criminal prosecution. idea and carries it into execution. supervising agent of the Dangerous Drugs Division-NBI.There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly or over acts. ABSOLUTORY CAUSES Art. He went along the plan and then he informed the Philippine Constabulary of all that had taken place and they discussed a plan to capture the opium owners. transparent plastic bag with white crystalline substance inside. There is nothing immoral in this or against the public good which should prevent the government from prosecuting and punishing the culprits. Congzon returned and gave the "boodle money" to Atty. CA (1986) Facts: Atty. for this is not a case where an innocent person is induced to commit a crime merely to prosecute him. Araneta v. Entrapment does not exempt the criminal from liability. but civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is extinguished by his express waiver. the intervention of the aggrieved parties is limited to being witnesses for the prosecution. Pacis (2002) Facts: Atty.A. Anti-Rape Law of 1997. Yap. 23. Effect of Pardon . Provided.The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed. Yap. ♣ A pardon by the offended party does not extinguish criminal action because a crime is an offense against the State. instigators practically induce the would-be defendant into the commission of the offense and become co-principals themselves. Yap who handed the money to Pacis. — Light felonies are punishable only when they have been LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Not a bar to the prosecution and conviction of the lawbreaker. ♣ Compromise does not extinguish criminal liability. The next day. The informant introduced Yap to Pacis as interested buyer. the officers identified themselves as NBI agents and arrested him. Virtvs." A buy-bust operation was approved. 6(3). In entrapment. in order the better to assure the seizure of said opium and the arrest of its importers. 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. 7. The latter went to see Araneta regarding her claim for death compensation and Araneta asked for P100 for her claim to be processed. Samson did not induce nor instigate the accused to import the opium but merely pretended to have an understanding with the collector of customs. They negotiated the sale of ½ kg of shabu. Upon Pacis' receipt of the payment. Yap instructed Congzon to get the money from the car. Congzon and the informant then went to the house of Pacis. c. People v. Yap and Senior Agent Congzon. Pacis handed to Yap a paper bag with markings "yellow cab". Jr. When he opened the bag. were assigned to handle the case. That the crime shall be extinguish or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio. Art. of Labor in Cabanatuan while Mrs. . In entrapment. When light felonies are punishable. b. but it is simply a trap set to catch a criminal. In case it is the legal husband who is the offender.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 77 A person has planned or is about to commit a crime and ways and means are resorted to by a public officer to trap and catch the criminal. The widow reported this to the PC and the PC decided to entrap Araneta.the pardon here may be implied. Yoyongco is the widow of a government employee. 8353. It has been held in numerous cases by this Court that entrapment is sanctioned by law as a legitimate method of apprehending criminal elements engaged in the sale and distribution of illegal drugs. Pacis asked for the payment. Held: The mere fact that the chief of customs secret service pretended to agree to a plan for smuggling illegally imported opium through the customhouse. is no bar to the prosecution and conviction of the accused.

he shall be exempt from punishment. legitimate. — No criminal. — Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which it may deem proper to repress and which is not punishable by law. shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her parents. if living together. 3. If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of any other kind. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery. natural.000 pesos. through the Department of Justice. Who are criminally liable. the occupants of the dwelling or a third person. Duty of the court in connection with acts which should be repressed but which are not covered by the law.000 pesos. in any case. nor. The Rules of Court mandates that after an adjudication of guilt. Spouses. concubinage. abduction. the penalty shall be death. 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. These rules shall be applicable. — The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended spouse. The exemption established by this article shall not be applicable to strangers participating in the commission of the crime. — The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses. or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury. Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability. taking into consideration the degree of malice and the injury caused by the offense. — Any legally married person who having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person. inn and other public houses. If the offense be committed by means of violence or intimidation. Veneracion (1995) Facts: The accused was found guilty of the crime of Rape with Homicide. the marriage of the offender with the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him. The instant petition raised the issue whether or not the respondent judge acted with grave abuse of discretion when he failed or refused to impose the mandatory penalty of death under RA 7659 Held: The law plainly and unequivocably provides that “when by reason or on the occasion of rape. under the same circumstances. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances. when a strict enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result in the imposition of a clearly excessive penalty. ascendants. through the Department of Justice. Courts are not concerned with wisdom. Art. — Any private person who shall enter the dwelling of another against the latter's will shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1. or guardian. Vnitas. it shall render the proper decision. while the same are open. taverns. People v. or shall otherwise have consented to the infidelity of the other spouse shall not be entitled to the benefits of this article. 2. 247. and in cases of excessive penalties. Art. d. 344. and their seducer. to parents with respect to their daughters under eighteen years of age. Qualified trespass to dwelling. abduction. accomplices and accessories after the fact of the above-mentioned crimes. efficacy or morality of law. — The following are criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies: 1. the reasons which induce the court to believe that said act should be made the subject of legislation. nor shall it be applicable to any person who shall enter a dwelling for the purpose of rendering some service to humanity or justice. the judges should impose the proper penalty and civil liability provided for by the law on the accused. The provisions of this article shall not be applicable to any person who shall enter another's dwelling for the purpose of preventing some serious harm to himself. The provisions of this paragraph shall also be applicable to the co-principals. Art. if he shall have consented or pardoned the offenders. or relatives by affinity within the same degrees. Art. Art. the court shall submit to the Chief Executive. In the same way. as the case may be. 20. shall suffer the penalty of destierro. such statement as may be deemed proper. nor to anyone who shall enter cafes. Art. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. acts of lasciviousness and rape. with the single exception of accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article. but only civil liability. ACTS NOT COVERED BY LAW AND IN CASE OF EXCESSIVE PUNISHMENT Art. and adopted brothers and sisters. In cases of seduction. or relatives by affinity in the same line. if they are both alive. rape and acts of lasciviousness. rape or acts of lasciviousness. ascendants and descendants. in any case. Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of his wife or daughter. . Accessories. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law. while the daughters are living with their parents. 16. 280. descendants. The offenses of seduction. Virtvs. without suspending the execution of the sentence. shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter. grandparents. seduction. 2. The discomfort faced by those forced by law to impose death penalty is an ancient one. shall result from the commission of the crime of theft. swindling or malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by the following persons: 1. Principals. with the exception of those committed against person or property. but it is a matter upon which judges have no choice. 5. a homicide is committed. if the offender has been expressly pardoned by the above named persons. and shall report to the Chief Executive. nor. 332. Persons exempt from criminal liability. abduction. Accomplices.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 78 consummated. and 3. the penalty shall be prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding 1. The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without including both the guilty parties.

PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE Art. Accessories are not liable for light felonies. • Conspiracy arises on the very instant the plotters agree. 16. cannot commit a crime in which a willful purpose or a malicious intent is required. ♣ Officers. • Two or more persons who took part in the commission of the crime are principals by direct participation. PRINCIPALS Art. 3. the are punishable even if they are only in the attempted or frustrated stage of the execution. ♣ Only natural persons can be the active subject of crime because of the highly personal nature of the criminal responsibility. can be executed only against individuals. or by lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at the scene of the crime. c. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. • Mere knowledge without cooperation or agreement to cooperate is not enough to constitute conspiracy. — The following are considered principals: 1. the accused had the same purpose and were united in its execution. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would not have been accomplished. Who are criminally liable. Other penalties consisting in imprisonment and other deprivation of liberty like destierro. since from the legal viewpoint. the social wrong as well as the individual prejudice is so small that penal sanction is deemed not necessary for accessories RULES RELATIVE TO LIGHT FELONIES: a. • When a single individual commits a crime. .ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 79 V. CONSPIRACY • A conspiracy exists when 2 or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. 17. There is substitution of deprivation of liberty (subsidiary imprisonment) for pecuniary penalties in case of in case of insolvency of the accused. to commit the felony and forthwith decide to pursue it. An artificial or juridical person cannot act with malice or negligence. when the following requisites are present: 1. ♣ Juridical persons are criminally liable under certain special laws. even if they are committed against persons or property. between them. ♣ Only a natural person can be the offender because: a. are criminally liable. A. Virtvs. but only a manner of incurring criminal liability. it is necessary to determine the participation of each. b. • In order to hold an accused guilty as coprincipal by reason of conspiracy. b. 2. Only principals and accomplices are liable for light felonies. • It is well settled that a person may be convicted for the criminal act of another where. at the time of the commission of the offense. ♣ The ACCESSORIES are not liable for light felonies because in the commission of light felonies. ♣ In all crimes there are always 2 parties: ACTIVE (the criminal) and PASSIVE (the injured party). 2. there has been conspiracy or unity of purpose and intention in the commission of the crime charged. 3. expressly or impliedly. either by actively participating in the actual commission of the crime. ♣ The treble division of persons criminally responsible for an offense rests upon the very nature of their participation in the commission of the crime. First requisite – Participation in the criminal resolution • Two or more persons are said to have participated in the criminal resolution when they were in conspiracy at the time of the commission of the crime. Principals. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act. PAR. Vnitas. conspiracy exists if. Accomplices. That they carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which directly tended to the same end. like a corporation. c. d. Accessories. • Silence does not make one a conspirator • The existence of conspiracy does not require necessarily an agreement for an appreciable length of time prior to the execution of its purpose. there is no difficulty in determining his participation in the commission thereof. — The following are criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies: 1. Accomplices. Principals. A juridical person. The following are criminally liable for light felonies: 1. Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated. The RPC requires that the culprit should have acted with personal malice or negligence. it must be established that he performed an over act in furtherance of the conspiracy. That they participated in the criminal resolution 2. • When there is no conspiracy. d. Principals 2. • But when 2 or more persons are involved. But when light felonies are committed against persons or property. each of the offenders is liable only for the act performed by him. or by exerting moral ascendancy over the rest of the conspirators as to move them to executing the conspiracy. not the corporation. • Formal agreement or previous acquaintance among several persons not necessary in conspiracy. • The conspiracy contemplated in the first requisite is not a felony. – PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION The principal by direct participation PERSONALLY TAKES PART IN THE EXECUTION OF THE ACT constituting the crime. • Must be established by positive and conclusive evidence. 1. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it.

People v. Nunag (1989) Facts: The victim claimed that while she was standing outside the house of her neighbor peeping through an open window to watch a TV program. Dela Cerna (1967) Facts: Rafael filed an ejectment suit against dela Cerna’s father wherein the court ruled in his favor. ∞ There could be no conspiracy to commit an offense through negligence. who had desisted before the crime was committed by the other. There is collective criminal responsibility. and a. That the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime. Later. facts prove their active participation in the killing. A thoughtless expression without intention to produce the result is not an inducement to commit a crime. ∞ When the second requisite is lacking. Maquiling. or through influence. PAR. shot Casiano. By causing UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR 2) BY DIRECTLY INDUCING ANOTHER TO COMMIT A CRIME. Further Dacillo’s admission that he participated in the commission of the crime by holding Rosemarie’s legs made him a principal by direct participation. The person to LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. He must also participate in the criminal resolution of the other. ∞ Conspiracy may cover persons previously undetermined. By using IRRESISTIBLE FORCE b. one companion of Dela Cerna. Held: Dela Cerna cannot be held liable for the death of Casiano because the conspiracy was to kill Rafael only.” ∞ The principals by direct participation must be at the scene of the crime. the act of one is the act of all. Two or more persons taking part in the commission of a crime are considered principals by direct participation if the following requisites are present: 1. PRINCIPAL BY PROPOSAL TO COMMIT INDUCEMENT THE FELONY There is an inducement to commit a crime. ∞ A person in conspiracy with others. for other acts done outside the contemplation of the coconspirators or which are not the necessary and logical consequence of the intended crime. 2 WAYS OF BECOMING PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION 1) BY DIRECTLY FORCING ANOTHER TO COMMIT A CRIME a. it is not necessary to ascertain the specific act of each conspirator.The words of advice of the influence must have actually moved the hands of the principal by direct participation. They are all principals. The two men stopped only when they were sure that the victim was already dead. The victim lost consciousness and only assumed that the two also raped her. the latter only gave it to the former as per their agreement to shoot Rafael As to the other companions. there is only conspiracy. personally taking part in its execution. By giving price. The inducement may be by acts of command. Dacillo then encase her corpse in a cement. The rule has always been: co-conspirators are liable only for acts done pursuant to the conspiracy. Although Maquiling got the gun from Dela Cerna. Dacillo for his part. ∞ In cases of criminal negligence or crimes punishable by special law. a relative of Rafael. Nunag then undressed her and had sexual intercourse with her. allowing or failing to prevent an act to be performed by another. b. they carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which directly tended to the same end. makes one a coprincipal. they were joined by the other 4 accused. The principal by The mere proposal to inducement becomes liable commit a felony is only when the crime is punishable in treason and committed by the principal rebellion. Mandap and Manalili are found guilty of 3 distinct and separate crimes of rape. People v. REQUISITES: 1. hold down Rosemarie’s legs to prevent her from struggling.” ∞ The principal by induction becomes liable only when the principal by direct participation committed the act induced.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 80 ∞ It is not enough that a person participated in the assault made by another in order to consider him a co-principal in the crime committed. That such inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the material executor. Later he was shot by the accused while the former and his family were bringing sacks of corn. threatening to kill her. Both requisites were met in this case. or agreement for consideration. Held:. is not criminally liable. Virtvs. Nunag came towards her appearing to be drunk. Second requisite – that the culprits “carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution. Vnitas. advice. They being principals by direct participation while the other 2 accused as principals by indispensable cooperation since there is no sufficient evidence that the latter also had sexual intercourse with the victim. Mandap followed and she lost consciousness after. . only the actual perpetrators are liable. a. Dacillo (supra) Facts: Pacot stabbed and strangled Rosemarie leading to the latters death. – PRINCIPALS BY INDUCTION “Those who directly force or induce others to commit it. led her to a nearby ricefield. People v. by acts which directly tended to the same end. Held: Accused Nunag. 2. 2. . b. or offering reward or promise. Nunag. ∞ One serving as guard pursuant to the conspiracy is a principal by direct participation. ∞ The acts of each offender must directly tend to the same end. He was taken away by his family to tend his wounds but Dela Cerna and company followed them and Rafael was shot again resulting to his death. By using words of command. ∞ When there is conspiracy. they participated in the criminal resolution and 2. ∞ When there is conspiracy. She regained consciousness only when Manalili was abusing her.

the crime would not have been conceived. Without Dela Cruz. without which it would not have been accomplished. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. The victim was detained by Indianan until nightfall. there is either anterior conspiracy or unity of criminal purpose and intention immediately v To be liable as principals. some of the offenders in the crime are principals and the others are accomplices. he is nonetheless equally guilty thereof for having prevented the police from resisting the attack against him. He ordered his subordinates to seize Sariol (victim) and bring the latter to Indianan. The domination of Indianan was such as to make him responsible for whatever they did in obedience to such orders. Intending to call a policeman. They proceeded to the accused’s house where the accused informed the group of the whereabouts of the Chinese brothers and other details of the plan. Dela Cruz (1980) Facts: Dela Cruz met with Salip and a couple of other men when he proposed to them the killing of Antonio Yu and the kidnapping of the latter’s brother for a ransom. ♣ When there is no conspiracy between or among the defendants but they were animated by one and the same purpose to accomplish the criminal objective. ACCOMPLICES Art. Accomplices. otherwise. ♣ The participation of an accomplice presupposes the commission of the crime b the principal by direct participation. Held: Indianan had a very powerful influence over his subordinates based on TRADITION AND CUSTOM as well as his representation that he had an order from the governor. A chase ensued. Principal by induction. The penalty to be imposed must be the same for all. . The 2 acted in concert. — Accomplices are those persons who. ♣ In quasi-collective criminal responsibility. Even if the accused did not himself commit the act of stabbing. PAR. ♣ An accomplice does not have a previous agreement or understanding or is not in conspiracy with the principal by direct participation. the offender must fall under any of the three concepts defined in Article 17. except that who directly forced another to commit a crime. v Principals by direct participation have collective criminal responsibility. Capalad suddenly pulled out his knife and started stabbing the police at the back. The police approached the table and held Montealgre and Capalad. the proponent becomes a principal by inducement. 17. not being included in Art. REQUISITES: Participation in the criminal resolution. his power over them was such that any order issued by him had the force and efficacy of physical coercion. Indianan bolstered his command by claiming that he had an order from the governor that Sariol be executed. he went outside and saw a police and reported the matter. The police also died because of the wounds inflicted by Capalad. The inducement involves any crime whom the proposal is made should not commit the crime. – PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION “Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would not have been accomplished.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 81 by direct participation. B. CONSPIRATOR ACCOMPLICE They know and agree with the criminal design. and Cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act. The 3 grappled and the police was able to draw his gun and fired at the 2 assailants. then Indianan ordered his subordinates to take Sariol to an isolated place and kill him. A group of men sailed for Basilan where they met with Salip.” 1. 2. The proposal to be punishable must involve only treason or rebellion. Hence. 3. and principal by direct participation have collective criminal responsibility. much less committed. Indianan (1913) Facts: Indianan was the HEADMAN of the district of Parang. conspiracy does not exist. The accused was a principal by indispensable cooperation. Held: The contention of the accused that since he did not take part in the commission of the crime. Held: The accused was correctly considered a co-principal for having collaborated with Capalad in the killing of the police officer. he was the principal by induction. that is. The police released the 2 in order to draw his gun but Montealegre restrained the police so that Capalad may continue stabbing. 18. Montealegre (1988) Facts: Abadilla was eating at a restaurant when he detected the smell of marijuana smoke coming from a nearby table. v There is collective criminal responsibility when the offenders are criminally liable in the same manner and to the same extent. People v. The group was able to kidnap and detain the brother for a short while before he attempted to escape and was shot by one of the men. those who cooperated by previous or simultaneous act but cannot be held liable as principals are accomplices. The requisites necessary in order that a person may be convicted as principal by inducement are present. People v. US v. before the commission of the crime charged. He is a principal by inducement. Vnitas. 2) One cannot be held guilty of having instigated the commission of a crime without first being shown that the crime has been actually committed by another. EFFECTS OF ACQUITTAL OF PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION UPON THE LIABILITY OF PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT 1) Conspiracy is negated by the acquittal of codefendant. Capalad was shot which resulted to his death. is untenable. Indianan’s subordinates took Sariol to a cemetery and killed him. cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts. Principal by indispensable cooperation has collective criminal responsibility with the principal by direct participation. Clearly. Virtvs.

the 2 are accomplices. threw bottles at Caballes. by his acts showed knowledge of the criminal design of Mandolado. Roche and Gregorio barged into the compound. provided he has no direct participation in its execution or does not force or induce others to commit it. ♣ The wounds inflicted by an accomplice in crimes against persons should mot have caused the death of the victim. their 2 other companion. Jon-Jon. Caballes caught up with him. they are merely accomplices. 3. In other words. pulled him away on time. Their presence gave Ludovico encouragement in the commission of the crime. ♣ The moral aid may be through advice. he concurs with the latter in his purpose. the principal. When the cooperation is by simultaneous act. ♣ The accomplice merely supplies the principal with material or moral aid without conspiracy with the latter. immediately jumped off the jeep and ran away but Ortillano stayed. Thus. The accomplice. and leave his victim behind. Helen. Simon and Erinada. It is sufficient if there was a common purpose to commit a particular crime and that the crime actually committed was a natural or probable consequence of the intended crime. There is no evidence ♣ The community of design need not be to commit the crime actually committed. Held: Roche can not be held liable as an accomplice for the crime charged. indispensable in the commission of the act. People v. with the intention of supplying material or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious way. RULES: 1. The accomplice in crimes against persons does not inflict the more or most serious wounds. ♣ When the acts of the accused are not indispensable in the killing. PRINCIPAL by COOPERATION Cooperation ACCOMPLICE is Cooperation is not LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Gregorio tried to hit Rodel with an empty beer bottle but failed because his common-law wife. Virtvs. or to increase the odds against the victims. indispensable in the commission of the act. The one who had the original criminal design is the person who committed the resulting crime. encouragement or agreement. When Mandolado cocked his gun and ordered Tenorio to stop the jeep. It is impossible to claim that Virgilio and Conrado did not know what their brother was doing. Roderick was already dead. 3. Once can be an accomplice even if he did not know of the actual crime intended b the principal provided he was aware that it was an illicit act. hacked and stabbed Marcelo which caused his death. cooperates by previous or simultaneous acts. Roderick however was stabbed on the back with an ice pick by Roche. Conspirators decide that a crime should be committed. 2. And Ortillano’s act of firing his gun towards the ground manifested his concurrence with the criminal intent. But at the time. His presence served to encourage Mandolado. He was present when the latter tried to attack the driver of the Ford Fiera with a knife and fired at the vehicle hitting a female passenger. Roche (2000) Facts: Roderick and Rodel Ferol were having drinks with a friend named Bobot inside the Ferol compound.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 82 Conspirators know the criminal intention because they themselves have decided upon such course of action. Ortillano fired his armalite while they were riding in the jeep of the victim. 1. A brother of the victim. Accomplices merely assent to the plan and cooperate in it accomplishment Accomplices are merely instruments who perform acts not essential to the perpetration of the offense. The same accused while already on the road. People v. Conspirators are the authors of a crime Accomplices come to know about it after the principals have reached the decision and only then do they agree to cooperate in its execution. Conrado and Virgilio (all surnamed Doctolero) threw stones at Sagun’s house and called to all the men in the house to come out. Mandolado (supra) Held: An accomplice cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts. They knew and they just stood by and did nothing to stop their brother. Ortillano. . forcing the latter to run away. Roderick ran towards the house of his friend Bobot but outside the compound. Without any warning. Doctolero (1991) Facts: The 3 accused. Epifiana and Lolita died while Jonathan was slightly injured. knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct participation. Roderick fell to the ground and was repeatedly stabbed with a knife by Caballes. the accomplice takes part while the crime is being committed by the principal by direct participation or immediately thereafter. Vnitas. ♣ There must be a relation between the criminal act of the principal and the act of the one charged as accomplice. Epifiana and Lolita and Jonathan (1 ½ year old child of Lolita) were struck and stabled by the accused inside the house of Sagun. That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts. 2. and That there be a relation between the acts done by the principal and those attributed to the person charged as accomplice. they heard the 2 women protesting and Ludovico went inside and brutally killed the 2 women inside the room of the said house. Roderick was then taken to his house by Rogelio and Jon-Jon. or his cooperation is not indispensable to its accomplishment. REQUISITES: That there be community of design. that is. People v. Held: There is no question that while the 3 accused were still stoning at the house. his simultaneous acts supplied moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious way. after concurring in the criminal purpose of the principal. In a display of unity with Mandolado. In the case at bar. Ludovico. One Rossel tried to stop Caballes but he was chased by the latter. ♣ The cooperation of an accomplice is not due to a conspiracy.

or assisting in the escape of the principals of the crime. provided he acts with abuse of his public functions or the principal is guilty of treason. Joselito died on the spot. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime. Held: Lariba and Rogel. saw their gangmate Odilon stabbing the victim and decided to join the fray. were merely guarding the house for the purpose of either helping the other accused-appellants in facilitating the successful denouement to the crime or repelling any attempt to rescue the victim. However. C. It has not been proven that he was aware of Caballes’ plan to attack and kill Roderick. b) by concealing the body. Ronnie got a piece of broken bottle and struck Joselito once more. Julian. in order to prevent its discovery. concealing. or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive. Virtvs. he is a principal by direct participation. Edmar punched Julian in the face. or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime. Not content. effects or instruments of the crime in order to prevent its discovery. Tioleco was detained. provided the accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason. (b) the performance of previous or simultaneous acts that are not indispensable to the commission of the crime. 3. where one cooperates in the commission of the crime by performing overt acts which by themselves are acts of execution. Held: To hold a person liable as an accomplice.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 83 to show that he performed any previous or simultaneous act to assist Caballes in killing Roderick. 2. or is known to be habitually guilt of some other crime. — Accessories are those who. an altercation between Edmar and Julian ensued. Accessories. He placed his left arm around Joselito's neck. knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct participation. they are mere accomplices. take part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manners: 1. Ronnie picked up a piece of hollow block and with it bashed Joselito's head. the court cannot uphold the trial court’s finding of guilt. and without having participated therein. ♣ Entertaining suspicion that a crime has been committed is not enough. the appellant is nevertheless criminally liable as a principal by direct participation. Odilon and the appellant fled. By harboring. they merely assent to the plan of the principal by direct participation and cooperate in its accomplishment. They thus cooperated in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts by means of which they aided or facilitated the execution of the crime but without any indispensable act for its accomplishment. They pulled out their knives. In the course of their drinking. Accomplices do not decide whether the crime should be committed. Tioleco for the purpose of extorting ransom. . SPECIFIC ACTS OF THE ACCESSORIES 1. “without having participated therein either as principals or accomplices” “take part subsequent to its commission” ♣ The accessory takes part AFTER the crime has been committed. who were across the street. Absent any evidence to create the moral certainty required to convict Roche. he concurs with the latter in his purpose. BY PROFITING THEMSELVES OR ASSISTING THE OFFENDER TO PROFIT BY THE EFFECTS OF THE CRIME LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. He pulled out his knife with his right hand and stepped down from his perch. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime. ♣ Knowledge of the commission of the crime may be established by circumstantial evidence “commission of the crime” ♣ the crime committed by the principal must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. People v. Garcia (2002) Facts: Valler and Garcia kidnapped Atty. Pilola (2003) Facs: Joselito. For his part. but. or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive. parricide. People v. murder. Edmar and Odilon were having a drinking spree. all of them are criminally liable for the latter's death. The victim fell in the canal. 19. “knowledge of the commission of the crime” ♣ Mere possession of stolen property does not make the accused an accessory where the thief was already convicted. murder. Both were unarmed although guns inside the house are available for their possession. The stab wounds inflicted by him cooperated in bringing about and accelerated the death of the victim or contributed materially thereto. Even assuming that the appellant did not conspire with Ronnie and Odilon to kill the victim. ACCESSORIES Art. as shown by the availability of arms and ammunition to them. The appellant is not merely an accomplice but is a principal by direct participation. 18 of The Revised Penal Code. Accomplices come to know about the criminal resolution of the principal by direct participation after the principal has reached the decision to commit the felony and only then does the accomplice agree to cooperate in its execution. An accessory does not participate in the criminal design. either as principals or accomplices. Joselito tried to placate the protagonists but his intervention apparently did not sit well with Odilon. Lariba and Rogel were caught by police officers inside the house where a handcuffed and blinfolded Atty. Vnitas. Edmar and Odilon then left the store. rushed to the scene and stabbed Joselito. Before running away from the scene. Odilon positioned himself on top of a pile of hollow blocks and watched as Edmar and Julian swapped punches. he subsequently takes part in 3 ways: a) by profiting from the effects of the crime. Ronnie and the appellant Pilola. that is. and not merely an accomplice All things considered. Under Art. Joselito and Julian were also about to leave when Edmar and Odilon returned. The two then traded fist blows. parricide. it was ruled that Ronnie and the appellant conspired with Odilon to kill the victim. hence. having knowledge of the commission of the crime. and c) by assisting in the escape or concealment of the principal of the crime. and stabbed the latter. or the effects or instruments thereof. two elements must concur: (a) the community of criminal design. with knowledge of the commission of the crime. nor cooperate in the commission of the felony. blocking their way.

BY HARBORING. If the fence is a partnership.000 pesos but not exceeding 12. (4) The crime committed by the principal is any crime. secure the necessary clearance or permit from the station commander of the Integrated National Police in the town or city where such store. acquire. item. and not the act of accessory? When a person knowingly acquired or received property taken by the brigands. (2) He harbors.000 pesos but not exceeding 22. article item. (b) The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods. (3) The crime committed by the principal is either: (a) treason. if the value of the property involved is over 50 pesos but not exceeding 200 pesos. Section 5. he is not an accessory but a principal in the crime of theft. the president or the manager or any officer thereof who knows or should have known the commission of the offense shall be liable.When is profiting by the effect of the crime punished as the act of principal. conceals. or in any other manner deal in any article. WHEREAS. Virtvs. do hereby order and decree as part of the law of the land the following: Section 1. I. sell or dispose of. He should not take it without the consent of the principal.The accessory must receive the property from the principal. keep.000 pesos. corporation or association. establishment or entity is located. (e) The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period if such value is over five (5) pesos but not exceeding 50 pesos. WHEREAS. BODY OF THE CRIME –“corpus delicti” which means that a specific offense was in fact committed by someone 3. of stolen properties. adding one year for each additional 10. or (e) that the principal is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.000 pesos. shall buy. to have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft. conceal or assist in the escape of the author of the crime – guilty of treason. establishments or entities dealing in the buy and sell of any good. receive. Penalties. or an attempt against the life of the President. 2.000 pesos. all stores. For purposes of this Act. . PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. (d) The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional in its minimum period. REQUISITES: (1) The accessory is a private person. Clearance/Permit to Sell/Used Second Hand Articles. The Chief of Constabulary/Director General. object or anything of value which he knows. reports from law enforcement agencies reveal that there is rampant robbery and thievery of government and private properties. BY CONCEALING OR DESTROYING THE BODY OF THE CRIME TO PREVENT ITS DISCOVERY. possess. firm. Section 6. if the value of the property involved is more than 200 pesos but not exceeding 6. CONCEALING ASSISTING IN THE ESCAPE OF PRINCIPAL OF THE CRIME OR THE 2 CLASSES: a. me by the Constitution. if the value of such property exceeds the latter sum. Public officers who harbor conceal or assist in the escape of the principal of any crime (not light felony) with abuse of his public functions REQUISITES: (1) The accessory is a public officer. b. Any person guilty of fencing shall be punished as hereunder indicated: (a) The penalty of prision mayor. (2) He harbors. NOW. Private persons who harbor. (3) The public officer acts with abuse of his public functions. parricide. a fence can be prosecuted only as an accessory after the fact and punished lightly. Section 2. murder. In such cases. (d) attempt against the life of the president. (c) murder. 1612 ANTI-FENCING LAW OF 1979 WHEREAS. firm. the penalty shall be termed reclusion temporal and the accessory penalty pertaining thereto provided in the Revised Penal Code shall also be imposed. Mere possession of any good. article. FERDINAND E. (b) parricide. provided it is not a light felony. or who is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.000 pesos. or shall buy and sell. Definition of Terms. association corporation or partnership or other organization who/which commits the act of fencing. object of anything of value obtained from an unlicensed dealer or supplier thereof. Integrated National Police shall promulgate such rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of this section. Section 3. . is imperative to impose heavy penalties on persons who profit by the effects of the crimes of robbery and theft. but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years. The following terms shall mean as follows: (a) "Fencing" is the act of any person who. Liability of Officials of Juridical Persons. such robbery and thievery have become profitable on the part of the lawless elements because of the existence of ready buyers. WHEREAS. Presumption of Fencing. (c) The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods. President of the Philippines by virtue of the powers vested in LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. commonly known as fence. or assists in the escape of the principal. THEREFORE. item. (f) The penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period if such value does not exceed 5 pesos. This decree shall be known as the Anti-Fencing Law. conceals or assists in the escape of the author of the crime. the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its maximum period. (b) "Fence" includes any person. if the value of the property involved is more than 12. object. or should be known to him. MARCOS. shall before offering the same for sale to the public. Any person who fails to secure the clearance or permit required by this section or who violates any of the provisions of the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder shall upon conviction be punished as a fence.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 84 . under existing law. Title. Vnitas. or else. with intent to gain for himself or for another. if the value of the property robbed or stolen is more than 6. conceal. or anything of value which has been the subject of robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of fencing. Section 4.

Later when the police came. when Bernardo came inside the kitchen. Michelle subsequently died as a result. She. or profit by the effects of is an accessory to the offense. 3. especially if unarmed. is wanting in the present case. Verily. Wilfedo then instructed appellant Jonathan Fabros and Merwin Ledesma to help him bring Hernan out of the house. she inquired from the child if she was able to recognize the assailants and when the latter identified the 4 accused as the culprits. Wilfredo held him by the neck while both appellant and Merwin grasped his feet. to desist from assisting the victim if to do so would put the former's life in peril. Ruth and Ruby were both convicted of murder by the trial court. with the single exception of accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article. sister or relative by affinity within the same degree. Thereafter. Effectivity. Mariano (2000) Facts: Ruth and their maid Michelle often engaged in a physical fight. he adequately explained his conduct prior to the stabbing incident as one born of fear for his own life. descendants. The fight usually ends with Ruth pouring boiling water on Michelle.even if only two of the principals guilty of murder are the brothers of the accessory and the others are not related to him. natural and adopted brothers and sisters. which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Decree are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. or relatives by affinity within the same degrees. descendants. if such effects of the crime. legitimate. this 2nd day of March. That. Teresa threatened to kill her if she would reveal the incident. precisely. the commission of the crime. PENALTIES People v. Held: Appellant Jonathan Fabros cannot be convicted as an accessory. Virtvs. Talingdan and Tobias fired at Bernardo and the 4 climbed the stairs of the Batalan. This Decree shall take effect upon approval. During their fights which number to at least 6 times a month. thus. which compels one to conceal crimes committed by relatives so near as those mentioned in the above-quoted article. and adopted brothers and sisters. Vnitas.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 85 Section 7. ascendants. Appellant was afraid that his co-accused would hurt him if he refused so he agreed to assist the latter in carrying the victim towards the river. Wilfredo then stab Sagario on the different parts of his body causing his death.—The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses. Repealing Clause. . Teresa came out after from her room and pulled her child to question her.a nephew or niece is not included ♣ An accessory is NOT liability even if the principal is accessory (1) PROFITED by the (2) assisted the offender to the crime EXEMPT from criminal related to him. Ruth placed the body of Michelle in a box which she then loaded inside the luggage compartment of her sister Ruby’s car. she claimed she had no suspects in mind. All laws or parts thereof. or relatives by affinity within the same degrees. As such. 20 of the Revised Penal Code —ARTICLE 20. ACCESSORY DISTINGUISHED FROM PRINCIPAL AND FROM ACCOMPLICE 1. the concealment or the destruction of the body of the crime or of the effects or the instruments thereof must have been done in order to prevent the discovery of the crime. ♣ An ACESSORY is exempt from criminal liability. The fact that appellant left thereafter likewise indicated his innocence of the charge. Wilfredo pushed and waded Sagario on the water. Under paragraph 2 of Article 19 of the Revised Penal Code. spouse. natural or adopted brother. or induce. Held: One who conceals or assists in the escape of the principal in the crime can be held guilty as accessory. The accessory does not cooperate in the commission of the offense by acts either prior thereto or simultaneous therewith. natural. Their child testified that on the day the killing occurred. Bernardo knew that Teresa had an illicit relationship with Talingdan. 2. became active in her cooperation with the 4 accused. 3. She was inside the room when her husband was shot. Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability. 4. 2. It is not incredible for an eyewitness to a crime. he ran away towards a banana plantation. Done in the City of Manila. They then carried Hernan towards a creek. nineteen hundred and seventy-nine. their relationship exempts Ruby from criminal liability under Art. Talingdan (1978) Facts: Bernardo and Teresa lived together but for quite some time their relationship has gotten bitter. legitimate. As she came out after the shooting. That the participation of the accessory in all cases always takes place after the commission of the crime. Ruby Mariano is acquitted. in the year of Our Lord. legitimate. Held: Ruby is the sister of Ruth. Appellant assisted Wilfredo out of fear and when he noticed that Sagario regained conciousness. People v. Teresa did not only enjoin her daughter not to reveal what she knew to anyone but she went to the extent of warning her not to tell anyone or else she would kill her. — The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses. ascendants. . ♣ The exemption is based on the ties of blood and the preservation of the cleanliness of one’s name. Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability. People v. there were 4 men inside their house and Bernardo knew about it but continued plowing his field. Ruth would bang Michelle’s head and pull on her hair. Section 8. such accessory is exempt from criminal liability. ascendant. when the principal is his: 1. 20. with the single exception of accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the preceding article (emphasis supplied). . Later. Tolentino (2002) Facts: Wilfredo Tolentino hit Herman Sagario with a piece of wood and later stabbed him with a bolo. The accessory does not take direct part or cooperate in. Seeing that the victim was alive they fired at him again. Art. descendant. which compels one to conceal crimes committed by relatives. The reason for exemption is obvious. V. There is morally convincing proof that Teresa LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. it is based on ties of blood and the preservation of the cleanliness of one's name.

a vindication of absolute right and moral law violated by the criminal. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITIONS 1987 CONSTITUTION Section 18. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted. c. ∗ REASON: An act or omission cannot be punished by the State if at the time it was committed there was no law prohibiting it. The constitutional inhibition refers only to criminal laws which are given retroactive effect. Section 22. because a law cannot be rationally obeyed unless it is first shown. a penalty has been prescribed. In Re: Kay Villegas Kami (1970) Facts: Petition for declaratory relief challenging the validity of Sec. e. changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when committed. Bracamonte (1996) LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. ∗ It has no application to any of the provisions of the RPC for the reason that for every felony defined in the Code. Must be COMMENSURATE with the offense – different crimes must be punished with different penalties. A. the penalty is imposed only for acts committed after the approval of the law and not those perpetrated prior thereto. This requirement follows from the nature of a bill of attainder as a legislative adjudication of guilt. Must be CORRECTIONAL. CORRECTION OR REFORMATION – as shown by the rules which regulate the execution of the penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty. Must be EQUAL for all. Must be PERSONAL – no one should be punished for the crime of another. ∗ The purpose of the State in punishing crimes is TO SECURE JUSTICE. 18 penalizes a violation of any provision of RA 6132 including Sec. Must be CERTAIN – no one may escape its effects. aggravates a crime. 3. Must be LEGAL – it is the consequence of a judgment according to law. deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which he has become entitled. 5. nor cruel. and punishes such an act. d. and a man cannot be expected to obey an order that has not been given. c. Different Juridical Conditions of Penalty: 1. Virtvs. The Act simply declares the Communist Party to be an organized conspiracy for the overthrow of the government. ∗ This article prohibits the Government from punishing any person for any felony with any penalty which has not been prescribed by the law. makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was innocent when done. . or makes it greater than it was when committed. Purpose of penalty under the RPC: a. 21. Must be PRODUCTIVE OF SUFFERING. 7.” Held: A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without a trial. — No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission. RETRIBUTION OR EXPIATION – the penalty is commensurate with the gravity of the offense. It is necessary that it must apply retroactively and reach past conduct. 8 thereof. 5.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 86 Penalty is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for the transgression of a law. Theories justifying penalty: a. in effect imposes penalty or deprivation of a right for something which when done was lawful. without however affecting the integrity of the human personality. Penalties that may be imposed. People v. unless. degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. the Congress hereafter provides for it. EXEMPLARITY – to serve as an example to deter others from committing crimes. alters the legal rules of evidence. Vnitas. Held: An ex post facto law is one which: 1. Its focus is not on the individuals but on the conduct. REFORMATION – to correct and reform the offender. assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only. GENERAL PRINCIPLES NO ex post facto laws Art. PREVENTION – to suppress danger to the State b. 4. JUSTICE – for retributive justice. right of association. b. 8 of RA 6132 on the ground that it violates due process. and authorizes conviction upon less or different testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense. People v. SOCIAL DEFENSE – shown by its inflexible severity to recidivist and habitual delinquents. for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes. 2. 4. such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal. Penal justice must therefore be exercised by the State in the service and satisfaction of a duty and rests primarily on the moral rightfulness of the punishment inflicted. While it is true that Sec. or a proclamation of amnesty. 3. Section 19. (2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. Section 20. and 6. (1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax. It is not enough that the statute specify persons or groups in order that it may be called a bill of attainder. Neither shall death penalty be imposed. SELF-DEFENSE – to protect the society from the threat and wrong inflicted by the criminal. 2. 6. freedom of expression and that it is an ex post facto law. Ferrer (1972) WON the Anti-subversion Act is a bill of attainder? The trial court ruled that the Act is a bill of attainder because it “tars and feathers” the communist party as a “continuing menace to the freedom and security of the country. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed.

Reason for the exception: The sovereign. Art. — No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission. EXCEPTION RPC.but a new law increasing the civil liability cannot be given retroactive effect. A subsequent statute cannot be so applied retroactively as to impair a right that accrued under the old law. GENERAL RULE: TO GIVE CRIMINAL LAWS PROSPECTIVE EFFECT Exception: to give them retroactive effect when favorable to the accused. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. the law in force at the time of the commission of the offense shall be applied. Art. c. in enacting a subsequent penal law more favorable to the accused. 23.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 87 Facts: Violeta and her common law husband. a. dead. 14. Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the Philippine territory. PROSPECTIVITY. it may be given retroactive effect. Inside the house. Insofar as RA 8294 will spare the accused from a separate conviction for the crime of illegal possession. Patalin (1999) Facts: The accused were convicted of Robbery with Physical Injuries and Robbery with Multiple Rape and were sentenced to imprisonment and death penalty respectively for the two convictions. they saw their son in the kitchen his head and body immersed in a pail of water. The sovereign would be inconsistent if it would still enforce its right under conditions of the former law. c. or b. theft. if the new law imposes a heavier penalty. has recognized that the greater severity of the former law is unjust. Thereafter. which has already been regarded by conscientious public opinion as juridical burdensome. Virtvs. The subsequent reimposition of the death penalty will not affect them. if it is favorable to the offender. — Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony. arrived home and 3 men rushing out of the house. Valdez (1999) Facts: Accused was convicted by the RTC and sentenced him to death for the complex crime of Multiple Murder with Double Frustrated Murder. People v. Held: There is no question that the abolition of the death penalty benefits herein accused. he is not entitled to the benefit of the provisions of the new favorable statute. If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the new law. 11 of RA 7659 partake of the nature of qualifying circumstances that must be pleaded in the indictment in order to warrant the imposition of the penalty (Garcia doctrine reiterated in Medina). who is not a habitual criminal. robbery. Sentence has been passed but service has not begun.But the penalty prescribed by law enacted after the commission of the felony may be imposed. Retroactive effect of penal laws. ∗ When the culprit is HABITUAL DELINQUENT. although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same. ∗ Criminal liability under the former law is obliterated when the repeal is absolute. The sentence is being carried out. estafa or falsification. Held: By operation of law. Sentence modified. 1993 for a crime committed back on Sep. The framers of the Constitution themselves state that the law to be passed by Congress reimposing the death penalty (RA 7659) can only have prospective application. ∗ The provisions of this article are applicable even to special laws which provide more favorable conditions to the accused. and likewise separately sentenced him to suffer the prison term of reclusion perpetua for the crime of Illegal Possession of Firearms (PD 1866) Held: There can be no separate conviction of the crime of illegal possession under PD 1866 in view of the amendments introduced by RA 8294 wherein illegal possession being merely taken as an aggravating circumstance to other crimes committed.Felonies are punishable under the laws in force at the time of their commission. When there is a SAVING CLAUSE ∗ What penalty may be imposed for the commission of a felony? . The crime has been committed and prosecution begins. ∗ A person shall be deemed to be a HABITUAL DELINQUENT if within a period of 10 years from the date of his release of last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries. the new law shall be applied. Held: To impose upon the accused the death penalty reimposed by RA 7659 which took effect on Dec. 31. 21. When the provisions of the former law are REENACTED. Art. he is found guilt of an said crimes a third time or oftener. ∗ Criminal liability under the repealed law subsists: a. . . ∗ The principle against retroactivity does not apply to civil liability. ∗ The favorable retroactive effect of a new law may find the defendant in one of these 3 situations: a. When the repeal is by IMPLICATION. DIFFERENT EFFECTS OF REPEAL OF PENAL LAW. 1987 would violate the basic rule in criminal law that. CIVIL CODE. Vnitas. . the appellant is rightfully entitled to the beneficial application of the Garcia or Medina doctrine. except when the offender is a habitual delinquent or when the new law is made not applicable to pending action or existing causes of action. 22. Clark Din. People v. Penalties that may be imposed. Gallo (1999) Facts: The accused seeks a modification of his death sentence to reclusion perpetua in line with the new Court rulings which annunciate that the 7 attendant circumstances introduced in Sec. subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations. b. People v.Only the penalty prescribed by law prior tot the commission of the felony may be imposed. as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code. they found their maid hands tied with her mouth gagged and bathed in her own blood. .

because they formed in the 2 general classes. a When the repealing law fails to penalize the offense under the old law. Destierro. • Penalties that are either principal or accessory. People v. B. Light penalties: Arresto menor. Correctional penalties: Prision correccional. Perpetual absolute or special disqualification d. PRINCIPAL PENALTIES – the court in the judgment of ACCESSORY PENALTIES included in the imposition of those expressly imposed by conviction. Correctional 4. and their different classes. Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of the offense. Reclusion temporal. thus. the accused cannot be convicted under the new law. are those included in the following: Scale PRINCIPAL PENALTIES Capital punishment: Death. Pecuniary (fine) According to their gravity 1. If the new law totally repeals the existing law so that the act which was penalized under the old law is no longer punishable. the crime is obliterated. Afflictive 3. Penalties common to the three preceding classes: Fine.6 years and 1 day to 12 years except when disqualification is accessory penalty. arresto) 3. a A person erroneously accused and convicted under a repealed statute may be punished under the repealing statute. Corporal (death) 2. Death b. PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE IMPOSED Art. the right to vote and be voted for. Prision correccional.those which have no fixed duration. Suspension. Pimentel (supra) Held: Where the repeal of a penal law is total and absolute and the act which was penalized by a prior law ceases to be criminal under the new law. – those that are deemed the principal penalties. suspension and destierro . Penalties which may be imposed. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification. Deprivation of rights (disqualification and suspension) 5. the previous offense is obliterated. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. If the new law imposes a heavier penalty. Reclusion temporal – 12 years and 1 day to 20 years 3. prision. Prision mayor and temporary disqualification .6 months and 1 day to 6 years except when suspension is an accessory penalty. Divisible . perpetual or temporary special disqualification. Indivisible . Payment of costs. and Bond to keep the peace. Public censure. since subversion is no longer a crime. a A new law which omits anything contained in the old law dealing on the same subject. Virtvs. Deprivation of freedom (reclusion. ACCESSORY PENALTIES Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. the offender can be tried under the old law. Suspension from public office. a When the repeal is absolute the offense ceases to be criminal. in which case its duration is that of the principal penalty. the charge of illegal possession of firearm and ammunition qualified by subversion should be amended to simple illegal possession of firearm and ammunition. the law in force at the time of the commission of the offense shall be applied. Public censure According to subject-matter 1. Civil interdiction. operates as are penal of anything not so included in the amendatory act. 25. a When the new law and the old law penalize the same offense. Afflictive penalties: Reclusion perpetua. Light NOTE: Public censure is a penalty. With the enactment of RA 7636.those that have fixed duration and are divisible into three periods. and suspension may be principal or accessory penalties. However. Vnitas. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. Indemnification. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification. Reclusion perpetua c. Prision mayor. the Court in acquitting the accused may criticize his acts or conduct.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 88 b. Restriction of freedom (destierro) 4. a. c. — The penalties which may be imposed according to this Code. it is not proper in acquittal. 2. DURATION OF EACH OF DIFFERENT PENALTIES 1. Capital 2. the profession or calling. Reclusion perpetua – 20 years and 1 day to 40 years 2. Arresto mayor. . Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. Other classifications of penalties: According to their divisibility: 1. in which case its duration is that of the principal penalty 4.

3. With cruelty. liberty and property. Article 267 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. to death if committed with any of the following attendant circumstances: 1. AMENDING FOR THAT PURPOSE THE REVISED PENAL LAWS. he shall suffer the penalty for the offense which was not prosecuted. or with the use of any other means involving great waste and ruin. 114. Treason. or descendants. female or a public officer. except when the accused is any of the parents. taking advantage of superior strength. 122. or by means of motor vehicles. 7659 AN ACT TO IMPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY ON CERTAIN HEINOUS CRIMES." Section 6. not being a member of its complement nor a passenger. or outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.Any Filipino citizen who levies war against the Philippines or adheres to her enemies giving them aid or comfort within the Philippines or elsewhere. he shall suffer the penalty of death. shall attack or seize a vessel or." Art. and if said crime be committed for the same purpose by the maternal grandparents or either of them. physical injuries or rape. 4. OTHER SPECIAL PENAL LAWS. In consideration of a price.1 month and 1 day to 6 months 6. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor. under any of the following circumstances: 1. or employing means to weaken the defense or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity. derailment or assault upon a railroad. 267. shall seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel. Likewise. homicide. The penalty of death for parricide under Article 246 of the same Code is hereby restored.The penalty provided for parricide in Article 246 and for murder in Article 248 shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill any child less than three days of age. Declaration of Policy. . fire. or any of his ascendants. . Chapter One. 2. or child. or if threats to kill him shall have been made. C. If any crime penalized in this Article be committed by the mother of the child for the purpose of concealing her dishonor. 2. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph. Title One of Book Two of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section Three. . is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. or in Philippine waters." Section 5. on the high seas.Piracy and mutiny on the high seas or in the Philippine waters Art. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than three days. shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed 100. Infanticide. If any serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained.000 pesos. the protection of life. Arresto Mayor . 211-A. but also to adopt such measures as would effectively promote the maintenance of peace and order. so that it shall read as follows: "Art. 123. By means of inundation. fall of an airship. residing in the Philippines. Qualified Bribery. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters. or his spouse." Section 3." Section 7. Article 114 of the Revised Penal Code. stranding of a vessel. 4. Virtvs. 248." Section 4. reward or promise. 3. If it is the public officer who asks or demands such gift or present.Any person who. Parricide. the penalty shall be reclusion temporal. There shall be incorporated after Article 211 of the same Code a new article to read as follows: "Art. poison. 3. or in any other manner deprive him of his liberty.If any public officer is entrusted with law enforcement and he refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death in consideration of any offer. If it shall have been committed simulating public authority. an alien. as amended. Article 248 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. . The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters. . shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua. Section Three. gift or present. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves or. With treachery. . 2. 6. . promise. explosion. epidemic or other public calamity. SPECIFIC PRINCIPAL AND ACCESSORY PENALTIES CAPITAL PUNISHMENT REPUBLIC ACT NO. Qualified piracy. The penalty shall be death penalty where the kidnapping or detention was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom from the victim or any other person. . who commits acts of treason as defined in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished by reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed 100.The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be inflicted upon any person who. or of an earthquake. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention. with the aid of armed men. With evident premeditation. Vnitas. 246." No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses at least to the same overt act or on confession of the accused in open court. she shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed upon those who commit any of the crimes referred to in the preceding article.Any person who shall kill his father. Arresto Menor – 1 day to 30 days. AS AMENDED. shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death: 1. mother. 255. Murder. shall be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. Section 2. eruption of a volcano. shipwreck. ." Section 8. by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim. Any private individual who shall kidnap or detain another. 5. whether legitimate of illegitimate. . and the promotion of the general welfare which are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy in a just and humane society. Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or firing upon the same. Article 255 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. even LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. its equipment or passengers.It is hereby declared the policy of the State to foster and ensure not only obedience to its authority.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 89 5. not falling within the provisions of Article 246 shall kill another. destructive cyclone. AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Section 1.000 pesos. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder.

" Section 11. the degree of participation and the attendance of mitigating and LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. transient dwellings. storehouse. when committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency.Any person guilty of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any person shall suffer: 1. Article 335 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. the crime of homicide shall have been committed. Any building of public or private ownership. or when in the course of its execution. meetings and conferences. factory. public conveyances or stops or terminals. 320. Any train or locomotive.Any public officer who. the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent. amasses. Definition of the Crime of Plunder. Any building.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed upon any person who shall burn: 1. shipyard.00) shall be guilty of the crime of plunder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death. storehouse or military powder or fireworks factory. if the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery shall have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime. any of the physical injuries penalized in subdivision I of Article 263 shall have been inflicted. By using force or intimidation. business associates. When and how rape is committed. when or if by reason or on occasion of such robbery. If as a consequence of the commission of any of the acts penalized under this Article. step-parent. archives or general museum of the Government. Irrespective of the application of the above enumerated qualifying circumstances. the penalty shall be death. entertainment or leisure. when by reason or on occasion of the robbery. . 2. 5. workshop. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its medium period. 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. When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention or is raped. when the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities. subordinates or other persons. In an inhabited place. 7080 (An Act Defining and Penalizing the Crime of Plunder) is hereby amended to read as follows: "Sec. and 3. Any person who participated with the said public officer in the commission of an offense contributing to the crime of plunder shall likewise be punished for such offense. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape. Article 320 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. by himself or in connivance with members of his family. Penalties. or is subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 90 if none of the circumstances above-mentioned were present in the commission of the offense. any of the children or other relatives within the third degree of consanguinity." Section 10. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious.000. the maximum penalty shall be imposed. death results. . Any building the burning of which is for the purpose of concealing or destroying evidence of another violation of law. 4. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons . When by reason or on the occasion of the rape. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period in other cases. 7. the victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation. or for the purpose of concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or to collect from insurance. commerce. regardless of whether the offender had knowledge that there are persons in said building or edifice at the time it is set on fire and regardless also of whether the building is actually inhabited or not. motels. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. warehouse installation and any appurtenances thereto. The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances: 1. 3. consequent to one single act of burning. Destructive Arson. the penalty shall be death.Penalties. or as a result of simultaneous burnings. When the rape is attempted or frustrated and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof. shall have been inflicted. 3. ordnance. ascendant. when by reason or on the occasion of the rape. ship or vessel. The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua. the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall likewise be imposed when the arson is perpetrated or committed by two (2) or more persons or by a group of persons. airship or airplane. relatives by affinity or consanguinity. committed on several or different occasions. or when the robbery shall have been accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson. which are devoted to the service of public utilities. any of the physical injuries penalized in subdivision 2 of the article mentioned in the next preceding paragraph. parent. Vnitas. In the imposition of penalties. official governmental function or business. Section 2 of Republic Act No. 2. . 5. Article 294 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. Whenever the crime of rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons. 5. or merely incidental to a definite purpose such as but not limited to hotels. Any arsenal. 335. 2. accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt criminal acts as described in Section 1 (d) hereof in the aggregate amount or total value of at least Fifty million pesos (P50. . the mandatory penalty of death shall be imposed. 4. the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. when the rape is committed in full view of the husband. a homicide is committed. private transaction. 2. 3. One (1) or more buildings or edifices. when the victim is a religious or a child below seven (7) years old. Virtvs. when the offender knows that he is afflicted with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) disease. devoted to transportation or conveyance. but not limited to. devoted to the public in general or where people usually gather or congregate for a definite purpose such as." Section 9. any storehouse or factory of inflammable or explosive materials. 4.000. 2. the victim has become insane. 2. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall also be imposed upon any person who shall burn: 1. The penalty of reclusion temporal. the offender shall have inflicted upon any person not responsible for its commission any of the physical injuries covered by subdivisions 3 and 4 of said Article 263. guardian. trade. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua. 294." Section 12. When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented. Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: 1. relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree. or the common-law-spouse of the parent of the victim. or for public use. when by reason or on occasion of the robbery. 6.

The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who. 7. the maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed on the maintainer notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary. 4. known as the Dangerous Drugs Act 1972. the maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed in every case where a regulated drug is administered. delivered or sold to a minor who is allowed to use the same in such place. administer. Delivery. . 6425. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary. shall sell. Importation of Regulated Drugs. Maintenance of a Den. "Sec. Confiscation and Forfeiture of the Proceeds or Instruments of the Crime. delivered or sold to a minor who is allowed to use the same in such place. 8 and 9 of Article II and Sections 14." Section 14. and 15 of Article III of Republic Act No. . . known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972. is amended to read as follows: "Sec. the maximum of the penalty shall be imposed in every case where a prohibited drug is administered. 8. distribute. or shall act as a broker in any of such transactions. Application of Penalties. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person or group of persons who shall maintain a den.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who. Should a regulated drug be the proximate cause of the death of a person using the same in such den. deliver. "Sec. give away to another. dive or resort where any prohibited drug is used in any form or where such prohibited drugs in quantities specified in Section 20. shall import or bring any regulated drug in the Philippines. or where such regulated drugs in quantities specified in Section 20. dispatch in transit or transport any prohibited drug. 14-A. unless authorized by law. Section 16 of Article III of Republic Act No. "Sec. 7. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall possess or use any regulated drug without the corresponding license or prescription. unless authorized by law. Manufacture of Prohibited Drug. 8 and 9. Distribution and Transportation of Prohibited Drugs. Maintenance of a den. Possession or Use of Prohibited Drugs. the maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed on the maintainer notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary. or should a regulated drug involved in any offense under this Section be the proximate cause of the death of a victim thereof. . . shall be considered by the court.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person or group of persons who shall maintain a den. The land or portions hereof. 4. the maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who. unless the owner thereof can prove that he did not know such cultivation or culture despite the exercise of due diligence on his part. "Sec. as amended. 14-A. . Administration. 15. 6425. opium poppy (papaver somniferum). 20. 15 and 16 of Article III LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. 9. 6425. if the victim of the offense is a minor. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary. Paragraph 1 of this Act are found. of Article II of Republic Act No. paragraph 1 of this Act are found. shall sell." Section 15.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 91 extenuating circumstances. cultivate or culture any medium Indian hemp. 4. 6425. unless authorized by law. The penalties for offenses under Section 3. unless authorized by law. ." Section 17. Sections 3. as amended. shall possess or use any prohibited drug subject to the provisions of Section 20 hereof. as amended. Delivery. The court shall declare any and all ill-gotten wealth and their interests and other incomes and assets including the properties and shares of stocks derived from the deposit or investment thereof forfeited in favor of the State. unless authorized by law. subject to the provisions of Section 20 hereof. Article IV of Republic Act No. deliver. are hereby amended to read as follows: "Sec. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who. "Sec. transport or distribute any regulated drug. known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972." Section 16.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall plant. . . Virtvs. Sale. dive or resort. as amended. is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. unless authorized by law. unless authorized by law. Dispensation. shall engage in the manufacture of any prohibited drug. 5. known as the Dangerous Drug Act of 1972. dive or resort. 3. Cultivation of Plants which are Sources of Prohibited Drugs. are hereby amended to read as follows: "Sec. shall engage in the manufacture of any regulated drug. known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972." Section 13. the maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed. Possession or Use of Regulated Drugs. Importation of Prohibited Drugs. 16. 7. Should a prohibited drug be the proximate cause of the death of a person using the same in such den. If the land involved in is part of the public domain.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who. Administration.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who. Transportation and Distribution of Regulated Drugs. Vnitas. as provided by the Revised Penal Code. 14-A. 14. or should a prohibited drug involved in any offense under this Section be the proximate cause of the death of a victim thereof. dive or resort for regulated drug users. 15-a. Dive or Resort for Prohibited Drug Users. Sections 14. dispense. 5. "Sec. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary. 6425. dive or resort where any regulated drugs is used in any form. . as amended. There shall be incorporated after Section 15 of Article III of Republic Act No. Sale. and/or greenhouses on which any of said plants is cultivated or cultured shall be confiscated and escheated to the State. the maximum of the penalties herein provided shall be imposed upon the offender. shall import or bring into the Philippines any prohibited drug. Manufacture of Regulated Drugs.The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who. "Sec. or any other plant which is or may hereafter be classified as dangerous drug or from which any dangerous drug may be manufactured or derived. if the victim of the offense is a minor. a new section to read as follows: "Sec. Section 20.

known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972. when the carnapping is committed by means of violence against or intimidation of any person. except when the guilty person is below eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the crime or is more than seventy years of age or when upon appeal or automatic review of the case by the Supreme Court. Section 24 of Republic Act No. 40 grams or more of morphine. Article 62 of the same Code. after public consultations/hearings conducted for the purpose. and destierro. 40 grams or more of cocaine or cocaine hydrochloride. Vnitas. Penalties for Government Official and Employees and Officers and Members of Police Agencies and the Armed Forces. within twenty (20) days but not earlier than fifteen (15) days after promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of any motion for new trial or reconsideration. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Sec. Otherwise. There shall be incorporated after Section 20 of Republic Act No. 750 grams or more of indian hemp or marijuana. irrespective of the value of motor vehicle taken. a new section to read as follows: "Sec. In the case of other dangerous drugs. Reclusion perpetua. when the carnapping is committed without violence or intimidation of persons. 6425." Section 23. except when the penalty of disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty. 7. 9. 14. In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by the trial court. as amended. 5(1). . 6. . 4(1). in which case.The bond to keep the peace shall be required to cover such period of time as the court may determine." Section 22. delivery. 47. sale. In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed. 11. Dangerous drugs and plant sources of such drugs as well as the proceeds or instruments of the crime so confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government shall be turned over to the Board for proper disposal without delay. including members of police agencies and the armed forces. and the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed when the owner. is hereby amended to read as follows : "Sec.The duration of the penalty of arresto menor shall be from one day to thirty days. known as the Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972. . . is hereby amended to read as follows : LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Prision mayor and temporary disqualification." Section 20. The duration of the penalties of prision correccional. . 7. 16 and 19 of Article III shall be imposed. Arresto menor. and by imprisonment for not less than seventeen years and four months and not more than thirty years. The duration of the penalties of prision mayor and temporary disqualification shall be from six years and one day to twelve years. 14 of Republic Act No. 4. or 8. employee or officer who is found guilty of "planting" any dangerous drugs punished in Sections 3. 20-A. The transcript shall also be forwarded within ten (10) days from the filing thereof by the stenographic reporter. 12 and 13 of Article II and Sections 14. Plea-bargaining Provisions. Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code.The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be from twenty years and one day to forty years. 8. as amended. as this term is defined in Section Two of this Act. . . unless they are the property of a third person not liable for the offense. 40 grams or more of heroin. 200 grams or more of shabu or methylamphetamine hydrochloride. except when the suspension is imposed as an accessory penalty.The maximum penalties provided for Section 3. 6539." Section 19. employees or officers. 14-A. 2. or force upon things. Automatic review of the Death Penalty Cases. shall suffer the same penalty as therein provided. administration. or force upon things.Any person who is found guilty of carnapping. in favor of the Government. 'Planting' of Evidence. but those which are not of lawful commerce shall be ordered destroyed without delay. Any such above government official. known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972. suspension.Any person charged under any provision of this Act where the imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua to death shall not be allowed to avail of the provision on plea bargaining. 40 grams or more of opium. Article 47 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Art. Penalty for Carnapping. in which cases the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua. suspension. 3." Section 21. . driver or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed or raped in the course of the commission of the carnapping or on the occasion thereof. Arresto mayor. if the quantity involved is less than the foregoing quantities. . the required majority vote is not obtained for the imposition of the death penalty. 5. transportation or manufacture of dangerous drugs. 50 grams or more of marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil. Any apprehending or arresting officer who misappropriates or misapplies or fails to account for seized or confiscated dangerous drugs or plant-sources of dangerous drugs or proceeds or instruments of the crime as are herein defined shall after conviction be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. the records shall be forwarded to the Supreme Court for automatic review and judgment by the Court en banc. as amended. 8. be punished by imprisonment for not less than fourteen years and eight months and not more than seventeen years and four months. its duration shall be that of the principal penalty. if those found guilty of any of the said offenses are government officials. 6425. Bond to keep the peace. Every penalty imposed for the unlawful importation. the quantity of which is far beyond therapeutic requirements. 7." Section 18. as amended. 9 and 13 of Article II and Sections 14. 4. Reclusion temporal. 14-A. 27. Prision correccional. as determined and promulgated by the Dangerous Drugs Board. 15 and 16 of Article III of this Act in the person or in the immediate vicinity of another as evidence to implicate the latter.The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be imposed under existing laws. shall.The duration of the penalty of arresto mayor shall be from one month and one day to six months. and destierro shall be from six months and one day to six years.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 92 of this Act shall be applied if the dangerous drugs involved is in any of the following quantities : 1. 15(1). of all the proceeds of the crime including but not limited to money and other obtained thereby and the instruments or tools with which it was committed. Virtvs. as amended. the penalty shall range from prision correccional to reclusion perpetua depending upon the quantity. 24. the cultivation of plants which are sources of dangerous drugs and the possession of any opium pipe and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs shall carry with it the confiscation and forfeiture. . in which case.The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be from twelve years and one day to twenty years. Sec. 6. it shall be that of the principal penalty.

When and how the death penalty is to be executed. if 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. advantage was taken by the offender of his public position. 1(a). The death sentence shall be executed under the authority of the Director of the Bureau of Corrections. Vnitas. the penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances. the total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender. . in conformity herewith. Section 25. If. 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. The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was committed by any group who belongs to an organized/syndicated crime group. shall in no case exceed 30 years. 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. 7659 is hereby further amended to read as follows: "Art. 81. after thorough examination. 83." Section 26. robo. "The Director of the Bureau of Corrections shall take steps to ensure that the lethal injection to be administered is sufficient to cause the instantaneous death of the convict. accomplices and accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant. Article 81 of the Revised Penal Code. Effects of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency. or from any other personal cause. The death sentence shall be executed under the authority of the Director of Prisons. 62. a person shall be deemed to be a habitual delinquent. 4. "Pursuant to this. The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act. Approved: December 13. he shall be anaesthetized at the moment of the execution.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 93 "Art. Virtvs. The death sentence shall be carried out not later than one (1) year after the judgment has become final. — The death sentence shall be executed with preference to any other penalty and shall consist in putting the person under the sentence to death by lethal injection.The death sentence shall not be inflicted upon a woman while she is pregnant or within one (1) year after delivery. the death sentence shall be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties provided in Article 40. 2. . executive issuances. and (c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction. In this last case. or from his private relations with the offended party. the method of carrying out the sentence shall be changed to gas poisoning. The publication shall not be later than seven (7) days after the approval hereof. hurto. 7659. 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. as amended. or in the means employed to accomplish it. For purposes of this article. AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLE 81 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender. 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. endeavoring so far as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the person under the sentence during electrocution as well as during the proceedings prior to the execution. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstances inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof. he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. If the person under sentence so desires. When in the commission of the crime. 3. Article 81 of the same Code. decrees presidential laws. . Notwithstanding the provisions of this article. Article 83 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in two (2) national newspapers of general circulation. An organized/syndicated crime group means a group of two or more persons collaborating. for any reason or reasons.The death sentence shall be executed with preference to any other and shall consist in putting the person under sentence to death by electrocution. Section 28. estafa or falsification. 1993 REPUBLIC ACT NO. other parts or provisions hereof which are not affected thereby shall continue to be in full force and effect. 8177 AN ACT DESIGNATING DEATH BY LETHAL INJECTION AS THE METHOD OF CARRYING OUT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. (b) Upon a fourth conviction. nor upon any person over seventy years of age. shall officially make LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. 81. "The authorized physician of the Bureau of Corrections. any part of the provision of this Act shall be held to be unconstitutional or invalid. all personnel involved in the administration of lethal injection shall be trained prior to the performance of such task. endeavoring so far as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the person under the sentence during the lethal injection as well as during the proceedings prior to the execution. is hereby amended to read as follows : "Art. the records of the case shall be forwarded immediately by the Supreme Court to the Office of the President for possible exercise of the pardoning power. confederating or mutually helping one another for purposes of gain in the commission of any crime. < modified or repealed hereby are Act this of provisions the with inconsistent thereof parts regulations and rules orders. Section 24. shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals. 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. As soon as facilities are provided by the Bureau of Prisons. AS AMENDED BY SECTION 24 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. When and how the death penalty is to be executed. 5. In all cases where the death sentence has become final. SECTION 1. Suspension of the execution of the death sentence. as amended by Section 24 of Republic Act No.> Section 27. 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.

Sec. The convict shall be provided with a bunk. — The Secretary of Justice in coordination with the Secretary of Health and the Bureau of Corrections shall. "Director" refers to the Director of the Bureau of Corrections. A judge who requires the appearance or attendance of a death convict in any judicial proceeding shall conduct such proceeding within the premises of the penal institution where the convict is confined. said outside movement. Mess utensils shall be made of plastic. religion. politics. Guidance and Counseling. SECTION 16. Meal Services. SECTION 2. Religious. after investigation. SECTION 15. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. AS AMENDED BY SECTION 24 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. language. SECTION 10. — All laws. — Meals shall. Sec. Confinement. the death convict shall be confined in an individual cell in a building that is exclusively assigned for the use of death convicts. the death convict shall be spared from unnecessary anxiety or distress. birth or other status. "Secretary" refers to the Secretary of the Department of Justice. After each meal. and e. Sec. be served individually to a death convict inside his cell. Handling of Inmate Mail. The religious beliefs of the death convict shall be respected. within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of this Act. SECTION 11. SECTION 14. SECTION 8. executive orders." Sec. unless the context otherwise requires — a.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 94 a pronouncement of the convict's death and shall certify thereto in the records of the Bureau of Corrections. — Television. c. who are waiting to undergo the death penalty by electrocution or gas poisoning shall be under the coverage of the provisions of this Act upon its effectivity. SECTION 9. radio and other interviews by media of a death convict shall not be allowed. presidential decrees and issuances. SECTION 4. Publication shall not be later than ten (10) days after the approval thereof. upon the request of the convict. wife or husband and children. Their sentences shall be automatically modified for this purpose. Repealing Clause. a death convict may be visited by the priest or minister of his faith and given such available religious materials which he may require. nationality. Principles. SECTION 12. 1996 b. AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLE 81 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE. Mail shall be censored in accordance with existing prison rules. — Whenever practicable. color. uncles. — A death convict shall be allowed to be visited by his immediate family and reputable friends at regular intervals and during designated hours subject to security procedures. and the execution shall not take place until RULES AND REGULATIONS TO IMPLEMENT REPUBLIC ACT NO. In the execution of a death penalty. step parents. rules and regulations or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. — A list of persons who may visit a death convict shall be compiled and maintained by the prison authorities. 2. Prison Services. b. Religious Services. social origin. List of Visitors. Objectives. property. Persons already sentenced by judgment. — The court shall designate a working day for the execution of the death penalty but not the hour thereof. include his grandparents. whichever comes earlier. c. "Death Convict" or "Convict" shall refer to a prisoner whose death penalty imposed by a Regional Trial Court is affirmed by the Supreme Court en banc. Medical and Dental. a pillow or blanket and mosquito net. — These Rules seek to ensure the orderly and humane execution of the death penalty by lethal injection. How Lethal Injection is to be Administered. "Bureau" refers to the Bureau of Corrections. said utensils shall be collected and accounted. brothers and sisters. There shall be no discrimination in the treatment of a death convict on account of race. — Subject to the availability of resources. 4. foster parents. Visitation. SECTION 5. in coordination with the Secretary of Health and the Director of Corrections. 8177 entitled "AN ACT DESIGNATING DEATH BY LETHAL INJECTION AS THE METHOD OF CARRYING OUT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. b. potassium chloride and such other lethal substances as may be specified by the Director of Corrections that will be administered intravenously into the body of a convict until said convict is pronounced dead. Exercise. SECTION 7. 8177 Pursuant to Section 3 of Republic Act No. hereby issues the following Rules to govern the implementation of said Act: SECTION 1. which has become final and executory. a steel/wooden bed or mat. SECTION 3. 5. — Subject to security conditions. — A death convict shall be allowed to enjoy regular exercise periods under the supervision of a guard. Notification and Execution of the Sentence and Assistance to the Convict. "Lethal Injection" refers to sodium thiopenthotal. — The sending and receiving of mail by a death convict shall be controlled to prevent illicit communication. — As used in these Rules. Approved: March 20. . aunts. Vnitas. be included in the list if it will assist in raising the morale of the convict. d. in-laws and cousins. — A death convict shall not be brought outside the penal institution where he is confined for appearance or attendance in any court except when the Supreme Court authorizes. The death sentence shall be carried out not earlier than one (1) year nor later than eighteen (18) months after the judgment has become final and executory without prejudice to the exercise by the President of his executive clemency powers at all times. The list may include the members of the convict's immediate family such as his parents. — The following principles shall be observed in the implementation of these Rules: a. Interviews of Convicts. c. Implementing Rules. Effectivity. d. SECTION 13. pancuronium bromide. The list may. the undersigned. Such designation shall only be communicated to the convict after sunrise of the day of the execution. Other visitors may. Virtvs. Mail. Definition of Terms. promulgate the rules to implement its provisions. a death convict shall enjoy the following services and privileges to encourage and enhance his self-respect and dignity: a. whenever practicable. — A death convict may be allowed to leave his place of confinement only for diagnosis of a life-threatening situation or treatment of a serious ailment. if the diagnosis cannot be done or the treatment provided in the prison hospital. SECTION 6. e. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation. 3. Court Appearance. Visitation. upon proper application. Exercise. Outside Movement. 7659". — The execution of the death sentence by lethal injection shall be done under the authority of the Director who shall endeavor to mitigate the sufferings of the convict prior to and during the execution.

during and after administering the lethal injection shall be set forth in a manual to be prepared by the Director. ∗ The 1987 Constitution suspended the imposition of the death penalty but RA 7659 restored it. the convict shall. — These Rules shall take effect fifteen (15) days after publication in a newspaper of general circulation. — Execution by lethal injection shall not be inflicted upon a woman within the three years next following the date of the sentence or while she is pregnant. the Supreme Court shall render its decision per curiam. — The execution by lethal injection shall take place in the prison establishment and space thereat as may be designated by the Director. of the administration of his property. the Congress hereafter provides for it. All unused drugs shall be inventoried and disposed of properly under the direct supervision of the Director. sound or other recording of the actual execution by media or by any private person or group. 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. SECTION 21. the vote of 8 members is not obtained for the imposition of the death penalty. — Any person who makes unnecessary noise or displays rude or improper behavior during an execution shall be expelled from the lethal injection chamber. In no case shall the burial of a death convict be held with pomp. b. the sequence of events before and after the execution. SECTION 17. Expulsion of Witness. In this latter case. SECTION 18. nor cruel. Neither shall death penalty be imposed. — The execution of a death convict shall be witnessed only by the priest or minister assisting the offender and by his lawyers. The employment of physical. the corpse of a death convict shall. When upon appeal or automatic review of the case by the SC. be turned over to an institution of learning or scientific research first applying for it. not exceeding six. c. SECTION 25. except in the following cases: 1. Otherwise. granting permission to be present thereat to the members of the family of the convict and the friends of the latter. and by such persons as the Director may authorize. — Details of the procedure prior to. Vnitas. SECTION 26. the administration of the lethal drugs. Quantity and Safekeeping of Drugs Purchased. as far as possible. Persons Who May Witness Execution. SECTION 22. — The injection of the lethal drugs to a death convict shall be made by a person designated by the Director. unless. RPC. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. When the guilty person be more than seventy years of age. unjust or cruel within the meaning of that word in the Constitution. SECTION 19. Virtvs. Execution Procedure. provided that such institution shall take charge of the decent burial of the remains. and the removal of the intravenous system. — The Director shall not allow the visual. During the interval between the notification and execution. Its accessory penalties. be furnished such assistance as he may request in order to be attended in his last moments by a priest or minister of the religion he professes and to consult his lawyers. Suspension of the Execution of the Death Sentence. Section 19. — The death penalty. degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. the pronouncement of death. Identity of Person Administering Lethal Injection. — The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be imposed under existing laws. ∗ The death penalty is not excessive. Death. 1997 1987 CONSTITUTION. SECTION 24. the death sentence shall be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties provided in Article 40 of the Revised Penal Code. A person below eighteen (18) years of age shall not be allowed to witness an execution. procedures in setting up the intravenous line. Said manual shall be confidential and its distribution shall be limited to authorized prison personnel. SECTION 27. the Director shall order the burial of the body of the convict at government expense. psychological. but before sunset. in which even the unanimous vote and signature of only the remaining justices shall be required.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 95 after the expiration of at least eight (8) hours following the notification. Effectivity. Art. When the guilty person is below 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime. APPROVED. In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed. Administering Lethal Drugs. 1. by the physician and the necessary personnel of the penal establishment. Excessive fines shall not be imposed. ∗ Death penalty is not imposed in the following cases: a. and by his relatives. Said place shall be closed to public view. for the purpose of study and investigation. unless such accessory penalties have been expressly remitted in the pardon. or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. SECTION 23. Non-Recording of Execution. Disposition of Corpse of Convict. 2. 47. RPC. among others. all the members thereof are not unanimous in their voting as to the propriety of the imposition of the death penalty. or of the care of his descendants. 2. For the imposition of said penalty or for the confirmation of a judgment of the inferior court imposing the death sentence. for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes. which shall be signed by all justices of said court. Adopted: April 28. — Unless claimed by his family. When the guilty person is more than 70 years of age. SECTION 20. The drugs shall be kept securely at the office of the superintendent of the prison where the death sentence is to be executed. as well as in order to make a will and confer with members of his family or of persons in charge of the management of his business. unless some member or members thereof shall have been disqualified from taking part in the consideration of the case. — The exact quantities of the drugs needed for an execution of a death penalty shall be purchased by the Director pursuant to existing rules and regulations not earlier than ten (10) days before the scheduled date of execution. if the convict so desires. 40. nor upon any person over seventy (70) years of age. upon the completion of the legal proceedings subsequent to the execution. Place of Execution. The manual shall contain details of. . When upon appeal or revision of the case by the Supreme court. ∗ Majority vote of the SC is required for the imposition of the death penalty. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. — The identity of the person who is designated to administer the lethal injection shall be kept secret.

the accused claimed that the penalty imposed by the court is erroneous under RA 7659 because he is neither LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. In no case shall the burial of the body of a person sentenced to death be held with pomp. 83 provides for suspension only of the execution of death sentence. granting permission to be present thereat to the members of the family of the culprit and the friends of the latter. The death sentence shall be executed under the authority of the Director of Prisons. Art. Convict who becomes insane after sentence of death has been pronounced. d. not exceeding six. ∗ RA 296 providing that eight justices must concur in the imposition of death penalty is retroactive. offender’s relatives. Echegaray (1996) Facts: Echegaray was sentenced to death penalty for raping his 10-year–old daughter. upon the completion of the legal proceedings subsequent to the execution. without prejudice to the exercise by the President of his executive clemency powers. Destructive arson 11. in so far as possible. physician. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention 9. 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. Robbery with homicide 10. nor upon any person over seventy years of age. and the execution shall not take place until after the expiration of at least eight hours following the notification. but before sunset. ∗ Review by the SC of the death sentence is absolutely necessary. Vnitas. c. — The court shall designate a working day for the execution but not the hour thereof. Murder 7. final ∗ Art. for the purpose of study and investigation. Treason 2. ∗ The records of the case shall be forwarded to the Office of the President. 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. Suspension of the execution of the death sentence. not exceeding six. and by his relatives. while pregnant. b. People v. by the physician and the necessary personnel of the penal establishment. On the other hand. . sentence shall be suspended when the accused Woman. and e. On appeal. ∗ Death sentence shall be executed with preference to any other penalty. 82. Art. b. Piracy 3. be turned over to the institute of learning or scientific research first applying for it. Art. — Unless claimed by his family. of the administration of his property. Carnapping RPC. Art. priests assisting the offender. . — The death sentence shall be executed with reference to any other and shall consist in putting the person under sentence to death by electrocution. when the death sentence has become final. In this last case. Qualified Piracy 4. if he so request. 83. provided that such institute shall take charge of the decent burial of the remains. he shall be anaesthetized at the moment of the electrocution. Plunder 13. offender’s lawyers. Certain violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act 14. Provisions relative to the corpse of the person executed and its burial. ∗ The death sentence shall be carried out not earlier than 1 year nor later than 18 months after the judgment becomes final and executory. ∗ RTC can suspend execution of death sentence. d. 81. 84. During the interval between the notification and the execution.The purpose of the law is to prevent anyone from making a hero out of a criminal. Notification and execution of the sentence and assistance to the culprit. and such designation shall not be communicated to the offender before sunrise of said day. for possible exercise of the pardoning power. the Director of Prisons shall order the burial of the body of the culprit at government expense. Rape with homicide 12. Virtvs. If the person under sentence so desires. the death sentence shall be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties provided in Article 40.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 96 Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or lingering death. ∗ Death sentence is executed by lethal injection. PERSONS WHO MAY WITNESS EXECUTION: a. Parricide 6. ∗ A convict sentenced to death may make a will. 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. and by such persons as the Director of Prisons may authorize. Place of execution and persons who may witness the same. Otherwise. — 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. ∗ In what crimes is death penalty imposed: 1. Person over 70 years of age. or of the care of his descendants. RPC. Art. Qualified bribery 5. Woman. When and how the death penalty is to be executed. Art. 85. the culprit shall. Infanticide 8. — 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. ∗ The execution shall take place in the penitentiary or Bilibid in a space closed to the public view. c. necessary personnel of penal establishment ∗ a person below 18 years of age may not be allowed to witness an execution. if so requested. ∗ The burial of the body of a person sentenced to death should not be held with pomp. the corpse of the culprit shall. 47 provides for cases in which death penalty is not to be imposed. ∗ Death is a: a. within one year after delivery.

The power to control the execution of its decision is an essential aspect of jurisdiction – supervening events may change the circumstance of the parties and compel the courts to intervene and adjust the rights of the litigants to prevent unfairness. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal. Secretary of Justice (1999) Facts: Upon conviction of Echegaray in People v. Rep. shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. Echegaray v. Act No. if already imposed.” Also. — The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be from twelve years and one day to twenty years. Held: Where the accused is a confirmed lover of the victim’s mother. The problem in an event is addressed not to this Court but to the Congress. Congress has reversed itself. — The duration of the penalties of prision mayor and temporary disqualification shall be from six years and one day to twelve years. Bon (2006) Held: Yet in truth. Article III. It merely states that the death penalty shall not be imposed unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes the Congress hereafter provides for it and. 9346 is not swaddled in the same restraints appreciated by Muñoz on Section 19(1). The SC did not restrain the effectivity of the law enacted by the Congress. 9346 unequivocally bars the application of the death penalty. Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. — Any person sentenced to any of the perpetual penalties shall be pardoned after undergoing the penalty for thirty years. Act No. People v. Since Article 71 denominates “death” as an element in the graduated scale of penalties. except when the penalty of disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty. Reclusion perpetua. only 4 were identified and convicted. AFFLICTIVE PENALTIES Art. except only in so far as it prohibits the imposition of the death penalty and reduces it to reclusion perpetua. unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. Abolition of the Death Penalty Republic Act No. The respondents claim that SC has no more jurisdiction over the case because judgment has become final and it cannot restrain the execution of its decision. 248 of the RPC. 27. the minimum and the medium. Virtvs. 7650.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 97 a father. The very Congress empowered by the Constitution to reinstate the imposition of the death penalty once thought it best to do so. in which case its duration shall be that of the principal penalty. through Rep. the issue that confronts the Court is whether or not it will proceed to automatically review her death sentence. Any court decision authorizing the State to take life must be as error-free as possible. The court cannot find basis to conclude that Rep. Vnitas. 11 of RA 7659 under the term “common-law spouse of the parent of the victim. — 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. It is not only within the power of the SC but also it is its duty to review all death penalty cases. Art. Munoz cannot enjoin us to adopt such conclusion. a reading of the Constitution will readily show that there is really nothing therein which expressly declares the abolition of death penalty. 8 of Rule 124 of the Rules of Court which authorizes the dismissal of an appeal when the appellant jumps bail has no application to cases where the death penalty has been imposed. such effect necessarily extends to its relevance to the graduated scale of penalties under Article 71. . Esparas (1996) Facts: Esparas was charged with violation of RA 6425 as amended by RA 759 for importing into the country 20kg of shabu. as well as expressly repeals all such statutory provisions requiring the application of the death penalty. However. 9346 People v. to wit. the SC temporarily restrained the execution of its own decision. Reclusion temporal. the date can be postponed. stepfather nor grandfather of Rodessa although he was a confirmed lover of the Rodessa’s mother. As the accused remains at large up to the present time. Act No. Held: The rule on finality of judgment cannot divest the SC of its jurisdiction to execute and enforce the same judgment. Held: The advocates of the Masangkay ruling argue that the Constitution abolished the death penalty and thereby limited the penalty for murder to the remaining periods.” for both terms embody the operation in law of the death penalty. there is no question that the operation of Article 71 involves the actual application of the death penalty as a means of determining the extent which a person’s liberty is to be deprived. 9346 intended to retain the operative effects of the death penalty in the graduation of the other penalties in our penal laws. Held: The reimposition of the death penalty revived the procedure by which the Supreme Court reviews death penalty cases pursuant to the Rules of Court – it remains automatic and continues to be mandatory and does not depend on the whims of the death convict and leaves the SC without any option. Within the same realm of constitutional discretion. Their accessory penalties. The Constitution does not change the periods of the penalty prescribed by Art. Since Rep. Munoz (1989) Facts: Of the 11 persons who were charged with murder. the fact that the victim referred to the accused as “Papa” is reason enough to conclude that the accused is either the farther or stepfather of the victim. and that of perpetual absolute disqualification which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the principal penalty. Sec. The range of the medium and minimum penalties remains unchanged. Echegaray. It merely restrained the execution of its judgment to give reasonable time to check its fairness in light of supervening events in Congress. People v. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. It must be asserted that today. Act No. Notwithstanding the order of execution and the executory nature thereof on the date set. the legal status of the suppression of the death penalty in the Philippines has never been more secure than at any time in our political history as a nation. They were held guilty for killing 3 persons. he falls squarely within Sec. unless such person by reason of his conduct or some other serious cause shall be considered by the Chief Executive as unworthy of pardon. 41. there is no material difference between “imposition” and “application.

Subsidiary penalty. 27 (4). 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. at a time when the imposition of the death penalty was prohibited. — The penalty of prision mayor. People v. The Court held that in spite of the amendment putting the duration of RP. 39. Its accessory penalties. unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. . They sat side by side a bench outside the store while exchanging pleasantries and drinking. Arresto mayor. in reality. — The duration of the penalty of arresto mayor shall be from one month and one day to six months. in which case. unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. the penalty of reclusion perpetua is now accorded a defined duration ranging from 20 years and 1 day to 40 years. it goes deeper than that. it should remain as an indivisible penalty since there was never an intent on the part of Congress to reclassify it into a divisible penalty. — The duration of the penalties of prision correccional. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the principal penalty. 27. suspension. Revised Penal Code)." Held: The SC disagrees with the trial court in sentencing appellant "to suffer imprisonment of forty (40) years reclusion perpetua. The significance of this fundamental principle was laid down by the Court in People v. its duration shall be that of the principal penalty. suspension and destierro shall be from six months and one day to six years. Ramirez (2001) Facts: Bañez invited Jojo to a drinking spree in a nearby store. The trial court sentenced the accused to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for 35 years of reclusion perpetua there being no aggravating or mitigating circumstance shown to have attended in the commission of the crime. — If the convict has no property with which to meet the fine mentioned in the paragraph 3 of the nest preceding article. he shall be considered by the Chief Executive as unworthy of pardon (Art. RECLUSION PERPETUA Duration: 20 years and 1 day to 40 years Accessory Penalties: a. 16. b. Civil interdiction for life or during the period of the sentence as the case may be. Perpetual Special Disqualification from the right to suffrage which the offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the principal penalty unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. Ballabare (1996) Held: The trial court erred in imposing the penalty of life imprisonment for violation of PD 1866." LIFE IMPRISONMENT Imposed for serious offenses penalized by special laws Does not carry with it accessory penalties Does not appear to have any definite extent or duration RECLUSION PERPETUA Prescribed under the RPC Carries with it accessory penalties Entails imprisonment for at least 30 years after which the convict becomes eligible for pardon although the maximum period shall in no case exceed 40 years RECLUSION TEMPORAL Duration: 12 years and 1 day to 20 years Accessory Penalties: a. and destierro. unless by reason of his conduct or some other serious cause. subject to the following rules: Reclusion Perpetua as indivisible penalty People v. 42. Ramirez suddenly came in front of them." There was no justification or need for the trial court to specify the length of imprisonment. it has no minimum. except when suspension is imposed as an accessory penalty. medium or maximum periods. Revised Penal Code) Reclusion Perpetua is imprisonment for life but the person sentenced to suffer it shall be pardoned after undergoing the penalty for thirty (30) years. Ramirez ordered beer then he calmly approached and stabbed Jojo which caused the latters death. "Since reclusion perpetua is an indivisible penalty. Prision correccional. an indivisible penalty. unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. (Art. The crime of illegal possession of firearm in its aggravated form is punished by the penalty of death. The maximum duration of reclusion perpetua is not and has never been 30 years which is merely the number of ears which the convict must serve in order to be eligible for pardon or for the application of the 3-fold rule. While life imprisonment may appear to be the English translation of reclusion perpetua. 63. Vnitas. Civil interdiction for life or during the period of the sentence as the case may be. the penalty next lower in degree which is reclusion perpetua should be imposed. Prision mayor. Gatward (1997) Facts: The accused was convicted of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act for unlawfully importing into the Philippines heroin. Virtvs. Since the offense was committed on Sep. b. This is not equivalent to life imprisonment. People v. Temporary Absolute Disqualification b. CORRECCIONAL PENALTIES Art.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 98 Art. It is imposed in its entirety regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances that may have attended the commission of the crime. Diquit. because reclusion perpetua is LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the principal penalty. Art. The trial court sentenced appellant "to suffer imprisonment of 40 years reclusion perpetua. he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of one day for each eight pesos. 1990. Held: As amended by RA 7659. PRISION MAYOR Duration: 6 years and 1 day to 12 years Accessory Penalties: a.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

99

1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or arresto and fine, he shall remain under confinement until his fine referred to in the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue for more than one year, and no fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the prisoner. 2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the culprit shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony. 3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit. 4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of fixed duration, the convict, during the period of time established in the preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations as those of which the principal penalty consists. 5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve. (As amended by RA 5465, April 21, 1969). Art. 43. Prision correccional; Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of prision correccional shall carry with it that of suspension from public office, from the right to follow a profession or calling, and that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage, if the duration of said imprisonment shall exceed eighteen months. The offender shall suffer the disqualification provided in the article although pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. Art. 44. Arresto; Its accessory penalties. — 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. PRISION CORRECCIONAL Duration: 6 months and 1 day to 6 years Accessory Penalties: a. Suspension from public office b. Suspension from the right to follow a profession or calling c. Perpetual Special Disqualification fro the right of suffrage, if the duration of the imprisonment shall exceed 18 months ARRESTO MAYOR Duration: 1 month and 1 day to 6 months Accessory Penalties: a. Suspension of right to hold office b. Suspension of the right of suffrage during the term of the sentence. LIGHT PENALTIES Art. 27 (6). Arresto menor. — The duration of the penalty of arresto menor shall be from one day to thirty days.

Art. 39. Subsidiary penalty. — If the convict has no property with which to meet the fine mentioned in the paragraph 3 of the nest preceding article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of one day for each eight pesos, subject to the following rules: 1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or arresto and fine, he shall remain under confinement until his fine referred to in the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue for more than one year, and no fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the prisoner. 2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the culprit shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony. 3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit. 4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of fixed duration, the convict, during the period of time established in the preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations as those of which the principal penalty consists. 5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve. (As amended by RA 5465, April 21, 1969). Art. 44. Arresto; Its accessory penalties. — 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. ARRESTO MENOR Duration: 1 day to 30 days Accessory Penalties: a. Suspension of right to hold office b. Suspension of the right of suffrage during the term of the sentence. PUBLIC CENSURE ∗ Censure, being a penalty is not proper in acquittal. PENALTIES COMMON TO AFFLICTIVE, CORRECCIONAL AND LIGHT PENALTIES FINE Art. 26. When afflictive, correctional, or light penalty. — A fine, whether imposed as a single of as an alternative penalty, shall be considered an afflictive penalty, if it exceeds 6,000 pesos; a correctional penalty, if it does not exceed 6,000 pesos but is not less than 200 pesos; and a light penalty if it less than 200 pesos. ∗ This article merely classifies fine and has nothing to do with the definition of light felony. Fine is: 1. Afflictive – over P6,000

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

100

2. 3.

Correctional – P200 to P6,000 Light Penalty – less than P200

Art. 66. Imposition of fines. — In imposing fines the courts may fix any amount within the limits established by law; in fixing the amount in each case attention shall be given, not only to the mitigating and aggravating circumstances, but more particularly to the wealth or means of the culprit. ∗ The court can fix any amount of the fine within the limits established by law. ∗ The court must consider: a. The mitigating and aggravating circumstances; and b. More particularly, the wealth or means of the culprit. ∗ When the law does not fix the minimum of the fine, the determination of the amount of the fine to be imposed upon the culprit is left to the sound discretion of the court, provided it shall not exceed the maximum authorized by law. ∗ Fines are not divided into 3 equal portions. BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE Art. 35. Effects of bond to keep the peace. — It shall be the duty of any person sentenced to give bond to keep the peace, to present two sufficient sureties who shall undertake that such person will not commit the offense sought to be prevented, and that in case such offense be committed they will pay the amount determined by the court in the judgment, or otherwise to deposit such amount in the office of the clerk of the court to guarantee said undertaking. The court shall determine, according to its discretion, the period of duration of the bond. 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, is he shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed thirty days, if for a light felony. ∗ The offender must present 2 sufficient sureties who shall undertake that the offender will not commit the offense sought to be prevented, and that in case such offense be committed they will pay the amount determined by the court; or ∗ The offender must deposit such amount with the clerk of court to guarantee said undertaking; or ∗ The offender may be detained, if he cannot give the bond, for a period not to exceed 6 months if prosecuted for grave or less grave felony, or for a period not to exceed 30 days, if for a light felony. ∗ Bond to keep the peace is different from bail bon which is posted for the provisional release of a person arrested for or accused of a crime. D. ACCESSORY PENALTIES Art. 30. Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. — The penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification for public office shall produce the following effects: 1. The deprivation of the public offices and employments which the offender may have held even if conferred by popular election.

2. The deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any popular office or to be elected to such office. 3. The disqualification for the offices or public employments and for the exercise of any of the rights mentioned. In case of temporary disqualification, such disqualification as is comprised in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article shall last during the term of the sentence. 4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office formerly held. Art. 31. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification. — The penalties of perpetual or temporal special disqualification for public office, profession or calling shall produce the following effects: 1. The deprivation of the office, employment, profession or calling affected; 2. The disqualification for holding similar offices or employments either perpetually or during the term of the sentence according to the extent of such disqualification. Art. 32. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage. — 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, according to the nature of said penalty, of the right to vote in any popular election for any public office or to be elected to such office. Moreover, the offender shall not be permitted to hold any public office during the period of his disqualification. Art. 33. Effects of the penalties of suspension from any public office, profession or calling, or the right of suffrage. — The suspension from public office, profession or calling, 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 suffrage during the term of the sentence. The person suspended from holding public office shall not hold another having similar functions during the period of his suspension. Art. 34. Civil interdiction. — Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender during the time of his sentence of the rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either as to the person or property of any ward, of marital authority, of the right to manage his property and of the right to dispose of such property by any act or any conveyance inter vivos. Art. 41. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal; Their accessory penalties. — 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, and that of perpetual absolute disqualification which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. Art. 42. Prision mayor; Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of prision mayor, shall carry with it that of temporary absolute disqualification and that of perpetual

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

101

special disqualification from the right of suffrage which the offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. Art. 43. Prision correccional; Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of prision correccional shall carry with it that of suspension from public office, from the right to follow a profession or calling, and that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage, if the duration of said imprisonment shall exceed eighteen months. The offender shall suffer the disqualification provided in the article although pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon. Art. 44. Arresto; Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of arresto shall carry with it that of suspension of the right to hold office and the right of suffrage during the term of the sentence. Art. 45. 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. Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government, unless they be property of a third person not liable for the offense, but those articles which are not subject of lawful commerce shall be destroyed. PERPETUAL OR DISQUALIFICATION TEMPORARY ABSOLUTE

SUSPENSION FROM PUBLIC OFFICE, THE RIGHT TO VOTE AND BE VOTED FOR, THE RIGHT TO PRACTICE A PROFESSION OR CALLING Effects: a. Disqualification from holding such office or the exercise of such profession or right of suffrage during the term of the sentence; b. Cannot hold another office having similar functions during the period of suspension. CIVIL INTERDICTION Effects: Deprivation of the following rights: 1) Parental authority 2) Guardianship over the ward 3) Marital authority 4) Right to manage property and to dispose of the same by acts inter vivos ∗ Civil interdiction is an accessory penalty to the following principal penalties: a) Death if commuted to life imprisonment; b) Reclusion perpetua c) Reclusion temporal INDEMNIFICATION OR CONFISCATION OF INSTRUMENTS ORPROCEES OF THEOFFENSE ∗ This is included in every penalty for the commission of the crime. ∗ The confiscation is in favor of the government. ∗ Property of a third person not liable for the offense is not subject to confiscation. ∗ If the trial court did not order any confiscation of the procees of the crime, the government cannot appeal from the confiscation as that would increase the penalty already imposed. PAYMENT OF COSTS Includes: a. Fees, and b. Indemnities, in the course of judicial proceedings. ∗ Costs may be fixed amounts already determined by law or regulations or amounts subject to a schedule. ∗ If the accused is convicted; costs may be charged against him. If he is acquitted, costs are de officio, meaning each party bears his own expense. E. MEASURES NOT CONSIDERED PENALTY RPC, Art. 24. Measures of prevention or safety which are nor considered penalties. — The following shall not be considered as penalties: 1. The arrest and temporary detention of accused persons, as well as their detention by reason of insanity or imbecility, or illness requiring their confinement in a hospital. 2. The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions mentioned in Article 80 and for the purposes specified therein. 3. Suspension from the employment of public office during the trial or in order to institute proceedings. 4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in the exercise of their administrative disciplinary powers, superior officials may impose upon their subordinates.

Effects: a. Deprivation of any public office or employment f offender b. Deprivation of the right to vote in any election or to be voted upon c. Loss of rights to retirement pay or pension ∗ All these effects last during the lifetime of the convict and even after the service of the sentence except as regards paragraphs 2 and 3 of the above in connection with temporary absolute disqualification. PERPETUAL OR TEMPORARY SPECIAL DISQUALIFICATION Effects: For public office, profession or calling: a. Deprivation of the office, employment, profession or calling affected; b. Disqualification for holding similar offices or employments during the period of disqualification; For the exercise of right to suffrage: c. Deprivation of the right to vote or to be elected in an office; d. Cannot hold any public office during the period of disqualification ∗ The penalty for disqualification if imposed as an accessory penalty is imposed for PROTECTION and NOT for the withholding of a privilege. ∗ Temporary disqualification or suspension if imposed as an accessory penalty, the duration is the same as that of the principal penalty.

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

or (5) Upon judicial declaration of absence or incapacity of the person exercising parental authority. ♠ The convict is to be released immediately if the penalty imposed after trial is less than the full time or four-fifths of the time of the preventive imprisonment. 3 applies. with the full time during which they have undergone preventive imprisonment. (As amended by Republic Act 6127. (4) Upon final judgment of a competent court divesting the party concerned of parental authority. as when he is undergoing preventive imprisonment. WHEN THE OFFENDER IS NOT IN PRISON – the duration of penalty consisting in deprivation of liberty. ♠ If not under detention. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general. or even if bailable. if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners. Computation of penalties. 214. 3 applies but the offender is entitled to a deduction of full time or 4/5 of the time of his detention. — The penalty prescribed by law for the commission of a felony shall be imposed upon the principals in the commission of such felony. ♠ The commitment of a minor mentioned in par. Art. ♠ If the offender is undergoing preventive imprisonment. is from the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of judicial authorities for the enforcement of the penalty. In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is destierro. if the same is under review. 229. (3) Upon judicial declaration of abandonment of the child in a case filed for the purpose. 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. 3. Art. 3 and 4 are merely preventive measures before conviction of offenders. Rules for the computation of penalties: 1. 1988). (2) Upon the death of the child. ♠ The accused shall be released immediately whenever he has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period equal to or more than the possible maximum imprisonment for the offense charged. 46. or (3) Upon emancipation of the child. 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. Art. and 2. Rule No. ♠ The succeeding provisions are some examples of deprivation of rights established in penal form: Family Code. Rule No. Rule No. July 10. Those mentioned in par. The duration of the other penalties shall be computed only from the day on which the defendant commences to serve his sentence. If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners. 29. When they are recidivists or have been convicted previously twice or more times of any crime. Rule No. 1 applies. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of imprisonment. (327a) F. . 2. 2 applies. Temporary special disqualification 3. (327a) Family Code. APPLICATION AND COMPUTATION OF PENALTIES Art. he cannot furnish the required bail. The imposition of the sentence in such case is suspended. Parental authority terminates permanently: (1) Upon the death of the parents. 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. Art. — Offenders who have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty. 1970). Destierro ♠ When the offender is not in prison. No. except in the following cases: 1. WHEN THE OFFENDER IS IN PRISON – the duration of temporary penalties is from the day on which the judgment of conviction becomes final. 2 is not a penalty because it is not imposed by the court in a judgment of conviction. Examples of penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty: 1. Vnitas. THE DURATION OF OTHER PENALTIES – the duration is from the day on which the offender commences to serve his sentence Examples of temporary penalties: 1. June 17. he shall be credited in the service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment. Suspension ♠ If offender is under detention. — If the offender shall be in prison.O. because the offender has been released on bail. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Temporary absolute disqualification 2. (2) Upon appointment of a general guardian. (As amended by E. he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal. 228. parental authority also terminates: (1) Upon adoption of the child. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil laws may establish in penal form. Imprisonment 2. ♠ The accused undergoes preventive imprisonment when the offense charged is nonbailable. If the offender be not in prison. he shall be released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily. ♠ They are not penalties because they are not imposed as a result of judicial proceedings. Virtvs. Unless subsequently revived by a final judgment. 28.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 102 5.

frustrated or attempted) and to the DEGREE OF THE CRIMINAL PARTICIPATION OF THE OFFENDER (whether as principal. Art. The said article provides that when the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating circumstance and there is no aggravating circumstance. 46. Art. EXCEPTIONS: Arts. 51. Vnitas. or to be imposed upon accomplices or accessories. one whole penalty or one unit of the penalties enumerated in the graduated scales provided for in Art. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in consummated crime. DIAGRAM OF THE APPLICATION OF ARTS. 55. For consummated felony EXCEPTION: The exception is when the penalty to be imposed upon the principal in frustrated or attempted felony is fixed by law. Art. in accordance with the provisions of Art. Art. frustrated or consummated) 2. 246 of the RPC is composed only of 2 indivisible penalties. as maximum. FRUSTRATED AND ATTEMPTED FELONIES. — The penalty prescribed by law for the commission of a felony shall be imposed upon the principals in the commission of such felony. — 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. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated crime. accomplice or accessory) ♠ The division of a divisible penalty into three periods. Held: The penalty applicable for parricide under Art. The other figures represent the degrees to which the penalty must be lowered. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of attempted crimes. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of a frustrated crime. Art. 57. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories to the commission of a consummated felony. medium and minimum. PRINCIPALS. 52. reclusion perpetua to death. the lesser penalty shall be applied. 50-57: CONSUMMATED 0 1 2 FRUSTRATED 1 2 3 ATTEMPTED 2 3 4 PRINCIPALS ACCOMPLICES ACCESSORIES “0” represents the penalty prescribed by law in defining a crime. to meet the different situation anticipated by law. the law fixes a distinct penalty for the principal in frustrated or attempted felony. Art. 71. Virtvs. Upon the principals b. 3. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in an attempted crime. 56. 46. GENERAL RULE: The penalty prescribed by law in general terms shall be imposed: a. it shall be understood as applicable to the consummated felony. 50. which is to be imposed n the PRINCIPAL in a CONSUMMATED OFFENSE. — 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. 53. The aggravating or mitigating circumstances which attended the commission of the crime. Art. ♠ The graduation of penalties by degrees refers to STAGES OF EXECUTION (consummated. ACCOMPLICES AND ACCESSORIES IN CONSUMMATED. Art. — 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. — 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. Penalty to imposed upon accomplices in a frustrated crime. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an attempted crime. . 54. ♠ A DEGREE is one entire penalty. Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony is general terms. Although the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating circumstance without any aggravating circumstance to offset them. — 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. Art. Art. it shall be understood as applicable to the consummated felony. The participation therein of the person liable. BASES FOR THE DETERMINATION OF THE EXTENT OF PENALTY: 1. — 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.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 103 Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony is general terms. — 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. Each of the LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general. The accused was sentenced to the penalty of reclusion perpetua. refers to the proper period of the penalty which should be imposed when aggravating or mitigating circumstances attend the commission of the crime. 63 of the RPC should be applied. The stage reached by the crime in its development (either attempted. People v. — 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. ♠ Whenever it is believed that the penalty lower by one or two degrees corresponding to said acts of execution is not in proportion to the wrong done. Formigones (1950) Facts: The accused without a previous quarrel or provocation took his bolo and stabbed his wife in the back resulting to the latter’s death. 50 to 57 shall not apply to cases where the law expressly prescribes the penalty for frustrated or attempted felony.

reclusion temporal. reclusion temporal b. etc. arresto menor * the divisible penalties are divided into three periods: MINIMUM. 61. 68 and 69). corresponding to different divisible penalties. The MINIMUM of the indeterminate penalty is within the range of the penalty next lower than that prescribed by the RPC for the offense. prision correccional d. ♠ When there is a mitigating or aggravating circumstance. 168). MEDIUM AND THE MAXIMUM RULES: FIRST RULE: When the penalty is single and indivisible. For the principal in frustrated felony – one degree lower. seduction.. inclusive. which shall be taken from the penalty prescribed. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. 346) b. 71. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one or two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of another divisible penalty. are to be imposed upon persons guilty as principals of any frustrated or attempted felony. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of two indivisible penalties. 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. a. . reclusion perpetua c. ♠ A PERIOD is one of the three equal portions called the minimum. 61 should also apply in determining the MINIMUM of the indeterminate penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Art. destierro f. 173 par. curators. in which case the penalty is lowered by degree. arresto mayor e. b. For the accessory in consummated felony – two degrees lower. inclusive. (Art. medium and maximum of a divisible penalty. ♠ Those rules also apply in lowering the penalty by one or two degrees by reason of the presence of privileged mitigating circumstance (Arts. public censure The DIVISIBLE PENALTIES are: a. white slate trade or abduction. or of attempt to commit the same. When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in some manner not especially provided for in the four preceding rules. 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. 3. otherwise from the penalty immediately following in the above mentioned respective graduated scale. 5. Rules for graduating penalties. For the accomplice in consummated felony – one degree lower. c. — For the purpose of graduating the penalties which. Using falsified document (Art. 64). ♠ This article provides for the rules to be observed in lowering the penalty by one or two degrees. prision mayor c. the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately following the minimum prescribed and of the two next following. Knowingly using counterfeited seal or forged signature or stamp of the President (Art. Using falsified dispatch (Art. proceeding by analogy. such act is punished as the act of the principal.3 ) d. Illegal possession and use of a false treasury or bank note (Art. Vnitas. ♠ The rules provided for in Art. One who furnished the place for the perpetration of the crime of slight illegal detention. GENERAL RULE: An accomplice is punished by a penalty one degree lower than the penalty imposed upon the principal. c. prision mayor. shall impose corresponding penalties upon those guilty as principals of the frustrated felony. 2. or to be imposed upon accomplices or accessories. For the principal in attempted felony – two degrees lower. or to be imposed upon accomplices or accessories. Virtvs. — The provisions contained in Articles 50 to 57. and d. or when the penalty is divisible and there are two or more mitigating circumstances (generic) and no aggravating circumstance (Art. The INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES are: a. When the penalty prescribed for the felony is single and indivisible. Exception to the rules established in Articles 50 to 57. 2) Art. if possible. The ascendants. 50 to 57 shall not apply to cases where the law expressly prescribes the penalty for frustrated or attempted felony. the courts. 142. enumerated in the graduated scales of Art. 173 par. according to the provisions of Articles 50 to 57. death b. shall cooperate as accomplices in the crimes of rape. acts of lasciviousness. 60. When accessories are punished with a penalty one degree lower: a. ♠ The lower penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in Art. but in Art. ♠ Arts. when the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of several periods. 4. the penalty is lowered or increased by PERIOD only. or of one or more divisible penalties to be impose to their full extent. of this Code shall not be applicable to cases in which the law expressly prescribes the penalty provided for a frustrated or attempted felony. b. (Art. the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the respective graduated scale. EXCEPTIONS: a. corruption of minors. 71 is a degree. and upon accomplices and accessories. except when the penalty is divisible and there are two or more mitigating and without aggravating circumstances. guardians. EXCEPTION: When accessory is punished as principal – knowingly concealing certain evil practices is ordinarily an act of the accessory. of this Code. teachers and any person who by abuse of authority or confidential relationship.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 104 penalties of reclusion perpetua. the following rules shall be observed: 1. or as accomplices or accessories. 268) GENERAL RULE: An accessory is punished by a penalty two degrees lower than the penalty imposed upon the principal. 162).

and (c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction. Ex. 2. (b) Upon a fourth conviction. — 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. THIRD RULE: When the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of a divisible penalty Ex. prision correccional to prision mayor ♠ The penalty immediately following the lesser of the penalties of prision correccional to prision mayor is arresto mayor. 4 and 5 of Art. is reclusion temporal. 3. reclusion perpetua ♠ The penalty immediately following it is reclusion temporal. the penalty next lower in degree is the penalty consisting in 2 periods down in the scale. which is reclusion perpetua. shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals. or for principal in frustrated murder Minimum When the penalty has one period . Thus. 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. corresponding to different divisible penalties. 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. Reclusion temporal in its MAXIMUM period to Reclusion perpetua ♠ The same rule shall be observed in lowering the penalty by one or two degrees. Effect of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency. accomplices and accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant. . Vnitas. 2. the penalty next lower in degree is the penalty consisting in the 3 periods down in the scale. 5. FOURTH RULE: When the penalty is composed of several periods . 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. Virtvs.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 105 Ex. reclusion perpetua to death ♠ The penalty immediately following the lesser of the penalties. Reclusion temporal Prision Mayor Prision Correccional Maximum Medium Minimum Maximum Medium Minimum Maximum Medium Minimum Penalty for the principal in the consummated felony Penalty for the accomplice. Prision Mayor in its MAXIMUM period ♠ The penalty immediately inferior is prision mayor in its MEDIUM period. or from his private relations with the offended party. 61 may be simplified as follows: 1. 4. Prision correccional in its MINIMUM and MEDIUM periods Prision correccional Maximum Medium Minimum Maximum Medium The penalty prescribed for the felony The penalty next lower Arresto Mayor LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in 3 periods. 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. 62. 3. When the penalty is composed of one or more divisible penalties to be imposed to their full extent Ex. If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in only 1 period. the penalty next lower in degree is the next period down in the scale. Prision Mayor in its MEDIUM period to Reclusion temporal in its MINIMUM period. reclusion temporal is the penalty next lower in degree. The several periods must correspond to different divisible penalties. 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. or principal in frustrated felony FIFTH RULE: When the penalty has two periods Ex. If the penalty prescribed b the Code consists in 2 periods. SECOND RULE: When the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties Ex. EFFECTS OF MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES Art. SIMPLIFIED RULES: The rules prescribed in pars. the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional When the penalty is composed of one indivisible penalty and the maximum period of a divisible penalty Ex. the penalty next lower in degree shall be that period next following the given penalty. or in the means employed to accomplish it. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender.If the penalty is any one of the three periods of a divisible penalty. or from any other personal cause.This rule contemplates a penalty composed of at least 3 periods. Ex. The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act. reclusion temporal in its MAXIMUM period to death Death Reclusion Perpetua Reclusion Temporal Prision Mayor Maximum Medium Minimum Maximum Medium Minimum Penalty for the principal in consummated murder Penalty for accomplice.

Rules for the application of indivisible penalties: 1.The penalty shall be applied regardless of the presence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances. 2) Fourth conviction .LESSER penalty d. • The law does not apply to crimes described in Art. In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible penalties. Rules for the application of indivisible penalties.the penalty is that provided by law for the last crime and the additional penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods. Art. It applies to all participants because it reveals persistence in them of the inclination to wrongdoing and of the perversity of character that led them to commit the previous crime. Penalty is single and indivisible . 3. for the purpose of applying the penalty in accordance with the preceding rules. Habitual delinquency applies at any stage of the execution because subjectively.will not affect all the offenders but only those to whom such act are attendant 2. When the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance. Any other personal cause c. b. the offender reveals the same degree of depravity or perversity as the one who commits a consummated crime. Those included by law in defining the crime. The imposition of such additional penalties is mandatory and is not discretionary. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances that serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the offender to whom such are attendant. When in the commission of the deed there is present only one aggravating circumstance.Felonies through negligence . 3) Fifth or additional conviction . a person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent. according to the result of such compensation.LESSER penalty c. Notwithstanding the provisions of this article. hurto. Note: • In no case shall the total of the 2 penalties imposed upon the offender exceed 30 years. One aggravating circumstance present . 3. Aggravating circumstances which are not considered for the purpose of increasing the penalty: 1. shall in no case exceed 30 years. the greater penalty shall be applied. 2. Means to accomplish the crime . When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 106 penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period. Those which in themselves constitute a crime especially punishable by law. 155 • The imposition of the additional penalty on habitual delinquents are CONSTITUTIONAL LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Those inherent in the crime but of necessity they accompany the commission thereof. Penalty is composed of 2 indivisible penalties: a. estafa or falsification. 4.When the penalty is a fine . Virtvs. Moral attributes of the offender 2. For the purpose of this article. it shall be applied by the courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances that may have attended the commission of the deed. Vnitas. reclusion perpetua or death 2. Some mitigating circumstances present and no aggravating . No mitigating circumstances present .HIGHER penalty b. Those which consist: 1.When the penalty is prescribed by a special law. Those arising from: 1. What are the effects of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances? a. the total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender. robo.the culprit is sentenced to the penalty for the crime committed and to the additional penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum period. 2. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended the commission of the act. His private relations with the offended party 3. in conformity herewith. — In all cases in which the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty. . In the material execution of the act . Cases where attending aggravating or mitigating circumstances are not considered in the imposition of penalties . he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. It is simply a punishment on future crimes on account of the criminal propensities of the accused. Ex. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances that affect the offenders only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein. the following rules shall be observed in the application thereof: 1.Penalty that is single and indivisible . 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. Mitigating and aggravating circumstances offset each other What are the legal effects of habitual delinquency? 1) Third conviction . the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one another in consideration of their number and importance. the lesser penalty shall be applied.the penalty is that provided by law for the last crime and the additional penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period. 63. the lesser penalty shall be applied.will affect only those offenders who have knowledge of the same at the time of the act of execution or their cooperation therein • • • because such law is neither an EX POST FACTO LAW nor an additional punishment for future crimes.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

107

- Basis importance.

of

penalty:

number

and

Art. 64. Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods. — In cases in which the penalties prescribed by law contain three periods, whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed of three different penalties, each one of which forms a period in accordance with the provisions of Articles 76 and 77, the court shall observe for the application of the penalty the following rules, according to whether there are or are not mitigating or aggravating circumstances: 1. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period. 2. When only a mitigating circumstances is present in the commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its minimum period. 3. When an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its maximum period. 4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall reasonably offset those of one class against the other according to their relative weight. 5. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall impose the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law, in the period that it may deem applicable, according to th7e number and nature of such circumstances. 6. Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by law, in its maximum period. 7. Within the limits of each period, 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.

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, and arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if of a less grave felony. Penalty to be imposed if the requisites of accident (Art. 12 par 4) are not all present: a. GRAVE FELONY - arresto mayor maximum period to prision correccional minimum period b. LESS GRAVE FELONY - arresto mayor minimum period and medium period Art. 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable. — 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, provided that the majority of such conditions be present. The courts shall impose the penalty in the period which may be deemed proper, in view of the number and nature of the conditions of exemption present or lacking. Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable - One or two degrees lower if the majority of the conditions for justification or exemption in the cases provided in Arts. 11 and 12 are present. People v. Lacanilao (1988) Facts: The CFI found the accused, a policeman, guilty of homicide. On appeal before the CA, the CA found that the accused acted in the performance of a duty but that the shooting of the victim was not the necessary consequence of the due performance thereof, therefore crediting to him the mitigating circumstance consisting of the incomplete justifying circumstance of fulfillment of duty. The CA lowered the penalty merely by one period applying Art. 64 (2) appreciating incomplete fulfillment of duty as a mere generic mitigating circumstance lowering the penalty to minimum period. Held: CA erred because incomplete fulfillment of duty is a privileged mitigating circumstance which not only cannot be offset by aggravating circumstances but also reduces the penalty by one or two degrees than that prescribed b law. The governing provision is Art. 69 of the RPC. People v. Campuhan (supra) The penalty for attempted rape is two (2) degrees lower than the imposable penalty of death for the offense charged, which is statutory rape of a minor below seven (7) years. Two (2) degrees lower is reclusion temporal, the range of which is twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, and in the absence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance, the maximum of the penalty to be imposed upon the accused shall be taken from the medium period of reclusion temporal, the range of which is fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and (1) day to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months, while the minimum shall be taken from the penalty next lower in degree, which is prision mayor, the range of which is from six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years, in any of its periods.

Rules for the application of DIVISIBLE PENALTIES a. No aggravating and No mitigating - MEDIUM PERIOD b. One mitigating - MINIMUM PERIOD c. One aggravating (any number cannot exceed the penalty provided by law in its maximum period) - MAXIMUM PERIOD d. Mitigating and aggravating circumstances present - to offset each other according to relative weight e. 2 or more mitigating and no aggravating - one degree lower (has the effect of a privileged mitigating circumstance) NOTE: Art. 64 does not apply to: - indivisible penalties - penalties prescribed by special laws - fines - crimes committed by negligence Art. 67. Penalty to be imposed when not all the requisites of exemption of the fourth circumstance of Article 12 are present.— When all the conditions required in circumstances Number 4 of Article 12 of this Code to exempt from criminal liability are not present, the penalty of arresto mayor in its

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

108

G. SPECIAL RULES COMPLEX CRIMES Art. 48. Penalty for complex crimes. — When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period. ♣ Art. 48 requires the commission of at least 2 crimes. But the two or more GRAVE or LESS GRAVE felonies must be the result of a SINGLE ACT, or an offense must be a NECESSARY MEANS FOR COMMITTING the other. ♣ In complex crimes, although two or more crimes are actually committed, they constitute only one crime in the eyes of the law as well as in the conscience of the offender. The offender has only one criminal intent. Even in the case where an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the evil intent of the offender is only one. TWO KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIMES 1. COMPOUND CRIME - When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies 2. COMPLEX CRIME PROPER - When an offense is a necessary means for committing the other. COMPOUND CRIME REQUISITES: 1. That only a SINGLE ACT is performed by the offender 2. That the single acts produces (a) 2 or more grave felonies, or (b) one or more grave and one or more less grave felonies, or (c) two or more less grave felonies ♣ Light felonies produced by the same act should be treated and punished as separate offenses or may be absorbed by the grave felony. Ex. When the crime is committed by force or violence, slight physical injuries are absorbed. ♣ Example of compound crime: - Where the victim was killed while discharging his duty as barangay captain to protect life and property and enforce law and order in his barrio, the crime is a complex crime of homicide with assault upon a person in authority. ♣ When in obedience to an order several accused simultaneously shot many persons, without evidence how many each killed, there is only a single offense, there being a single criminal impulse. COMPLEX CRIME PROPER REQUISITES: 1. That at least two offenses are committed 2. That one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other 3. That both or all the offenses must be punished under the same statute. ♣ The phrase “necessary means” does not mean “indispensable means”

♣ In complex crime, when the offender executes various acts, he must have a single purpose. ♣ Subsequent acts of intercourse, after forcible abduction with rape, are separate acts of rape. ♣ Not complex crime when trespass to dwelling is a direct means to commit a grave offense. ♣ No complex crime, when one offense is committed to conceal the other. ♣ When the offender had in his possession the funds which he misappropriated, the falsification of a public or official document involving said offense is a separate offense. ♣ No complex crime where one of the offense is penalized by a special law. ♣ There is no complex crime of rebellion with murder, arson, robbery, or other common crimes. ♣ When two crimes produced by a single act are respectively within the exclusive jurisdiction of two courts of different jurisdiction, the court of higher jurisdiction shall try the complex crime. ♣ The penalty for complex crime is the penalty for the most serious crime, the same to be applied in its maximum period. ♣ When two felonies constituting a complex crime are punishable by imprisonment and fine, respectively, only the penalty of imprisonment should be imposed. ♣ Art. 48 applies only to cases where the Code does not provide a definite specific penalty for a complex crime. ♣ One information should be filed when a complex crime is committed. ♣ When a complex crime is charged and one offense is not proven, the accused can be convicted of the other. ♣ Art. 48 does not apply when the law provides one single penalty for special complex crimes. PLURALITY OF CRIMES - consists in the successive execution by the same individual of different criminal acts upon any of which no conviction has yet been declared. KINDS OF PLURALITY OF CRIMES 1. FORMAL OR IDEAL PLURALITY - There is but one criminal liability in this kind of plurality. - divided into 3 groups: a. When the offender commits an of the complex crimes defined in Art. 48 of the Code. b. When the law specifically fixes a single penalty for 2 or more offenses committed. c. When the offender commits continued crimes. 2. REAL OR MATERIAL PLURALITY - There are different crimes in law as well as in the conscience of the offender. In such cases, the offender shall be punished for each and ever offense that he committed. - Ex. A stabbed B. Then, A also stabbed C. There are two crimes committed. PLURALITY OF CRIMES There is no conviction of any of the crimes committed. CONTINUED CRIME RECIDIVISM There must be conviction by final judgment of the first or prior offense.

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW

109

1. 2.

A single crime consisting of a series of acts but all arising from one criminal resolution. A continuous, unlawful act or series of acts set on foot by a single impulse and operated by an unintermittent force, however long a time it may occupy. Ex. a collector of a commercial firm misappropriates for his personal use several amounts collected by him from different persons. One crime only because the different appropriations are but the different moments during which once criminal resolution arises and a single defraudation develops.

described in Art. 135, when committed as a means to or in furtherance of the subversive ends described in Art. 134, become absorbed in the crime of rebellion and cannot be regarded or penalized as distinct crimes in themselves. Not every act of violence is to be deemed absorbed in the crime of rebellion solely because it happens to be committed simultaneously. If the killing, robbing, etc were done for private purposes, the crime would be separately punishable and would not be absorbed by the rebellion. Enrile v. Salazar (1990) The appellants proposed 3 options to the court: (b) abandon Hernandez and adopt the minority view in said case that rebellion cannot absorb more serious crimes, and that under Art. 48 rebellion may be properly complexed with common offenses, (c) hold Hernandez applicable only to offense committed in furtherance, or as a necessary means for the commission, of rebellion, but not to acts committed in the course of a rebellion which also constitute “common” crimes of grave or less grave character, (d) maintain Hernandez as applying to make rebellion absorb all other offenses committed in its course, whether or not necessary to its commission or in furtherance thereof. Held: Hernandez doctrine remains binding and operates to prohibit the complexing of rebellion with another offense committed on the occasion thereof, either as a means necessary to its commission or as an unintended effect of an activity that constitutes rebellion. People v. Toling (1975) The eight killings and the attempted killing should be treated as separate crimes of murder and attempted murder qualified by treachery. The unexpected surprise assaults perpetrated by the twins upon their co-passengers, who did not anticipate that the twins would act like juramentados and who were unable to defend themselves was a mode of execution that insured the consummation of the twins’ diabolical objective to butcher their co-passengers. The conduct of the twins evinced conspiracy and community of design. The eight killings and the attempted murder were perpetrated by means of different acts. Hence, they cannot be regarded as constituting a complex crime under art. 48 of the RPC which refers to cases where “a single act constitutes two or more grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other.” Monteverde v. People (2002) Facts: Monteverde was purportedly charged with the complex crime of estafa through falsification of a commercial document for allegedly falsifying the document she had submitted to show that the money donated by PAGCOR was used and spent for lighting materials for her barangay. Held: Under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, a complex crime refers to (1) the commission of at least two grave or less grave felonies that must both (or all) be the result of a single act, or (2) one offense must be a necessary means for committing the other (or others). Negatively put, there is no complex crime when (1) two or more crimes are committed, but not by a

♣ A continued crime is not a complex crime. ♣ A continued crime is different from a TRANSITORY CRIME which is also called a MOVING CRIME. REAL OR MATERIAL CONTINUED CRIME PLURALITY There is a series of acts performed by the offender. Each act performed b the The different acts offender constitutes a constitute only one crime separate crime because because all of the acts each act is generated by a performed arise from one criminal impulse. criminal resolution. People v. Escober (supra) Special complex crime of robbery with homicide. Rule is established that whenever a homicide has been committed as a consequence of or on the occasion of a robbery, all those who took part as principals in the special complex crime of robbery with homicide although they did no actually take part in the homicide unless endeavored to prevent homicide. While it has been established that Punzalan’s participation in the crime was to act as a look-out, and as such he did not participate in the killing of the two helpless victims, he cannot evade responsibility. People v. Hernandez (1956) Facts: Hernandez and others were charged with the crime of rebellion with multiple murder, arsons and robberies. He was found guilty and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment. Held: Murder, arson and robbery are mere ingredients of the crime of rebellion, as a means “necessary” for the perpetration of the offense. Such common offenses are absorbed or inherent in the crime of rebellion. Inasmuch as the acts specified in Art. 135 constitute one single crime, it follows that said acts offer no occasion for the application of Art. 48 which requires therefore the commission of atleast 2 crimes. Principle of pro reo. Art. 48 is intended to favor the culprit: when two or more crimes are the result of a single act, the offender is deemed less perverse than when he commits said crimes through separate and distinct acts. People v. Geronimo (1956) As in treason, where both intent and overt act are necessary, the crime of rebellion is integrated by the coexistence of both the armed uprising for the purposes expressed in Art. 134 of the RPC, and the overt acts of violence described in the first paragraph of Art. 135. That both purpose and overt acts are essential components of one crime and that without either of them the crime of rebellion legally does not exist, is shown by the absence of any penalty attached to Art. 134. It follows, therefore, that any or all of the acts

LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Vnitas. Virtvs.

the penalty for the most serious offense shall be imposed in its maximum period. 1 of whom eventually died and 10 sustained minor injuries. with the use of motor vehicle as the qualifying circumstance. the rules on the imposition of penalties for complex crimes. On their way. Robert died while his father. in such a case. People v. Bullanday. will not apply. Held: Considering that Velasquez forcibly abducted Karen and then raped her twice. they decided to pass by a restaurant where Glenn had 3 bottles of beer. the place of the incident was very dark as there was no moon. and Bullanday sustained shrapnel injuries. Neither were there lamposts that illuminated the highway. it shall be imposed as it is. Considering that the offenses committed by the act of the appellant of firing a single shot are one count of homicide. Karen went with Velasquez. bumped. they should be treated and punished as separate offenses. At an intersection. and two counts of slight physical injuries. Held: Considering that the incident was not a product of a malicious intent but rather the result of a single act of reckless driving. Kevin and Feliber which caused the latter’s death. had they been intentional. Dino. SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIMES LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. The single act by appellant of detonating a hand grenade may quantitatively constitute a cluster of several separate and distinct offenses. The underlying philosophy of complex crimes in the Revised Penal Code. Feliber. been filed People v. The hand grenade exploded ripping a hole in the roof of the house. The trial court convicted Velasquez of two counts of rape. On his way back to his vehicle. a light felony. Using the above guidelines. Neither were the two crimes the result of a single act. yet these component criminal offenses should be considered only as a single crime in law on which a single penalty is imposed because the offender was impelled by a “single criminal impulse” which shows his lesser degree of perversity. Out of fear and not knowing that the gun that Velasquez was holding is a mere toy. he met Gonzales son. Velasquez then raped Karen twice. Art. Wabe. People v. he should be convicted of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape and simple rape. that the accused who commits two crimes with single criminal impulse demonstrates lesser perversity than when the crimes are committed by different acts and several criminal resolutions. a grave felony. The subsequent rape committed by Velasquez can no longer be considered as a separate complex crime of forcible abduction with rape but only as a separate act of rape punishable by reclusion perpetua. Delos Santos (2001) Facts: Glenn Delos Santos and his 3 friends went to Bukidnon on his Isuzu Elf truck. 25 defines grave felonies as those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or afflictive penalties from reclusion perpetua to prision mayor. Gonzales continued driving while Andres tailed Gonzales’ vehicle and cut him off when he found the opportunity to do so. The rationale being. his 2yr old son. Wabe. and light felonies are those punishable by arresto menor or fine not exceeding two hundred pesos. seriously wounded and claimed the lives of several members of the PNP who were undergoing an endurance run on a highway wearing black shirts and shorts and green combat shoes. poked a toy gun and forced Karen to go with her at his grandmother’s house. Heated exchange of remarks followed. Jaime Agbanlog. Held: The rules on the imposition of penalties for complex crimes under Art. Separate informations should have. Art. The trial court convicted Glenn of the complex crime of multiple murder. Jaime. Velasquez (2000) Facts: Velasquez. Held: Antonio is guilty of the complex crime of murder with multiple attempted murder under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. Glenn should be held guilty of the complex crime of reckless imprudence resulting in multiple homicide with serious physical injuries and less serious physical injuries. The 3 stopped in front of the house. Andres had a shouting match this time with Dino. the acts attributed to petitioner in the present case cannot constitute a complex crime. Camat. Gonzalez (Supra) Facts: Both of the families of Andres and that of Gonzalez were on their way to the exit of the Loyola Memorial Park. While his companions looked on. Glenn’s truck hit. which follows the pro reo principle. Antonio suddenly lobbed a hand grenade which fell on the roof of the terrace.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 110 single act. Jaime was seated on the banister of the terrace listening to the conversation of the companions of his son. Being light felonies. Gonzales was driving with his grandson and 3 housemaids. Robert and the others noticed appellants George and Antonio Comadre and Lozano walking. is intended to favor the accused by imposing a single penalty irrespective of the crimes committed. Rape is the more serious of the two crimes and is punishable with reclusion perpetua under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and since reclusion perpetua is a single indivisible penalty. or (2) committing one crime is not a necessary means for committing the other (or others). 9 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to Art. The penalty for complex crimes is the penalty for the most serious crime which shall be imposed in its maximum period. Virtvs. Specifically. The single bullet fired hit Kenneth. would. People v. 48 applies if a single act constitutes two or more grave and less grave felonies or when an offense is a necessary means of committing another. The slight physical injuries caused by Glenn to the ten other victims through reckless imprudence. Twelve trainees were killed on the spot. Kenneth. 12 were seriously wounded. have constituted light felonies. Appellants immediately fled. Camat and Eugenio were having a drinking spree on the terrace of the house of Robert’s father. then got out of his vehicle and knocked on the appellant's car window. Gonzales then alighted from his car and fired a single shot at the last window on the left side of Andres' vehicle at an angle away from Andres. their two vehicles almost collided. Comadre (2004) Facts: Robert Agbanlog.. which requires two or more grave and/or less grave felonies. while Andres was driving with his pregnant wife. From Bukidnon to Cagayan de Oro City. which are not covered by Article 48. less grave felonies are those to which the law attaches a penalty which in its maximum period falls under correctional penalties. 48 of the Revised Penal Code are not applicable in this case. his nephew Kevin and his sister-in-law. multiple frustrated murder and multiple attempted murder. As the drinking session went on. Vnitas. therefore. At the time of the occurrence. her alleged actions showing falsification of a public and/or a commercial document were not necessary to commit estafa. .

603. ♣ Absolute perpetual disqualification if the principal offender is guilty of a grave felony. a discretionary penalty shall be imposed. Rape with Homicide (Art. Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit the crime because the means employed or the aims sought are impossible. the court should find that the youthful LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. the rape is considered as an aggravating circumstance. ♣ In Art. People v. CRIME DIFFERENT FROM THAT INTENDED Art. PD No. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower than that corresponding to the one which the accused intended to commit. 192. — In cases in which the felony committed is different from that which the offender intended to commit. 49 has reference to Art. he claims that the trial court should have appreciated two mitigating circumstances in his favor namely voluntary confession of guilt and intoxication and sentenced him to a lesser penalty. the court. 294 (1)) 2. 294 (2)) 3. but always in the proper period. 49. When rape and homicide co-exist in the commission of robbery. — Those accessories falling within the terms of paragraphs 3 of Article 19 of this Code who should act with abuse of their public functions. On appeal. WHERE THE OFFENDER IS BELOW 18 YEARS Art. It applies only when there is ERROR IN PERSONAE. the LOWER PENALTY in its MAXIMUM PERIOD is always imposed. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime committed is different from that intended. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of age. which must be applied regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance which may have attended the commission of the deed. Empante (1999) Facts: The accused was found guilty of three counts of rape against his daughter who was then below 18 years old and sentenced him to death and to indemnify his daughter in the amount of P50k with moral damages amounting to another P5ok for each count of rape. 3. 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. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher than that corresponding to the offense which the accused intended to commit. if the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter offenses. and that of absolute temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less grave felony. 49 pars. Held: Qualified rape is punishable by the single indivisible penalty of death. it is the first paragraph of Art. 294 of the RPC which applies. the following rules shall be observed: 1. — 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. who is not exempted from liability by reason of the court having declared that he acted with discernment. 2. ♣ Art. Penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen years of age. Fabon (2000) The trial court inaccurately designated the crime committed as “robbery with homicide and rape. — 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. degree of criminality shown by the offender ADDITIONAL PENALTY FOR CERTAIN ACCESSORIES Art. social danger 2. 59 is limited to cases where the act performed would be grave or less grave felonies. Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed. 2. shall impose upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 500 pesos. Suspension of Sentence and Commitment of Youthful Offender. ♣ In Par. shall suffer the additional penalty of absolute perpetual disqualification if the principal offender shall be guilty of a grave felony. Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain accessories. Virtvs. 48. This rule is not necessary and may well be covered by Art. in view of the fact that the same act also constitutes an attempt or a frustration of another crime. 3.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 111 ♣ Art. Vnitas. 4 (1). the penalty for the former shall be imposed in its maximum period. .” When the special complex crime of robbery with homicide is accompanied b another offense like rape or intentional mutilation. having in mind the social danger and the degree of criminality shown by the offender. 1 and 2. The proper designation is robbery with homicide aggravated by rape. 267 (3)) 4. 48 does not apply when the law provides one single penalty for special complex crimes: 1. ♣ Absolute temporary disqualification if the principal offender is guilt of less grave felony. ♣ Art. but always lower by two degrees at least than that prescribed by law for the crime which he committed. the penalty corresponding to the latter shall be imposed in its maximum period. ART. IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES Art. the penalty for the attempted or frustrated crime shall be imposed in its maximum period. 58. 59. Robbery with Homicide (Art. 68. Kidnapping with serious physical injuries (Art. If after hearing the evidence in the proper proceedings. the following rules shall be observed: 1. in which case the penalty provided for the attempted or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in its maximum period. ♣ Basis of penalty: 1. Robbery with Rape (Art. such additional offense is treated as an aggravating circumstance which would result in the imposition of the maximum of the penalty of death. 335) People v.

Penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty cannot be served simultaneously by reason of the nature of such penalties. When the culprit has to serve 2 or more penalties. 10 Temporal absolute disqualification. ♣ 9 to 15 years only with discernment: at least 2 degrees lower. the following rules shall be observed: In the imposition of the penalties. 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. the right to follow a profession or calling. Suspension from public office. and 12.The Rules of Court specifically provide that any information must not charge more than one offense. However. Suspension from public office. 2. after considering the reports and recommendations of the Department of Social Welfare or the agency or responsible individual under whose care he has been committed. Confiscation and payment of costs • • The above penalties. Outline of the provisions of this Article: 1. Reclusion temporal. 3. Fine and Bond to keep the peace 9. or duly licensed agencies or any other responsible person. Temporary absolute disqualification 4. 7. the order of their respective severity shall be followed so that they may be executed successively or as nearly as may be possible. he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so permit. Perpetual special disqualification 3. . Otherwise. ♣ All the penalties. can be served simultaneously with imprisonment. Public censure The penalties which can be simultaneously served are: 1. The youthful offender shall be subject to visitation and supervision by a representative of the Department of Social Welfare or any duly licensed agency or such other officer as the court may designate subject to such conditions as it may prescribe. instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction. until he shall have reached twenty-one years of age or. Death. 6. a minor over 15 but under 18 years old may still get a penalty two degrees lower. even if by different courts at different times. 68 applies to such minor if his application for suspension of sentence is disapproved or if while in the reformatory institution he becomes incorrigible in which case he shall be returned to the court for the imposition of the proper penalty. ♣ 15 to 18 years old: penalty next lower ♣ Art. Prision mayor. ♣ The three-fold rule applies only when the convict has to serve at least four sentences. Temporary absolute disqualification k. 70. In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties (pena perpetua) shall be computed at thirty years. and l. 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. (As amended). Reclusion perpetua. and be voted for. 4.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 112 offender has committed the acts charged against him the court shall determine the imposable penalty. Prision mayor e. ♣ Art. should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed. 11. 3. Successive service of sentence. the right to vote. ♣ The phrase “the most severe of the penalties” includes equal penalties. . Reclusion perpetua c. Vnitas. the right to follow profession or calling. 5. the penalty being divisible. 2. the order of their respective severity shall be followed. Public Censure 8. — When the culprit has to serve two or more penalties. 68 provides for two of the PRIVILEGED MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES ♣ If the act is attended by two or more mitigating and no aggravating circumstance. or should they have been served out. Perpetual absolute disqualification j. Destierro 7. including any civil liability chargeable against him. or to any training institution operated by the government. Reclusion temporal d. Perpetual absolute disqualification. Virtvs. Death b. Perpetual absolute disqualification 2. Arresto menor. the court shall suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such minor to the custody or care of the Department of Social Welfare. cannot exceed three-fold the most severe. 8. Necessarily. Suspension 6. Civil interdiction 10. Prision correccional. Temporary special disqualification 5. for a shorter period as the court may deem proper. Public censure Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding. the right to vote and be voted for. 9. Destierro i. Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years. The respective severity of the penalties is as follows: a. Arresto mayor g. he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so permit otherwise. Prision correccional f. the various offense punished with different penalties must be charged under different informations LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. except destierro. Arresto mayor. No other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period. Arresto menor h. Three-fold Rule The maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than three times the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him. THE THREE-FOLD RULE Art. Destierro.

then add the quotient to the minimum (eliminate the 1 day) of the medium period and the total will represent the maximum of the medium period. the courts shall apply the rules contained in the foregoing articles. he filed a petition for habeas corpus claiming he completed the service of his sentence. 70. (As amended by Republic Act No. It merely provides that the prisoner cannot be made to serve more than three times the most severe of these penalties the maximum which is 40 years.) SECTION 3. 4203. add 1 day and make it the minimum of the maximum period. The nature of the sentence does not allow petitioner to serve all the terms simultaneously. a successor may be appointed to serve only for the unexpired portion of the term of the respective members. H. and the other members shall be persons qualified for such work by training and experience. nineteen hundred and sixty-nine. (As amended by Act No. 2. Sandiganbayan (1987) Facts: The petitioner was convicted of violating Section 3(E) of RA No. or its amendments. 65. 19. Nowhere in the article is anything mentioned about the “imposition of penalty”. and the minimum which shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the offense. ♣ Indemnity is a penalty. to those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year. the petitioner was sentenced to suffer one year imprisonment for every count of the offense committed. two shall be designated by the President to continue until December thirty. dividing into three equal portions of time included in the penalty prescribed. 70 speaks of “service” of sentence. to those convicted of misprision of treason. This Act shall not apply to persons convicted of offenses punished with death penalty or lifeimprisonment. he claimed that he shall serve the penalties simultaneously. Take the maximum of the medium period. 70 of the RPC. rebellion. Rule in cases in which the penalty is not composed of three periods. but in the service of the same. 2001. Thus. Art. In the Matter of the petition for Habeas Corpus of Pete Lagran (2001) Facts: The accused was convicted of 3 counts of violating BP22 and was sentenced to imprisonment of 1 year for each count. Compute and determine first the 3 periods of the entire penalty. Held: Art. 3. — In cases in which the penalty prescribed by law is not composed of three periods. to those convicted of piracy. 1965. in view of the attending circumstances. 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. The quotient should be added to the minimum prescribed (eliminate the 1 day) and the total will represent the maximum of the minimum period. The rule of successive service of sentence must be applied. 3019 aka the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. with the consent of the Commission on Appointments who shall hold office for a term of six years: Provided. and four members to be appointed by the President.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 113 which may be filed in the same court or in different courts. June 19. He was detained on Feb. 4225. The minimum of the minimum period should be the minimum of the given penalty (including the 1 day) 4. and if the offense is punished by any other law. to those convicted of treason. RPC. after subtracting the minimum (eliminate the 1 day) from the maximum of the penalty. the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence. they shall not exceed three times the most severe and shall not exceed 40 years. In the case at bar. He impugns this as contrary to the threefold rule and insists that the duration of the aggregate penalties should not exceed 40 years. in imposing a prison sentence for an offense punished by the Revised Penal Code. except as provided in Section 5 hereof. Take the maximum of the minimum period. then add the quotient to the minimum (eliminate the 1 day) of the maximum period and the total will represent the maximum of the maximum period. There is hereby created a Board of Pardons and Parole to be composed of the Secretary of Justice who shall be its Chairman. the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence the maximum term of which shall be that which. sedition or espionage. . there is no more legal basis for his detention. In case of any vacancy in the membership of the Board. Held: Petitioner is mistaken in his application of the 3-fold rule as set forth in Art. to those who are habitual delinquents. ♣ Court must impose all the penalties for all the crimes of which the accused is found guilty. Hereafter. One of the issues raised by the petitioner concerns the penalty imposed by the Sandiganbayan which totals 56 years and 8 days of imprisonment. TO CREATE A BOARD OF INDETERMINATE SENTENCE AND TO PROVIDE FUNDS THEREFOR. 4225. “duration” of penalty and penalty “to be inflicted”. and forming one period of each of the three portions. to those who having been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive shall have violated the terms thereof. Vnitas. WHERE THE PENALTY IS NOT COMPOSED OF 3 PERIODS Art. 4103 AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR AN INDETERMINATE SENTENCE AND PAROLE FOR ALL PERSONS CONVICTED OF CERTAIN CRIMES BY THE COURTS OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. 1999. one a clergyman or educator. Mejorada v. ♣ Subsidiary imprisonment forms part of the penalty. 70 allows simultaneous service of two or more penalties only if the nature of the penalties so permit.) LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Virtvs. That one member of the board shall be a trained sociologist. nineteen hundred and sixty-six and the other two shall continue until December thirty. THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW ACT NO. At least one member of the board shall be a woman. (As amended by Act No. On Mar. 24. add 1 day and make it the minimum of the medium period. AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES SECTION 1. Of the members of the present board. MEANING OF THE RULE 1. one psychiatrist unless a trained psychiatrist be employed by the board. not to those already sentenced by final judgment at the time of approval of this Act. at the same time or at different times. could be properly imposed under the rules of the said Code. Citing Art. conspiracy or proposal to commit treason.) SECTION 2. The time included in the penalty prescribed should be divided into 3 equal portions. This article is to be taken into account not in the imposition of the penalty but in connection with the service of the sentence imposed. to those who have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence.

rebellion. notwithstanding the provisions of Section two hundred and fifty-nine of the Revised Administrative Code. authorize the release of such prisoner on parole. and in accordance with the rules and regulations adopted hereunder. and in addition thereto. particularly to shorten his term of imprisonment. a MINIMUM taken from the penalty next lower to that fixed in the code. 3. during the period of surveillance. Vnitas. The Board is empowered to call upon any bureau. Approved and effective on December 5. mental LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Every prisoner released from confinement on parole by virtue of this Act shall. It shall be the duty of the Board of Indeterminate Sentence to look into the physical. 4. and have been sentenced for more than one year by final judgment prior to the date on which this Act shall take effect. . 4225. The Board shall file with the court which passed judgment on the case. a MAXIMUM taken from the penalty imposable under the penal code 2. . including the Chairman and the Executive Officer. in its discretion. 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. at such times and in such manner as may be required by the conditions of his parole. (As amended by Republic Act No. and that such release will not be incompatible with the welfare of society. 1965. however. office. sedition or espionage. and from the study and investigation made by the Board itself. Those convicted of piracy. 9. 10. Those convicted of treason. grant a new parole to the said prisoner. 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. and to provide a more autonomous government for those Islands. 4203. mental and moral record of the prisoners who shall be eligible to parole and to determine the proper time of release of such prisoners. The Board of Pardons and Parole is authorized to adopt such rules and regulations as may be necessary for carrying out its functions and duties. subdivision. Persons convicted of offense punished with death penalty or life imprisonment. branch. Those sentenced to the penalty of destierro or suspension. upon such terms and conditions as are herein prescribed and as may be prescribed by the Board. the Board of Indeterminate Sentence may issue a final certificate of release in his favor. 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. ♣ The indeterminate sentence is composed of: 1. as may be designated by the said Board for such purpose.The law is intended to favor the defendant. and with the Chief of Constabulary. upon the approval of the law. 1916 entitled "An Act to declare the purpose of the people of the United States as to the future political status of the people of the Philippine Islands.) SECTION 5. Those convicted of misprision of treason. unless the Board of Indeterminate Sentence shall. 7.It is necessary to consider the criminal first as an individual. Those who are habitual delinquents. 5. 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. which shall entitle him to final release and discharge. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year. said Board of Indeterminate Sentence may. and second as a member of the society. 6. ♣ The law does not apply to certain offenders: 1. agency or instrumentality of the Government for such assistance as it may need in connection with the performance of its functions. 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. ♣ Purpose of the law: to uplift and redeem valuable human material and prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of liberty and economic usefulness . violate any of the conditions of his parole. Any dissent from the majority opinion shall be reduced to writing and filed with the records of the proceedings. (As amended by Act No. Whenever any prisoner released on parole by virtue of this Act shall. depending upon his behavior and his physical. reimbursement of actual and necessary travelling expenses incurred in the performance of duties: Provided. In such case the prisoner so rearrested shall serve the remaining unexpired portion of the maximum sentence for which he was originally committed to prison. SECTION 6.) SECTION 9. in its discretion. from the reports of the prisoner's work and conduct which may be received in accordance with the rules and regulations prescribed. and it shall appear to the Board of Indeterminate Sentence. SECTION 8. Those who violated the terms of conditional pardon granted to them by the Chief Executive. That the Board meetings will not be more than three times a week. 8. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impair or interfere with the powers of the Governor-General as set forth in Section 64(i) of the Revised Administrative Code or the Act of Congress approved August 29. 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. Whenever any prisoner shall have served the minimum penalty imposed on him. 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. 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. SECTION 7. that there is a reasonable probability that such prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating the law. 1993. Virtvs. Whenever any prisoner shall be released on parole hereunder he shall be entitled to receive the benefits provided in Section 1751 of the Revised Administrative Code. Each member of the Board.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 114 SECTION 4. 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. had been sentenced by final judgment. June 19. conspiracy or proposal to commit treason. 2. Those who. that such prisoner is fitted by his training for release. Those who shall have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence. shall be entitled to receive as compensation fifty pesos for each meeting actually attended by him." SECTION 10. A majority of all the members shall constitute a quorum and a majority vote shall be necessary to arrive at a decision.

they shall impose the penalty in its minimum period. NOTE: A minor who escaped from confinement in the reformatory is entitled to the benefits of the ISL because his confinement is not considered imprisonment. 2.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 115 and moral record as a prisoner. then adding one year for each additional P10k. ♣ The maximum is determined in any case punishable under the RPC in accordance with the rules and provisions of said code exactly as if the ISL had never been enacted. while the minimum shall be taken from the penalty next lower in degree. — In cases in which the penalties prescribed by law contain three periods. Virtvs. to be determined by the Board of Indeterminate Sentence. which is prision mayor. which is statutory rape of a minor below seven (7) years. each one of which forms a period in accordance with the provisions of Articles 76 and 77. ♣ The period between the minimum and maximum is indeterminate in the sense that the prisoner may be exempted from serving said indeterminate period in whole or in part. whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed of three different penalties. 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. The modifying circumstances are considered only in the imposition of the maximum term of the indeterminate sentence. 3. the maximum term of the penalty shall be "that which. 8 months and 21 days to 8 years of prision mayor minimum would be increased by 69 years. Under the ISL. without first considering any modifying circumstance attendant to the commission of the crime. Within the limits of each period. Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating circumstances. The determination of the minimum penalty is left by law to the sound discretion of the court and it can be anywhere within the range of the penalty next lower without any reference to the periods into which it might be subdivided. This interpretation of the law accords with the rule that penal laws should be construed in favor of the accused. . the matter should be so taken as analogous to modifying circumstances in the imposition of the maximum term of the full indeterminate sentence. in its maximum period. ISL is expressly granted to those who are sentenced to imprisonment exceeding 1 year. ♣ Apply first the effect of privileged mitigating circumstances then consider the effects of aggravating and ordinary mitigating circumstances. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Saley (supra) Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. 4. in view of the attending circumstances. Vnitas. Campuhan (supra) The penalty for attempted rape is two (2) degrees lower than the imposable penalty of death for the offense charged. ♣ The settled practice is to give the accused the benefit of the law even in crimes punishable with death or life imprisonment provided the resulting penalty. Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods. Two (2) degrees lower is reclusion temporal. ♣ Prisoner must serve the minimum before he is eligible for parole. the court shall impose the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law.00 should not be considered in the initial determination of the indeterminate penalty. the range of which is from six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years. The fact that the amounts involved in the instant case exceed P22. according to the number and nature of such circumstances. When only a mitigating circumstance is present in the commission of the act. the maximum of the penalty to be imposed upon the accused shall be taken from the medium period of reclusion temporal. and the minimum shall be "within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed" for the offense. could be properly imposed" under the Revised Penal Code. in the period that it may deem applicable. ♣ ISL does not apply to destierro. and in the absence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance. eight (8) months and (1) day to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months. the court shall reasonably offset those of one class against the other according to their relative weight. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law. But the law categorically declares that the maximum penalty then shall not exceed 20 years of reclusion temporal. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present. 64. Since the penalty prescribed by law for the estafa charge against accused-appellant is prision correccional Art. PROCEDURE FOR DETERMING THE MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM SENTENCE ♣ Is consists of a maximum and a minimum instead of a single fixed penalty. they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period. the range of which is twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years. after considering the attending circumstances. the range of which is fourteen (14) years. The penalty next lower should be based on the penalty prescribed by the Code for the offense. as computed by the trial court. CA (1996) In as much as the amount of P715k is P693k more than the abovementioned benchmark of P22k. the minimum term of the indeterminate penalt should be within the range of the penalty next lower in degree to that prescribed b the Code for the offense committed. they shall impose the penalty in its maximum period. People v. ♣ The minimum depends upon the court’s discretion with the limitation that it must be within the range of the penalty next lower in degree to that prescribed by the Code for the offense committed. De la Cruz v. When an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of the act. instead. the maximum period of 6 years.000. in any of its periods. the court shall observe for the application of the penalty the following rules. People v. is reclusion temporal or less. the courts shall not impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by law. 6. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances. 7. according to whether there are or are not mitigating or aggravating circumstances: 1. 5. which is prision correccional. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances are present.

he claimed that he shall serve the penalties simultaneously. and who are not otherwise disqualified by law. 2001. In the municipal jail b. 24. defines probation as a disposition under which an accused. 284) c. because the accused may still appeal within 15 days from its promulgation. — The penalty of arresto menor shall be served in the municipal jail. prision mayor. (2) convicted of subversion or any offense against the security of the State. Disqualified Offenders Probation under PD No. after conviction and sentence. ♠ The judgment must be final before it can be executed. the relations of the convicts among themselves and other persons. ♠ See Rules and regulations to implement RA No. I. On Mar. 78. The nature of the sentence does not allow petitioner to serve all the terms simultaneously. When and how a penalty is to be executed. Offenders who are disqualified are those: (1) sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years. 87. prision correccional and arresto mayor. 19. the judgment becomes final and executory. 334) d. 247) b. and other incidents connected therewith. it cannot be availed of as a matter of right by a person convicted of a crime. or in the house of the defendant himself under the surveillance of an officer of the law. As a penalty for the concubine in the crime of concubinage (Art. the minimum term of the indeterminate sentence should be anywhere within six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4) years and two (2) months . . Art. A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that prescribed by law. taking into consideration the health of the offender and other reasons which may seem satisfactory to it. — No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a final judgment. When the death or serious physical injuries is caused or are inflicted under exceptional circumstances (art. When after lowering the penalty by degrees. In the case at bar. as amended. Art. or the Public Order. — Any person sentenced to destierro shall not be permitted to enter the place or places designated in the sentence. it must first be shown that an applicant has none of the disqualifications imposed by law. and their diet. is released subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer. whenever the court so provides in the decision due to the health of the offender. prision correccional and arresto mayor. nor within the radius therein specified. the time of its performance. The rule of successive service of sentence must be applied. ♠ If the convict enters the prohibited area. Art. 1999. RPC. but under the surveillance of an officer of the law. But if the defendant has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal. 70. EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES Execution of Penalties Art. 88. 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. as amended. he filed a petition for habeas corpus claiming he completed the service of his sentence. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. In the house of the offender. which shall not more than 250 and not less than 25 km from the place designated. is intended for offenders who are 18 years of age and above. Reclusion perpetua.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 116 maximum to prision mayor minimum. Post-Sentence Investigation The Post-Sentence Investigation (PSI) and the submission of the Post-Sentence Investigation Report (PSIR) are prerequisites to the court disposition on the application for probation. 70 allows simultaneous service of two or more penalties only if the nature of the penalties so permit. ♠ Convict shall not be permitted to enter the place designated in the sentence nor within the radius specified. 968. He was detained on Feb. nor with any other circumstances or incidents than those expressly authorized thereby. Service of the penalty of arresto menor: a. — The penalties of reclusion perpetua. Citing Art. ♠ Destierro is imposed: a. 86. Thus. Thus. Held: Art. In addition to the provisions of the law. In the Matter of the petition for Habeas Corpus of Pete Lagran (2001) Facts: The accused was convicted of 3 counts of violating BP22 and was sentenced to imprisonment of 1 year for each count. Virtvs. To be able to enjoy the benefits of probation. Destierro. the petitioner was sentenced to suffer one year imprisonment for every count of the offense committed. the penalty next lower would then be prision correccional minimum to medium. he commits evasion of sentence. Effects of the Probation Law THE PROBATION LAW Taken from the DOJ website Section 3(a) of Presidential Decrees 968. when the court so provides in its decision. It is a privilege granted by the court. there is no more legal basis for his detention. 8177 under Capital Punishment. Arresto menor. (3) 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 more than Two Hundred Pesos. The regulations shall make provision for the separation of the sexes in different institutions. or at least into different departments and also for the correction and reform of the convicts. (4) who have been once on probation under the provisions of this Decree. When a person fails to give bond for good behavior (art. Vnitas. the relief which they may receive. destierro is the proper penalty. which shall be not more than 250 and not less than 25 kilometers from the place designated. reclusion temporal. reclusion temporal. 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.

ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 117 Period of Probation The period of probation is in essence a time-bound condition. counseling. through its Community Services Division. the Agency. and (b) report to the probation officer at least once a month at such time and place as specified by said officer. Rehabilitation Programs. the court may issue a warrant for the arrest of a probationer for any serious violation of the conditions of probation. Revocation of Probation At any time during probation. the provisions regarding release on bail of persons charged with crime shall be applicable to probationers arrested under this provision. The court shall notify either the probationer or the probation officer of the filing of such an application so as to give both parties an opportunity to be heard thereon. Pre-Parole Investigation. shall immediately be brought before the court for a hearing of the violation charged. depends on available resources in the community for the rehabilitation of offenders. or persons placed under probation by the courts. Termination of Probation After the period of probation and upon consideration of the report and recommendation of the probation officer. etc. the court may. The purpose is to determine whether offenders confined in prisons/jails are qualified for parole or any form of executive clemency and to discuss with them their plans after release. Regional and Field Offices nationwide. CA (1989) In its present form. revise or modify the conditions or period of probation. Section 4 of the Probation Law establishes a much narrower period during which an application for probation ma be filed with the trial curt: “after the trial curt shall have convicted and sentenced a LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. has been tapping government/non-government organizations/individuals for various rehabilitation programs and activities for probationers. Consequent to the revocation. a copy of the Probation Order. The treatment process employed by the field officers focused on particular needs of probationers. Transfer of Residence Whenever a probationer is permitted to reside in a place under the jurisdiction of another court. An order revoking the grant of probation or modifying the terms and conditions thereof shall not be appealable. Thus. the executive judge to whom jurisdiction over the probationer is transferred shall have the power with respect to him that was previously possessed by the court which granted the probation. involves the community in probation work through the use of volunteer workers and welfare agencies. recognizing the important role of the community as a rehabilitation agent. . the PAROLE AND PROBATION ADMINISTRATION (PPA). as a community-based treatment program. who in turn orders the Probation Officer to conduct a post-sentence investigation to determine whether a convicted offender may be placed on probation or not. and to bring about the rehabilitation of the client and his re-integration into the community. a Volunteer Probation Aide is a volunteer who is a citizen of good moral character and good standing in the community. the investigation report and other pertinent records shall be furnished to said executive judge.(PPA) conducts pre-parole investigation of all sentenced prisoners confined in prisons and jails within their jurisdiction. a convicted offender or his counsel files a petition for probation with the trail court. 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. who has been carefully selected and trained to do volunteer probation work. and in such case. the probationer will have to serve the sentence originally imposed. In such case. He is appointed by the Administrator after successful completion of the Introductory Training Course for probation volunteers. The defendant may be admitted to bail pending such hearing. upon application of either the probationers or the probation officer. It is a condition in point of time which may be shortened and lengthened within the statutory limits and the achievements by the probationer of the reasonable degrees of social stability and responsibility from the measured observation of the supervising officer and the exercise discretion by the court in decisive order. parolees and pardonees. Programs and Services Post-Sentence Investigation. The objectives of supervision are to carry out the conditions set forth in the probation/parole order. Supervision of Offenders. Assistance is provided to the clientele in the form of job placement. control over him shall be transferred to the executive judge of the "Court of First Instance" of that place. parolees and pardonees. or prisoners released on parole or conditional pardon and referred by the Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP) to PAROLE AND PROBATION ADMINISTRATION . Virtvs. Modification of Conditions of Probation During the period of probation. Vnitas. Llamado v. As defined. Probation Conditions The grant of probation is accompanied by conditions imposed by the court: • The mandatory conditions require that the probationer shall (a) present himself to the probation officer designated to undertake his supervision at each place as may be specified in the order within 72 hours from receipt of said order. The role of the probation officer in this phase is to conduct the post-sentence investigation and to submit his report to the court within the period not later than 60 days from receipt of the order of the Court to conduct the said investigation. His term of office is one year but can be renewed thereafter or terminated earlier depending upon his performance and willingness to serve. The Agency supervises two types of offenders under conditional release: (1) probationers. Thereafter. The PAROLE AND PROBATION ADMINISTRATION . parolees and pardonees particularly in the areas where the caseload is heavy and the office is understaff or where the residence of the clientele is very far from the Parole and Probation Office. A violation of any of the conditions may lead either to a more restrictive modification of the same or the revocation of the grant of probation. The probationer. spiritual/moral upliftment. Further. once arrested and detained. Presidential Decree No. Probation officers submit their preparole assessment reports to the Board of Pardons and Parole. (2) parolees and pardonees. Community Linkages Probation/Parole.(PPA) (PPA). After conviction and sentence. • Special or discretionary conditions are those additional conditions imposed on the probationer which are geared towards his correction and rehabilitation outside of prison and right in the community to which he belongs. skills training. to ascertain whether the probationer/parolee/pardonee is complying with the said conditions. 968 permits the utilization of the services of Volunteer Probation Aides to assist the Probation and Parole Officers in the supervision of probationers.

The OCA filed an administrative case against him and he was suspended from office. The respective provisions of this section shall also be observed if the insanity or imbecility occurs while the convict is serving his sentence. Expiration of probation period alone does not automatically terminate probation. Causes of extinction of criminal liability: 1. 3. 89. CA (1990) There is no question that the decision convicting Salgado of the crime of serious physical injuries had become final and executory because the filing by respondent of an application for probation is deemed a waiver of his right to appeal. 6. By prescription of the penalty. the provisions of the second paragraph of circumstance number 1 of Article 12 being observed in the corresponding cases. . By absolute pardon.the death of the convict whether before or after final judgment extinguished criminal liability.court shall suspend hearings and order his confinement in a hospital until he recovers his reason c. his sentence shall be executed. Courts are allowed to impose practically any term it chooses. By amnesty. 5. 4. which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects. Bala v. Librado (1996) Facts: The respondent is a deputy sheriff who was charged of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act and is now claiming he is in probation. the claim for civil liability survives if the same may also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict such as law. Petitioner’s right to apply for probation was lost when he perfected his appeal from the judgment of the trial court. Bala was placed on probation on Aug. 1985 and cannot be given retroactive effect because it would be prejudicial to the accused. The order of probation with one of the conditions providing for the manner of payment of the civil liability during the period of probation. as to the personal penalties and as to pecuniary penalties. the revocation of his probation is compelling. ♠ An accused may become insane: a. . PARTIAL ♠ Extinction of criminal liability does not automatically extinguish the civil liability. . Suspension of the execution and service of the penalties in case of insanity. 2. The conditions listed under Sec. Vnitas. The grant of probation does not extinguish the civil liability of the offender. BY DEATH OF THE CONVICT . Virtvs. By prescription of the crime. 7. The provision expressly prohibits the grant of an application for probation if the defendant has perfected an appeal from the judgment of conviction. except. The image of the judiciary is tarnished by conduct involving moral turpitude. By the marriage of the offended woman. Salgado v. ♠ Only execution of personal penalty is suspended: civil liability may be executed even in case of insanity of convict. VI. Probation is revocable before the final discharge by the court. 4 of PD 968 is not applicable to the case at bar. a final order of discharge from the court is required. EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY A. at the time of final judgment or while serving sentence – execution suspended with regard to the personal penalty only ♠ see Exempting Circumstance of Minority for PD No. .civil liability is extinguished only when death occurs before final judgment. unless the penalty shall have prescribed in accordance with the provisions of this Code. 1982. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. By the death of the convict. Martinez (1990) PD 1990 which amends Sec. quasi-contracts and quasi-delicts. TOTAL EXTINCTION Art.death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguished his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based solely on the offense committed. — When a convict shall become insane or an imbecile after final sentence has been pronounced. 15. By service of the sentence. Probationer failed to reunite with responsible society. as provided in Article 344 of this Code. If at any time the convict shall recover his reason. — Criminal liability is totally extinguished: 1. the only limitation being that it does not jeopardize the constitutional rights of the accused. liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment. The reform and rehabilitation of the probationer cannot justify his retention in the government service. BY SERVICE OF SENTENCE . the execution of said sentence shall be suspended only with regard to the personal penalty.crime is a debt incurred by the offender as a consequence of his wrongful act and the penalty is but 2. Thus. The trial court lost jurisdiction already over the case.death of the offended party does not extinguish the criminal liability of the offender. It went into effect on Jan. it must not be forgotten that unlike pardon probation does not obliterate the crime of which the person under probation has been convicted. 11. 10 of the Probation law are not exclusive. 603 and Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with Law. Suspension in case of Insanity or Minority Art. 79. contracts. Held: While indeed the purpose of the Probation Law is to save valuable human material. He violated the conditions of his probation. at the time of the trial . did not increase or decrease the civil liability adjudged.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 118 defendant and – within the period for perfecting an appeal”. How is criminal liability extinguished? 1. Office of the Court Administrator v. TOTAL 2. at the time of commission of the crime – exempt from criminal liability b.

♠ Where the last day of the prescriptive period for filing an information falls on a Sunday or legal holiday. 3. second and third paragraphs of this article. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago. Requisites: a) that there be final judgment b) that the period of time prescribed by law for its enforcement has elapsed. Service of sentence does not extinguish civil liability. PERIOD OF PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES PUNISHED BY: 1. Prescription of crime. or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 119 the amount of his debt. approved June 19. the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the application of the rules contained in the first.the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the offender after the lapse of a certain time. Virtvs. BY AMNESTY . the authorities. punished by a fine or imprisonment not more than 1 month or both – 1 year b.It is an act of grace proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the laws which exempts the individual on whom is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for the crime he has committed. as amended) Art. oral defamation and slander by deed .The period is not interrupted b the mere act of reporting the case to the fiscal. death. When payment is made. the information can no longer be filed on the next day as the crime has already prescribed. — Crimes punishable by death. and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information. 90. and is usually exerted in behalf of certain classes of persons. the court may take judicial notice of the same Do not extinguish civil liability BY PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME . and shall commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or acquitted. No. Computation of prescription of offenses. 6. . It does not run if the offender is outside the Philippines.the loss or forfeiture of the right of the government to execute the final sentence after the lapse of a certain time.20 years 2. 1966). libel or similar offense .2 months PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENSES PUNISHED BY SPECIAL LAWS: a. BY PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY . punished by imprisonment for 2 years but less than 6 years – 8 years d.amnesty is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or a general pardon for a past offense.6 months 6. and is rarely. 5. or their agents. Municipal ordinances – 2 months (Act. . 3763. . Light offenses prescribe in two months. correctional penalties . ♠ In computing the period of prescription.The preliminary investigation conducted by the municipal mayor in the absence of the justice of peace partakes of the nature of a judicial proceeding and it does not interrupt the running of the period of prescription. other afflictive penalties . Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten years. BY THE MARRIAGE OF THE OFFENDED WOMAN . LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one. abduction or acts of lasciviousness.applicable in the crimes of rape. Pardon Includes any crime Given after conviction Amnesty Generally political offenses Given before conviction or institution of the action Looks forward and forgives Looks backwards and the punishment abolished the offense itself Must be proved as a Being a result of a defense proclamation. ♠ Period commences to run from the day the offense is committed or discovered by the offended party. reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal shall prescribe in twenty years. exercised in favor of a single individual. if ever. 91. seduction. punished by imprisonment for 6 years or more – 12 years e. who are subject to trial but have not yet been convicted. with the exception of those punishable by arresto mayor. Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen years. (As amended by RA 4661. Art. reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal . punished by imprisonment of more than 1 month but less than 2 years – 4 years c. ♠ The fact that the offender is unknown will not interrupt the period of prescription because what the Code requires is the discovery of the crime and not of the offender.15 years 3. — The period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party. Vnitas. the debt is extinguished. ♠ The period is interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information.1 year (as amended by RA 4661) 5. BY ABSOLUTE PARDON .10 years except arresto mayor which prescribes in 5 years 4. 4. The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year. 7. light offenses . The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six months. Internal Revenue offenses – 5 years f. which shall prescribe in five years. the authorities or their agents. the first day is to be excluded and the last day included. Marriage must be made in good faith.

Light penalties.the proceeding is unjustifiably stopped for a reason not imputable to the offender. Computation of the prescription of penalties. — A pardon shall not work the restoration of the right to hold public office. . 1973 executed in her favor by her father.520 sq meters. Dorol maintained and insisted that the transaction between them involving her property was a mortgage. cannot preclude the appointing power from refusing appointment to anyone deemed of bad character. unless such rights be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon. Abungan appealed his case but died during the pendency of his appeal. A pardon although full and plenary. Correctional penalties.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 120 ♠ The period commences to run again when the proceeding is terminated: . 36. the convict evaded the service of sentence by escaping during the term of his sentence c. A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence. in one year. in twenty years. She now seeks reinstatement to her former position as Assistant treasurer. 3. In said confrontation.from the date of the commission of the offense Art. which Dorol mortgaged to Recebido sometime in April of 1985. PERIOD 1. penalty is imposed by final sentence b. 1979. Desierto (2001) The applicable law in the computation of the prescriptive period for RA 3019 is Section 2 of Act No. or has been captured d. together with 2 others were charged with murder for the death of Dirilo. 3. a poor moral risk. without need of a new appointment. Pardon. be captured. — The penalties imposed by final sentence prescribe as follows: 1. ♠ Period of prescription of election offense begins to run: 1) if discovery of the offense is incidental in a judicial proceeding .20 years other afflictive penalties – 15 years correctional penalties – 10 years except arresto mayor which prescribes in 5 years light penalties . as may be warranted by law and procedural rules. because he died during the pendency of the appeal and before the finality of the judgment against him. 93. from the discovery thereof and the institution of judicial proceedings for its investigation and punishment. For this reason. ♠ Period commences to run from the date the culprit evades the service of sentence. if he is captured c. ♠ The period is interrupted: a. with the exception of the penalty of arresto mayor. Upon examination of the said Deed of Sale. or should commit another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription. Virtvs. — The period of prescription of penalties shall commence to run from the date when the culprit should evade the service of his sentence. his civil liability arising from the crime or delict (civil liability ex delicto) was also extinguished. 4. Recebido and Dorol did not execute a document on the mortgage but Dorol instead gave Recebido a copy of the Deed of Sale dated June 16. Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee v. that his civil liability may be based on sources of obligation other than delict. in fifteen years. Recebido v. Moreover. She was pardoned. Sr. or the right of suffrage. Other afflictive penalties. After trial on the merits. Factoran (1989) Monsanto was convicted of the complex crime of estafa thru falsification of public documents. 2. Recebido. penalty has prescribed because of the lapse of time LEX SOCIETAS Veritas.from the date of the termination of the proceedings 2) otherwise . escaped convict has not given himself up. 3326 which provides that prescription shall begin to run from the day of the commission of the violation of the law and if the same be not known at the time.year Art. allegedly executed by Dorol in favor of Recebido and that the property was registered in the latter's name. 92. Vnitas. Dorol verified from the Office of the Assessor in Sorsogon that there exists on its file a Deed of Sale dated August 13. Dorol went to the house of her cousin. Abungan pleaded not guilty upon his arraignment. People v. the prescription commences to run after the termination of the continuity of the offense. People (2000) Facts: On September 9. Held: The death of appellant extinguished his criminal liability. or who is unsuitable by reason of the pardoned conviction. though. and it shall be interrupted if the defendant should give himself up. the victims may file a separate civil action against his estate. if the defendant surrenders b. Abungan (2000) Facts: Abungan.without the accused being convicted or acquitted . if he should commit another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription ♠ ELEMENTS: a. should go to some foreign country with which this Government has no extradition treaty. Death and reclusion perpetua. 1990. its effect. 4. It must be added. if he should go to a foreign country with which the Philippines has no extradition treaty d. Art. ♠ In continuing crime. petitioner refused to allow Dorol to redeem her property on his claim that she had sold her property to him in 1979. it was discovered that Dorol’s signature on said document was falsified by Recebido. Pardon does not ipso facto restore a convicted felon to public office. in ten years. 2. When and how penalties prescribe. the trial court sentenced Pedro Abungan to suffer the penalty of reclusion and such penalties accessory thereto. which prescribes in five years. Monsanto v. an agricultural land with an area of 3. OF PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTIES: death and reclusion perpetua . to redeem her property.

1990. 347. Thus. dated March 25. it is binding and effective. he was already in hiding. legal and equitable. included therein. But it was Torrecampo who chose to become a fugitive. People v. . and Violations of the Article of War. requested permission to rest in the house of Malto. it is logical and in consonance with human experience to infer that the crime committed was not discovered. The record is constructive notice of its contents as well as all interests. delivered to the petitioner-accused in August 13. by the offended party before 1983. Del Castillo v. The Court has declared that registration in public registry is a notice to the whole world. Patriarca then applied for amnesty under Proclamation No. . and All Other Persons Who Have or May Have Committed Crimes Against Public Order. which is favorable to the petitioner since the running of the prescriptive period of the crime shall have to be reckoned earlier. the execution of judgment was scheduled on October 14. — Criminal liability is extinguished partially: 1. Patriarca (2000) Facts: Patriarca with the alias of Ka Django. 94. Considering the foregoing. The crime had not prescribed at the time of the filing of the information. He is therefore not to be rewarded therefor. the year the alleged deed of sale was executed by Dorol. Torrecampo appealed his conviction to the CA which eventually affirmed the decision of the trial court in toto. Insurgents. for striking the electric bulb and 2 kerosene petromax lamps during the counting of the votes in a voting center plunging the room in complete darkness. Torrecampo was never brought to prison." His application was favorably granted by the National Amnesty Board Held: Paragraph 3 of Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code provides that criminal liability is totally extinguished by amnesty. Partial Extinction of criminal liability. the period of prescription shall "commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party. The trial court convicted Patriarca of murder. CONDITIONAL PARDON a) when delivered and accepted is considered a contract between the sovereign power and the convict that the former will release the latter upon compliance with the condition b) usual condition “he shall not again violate any of the penal laws of the Philippines Violations of the conditions: • offender is rearrested and re-incarcerated • prosecution under Art. Reyes. an NPA. Ten years later. In the instant case. The Court noted that Dorol had no actual knowledge of the falsification prior to September 9. Neither could constructive notice by registration of the forged deed of sale. Even granting arguendo that the deed of sale was executed by the private complainant. Held: Under Article 91 of the Revised Penal Code. Now Torrecampo begs for the compassion of the Court because he has ceased to live a life of peace and tranquility after he failed to appear in court for the execution of his sentence. Hence. with ten (10) armed companions. petitioner failed to appear which prompted the presiding judge to issue an order of arrest of petitioner and the confiscation of his bond. nor could have been discovered. . CAUSES OF PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY: 1. 1987. They had with them Arevalo who was hogtied. In fact. or their agents. 159 of the RPC 2. During the execution of judgment. Vnitas. The Court takes judicial notice of the grant of amnesty upon Patriarca. entitled "Granting Amnesty to Rebels. evasion of service of sentence can be committed only by those who have been convicted by final judgment by escaping during the term of his sentence. thereby interrupting and disrupting the proceedings of the Board of Election Tellers. Patriarca asked that the lights in Malto's house be extinguished.. petitioner was never apprehended. Held: Article 93 of the Revised Penal Code provides when the prescription of penalties shall commence to run. 2. Other Crimes Committed in Furtherance of Political Ends. the authorities.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 121 Recebido then alleged that Juan Dorol sold the said land to him on August 13. one who has not been committed to prison cannot be said to have escaped therefrom. and Creating a National Amnesty Commission. He remained at large. Once granted. Patriarca then ordered Arevalo to lie down then shot the latter two times. Clearly. 724 amending Proclamation No. Under said provision. 1997. on October 24. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence. the 10yr prescriptive period of the crime had not yet elapsed at the time the information was filed in 1991. PARTIAL EXTINCTION Art. which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects. All persons are charged with knowledge of what it contains. However. Torrecampo (2002) Facts: The trial court rendered judgment and declared Torrecampo guilty of violating Section 178 (nn) of PD 1296. The Court accords compassion only to those who are deserving. Torrecampo filed a motion to quash the warrant issued for his arrest on the ground of prescription of the penalty imposed upon him. "Escape" in legal parlance and for purposes of Articles 93 and 157 of the RPC means unlawful departure of prisoner from the limits of his custody. 1983 and registered on the same day. 1983. Said decision became final and executory. COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE a) reduce degree of penalty b) decrease the length of imprisonment c) decrease the amount of fine Specific cases where commutation is provided for by the Code: • convict sentenced to death over 70 years old LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. otherwise known as the 1978 Election Code. and 3. Virtvs. B. The alleged sale also could not have been registered before 1983. Torrecampo guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt but he refused to answer for the wrong he committed. By conditional pardon. By commutation of the sentence. Pursuant to Article 157 of the same Code. the grant of amnesty extinguishes the liability of Patriarca in the present case. it shall commence to run from the date the felon evades the service of his sentence. have been done before 1983 as it is impossible for the petitioner to have registered the deed of sale prior thereto. ." In People v. 1994. even before the execution of the judgment for his conviction.

— A deduction of one-fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who.deduction for the term of sentence for good behavior PAROLE . convict can be rearrested and reincarcerated to serve the unexpired portion of his original penalty 4. 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. SOCIAL INJURY – produced by the disturbance and alarm which are the outcome of the offense . 99. earthquake. gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamity. — Whenever lawfully justified. inclusive. During the following years until the tenth year. Obligation incurred by person granted conditional pardon.it is a deduction of 1/5 of the period of his sentence if he. Allowance for good conduct. — The good conduct of any prisoner in any penal institution shall entitle him to the following deductions from the period of his sentence: 1. having evaded the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in Article 58 of this Code. convict may be rearrested or prosecuted under Art. During the first two years of his imprisonment. Art. 8 days 3. following years to 10th year c. Art. SPECIAL TIME ALLOWANCE FOR LOYALTY . 3. without granting a pardon prescribing the terms upon which the sentence shall be punished. During the eleventh and successive years of his imprisonment. he shall be allowed a deduction of fifteen days for each month of good behavior. prescribing the terms upon which the sentence shall be suspended. Parole May be given after the prisoner has served the minimum penalty is granted by the Board of Parole and Pardons under the ISL For violation. Vnitas.May be granted to a prisoner after serving the minimum penalty under the indeterminate sentence law .this is sought to be repaired through the imposition of the corresponding penalty. he shall be allowed a deduction of eight days for each month of good behavior. 11th year and successive years d. ♠ This article does not apply to prisoners who did not escape.Consists in the suspension of the sentence of a convict after serving the minimum term of the indeterminate penalty. he shall be allowed a deduction of five days for each month of good behavior. the Director of Prisons shall grant allowances for good conduct. a convict who evaded service of his sentence by leaving the penal institution on the occasion of disorder resulting from a conflagration. 3. 95. 159 Art. of his imprisonment. explosion or similar catastrophe or during a mutiny in which he did not participate. First 2 years a. he shall be allowed a deduction of ten days for each month of good behavior. Special time allowance for loyalty. 98. — 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. 158.consists in the suspension of the sentence of a convict without granting pardon. 96. 2. 158. 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. Virtvs. an offense causes two classes of injuries: 1. 5 days per month of good behavior 2. having evaded the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in Art. Such allowances once granted shall not be revoked. During the third to the fifth year. VII. . — Any person who has been granted conditional pardon shall incur the obligation of complying strictly with the conditions imposed therein otherwise. Art. is liable to an increased penalty (1/5 of the time still remaining to be served – not to exceed 6 months) if he fails to give himself up within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation by the President announcing the passing away of the calamity. CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING FROM FELONY ♣ As a general rule. ♠ Under Art.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 122 • 10 justices of the SC fail to reach a decision for the affirmance of the death penalty 4. 10 days 4. GOOD CONDUCT ALLOWANCES OF A PRISONER IN A PENAL INSTITUTION: 1. of his imprisonment. and Art. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. GOOD CONDUCT ALLOWANCES DURING CONFINEMENT . 97. Conditional Pardon May be given an time before final judgment is granted by the Chief Executive under the Administrative Code For violation. 15 days ♠ These allowances are granted by the Director of Prisons and once given cannot be revoked. inclusive. 3rd – 5th year b. ♠ The deduction of 1/5 is based on the original sentence. Effect of commutation of sentence. . Who grants time allowances.

like the crime of physical injuries. GENERAL RULE RPC. if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties. PERSONAL INJURY – caused to the victim of the crime who may have suffered damage. is obliged to pay for the damage done. and b) as an offense against the private person injured by the crime unless it involves the crime of treason. 2177. ♣ A reservation of the right to file a separate civil action only gives the party aggrieved the right to choose under which body of laws he must bring the civil action. Institution of criminal and civil actions. Art. ♣ Moral damages may be recovered as well. Preliminary Title. rebellion. Civil obligations arising from criminal offenses shall be governed by the penal laws. (n) RULE 111 PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION 1985 Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure Section 1. A. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another. Art. either to his person. or the reservation of the right LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. 1161. But the plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the defendant. A waiver of any of the civil actions extinguishes the others. or to her chastity. Every person who. contempt and others wherein no civil liability arises on the part of the offender either because there are no damages to be compensated or there is no private person injured by the crime. RPC – where the recovery may be defeated by proof that the acts on which the action is based do not exist. there being fault or negligence. espionage. if the offender is acquitted. 33) c. or 2. 20. 32) b. regulating damages. ♣ But if there is no damage caused by the commission of the crime. and damages under Articles 32. Such fault or negligence. 100. Civil Code – where the same proof is required to preclude recovery. . contrary to law. Art. either under the: 1. Said rule applies only when the plaintiff in the civil action is the offended party in the criminal action and both cases arise from the same offense. 34) PERTINENT PROVISIONS Civil Code. ♣ In crimes against persons. 2176. When a criminal action is instituted. (1092a) Art. doctor’s fees etc. Virtvs. unless the offended party waives the civil action. Vnitas. violations of fundamental rights (Art. the offended party institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action. on Human Relations. 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines arising from the same act or omission of the accused. to his honor. or proof of diligence in the selection and employment of the employee ♣ Effect of ACQUITTAL: As a rule. and of Title XVIII of this Book. except: a) if the acquittal is on the ground that the guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt b) the acquittal was due to an exempting circumstance like insanity and c) when the court finds and states in its judgment that there is only civil responsibility. defamation. the civil action for the recovery of civil liability is impliedly instituted with the criminal action. ♣ Exemplary damages as part of the civil liability ma be imposed when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances. and of the pertinent provisions of Chapter 2.this is sought to be repaired through indemnity which is civil in nature. wilfully or negligently causes damage to another. Exceptions: Independent civil actions may be filed for: a. — Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. the offended party waives his right to file a civil action b. failure or refusal of a member of the police force to render aid or protection to any person in case of danger to life or property (Art. Art. subject to the provisions of Article 2177. the injured party is entitled to be paid for whatever he spent for the treatment of his wounds. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. the civil liability is extinguished. ♣ Civil liability arises from the commission of the felony. it is to be suspended. or c. The institution of. shall indemnify the latter for the same. the offended party reserves his right to institute it separately. ♣ SEPARATE CIVIL ACTION The rule is that when the criminal action is instituted. to his property. ♣ BASIS: A crime has dual character: a) as an offense against the state because of the disturbance of the social order. It is determined in the criminal action except: a. as well as for loss or impairment of earning capacity. a separate civil action cannot be instituted or if already instituted. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is entirely separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code. the offender is not civilly liable. 33. . reserves his right to institute it separately. is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter. or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action. fraud and physical injuries (Art. Such civil action includes recovery of indemnity under the Revised Penal Code.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 123 2.

it was respondent Andres who brought out the deceased. and informed her that her son had died. the civil action based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a finding in a final judgment in the civil action that the act or omission from where the civil liability may arise does not exist. In case of consolidation. the petitioner testified that respondent Andres used to go to their house and play with her son before the latter's death. the filing fees for such civil action as provided in these Rules shall constitute a first lien on the judgment except in an award for actual damages. When the criminal action has been filed in court for trial. went back inside. A final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the defendant from civil liability is no bar to a criminal action. treasurer of Siena Realty Corporation. Sua-Kho and Atty. Melba Quinto rushed to the drainage culvert while respondent Andres followed her. (a) Whenever the offended party shall have instituted the civil action as provided for in the first paragraph of Section 1 hereof before the filing of the criminal action and the criminal action is subsequently commenced. the same may be consolidated with the criminal action upon application with the court trying the criminal action. and falsified the Minutes of the Annual Stockholders meeting of the BOD of the Siena Realty Corporation by causing it to appear in said Minutes that Hao was present and has participated in said proceedings. if no final judgment has been rendered by the trial court in the civil action. 3. The reservation of the right to institute the separate civil actions shall be made before the prosecution starts to present its evidence and under circumstances affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such reservation. 6. In this case. respondent Pacheco. Chua v. is alleged in the complaint or information. In the present case. When the petitioner's son died inside the drainage culvert. until final judgment in the criminal action has been rendered. However. they are not criminally and civilly liable for the latter’s death. after the criminal action has been commenced. Virtvs. In no case may the offended party recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the accused. He then informed the petitioner of her son's death. the corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended party upon the filing thereof in court for trial. Wilson assented but Garcia seeing that it was dark inside opted to remain seated in a grassy area about 2meters from the entrance of the drainage system. the civil action which has been reserved cannot be instituted until final judgment has been rendered in the criminal action. in whatever stage before final judgment it may be found. The two (2) essential elements of a prejudicial question are: (a) the civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action. Andres laid the boy's lifeless body down in the grassy area. and emerged again. During the trial in the MeTC. Atty. Suspension by reason of prejudicial question. 5. entered the drainage system which was covered by concrete culvert about a meter high and a meter wide. Except in the cases provided for in Section 3 hereof. carrying Wilson who was already dead. However. For his part. Rivera appeared as private prosecutors. Even after informing the petitioner of the death of her son. filed a complaint-affidavit with the City Prosecutor of Manila charging Spouses Francis and Elsa Chua. 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. both the criminal and the civil actions shall be tried and decided jointly. respondent Andres followed the petitioner on her way to the grassy area where the deceased was. Vnitas. Elements of prejudicial question. any of said civil actions separately waives the others. Sec. Sec. certified. shall proceed independently of the criminal action. with water about a foot deep. Chua moved to exclude LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. and his playmate. Held: The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil action. 4. the pending civil action shall be suspended. the petition to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action at any time before the prosecution rests. (b) Extinction of the penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil. Accused allegedly prepared. . Judgment in civil action not a bar. In cases wherein the amount of damages. Pacheco. Indeed. who was about 11 yrs old saw Andres and Pacheco who invited them to go fishing inside a drainage culvert. The respondents aver that since the prosecution failed to adduce any evidence to prove that they committed the crime of homicide and caused the death of Wilson. nominal. the petitioner failed to adduce proof of any ill-motive on the part of either respondent to kill the deceased before or after the latter was invited to join them in fishing. this time. After a while. came out of the drainage system and left without saying a word. CA (2004) Facts: Hao. the court ruled that respondents cannot be held criminally nor civilly liable for the death of Wilson. 33. and (b) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed. unless the extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the civil might arise did not exist. Shocked at the sudden turn of events. Institution of separate civil action. Andres went to the house of petitioner Melba Quinto. Garcia fled from the scene. In the cases provided for in Articles 32. a Grade 4 elementary school pupil. Wilson Quinto. Andres (2005) Facts: Garcia. When civil action may proceed independently. When the offended party seeks to enforce civil liability against the accused by way of moral. Andres and Quinto. other than actual. temperate or exemplary damages. the evidence presented and admitted in the civil action shall be deemed automatically reproduced in the criminal action. who was holding a fish. without prejudice to the admission of additional evidence that any party may wish to present. Wilson's mother. If the application is granted. A petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in a civil action may be filed in the office of the fiscal or the court conducting the preliminary investigation. Sec. of 4 counts of falsification of public documents pursuant to Article 172 in relation to Article 171 of the RPC. 2. Sec. the independent civil action which has been reserved may be brought by the offended party. Quinto v. and shall require only a preponderance of evidence. Andres also came out. Sec.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 124 to file.

nor institute the civil action for damages arising from the offense charged. as in the present case. Under the Rules. the following may be recovered: (1) civil indemnity ex delicto for the death of the victim. Additionally. it was the insurance company. Pronebo then filed an application for probation. Taan (2006) Held: Regarding damages. Basilio did not intervene in the criminal proceedings. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. the former cannot act independently on their own behalf. It argues that. When a person commits a crime he offends two entities namely (1) the society in which he lives in or the political entity called the State whose law he has violated. When the accused-employee absconds or jumps bail. chastity or property has been actually or directly injured or damaged by the same punishable act or omission. the offended party may intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the offense. the basis of civil liability arising from crime is the fundamental postulate that every man criminally liable is also civilly liable. 2) that the employer is engaged in some kind of industry. the accused was not lawfully discharging duties as an employee at the time of the incident. it is our view that the lower court did not err when it found that Basilio was not denied due process. the judgment meted out becomes final and executory. and prove that he was not the employer of the accused. petitioner must be accorded the right to pursue the case to its logical conclusion — including the appeal. in proper cases. that provided the counsel for Pronebo. Subsequently. Consequently. — The exemption from criminal liability LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. through counsel. what gives rise to the civil liability is really the obligation and the moral duty of everyone to repair or make whole the damage caused to another by reason of his own act or omission. we find that the private prosecutors can intervene in the trial of the criminal action. Philippine Rabbit v. it is considered a party to the criminal case and is conclusively bound by the outcome thereof. which was filed solely against Roman. Basilio now asserts that he was not given the opportunity to be heard by the trial court to prove the absence of an employer-employee relationship between him and accused. an employee of Philippine Rabbit was found guilty and convicted of the crime of reckless imprudence resulting to triple homicide. (3) moral damages. and 4) that said employee is insolvent. 101. Generally. reserves the right to institute it separately. The indemnity which a person is sentenced to pay forms an integral part of the penalty imposed by law for the commission of the crime. they have an interest therein. (2) actual or compensatory damages. An act or omission is felonious because it is punishable by law. People (2004) Facts: Accused Roman. (5) attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation. Virtvs. With the convict's application for probation. and (6) interest. whether done intentionally or negligently. Held: Petitioner's contention lacks merit. "[w]hen a criminal action is instituted. SPECIAL CASE Art. Accused then jumped bail and remained at-large. the trial court's judgment became final and executory. CA (2000) Facts: Pronebo was found guilty by the trial court of Reckless Imprudence resulting to the death of one Advincula. with which his truck was insured. it gives rise to civil liability not so much because it is a crime but because it caused damage to another. the offended party may not intervene in the prosecution of the offense. The employer cannot defeat the finality of the judgment by filing a notice of appeal on its own behalf in the guise of asking for a review of its subsidiary civil liability. The civil action involves the civil liability arising from the offense charged which includes restitution. Jr. The cases dealing with the subsidiary liability of employers uniformly declare that. before execution against an employer ensues. While they may assist their employees to the extent of supplying the latter's lawyers. v. . Undisputedly. All told. or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action. Held: The statutory basis for an employer's subsidiary liability is found in Article 103 of the RPC. they are not parties to the criminal cases instituted against their employees. Both the primary civil liability of the accused-employee and the subsidiary civil liability of the employer are carried in one single decision that has become final and executory. when death occurs due to a crime. Petitioner cites the case of Tan. honor. Gallardo. strictly speaking. reparation of the damage caused. shall be liable for his civil liabilities. but can only defend the accused. and (2) the individual member of the society whose person. People v. Although in substance and in effect. multiple physical injuries and damage to property. The court further ruled that Philippine Rabbit. where the civil action for recovery of civil liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111. Basilio knew of the criminal case that was filed against his driver because it was his truck that was involved in the incident. B." Hao did not waive the civil action. petitioner is not a direct party to the criminal case. (4) exemplary damages. despite knowledge. and indemnification for consequential damages. Thus. but he chooses not to intervene at the appropriate time. its employee. Further. as an employer. pursuant to the stipulations in their contract. He had all his chances to intervene in the criminal proceedings. the civil action arising from the offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the offended party waives the civil action. This liability is enforceable in the same criminal proceeding where the award is made. 3) that the employee is adjudged 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. holding that where from the nature of the offense or where the law defining and punishing the offense charged does not provide for an indemnity. nor did she reserve the right to institute it separately. this fact should be viewed in the light of their subsidiary liability.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 125 complainant's counsels as private prosecutors in the case on the ground that Hao failed to allege and prove any civil liability in the case. alternatively. Philippine Rabbit filed a notice of appeal. that the prosecution adduced evidence to show employer-employee relationship. Held: The argument has no merit. Nor that. in a hearing set for the purpose of 1) the existence of an employer-employee relationship. there must be a determination. Basilio v. right. the trial court issued an Order granting the motion for execution of the subsidiary liability of his employer Basilio. However. in the event of the insolvency of accused. Vnitas. 31 Rule 111(a) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that.

3. There is no civil liability in paragraph 4 of Art. 3. and. The courts shall determine. “the father and. saving always to the latter that part of their property exempt from execution. imbecile. 1: 1. in accordance with the civil law. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11. 2. SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY OF INNKEEPERS.There is no civil liability in justifying circumstances except in par. who has acted without discernment. In cases of subdivisions 1. 2. or if such person be insolvent. Second. Pars. 4 and 7 of Art. 102. 4 of Art. tavernkeepers. Vnitas. The particular law that governs is Art. 1. those doing the act shall be liable secondarily. There is no civil liability in par. TAVERNKEEPERS OR PROPRIETORS OF ESTABLISHMENTS – ELEMENTS OF PAR. even approximately. ELEMENTS OF PAR 2. and any other persons or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes committed in their establishments. 3. 1. in sound discretion. 12 which provides for injury caused by mere accident. Therefore. No liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons unless committed by the innkeeper's employees. legal guardianship or control. the innkeeper. 4 and 7 are not mentioned. CIVIL LIABILITY FOR ACTS COMMITTED BY AN INSANE OR IMBECILE OR MINOR UNDER 9 OR OVER 9 AND LESS THAN 15 WHO ACTED WITH DEISCERNMENT ♣ A minor over 15 years of age who acts with discernment is not exempt from criminal liability that is why the RPC is silent as to the subsidiary liability of his parents. the mother are responsible for damages caused by the minor children who live in their company. or minor shall respond with their own property. That the person criminally liable is insolvent. or the person representing him. 2. Third. unless it appears that there was no fault or negligence on their part. indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed by special laws or regulations. tavernkeeper or any other person or corporation is civilly liable for the crime committed in his establishment. or. 2180 of the Civil Code which provides. innkeepers. TAVERNKEEPER OR PROPRIETOR of establishment or his employee committed a violation of municipal ordinance or some general or special police regulation. and 3 of Article 12. 2. 2. That the INNKEEPER. the civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile or insane person. CIVIL LIABILITY FOR ACTS COMMITTED BY PERSONS ACTING UNDER IRRESISTIBLE FORCE OR UNCONTROLLABE FEAR . 2. ♣ The exemption from criminal liability does not include exemption from civil liability in the cases provided for in pars. of the deposit of such goods within the inn. which shall be enforced subject to the following rules: First. When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 126 established in subdivisions 1. The guests notified in advance the innkeeper or the person representing him of the deposit of their goods within the inn or house. — In default of the persons criminally liable. if there be no such persons. 12 which provides for failure to perform an act required by law when prevented by some lawful or insuperable cause.The persons using violence or causing the fear are primarily liable. CIVIL LIABILITY OF INNKEEPERS AND SIMILAR PERSONS Art. Should there be no person having such insane. or for the payment of the value thereof. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. Virtvs. That a crime is committed in such inn. 7 of Art. shall devolve upon those having such person under their legal authority or control. 3. tavern or establishment. there is also exemption from civil liability in the cases provided for in pars. the persons using violence or causing the fears shall be primarily liable and secondarily. and by a person under nine years of age. 5 and 6 of Article 12 and in subdivision 4 of Article 11 of this Code does not include exemption from civil liability. 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. tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments. or to the majority of the inhabitants of the town. 5 and 6 of Art. The guest followed the directions of the innkeeper or his representative with respect to the care of the vigilance over such goods.” ♣ The final release of a child based on good conduct does not obliterate his civil liability for damages. 1. 2. 4. 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. those doing the act shall be liable. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers. in all events. or by one over nine but under fifteen years of age. in case of his death or incapacity. CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS ACTING UNDER JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES . whenever the damages have been caused with the consent of the authorities or their agents. Exceptions: 1. 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. imbecile or minor under his authority. Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging therein. 11 wherein the person who was benefited by the act which causes damage to another is the one civilly liable. said insane. CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY Exemption from criminal liability does not include exemption from civil liability. . the proportionate amount for which each one shall be liable. or when the liability also attaches to the Government. 12. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article 12. excepting property exempt from execution. ♣ When all the above elements are present. provided that such guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper himself. 12.

The thing itself shall be restored. Reparation. ♣ Where the crime committed is not against property. Virtvs. the court held that it should be shown that: 1) the employer. Indemnification for consequential damages. ♣ RESTITUTION of the thing itself must be made whenever possible. 107. even though it be found in the possession of a third person who has acquired it by lawful means. teachers. or diminution of value. 5. How made. How made. who may be liable to him. workmen. and reparation shall be made accordingly. 106. whenever possible. etc. apprentices. bar an action for its recovery.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 127 Such goods of the guests lodging therein were taken by robbery with force upon things or theft committed within the inn or house. In either case. 103. and its special sentimental value to the injured party. the employer. workmen. 104. Carpio v. ♣ The convict cannot. — The subsidiary liability established in the next preceding article shall also apply to employers. Restitution. ♣ The first remedy granted by law is RESTITUTION of the thing taken away by the offender. even if found in the possession of the 3rd person who acquired it legally. ♣ The damages are limited to those caused by the crime. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. Reparation of the damage caused. C. pupils. ♣ No defense of diligence of a good father of a family. SUBSIDIARY LIABILITY OF OTHER PERSONS Art. give to the offended part a similar thing of the same amount. persons. ♣ It is not necessary that the effects of the guest be actually delivered to the innkeeper. by law. ♣ When all the above elements are present. or employees in the discharge of their duties. 3. All these requisites present. 101. the court must order the accused to restore it to its owner or. whenever possible. person or corporation is engaged in any kind of industry. indemnity for consequential damages may be required. — The civil liability established in Articles 100. apprentices or employees commits a felony while in the discharge of his duties. pupils. becomes ipso facto subsidiarily liable upon the employee’s conviction and upon proof of the latter’s insolvency. although the latter can file an action against the person who may be liable to him except if the thing has been acquired by the 3rd person in the manner provided by law which bars an action for its recovery. no restitution nor reparation of the thing damaged can be done. Art. the innkeeper is subsidiarily liable. 2. The said employee is insolvent and has not satisfied his civil liability. ♣ Employer has the right to take part in the defense of his employee. or diminution of value as determined by the court. with allowance for deterioration. 102. 3. the law 3. ♣ When property taken away is not recovered. with allowance for any deterioration. there can be no reparation. Doroja (1989) Ruling upon the enforcement of the subsidiary liability of an employer in the same criminal proceeding without the need of a separate action. and corporations engaged in any kind of industry for felonies committed by their servants. he cannot be ordered to return the property or amount received EXCEPT if: it is proved that the property belonged to the offended party was in his possession when stolen from him and the identity of the offender is not proved. arises only after conviction of the employee in the criminal action. ♣ No liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons. . Restitution. ♣ If the accused is acquitted. however. kin or species and quality. Vnitas. ♣ Private persons without business or industry are not subsidiarily liable. ♣ HOW RESTITUTION IS MADE? The thing itself is to be restored. taking into consideration the price of the thing. ♣ The felony must be committed by the servant or employee of the defendant in the civil case. HOW IS REPARATION MADE? . although the offended party is entitled to indemnification under Art. What is included in civil liability. and 103 of this Code includes: 1. WHAT CIVIL LIABILITY INCLUDES Art. it is enough that they were within the inn. unless committed by the innkeeper’s employees. ELEMENTS: 1. teacher. by way of restitution. The employer.The court determines the amount of damages by considering: a) the price of the thing and b) its special sentimental value to the offended party. — The court shall determine the amount of damage. in which case the acquitted person in whose possession the property was found may be ordered by the court to return it to the owner. 105. allows the offended party REPARATION. 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. ♣ If there is no evidence as to the value of the thing unrecovered. is engaged in any kind of industry 2) the employee committed the offense in the discharge of his duties and 3) he is insolvent The subsidiary liability of the employer. ♣ The accused is liable for the damages caused as a result of the destruction of the property after the crime was committed either because it was lost or destroyed LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. as an alternative. — The restitution of the thing itself must be made whenever possible. Art. Any of their servants. if restitution cannot be made by the offender or by his heirs. saving to the latter his action against the proper person. 2. to pay its just value.

the insurance company is subrogated to the right of the offended party to collect damages. 112. reparation for damages. 4. What is included.000 Lost of Earning Capacity Support to a non-heir Moral damages for mental anguish… Exemplary damages if attended by 1 or more aggravating circumstances D. the courts shall determine the amount for which each must respond. EXTINCTION OF CIVIL LIABILITY Art. the person by whom payment has been made shall have a right of action against the others for the amount of their respective shares. and subsidiaries for those of the other persons liable. those suffered by 3rd person by reason of the crime ♣ Damages cover not only ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY damages but also MORAL AND EXEMPLARY or CORRECTIVE damages. Art. first against the property of the principals. accomplices and accessories of a felony. ♣ The action to demand restoration.upon the HEIRS of the person liable ♣ The heirs of the person liable has no obligation if restoration is not possible and the deceased left no property. Vnitas. reparation and indemnification descends to the heirs of the person injured. — Notwithstanding the provisions of the next preceding article. Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability has been enforced. CIVIL CODE. against that of the accessories. — Civil liability established in Articles 100. reparation. 5. ♣ Subsidiary liability is enforced: first. . Art. Preference in payment. against that of the accomplices. those caused the injured party b. or c. lastly. ♣ Indemnification for consequential damages includes: a. ♣ The accused is not relieved of his obligation to satisfy his civil liability if the insurance company has already paid the offended party as the payment of the insurance company was not made on behalf of the accused but because the contract with the insured-offended party. Upon whom it devolves. — Indemnification for consequential damages shall include not only those caused the injured party. 2. or indemnification for consequential damages and actions to demand the same. second. will have a right of action against the others for the amount of their respective shares. 111. However. and accessories. those suffered by the family. Obligation to make restoration. Obligations are extinguished: (1) By payment or performance: (2) By the loss of the thing due: (3) By the condonation or remission of the LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. shall be liable severally (in solidum) among themselves for their quotas. third. ♣ Upon whom does the obligation to make restoration. — If there are two or more persons civilly liable for a felony. 110. Virtvs. ♣ Extinguished in the same manner as other obligations in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code. 102. Extinction of civil liability. each within their respective class. Art. The subsidiary liability shall be enforced. 101. PERSONS CIVILLY LIABLE Art.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 128 by the accused himself or that of any other person or as a result of any other cause or causes. ♣ Civil liability is possible only when the offender dies after final judgment. against the property of the principals. 1231. next. ♣ This refers to a person who has participated gratuitously in the commission of a felony and he is bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent to the extent of such participation. Art. in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Law. DEATH results: INDEMNITY: P50. ACCOMPLICES AND ACCESSORIES . ♣ Where 1. the principals. Art. 107. and 103 of this Code shall be extinguished in the same manner as obligations. against that of the accomplices. 3. Indemnification. but also those suffered by his family or by a third person by reason of the crime. he would be liable as an accessory and this article will apply. — 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. Obligation to make restitution in certain cases. — The obligation to make restoration or reparation for damages and indemnification for consequential damages devolves upon the heirs of the person liable. The action to demand restoration. especially when attended by 1 or more aggravating circumstances in the commission of the crime and considering that proof of pecuniary loss is not necessary in order that moral or exemplary damages may be adjudicated as the assessment of such damages is left to the discretion of the court. ♣ The third person must be innocent of the commission of the crime. against that of the accessories ♣ The person who made the payment when liability is in solidum or subsidiary liability has been enforced. ♣ Contributory negligence of the offended party reduces the liability of the accused. 109. accomplices. Several and subsidiary liability of principals. LIABILITY OF PRINCIPALS. and. Share of each person civilly liable.Each within their respective class is liable in solidum among themselves for their quotas and subsidiarily for those of the other persons liable. reparation or indemnification for damages devolve? . and indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of the person injured. otherwise. 108. E.

or has not been required to serve the same by reason of amnesty. (1156a) ♣ Loss of the thing due does not extinguish civil liability because if the offender cannot make restitution. pardon. commutation of sentence or any other reason. rescission. ♣ Unless extinguished. are governed elsewhere in this Code. (5) By compensation. LEX SOCIETAS Veritas. and prescription. fulfillment of a resolutory condition. . this pecuniary liability of the defendant is not extinguished. Obligation to satisfy civil liability. — Except in case of extinction of his civil liability as provided in the next preceding article the offender shall continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability resulting from the crime committed by him. notwithstanding the fact that he has served his sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights.ESGUERRA NOTES – CRIMINAL LAW 129 debt. Art. even if the subsidiary imprisonment is served for non-payment of fine. he is obliged to make reparation. civil liability subsists even if the offender has served sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights or has served the same. (6) By novation. pardon. ♣ Under the law as amended. Virtvs. Other causes of extinguishment of obligations. (4) By the confusion or merger of the rights of creditor and debtor. due to amnesty. 113. Vnitas. such as annulment. ♣ Indemnity for damages as a judgment in a criminal case is purely civil in nature and is independent of the penalty imposed. commutation of sentence or any other reason.