You are on page 1of 168

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

1 of 86

ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS IN

CRIMINAL LAW
ARRANGED BY TOPIC

(1994 2006)
Version 1973 2003 Edited and Arranged by: J !"##" L $$%&'I( ) !* A+", A!*-". P/ I( )
(Silliman University College of Law)

U0* #"* 123

Dondee
ReTake BarOps 2007

From the ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS IN CRIMINAL LAW ! the U" LAW COM"LEX a#$ "%ILI""INE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SC%OOLS

&'(! )* 2007

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

2 of 86

FORWAR+
This work is not intended for sale or commerce. This work is freeware. It may be freely copied and distributed. It is primarily intended for all those who desire to have a deeper understanding of the issues touched by the Philippine Bar Examinations and its trend. It is specially intended for law students from the provinces who, very often, are recipients of deliberately distorted notes from other unscrupulous law schools and students. hare to others this work and you will be richly rewarded by !od in heaven. It is also very good karma. "e would like to seek the indulgence of the reader for some Bar #uestions which are improperly classified under a topic and for some topics which are improperly or ignorantly phrased, for the authors are $ust Bar %eviewees who have prepared this work while reviewing for the Bar Exams under time constraints and within their limited knowledge of the law. "e would like to seek the reader&s indulgence for a lot of typographical errors in this work.

The 'uthors (uly )*, )++,


-pdated by.

(uly /, )++0

Version 1994-2006

Updated by Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

3 of 86

T 1+" )4 C)!#"!#5
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
General Principles; Schools of thought in Criminal Law (1996) General Principles; Territoriality (199 ) General Principles; Territoriality; !uris"iction o#er $essel (%&&&) 'se of (liases; )hen (llowe" (%&&6) 10 10 10 10

10

6ELONIES
Conspiracy (199*) Conspiracy; (#oi"ance of Greater +#il (%&& ) Conspiracy; Co,Conspirator (199-) Conspiracy; Common .elonious Purpose (199 ) Conspiracy; Comple/ Crime with 0ape (1996) Conspiracy; .light to +#a"e (pprehension (%&&1) Conspiracy; .light to +#a"e (pprehension (%&&1) Conspiracy; 2mplie" Conspiracy (199-) Conspiracy; 2mplie" Conspiracy; +ffects (%&&1) Criminal Lia3ility4 5estructi#e (rson (%&&&) Criminal Lia3ility4 .elonious (ct of Scaring (1996) Criminal Lia3ility4 .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (1996) Criminal Lia3ility4 2mpossi3le Crimes (%&&&) Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct of Scaring (%&&1) Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct of Scaring (%&&6) Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; 2mme"iate Cause (%&&1) Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (199 ) Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (199*) Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (1999) Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (%&&1) Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (%&& ) Criminal Lia3ility; 2mpossi3le Crime (%&& ) Criminal Lia3ility; 2mpossi3le Crimes (199 ) Criminal Lia3ility; 2mpossi3le Crimes; 7i"napping (%&&&) 8ala in Se #s9 8ala Prohi3ita (199*) 8ala in Se #s9 8ala Prohi3ita (1999) 8ala in Se #s9 8ala Prohi3ita (%&&1) 8ala in Se #s9 8ala Prohi3ita (%&&1) 8ala Prohi3ita; (ctual 2n:ury 0e;uire" (%&&&) 8alum in Se #s9 8alum Prohi3itum (%&&6) 8oti#e #s9 2ntent (1996) 8oti#e #s9 2ntent (1999) 8oti#e #s9 2ntent (%&& ) 8oti#e; Proof thereof; <ot +ssential; Con#iction (%&&6) 10 11 11 11 11 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 19 19

10

JUSTI6YING 7 EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES


+/empting Circumstances; Co#erage (%&&&) +/empting Circumstances; 8inority (199-) +/empting; 8inority; 11 yrs =l"; (3sence of 5iscernment (%&&&) !ustifying #s9 +/empting Circumstances (%&& ) !ustifying; 5efense of >onor; 0e;uisites (%&&%) !ustifying; 5efense of Stranger (%&&%) !ustifying; .ulfillment of 5uty; 0e;uisites (%&&&) !ustifying; S5; 5efense of >onor; 0e;uisites (199-) !ustifying; 5efense of >onor; +lements (%&&&) !ustifying; S5; 5efense of Property; 0e;uisites (1996) !ustifying; S5; 5efense of Property; 0e;uisites (%&&1) 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21

19

Version 1994-2006

Updated by Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

4 of 86
22

?ualifying; +lements of a Crime (%&&1)

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
8itigating; <on,2nto/ication (%&&&) 8itigating; Plea of Guilty (1999) 8itigating; Plea of Guilty; 0e;uisites (1999) 8itigating; Plea of Guilty; $oluntary Surren"er (199*) 8itigating; $oluntary Surren"er (1996) 8itigating; $oluntary Surren"er; +lements (1999) 22 22 22 22 23 23

22

AGGRA8ATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(ggra#ating Circumstances (1996) (ggra#ating Circumstances; Generis #s9 ?ualifying (1999) (ggra#ating Circumstances; 7in"s @ Penalties (1999) (ggra#ating; Cruelty; 0elationship (199 ) (ggra#ating; 8ust 3e allege" in the information (%&&&) (ggra#ating; <ighttime; Aan" (199 ) (ggra#ating; 0eci"i#ism (%&&1) (ggra#ating; 0eci"i#ism #s9 ?uasi,0eci"i#ism (199-) (ggra#ating; Treachery @ 'nlawful +ntry (199*) 23 24 24 24 24 24 24 25 25

23

ALTERNATI8E CIRCUMSTANCES
(lternati#e Circumstances; 2nto/ication (%&&%) 25

25 25
25 26 26 26 26 27 27 27 27

PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE 6OR 6ELONIES


(nti,.encing Law; .encing (1996) (nti,.encing Law; .encing #s9 Theft or 0o33ery (1996) (nti,.encing Law; .encing; +lements (1996) Criminal Lia3ility; (ccessories @ .ence (199-) Criminal Lia3ility; <on,+/emption as (ccessory (%&& ) Criminal Lia3ility; Principal 3y 5irect Participation; Co,Principal 3y 2n"ispensa3le Cooperation (%&&&) Criminal Lia3ility; Principal 3y 2n"ucement (%&&%) Criminal Lia3ility; Principal; 2n"ucement @ Participation (199 ) 5estructi#e (rson (199 )

PENALTIES
Comple/ Crime #s9 Compoun" Crime (%&& ) Comple/ Crime #s9 Special Comple/ Crime #s9 5elito Continua"o (%&&6) Comple/ Crime; (3erratio ictus #s9 error in personae (199 ) Comple/ Crime; (3erratio 2ctusB +rror 2n Personae @ Praeter 2ntentionem (1999) Comple/ Crime; (3erratio 2ctus; (ttempte" 8ur"er with >omici"e (%&&&) Comple/ Crime; 5octrine of (3erratio 2ctus; <ot (pplica3le (1996) Comple/ Crimes; Coup "Cetat @ re3ellion @ se"ition (%&&1) Comple/ Crimes; 5etermination of the Crime (1999) Comple/ Crimes; <ature @ Penalty 2n#ol#e" (1999) Comple/ Crimes; =r"inary Comple/ Crime #s9 Special Comple/ Crime (%&&1) Continuing =ffense #s9 5elito Continua"o (199 ) 5eath Penalty (%&& ) 5eath Penalty; ?ualifie" 0ape; 0e;uisites (%&& ) >a3itual 5elin;uency @ 0eci"i#ism (%&&1) 2n"eterminate Sentence Law (199 ) 2n"eterminate Sentence Law (1999) 2n"eterminate Sentence Law (1999) 2n"eterminate Sentence Law (%&&%) 2n"eterminate Sentence Law (%&&6) 2n"eterminate Sentence Law; +/ceptions (1999) 2n"eterminate Sentence Law; +/ceptions (%&&1) 27 28 28 28 28 29 29 29 30 30 30 30 31 31 31 32 32 32 32 32 33

27

Version 1994-2006

Updated by Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

5 of 86
33 33 33 33 34 34 34 34 35 35 35 35 35 36 36 36 36 36 37 37 37 38

Penalties4 .ine or 2mprisonment #s9 Su3si"iary 2mprisonment (%&&6) Penalties4 Pecuniary Penalties #s9 Pecuniary Lia3ilities (%&&6) Penalties; Comple/ Crime of +stafa (199*) Penalties; .actors to Consi"er (1991) Penalties; >omici"e wD 8o"ifying Circumstance (1996) Penalties; 8itigating Circumstances wDout (ggra#ating Circumstance (199*) Penalties; Parrici"e wD 8itigating Circumstance (199*) Penalties; Pre#enti#e 2mprisonment (199 ) Penalties; 0eclusion Perpetua (0() <o9 *969 (%&&6) Penalties; 0eclusion Perpetua #s9 Life 2mprisonment (199 ) Penalties; 0eclusion Perpetua #s9 Life 2mprisonment (%&&1) Pro3ation Law4 Proper Perio" (%&&6) Pro3ation Law; Aarre" 3y (ppeal (199 ) Pro3ation Law; Aarre" 3y (ppeal (%&&1) Pro3ation Law; 8a/imum Term #s9 Total Term (199*) Pro3ation Law; =r"er 5enying Pro3ation; <ot (ppeala3le (%&&%) Pro3ation Law; Perio" Co#ere" (%&& ) Pro3ation Law; 0ight; Aarre" 3y (ppeal (1996) Pro3ation Law; 0ight; Aarre" 3y (ppeal (%&&1) Suspension of Sentence; ("ultsD8inors (%&&6) Suspension of Sentence; 8inors (%&&1) Suspension of Sentence; Eouthful =ffen"er (1996)

EXTINCTION O6 CRIMINAL LIABILITY


(mnesty #s9 P5 116& (%&&6) (mnesty; Crimes Co#ere" (%&&6) +/tinction; Criminal @ Ci#il Lia3ilities; +ffects; 5eath of accuse" pen"ing appeal (%&& ) +/tinction; Criminal @ Ci#il Lia3ilities; +ffects; 5eath of =ffen"e" Party (%&&&) Par"on #s9 (mnesty (%&&6) Par"on; +ffect; Ci#il 2nter"iction (%&& ) Par"on; +ffect; 0einstatement (199 ) Prescription of Crimes; Aigamy (1996) Prescription of Crimes; Commencement (%&&&) Prescription of Crimes; Commencement (%&& ) Prescription of Crimes; Concu3inage (%&&1) Prescription of Crimes; .alse Testimony (199 ) Prescription of Crimes; Simple Slan"er (199*) 38 38 38 38 39 39 39 40 40 40 40 41 41

38

CI8IL LIABILITY
Ci#il lia3ility; +ffect of (c;uittal (%&&&) Ci#il lia3ility; +ffect of (c;uittal (%&&&) Ci#il Lia3ility; Su3si"iary; +mployers (199-) Ci#il Lia3ility; )hen 8an"atory; Criminal Lia3ility (%&&6) 5amages; >omici"e; Temperate 5amages (%&&6) 41 41 42 42 42

41

CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND T9E LAW O6 NATIONS


Piracy in the >igh Seas @ ?ualifie" Piracy (%&&6) 42

42 43
43

CRIMES AGAINST T9E 6UNDAMENTAL LAW O6 T9E STATE


$iolation of 5omicile #s9 Trespass to 5welling (%&&%)

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER


(rt 11 ; 0e3ellion; Politically 8oti#ate"; Committe" 3y <P( 8em3ers (199-) (rt 11 ,(4 Coup "C etat @ 0ape; .rustrate" (%&&6) (rt 11 ,(; Coup "Cetat (%&&%) (rt 11 ,(; Coup "Cetat; <ew .irearms Law (199-) (rt 116; Conspiracy to Commit 0e3ellion (199 ) 43 44 44 44 44

43

Version 1994-2006

Updated by Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

6 of 86
44 45 45 45 46 46 46

(rt 1 -; 5irect (ssault #s9 0esistance @ 5iso3e"ience (%&&1) (rt 1 -; 5irect (ssault; Teachers @ Professors (%&&%) (rt 1 -; Persons in (uthorityD(gents of Persons in (uthority (%&&&) (rt 166; 5eli#ery of Prisoners from !ail (%&&%) (rt 16*; +#asion of Ser#ice of Sentence (199-) (rt9 11 ; 0e3ellion #s9 Coup "Fetat (%&& ) Comple/ Crime; 5irect (ssault with mur"er (%&&&)

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST


.alse <otes; 2llegal Possession (1999) .alse Testimony (199 ) .alsification; Presumption of .alsification (1999) .orgery @ .alsification (1999) Gra#e Scan"al (1996) Per:ury (1996) Per:ury (199*) Per:ury (%&&6) 47 47 47 47 48 48 48 49

47

CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC O66ICERS


Ari3ery @ Corruption of Pu3lic =fficial (%&&1) 5irect Ari3ery4 2nfi"elity in the Custo"y of 5ocuments (%&&6) !uris"iction; 2mpeacha3le Pu3lic =fficers (%&&6) 8al#ersation (199 ) 8al#ersation (1999) 8al#ersation (1999) 8al#ersation (%&&1) 8al#ersation (%&&6) 8al#ersation #s9 +stafa (1999) 8al#ersation; Properties; Custo"ia Legis (%&&1) 8al#ersation; Technical 8al#ersation (1996) Pu3lic =fficers; "efinition (1999) Pu3lic =fficers; 2nfi"elity in Custo"y of Prisoners (1996) Pu3lic =fficers; 2nfi"elity in Custo"y of Prisoners (199*) 49 49 50 50 50 50 50 51 51 52 52 52 52 53

49

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS


Comple/ Crime; >omici"e wD (ssault,(uthority (1996) Comple/ Crime; Parrici"e wD unintentional a3ortion (199 ) Criminal Lia3ilities; 0ape; >omici"e @ Theft (199- <o) Criminal Lia3ility; Tumultous (ffray (199*) Criminal Lia3ility; Tumultuous (ffray (%&&1) 5eath un"er +/ceptional Circumstances (%&&1) 5eath un"er +/ceptional Circumstances (%&&6) >omici"e; .raustrate"; Physical 2n:uries (199 ) 2nfantici"e (%&&6) 8ur"er @ Sec9 %6B 09(9 <o9 9166 (%&&6) 8ur"er (1999) 8ur"er; 5efinition @ +lements (1999) 8ur"er; +#i"ent Preme"itation (1996) 8ur"er; >omici"e; 2nfantici"e; Parrici"e (1999) 8ur"er; 0ecGles 2mpru"ence (%&&1) 8ur"er; Treachery (1996) 8ur"er; 'se of 2llegal .irearms (%&& ) Parrici"e (1999) Parrici"e (1999) Parrici"e; 8ultiple Parrici"e; >omici"e (199*) 0ape (1996) 0ape; (3sence of .orce @ 2ntimi"ation (1996) 0ape; (nti,0ape Law of 199* (%&&%) 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 57 57 58 58 58

53

Version 1994-2006

Updated by Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

7 of 86
58 59 59 59 59 59 60

0ape; (nti,0ape Law of 199* (%&&%) 0ape; Consente" (3"uction (%&&%) 0ape; +ffect; (ffi"a#it of 5esistance (1991) 0ape; 8ale $ictim (%&&%) 0ape; 8ultiple 0apes; .orci3le (3"uction (%&&&) 0ape; Proper Party (1991) 0ape; Statutory 0ape; 8ental 0etar"ate $ictim (1996)

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND SECURITY


(r3itrary 5etention; +lements; Groun"s (%&&6) Gra#e Coercion (199-) Gra#e Coercion #s9 8altreatment of Prisoner (1999) 2llegal 5etention #s9 Gra#e Coercion (1999) 7i"napping (%&&%) 7i"napping (%&&6) 7i"napping wD >omici"e (%&&6) 7i"napping; +ffects; $oluntary 0elease (%&& ) 7i"napping; 2llegal 5etention; 8inority (%&&6) 7i"napping; Proposal to 7i"nap (1996) 7i"napping; Serious 2llegal 5etention (199*) Trespass to 5welling; Pri#ate Persons (%&&6) Tresspass to 5welling; 0ule of (3sorption (199 ) 'n:ust $e/ation #s (cts of Lasci#iousness (199 ) 60 60 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 63 63 63 64 64

60

CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY


(rson; 5estructi#e (rson (199 ) (rson; 5estructi#e (rson (%&&&) (rson; <ew (rson Law (%&& ) AP %%; 8emoran"um ChecG (199 ) AP %%; 8emoran"um ChecG (1996) AP %%; Presumption of 7nowle"ge (%&&%) +stafa @ Trust 0eceipt Law (1996) +stafa (1999) +stafa #s9 AP %% (1996) +stafa #s9 AP %% (%&&1) +stafa #s9 8oney 8arGet Placement (1996) +stafa #s9 Theft (%&&6) +stafa; +lements (%&&6) +stafa; .alsification of Commercial 5ocument (%&&&) +stafa; .alsification of Commercial 5ocuments (199*) +stafa; Swin"ling (199-) 0o33ery (1996) 0o33ery un"er 0PC (%&&&) 0o33ery un"er 0PC (%&&1) 0o33ery #s9 >ighway 0o33ery (%&&&) 0o33ery wD force upon things (%&&&) 0o33ery wD >omici"e , 09(9 <o9 *669 (%&&6) 0o33ery wD >omici"e (1996) 0o33ery wD >omici"e (199-) 0o33ery wD >omici"e (%&&1) 0o33ery wD >omici"e; Special Comple/ Crime (1996) 0o33ery wD 2ntimi"ation #s9 Theft (%&&%) 0o33ery wD 0ape (1999) 0o33ery wD 0ape; Conspiracy (%&& ) 0o33ery; >omici"e; (rson (1996) 0o33ery; 0ape (199*) Theft (199-) Theft (%&&1) 64 64 64 65 65 65 65 66 66 66 67 67 67 67 68 68 68 68 68 69 69 69 70 70 71 71 71 71 71 72 72 72 73

64

Version 1994-2006

Updated by Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

8 of 86
73 73 73 73 74 74

Theft; ?ualifie" Theft (%&&%) Theft; ?ualifie" Theft (%&&%) Theft; ?ualifie" Theft (%&&6) Theft; Stages of +/ecution (199-) Theft; Stages of +/ecution (%&&&) 'surpation of 0eal 0ights (1996)

CRIMES AGAINST C9ASTITY


(cts of Lasci#iousness #s9 'n:ust $e/ation (199 ) ("ultery (%&&%) Concu3inage (199 ) Concu3inage (%&&%) 'n:ust $e/ation #s9 (ct of Lasci#iousness (%&&6) 74 74 74 75 75

74

CRIMES AGAINST T9E CI8IL STATUS O6 PERSONS


Aigamy (199 ) Aigamy (1996) Aigamy (%&& ) Aigamy; Prescripti#e Perio" (1996) Simulation of Airth @ Chil" TrafficGing (%&&%) 75 75 75 76 76

75

CRIMES AGAINST 9ONOR


Li3el (%&&%) Li3el (%&&1) Li3el (%&&6) Slan"er (19--) Slan"er (1996) Slan"er 3y 5ee" #s9 8altreatment (199 ) Slan"er #s9 Criminal Con#ersation (%&& ) 76 76 77 77 77 77 77

76

MISCELLANEOUS
Corpus 5elicti (%&&1) Corpus 5elicti; 5efinition @ +lements (%&&&) +ntrapment #s9 2nstigation (1996) +ntrapment #s9 2nstigation (%&&1) 78 78 78 78

78

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS


(nti,Carnapping (ct; Carnapping wD >omici"e (199-) (nti,Graft @ Corrupt Practices , 0( 1&19 (199*) (nti,>aHing law I 0( -& 9 (%&&%) C>2L5 (A'S+; 0( *61& (%&& ) Chil" (3use; 0( *61& (%&&6) 5angerous 5rug (ct4 Plea,Aargaining (%&&6) 5angerous 5rugs (ct (199-) 5angerous 5rugs (ct (%&&6) 5angerous 5rugs (ct (6 %6); 8arGe" 8oney (%&&&) 5angerous 5rugs (ct (6 %6); Plea Aargaining (199-) 5angerous 5rugs (ct; Consummation of Sale (1996) 5angerous 5rugs (ct; Criminal 2ntent to Posses (%&&%) 5angerous 5rugs (ct; Plea,Aargaining (%&& ) >ighway 0o33ery (%&&1) 2llegal .ishing , P5 *& (1996) 2llegal Possession of .irearms I 0( -%9 (199-) 2llegal Possession of .irearms @ (mmunitions (%&&&) P5 6 @ 0( 6*11 @ 2n"irect Ari3ery (%&&6) P5 6 (199 ) P5 6 (199*)
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

79
79 79 80 80 80 80 80 81 81 81 82 82 82 82 82 83 83 83 83 84

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

9 of 86 Plun"er un"er 0( *&-&; Prescripti#e Perio" (1991)........................................................................................ 84 09(9 <o9 916& (nti,8oney Laun"ering (ct (%&&6).......................................................................................... 84 0a 1&19; Pre#enti#e Suspension (1999)..................................................................................................... 84 0( 1&19; Pre#enti#e Suspension (%&&&)..................................................................................................... 84 0( 1&19; Pu3lic =fficer (%&&1).................................................................................................................85 0a 6*11; Co#erage (%&&1)......................................................................................................................85 0( * 1-,+conomic Sa3otage; 2llegal 0ecruitment (%&& )................................................................................. 85 0( *61& I Chil" +/ploitation (%&&6)...........................................................................................................86

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

GENERAL PRINCIPLES
General Principles; Schools of thought in Criminal Law (1996) 1} What are the different schools of thought or theories in Criminal Law and describe each briefly. ) !o what theory does our "evised #enal Code belong$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

"egional !rial Court of Cebu City. (e moved to 1uash the information for lac0 of /urisdiction. 'f you were the 2udge% will you grant the motion$ Why$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1.

!here are two schools of thought in Criminal Law% and these are (a) the CL&SS'C&L !()*"+% which sim,ly means that the basis of criminal liabilities is human free will% and the ,ur,ose of the ,enalty is retribution which must be ,ro,ortional to the gravity of the offense- and (b) the #*S'!'.'S! !()*"+% which considers man as a social being and his acts are attributable not /ust to his will but to other forces of society. &s such% ,unishment is not the solution% as he is not entirely to be blamed- law and /uris,rudence should not be the yardstic0 in the im,osition of sanction% instead the underlying reasons would be in1uired into.

We follow the classical school of thought although some ,rovisions of eminently ,ositivist in tendencies% li0e ,unishment of im,ossible crime% 2uvenile circumstances% are incor,orated in our Code.

General Principles; Territoriality (199 ) &be% married to Li3a% contracted another marriage with Connie in Singa,ore. !hereafter% &be and Connie returned to the #hili,,ines and lived as husband and wife in the hometown of &be in Calamba% Laguna. 1) Can &be be ,rosecuted for bigamy$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1) 4o% &be may not be ,rosecuted for bigamy since the bigamous marriage was contracted or solemni3ed in Singa,ore% hence such violation is not one of those where the "evised #enal Code% under &rt. thereof% may be a,,lied e5traterritorially. !he general rule on territoriality of criminal law governs the situation.

General Principles; Territoriality; !uris"iction o#er $essel (%&&&) &fter drin0ing one (1) case of San 6iguel beer and ta0ing two ,lates of 7,ulutan7% 8inoy% a 9ili,ino seaman% stabbed to death Sio 6y% a Singa,orean seaman% aboard 6:. 7#rincess of the #acific7% an overseas vessel which was sailing in the South China Sea. !he vessel% although #anamanian registered% is owned by Lucio Sy% a rich 9ili,ino businessman. When 6:. 7#rincess of the #acific7 reached a #hili,,ine #ort at Cebu City% the Ca,tain of the vessel turned over the assailant 8inoy to the #hili,,ine authorities. &n information for homicide was filed against 8inoy in the

10 of 86
+es% the 6otion to =uash the 'nformation should be granted. !he #hili,,ine court has no /urisdiction over the crime committed since it was committed on the high seas or outside of #hili,,ine territory and on board a vessel not registered or licensed in the #hili,,ines (US vs. o!"er# 1 $%i" 614& 't is the registration of the vessel in accordance with the laws of the #hili,,ines% not the citi3enshi, of her owner% which ma0es it a #hili,,ine shi,. !he vessel being registered in #anama% the laws of #anama govern while it is in the high seas. 'se of (liases; )hen (llowe" (%&&6) When can a 9ili,ino citi3en residing in this country use an alias legally$ >ive ? instances. ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

of Candidacy (*mnibus )lection Code).

6ELONIES
Conspiracy (199*)
& had a grudge against 9. Feciding to 0ill 9% & and his friends% 8% C% and F% armed themselves with 0nives and ,roceeded to the house of 9% ta0ing a ta5icab for the ,ur,ose. &bout A meters from their destination% the grou, alighted and after instructing )% the driver% to wait% traveled on foot to the house of 9. 8 ,ositioned himself at a distance as the grou,Gs loo0out. C and F stood guard outside the house. 8efore & could enter the house% F left the scene without the 0nowledge of the others. & stealthily entered the house and stabbed 9. 9 ran to the street but was bloc0ed by C% forcing him to flee towards another direction. 'mmediately after & had stabbed 9% & also stabbed > who was visiting 9. !hereafter% & e5iled from the house and% together with 8 and C% returned to the waiting ta5icab and motored away.

1. . ?. C. ;. @. E.

#seudonym for literary ,ur,oses. Use of aliases in cinema and television entertainment. 'n athletics and s,orts activities ("&. @AB;). Under the witness ,rotection ,rogram a ,erson may ado,t a different identity ("&. @DB1). When he has been ba,ti3ed or customarily 0nown by such alias. When authori3ed by a com,etent court (C&. 4o. 1C % as amended by "&. @AB;). When ,ro,erly indicated in a Certificate
Dondee

> died. 9 survived. Who are liable for the death of > and the ,hysical in/uries of 9$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

& alone should be held liable for the death of >. !he ob/ect of the cons,iracy of &. 8% C% and F was to 0ill 9 only. Since 8% C% and F did not 0now of the stabbing of > by &% they cannot be held criminally therefor. )% the driver% cannot be also held liable for the death of > since the former was com,letely unaware of said 0illing.

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

11 of 86
&rturo% being one of the two who devised the ,lan to murder 2oel% thereby becomes a coJ,rinci,al by direct cons,iracy. What is needed only is an overt act and both will incur criminal liability. &rturoGs liability as a cons,irator arose from his ,artici,ation in /ointly devising the criminal ,lan with 2uan% to 0ill 2ose. &nd it was ,ursuant to that cons,iracy that 2uan 0illed 2oel. !he cons,iracy here is actual% not by inference only. !he overt act was done ,ursuant to that cons,iracy whereof &rturo is coJcons,irator. !here being a cons,iracy% the act of one is the act of all. &rturo% therefore% should be liable as a coJcons,irator but the ,enalty on him may be that of an accom,lice only ($eop"e vs. )ierra# 96 S*+, 1- $eop"e .s. /edrano# 114 S*+, 335& because he was not able to actually ,artici,ate in the shooting of 2oel% having been a,,rehended before reaching the ,lace where the crime was committed.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

9or the ,hysical in/uries of 9% &% 8 and C. should be held liable therefore. )ven if it was only & who actually stabbed and caused ,hysical in/uries to >% 8 and C are nonetheless liable for cons,iring with & and for contributing ,ositive acts which led to the reali3ation of a common criminal intent. 8 ,ositioned himself as a loo0out% while C bloc0ed 9Gs esca,e. F% however% although ,art of the cons,iracy% cannot be held liable because he left the scene before & could enter the house where the stabbing occurred. &lthough he was earlier ,art of the cons,iracy% he did not ,ersonally ,artici,ate in the e5ecution of the crime by acts which directly tended toward the same end ($eop"e vs. 'o(oro# et a" 44 $%i". 38&#

'n the same breath% )% the driver% cannot be also held liable for the infliction of ,hysical in/uries u,on 9 because there is no showing that he had 0nowledge of the ,lan to 0ill 9. Conspiracy; (#oi"ance of Greater +#il (%&& ) 88 and CC% both armed with 0nives% attac0ed 9!. !he victimGs son% S!% u,on seeing the attac0% drew his gun but was ,revented from shooting the attac0ers by &&% who gra,,led with him for ,ossession of the gun. 9! died from 0nife wounds. &&% 88 and CC were charged with murder. 'n his defense% && invo0ed the /ustifying circumstance of avoidance of greater evil or in/ury% contending that by ,reventing S! from shooting 88 and CC% he merely avoided a greater evil. Will &&Gs defense ,ros,er$ "eason briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&rturo is not liable because he was not able to ,artici,ate in the 0illing of 2oel. Cons,iracy itself is not ,unishable unless e5,ressly ,rovided by law and this is not true in the case of 6urder. & coJ cons,irator must ,erform an overt act ,ursuant to the cons,iracy. Conspiracy; Common .elonious Purpose (199 ) &t about DK?A in the evening% while Fino and "affy were wal0ing along #adre 9aura Street% 6anila. 2ohnny hit them with a roc0 in/uring Fino at the bac0. "affy a,,roached Fino% but suddenly% 8obby% Steve% Fanny and 4onoy surrounded the duo. !hen 8obby stabbed Fino. Steve% Fanny% 4onoy and 2ohnny 0e,t on hitting Fino and "affy with roc0s. &s a result. Fino died% 8obby% Steve% Fanny% 4onoy and 2ohnny were charged with homicide. 's there cons,iracy in this case$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% &&Gs defense will not ,ros,er because obviously there was a cons,iracy among 88% CC and &&% such that the ,rinci,le that when there is a cons,iracy% the act of one is the act of all% shall govern. !he act of S!% the victimGs son% a,,ears to be a legitimate defense of relatives- hence% /ustified as a defense of his father against the unlawful aggression by 88 and CC. S!Gs act to defend his fatherGs life% cannot be regarded as an evil inasmuch as it is% in the eyes of the law% a lawful act.

What && did was to sto, a lawful defense% not greater evil% to allow 88 and CC achieve their criminal ob/ective of stabbing 9!. Conspiracy; Co,Conspirator (199-) 2uan and &rturo devised a ,lan to murder 2oel. 'n a narrow alley near 2oelGs house% 2uan will hide behind the big lam,,ost and shoot 2oel when the latter ,asses through on his way to wor0. &rturo will come from the other end of the alley and simultaneously shoot 2oel from behind. *n the a,,ointed day% &rturo was a,,rehended by the authorities before reaching the alley. When 2uan shot 2oel as ,lanned% he was unaware that &rturo was arrested earlier. Fiscuss the criminal liability of &rturo% if any. H;<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% there is cons,iracy among the offenders% as manifested by their concerted actions against the victims% demonstrating a common felonious ,ur,ose of assaulting the victims. !he e5istence of the cons,iracy can be inferred or deduced from the manner the offenders acted in commonly attac0ing Fino and "affy with roc0s% thereby demonstrating a unity of criminal design to inflict harm on their victims. Conspiracy; Comple/ Crime with 0ape (1996) 2ose% Fomingo% 6anolo% and 9ernando% armed with bolos% at about one oGcloc0 in the morning% robbed a house at a desolate ,lace where Fanilo% his wife% and three daughters were living. While the four were in the ,rocess of ransac0ing FaniloGs house% 9ernando% noticing that one of FaniloGs daughters was trying to get away% ran after her and finally caught u, with her in a thic0et somewhat distant from the house. 9ernando% before bringing bac0 the daughter to the house% ra,ed her first. !hereafter% the four carted away the belongings of

Fanilo and his family. a) What crime did


Version 1994-2006 Updated by

and 9ernando commit$ )5,lain. 2ose% Fomingo% 6anolo

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

b)

Su,,ose% after the robbery% the four too0 turns in ra,ing the three daughters of Fanilo inside the latterGs house% but before they left% they 0illed the whole family to ,revent identification% what crime

e5,ressed cons,iracy. 8oth are liable com,osite crime of robbery with homicide.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

for

the

did the four commit$ )5,lain.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(a) 2ose% Fomingo% and 6anolo committed "obbery% while 9ernando committed com,le5 crime of "obbery with "a,e% Cons,iracy can be inferred from the manner the offenders committed the robbery but the ra,e was committed by 9ernando at a ,lace 7distant from the house7 where the robbery was committed% not in the ,resence of the other cons,irators. (ence% 9ernando alone should answer for the ra,e% rendering him liable for the s,ecial com,le5 crime. ($eop"e vs. *ant.ria et. a"# 0.+. 108490# 22 1.ne 19952

b) !he crime would be "obbery with (omicide ... (im,liedK there is still cons,iracy) Conspiracy; .light to +#a"e (pprehension (%&&1) & and 8% both store /anitors% ,lanned to 0ill their em,loyer C at midnight and ta0e the money 0e,t in the cash register. & and 8 together drew the s0etch of the store% where they 0new C would be slee,ing% and ,lanned the se1uence of their attac0. Shortly before midnight% & and 8 were ready to carry out the ,lan. When & was about to lift CGs mos1uito net to thrust his dagger% a ,olice car with sirens blaring ,assed by. Scared% 8 ran out of the store and fled% while & went on to stab C to death% ,ut the money in the bag% and ran outside to loo0 for 8. !he latter was nowhere in sight. Un0nown to him% 8 had already left the ,lace. What was the ,artici,ation and corres,onding criminal liability of each% if any$ "easons. B<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!here was an e5,ressed cons,iracy between & and 8 to 0ill C and ta0e the latterGs money. !he ,lanned 0illing and ta0ing of the money a,,ears to be intimately related as com,onent crimes% hence a s,ecial com,le5 crime of robbery with homicide. !he cons,iracy being e5,ressed% not /ust im,lied% & and 8 are bound as coJcons,irators after they have ,lanned and agreed on the se1uence of their attac0 even before they committed the crime. !herefore% the ,rinci,le in law that when there is a cons,iracy% the act of one is the act of all% already governs them. 'n fact% & and 8 were already in the store to carry out their criminal ,lan.
!hat 8 ran out of the store and fled u,on hearing the sirens of the ,olice car% is not s,ontaneous desistance but flight to evade a,,rehension. 't would be different if 8 then tried to sto, & from continuing with the commission of the crime- he did not. So the act of & in ,ursuing the commission of the crime which both he and 8 designed% ,lanned% and commenced to commit% would also be the act of 8 because of their

12 of 86
& shall incur full criminal liability for the crime of robbery with homicide% but 8 shall not incur criminal liability because he desisted. 8Gs s,ontaneous desistance% made before all acts of e5ecution are ,erformed% is e5cul,atory. Cons,iracy to rob and 0ill is not ,er se ,unishable. !he desistance need not be actuated by remorse or good motive. 't is enough that the discontinuance comes from the ,erson who has begun the commission of the crime but before all acts of e5ecution are ,erformed. & ,erson who has began the commission of a crime but desisted% is absolved from criminal liability as a reward to one% who having set foot on the verge of crime% heeds the call of his conscience and returns to the ,ath of righteousness. Conspiracy; .light to +#a"e (pprehension (%&&1) & and 8% both store /anitors% ,lanned to 0ill their em,loyer C at midnight and ta0e the money 0e,t in the cash register. & and 8 together drew the s0etch of the store% where they 0new C would be slee,ing% and ,lanned the se1uence of their attac0. Shortly before midnight% & and 8 were ready to carry out the ,lan. When & was about to lift CGs mos1uito net to thrust his dagger% a ,olice car with sirens blaring ,assed by. Scared% 8 ran out of the store and fled% while & went on to stab C to death% ,ut the money in the bag% and ran outside to loo0 for 8. !he latter was nowhere in sight. Un0nown to him% 8 had already left the ,lace. What was the ,artici,ation
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

and corres,onding criminal liability of each% if any$ "easons. B<


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!here was an e5,ressed cons,iracy between & and 8 to 0ill C and ta0e the latterGs money. !he ,lanned 0illing and ta0ing of the money a,,ears to be intimately related as com,onent crimes% hence a s,ecial com,le5 crime of robbery with homicide. !he cons,iracy being e5,ressed% not /ust im,lied% & and 8 are bound as coJcons,irators after they have ,lanned and agreed on the se1uence of their attac0 even before they committed the crime. !herefore% the ,rinci,le in law that when there is a cons,iracy% the act of one is the act of all% already governs them. 'n fact% & and 8 were already in the store to carry out their criminal ,lan.
!hat 8 ran out of the store and fled u,on hearing the sirens of the ,olice car% is not s,ontaneous desistance but flight to evade a,,rehension. 't would be different if 8 then tried to sto, & from continuing with the commission of the crime- he did not. So the act of & in ,ursuing the commission of the crime which both he and 8 designed% ,lanned% and commenced to commit% would also be the act of 8 because of their e5,ressed cons,iracy. 8oth are liable for the com,osite crime of robbery with homicide.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

& shall incur full criminal liability for the crime of robbery with homicide% but 8 shall not incur criminal liability because he desisted. 8Gs s,ontaneous desistance% made before all acts of e5ecution are ,erformed% is

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

8% C and F liable for any crime$ )5,lain. (?<)

e5cul,atory. Cons,iracy to rob and 0ill is not ,er se ,unishable. !he desistance need not be actuated by remorse or good motive. 't is enough that the discontinuance comes from the ,erson who has begun the commission of the crime but before all acts of e5ecution are ,erformed. & ,erson who has began the commission of a crime but desisted% is absolved from criminal liability as a reward to one% who having set foot on the verge of crime% heeds the call of his conscience and returns to the ,ath of righteousness. Conspiracy; 2mplie" Conspiracy (199-) What is the doctrine of im,lied cons,iracy$ H?<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he doctrine of im,lied cons,iracy holds two or more ,ersons ,artici,ating in the commission of a crime collectively res,onsible and liable as coJ cons,irators although absent any agreement to that effect% when they act in concert% demonstrating unity of criminal intent and a common ,ur,ose or ob/ective. !he e5istence of a cons,iracy shall be inferred or deduced from their criminal ,artici,ation in ,ursuing the crime and thus the act of one shall be deemed the act of all.

Conspiracy; 2mplie" Conspiracy; +ffects (%&&1) State the conce,t of 7im,lied cons,iracy7 and give its legal effects. C<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&n 7'6#L')F C*4S#'"&C+7 is one which is only inferred or deduced from the manner the ,artici,ants in the commission of crime carried out its e5ecution. Where the offenders acted in concert in the commission of the crime% meaning that their acts are coordinated or synchroni3ed in a way indicative that they are ,ursuing a common criminal ob/ective% they shall be deemed to be acting in cons,iracy and their criminal liability shall be collective% not individual.

!he legal effects of an 7im,lied cons,iracy7 areK a) 4ot all those who are ,resent at the scene of the crime will be considered cons,iratorsb) *nly those who ,artici,ated by criminal acts in the commission of the crime will be considered as coJ cons,irators- and c) 6ere ac1uiescence to or a,,roval of the commission of the crime% without any act of criminal ,artici,ation% shall not render one criminally liable as coJcons,irator. Criminal Lia3ility4 5estructi#e (rson (%&&&)
&% 8% C and F% all armed with armalites% ,roceeded to the house of L. +% a neighbor of L% who ha,,ened to be ,assing by% ,ointed to the four cul,rits the room that L occu,ied. !he four cul,rits ,e,,ered the room with bullets. Unsatisfied% & even threw a hand grenade that totally destroyed LGs room. (owever% un0nown to the four cul,rits% L was not inside the room and nobody was hit or in/ured during the 'ncident. &re &%

13 of 86
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. &% 8. C and F are liable for destructive arson because of the destruction of the room of L with the use of an e5,losive% the hand grenade. Liability for an im,ossible crime is to be im,osed only if the act committed would not constitute any other crime under the "evised #enal Code. &lthough the facts involved are ,arallel to the case of 3ntod vs. *o.rt o4 ,ppea"s (215 S*+, 52&% where it was ruled that the liability of the offender was for an im,ossible crime% no hand grenade was used in said case% which constitutes a more serious crime though different from what was intended%

mind of another a sense of imminent danger% ,rom,ting the latter to esca,e from or avoid such danger and in the ,rocess% sustains in/uries or dies% the ,erson committing the felonious act is res,onsible for such in/uries or death.
(US vs. Va"de5# 41 $%i"# 1497- $eop"e vs. ,pra# 27 S*+, 1037.&

Criminal Lia3ility4 .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (1996)


.icente hac0ed &nacleto with a bolo but the latter was able to ,arry it with his hand% causing u,on him a twoJ inch wound on his right ,alm. .icente was not able to hac0 &nacleto further because three ,olicemen arrived and threatened to shoot .icente if he did not dro, his bolo. .icente was accordingly charged by the ,olice at the ,rosecutorGs office for attem,ted homicide. !wentyJ five days later% while the ,reliminary investigation was in ,rogress% &nacleto was rushed to the hos,ital because of sym,toms of tetanus infection on the twoJinch wound inflicted by .icente. &nacleto died the following day.

Criminal Lia3ility4 .elonious (ct of Scaring (1996) &le5ander% an esca,ed convict% ran amuc0 on board a Su,erlines 8us bound for 6anila from 8icol and 0illed ten (1A) ,ersons. !errified by the incident% Carol and 8en/amin who are ,assengers of the bus% /um,ed out of the window and while lying unconscious after hitting the ,avement of the road% were ran over and crushed to death by a fast moving Fesert 9o5 bus tailing the Su,erlines 8us. Can &le5ander be held liable for the death of Carol and 8en/amin although he was com,letely unaware that the two /um,ed out of the bus$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Can .icente be eventually charged with homicide for the death of &nacleto$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% &le5ander can be held liable for the death of Carol and 8en/amin because of felonious act of running was the ,ro5imate cause of the victimGs death. !he rule is that when a ,erson% by a felonious act% generates in the
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

+es% .icente may be charged of homicide for the death of &nacleto% unless the tetanus infection which develo,ed twenty five days later% was brought about by an efficient su,ervening cause. .icenteGs felonious act of causing a twoJinch wound on &nacletoGs right ,alm may still be regarded as the ,ro5imate cause of the latterGs death because without such wound% no tetanus infection could develo, from the victimGs right ,alm% and without

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

such tetanus infection the victim would not have died with it. Criminal Lia3ility4 2mpossi3le Crimes (%&&&) a. What is an im,ossible crime$ ( <) b. 's an im,ossible crime really a crime$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% 9eli,e is not liable because the act of frightening another is not a crime. What he did may be wrong% but not all wrongs amount to a crime. 8ecause the act which

1.

&n im,ossible crime is an act which would be an offense against ,erson or ,ro,erty% were if not for the inherent im,ossibility of its accom,lishment or on account of the em,loyment of inade1uate or ineffectual means (&rt. C% ,ar. % "#C) 4o% an im,ossible crime is not really a crime. 't is only soJcalled because the act gives rise to criminal liability. 8ut actually% no felony is committed. !he accused is to be ,unished for his criminal tendency or ,ro,ensity although no crime was committed.

Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct of Scaring (%&&1)


6ary/ane had two suitors J 9eli,e and Cesar. She did not o,enly show her ,reference but on two occasions% acce,ted CesarGs invitation to concerts by "egine and #o,s. 9eli,e was a wor0ing student and could only as0 6ary to see a movie which was declined. 9eli,e felt insulted and made ,lans to get even with Cesar by scaring him off somehow. *ne day% he entered CesarGs room in their boarding house and ,laced a rubber sna0e which a,,eared to be real in CesarGs bac0,ac0. 8ecause Cesar had a wea0 heart% he suffered a heart attac0 u,on o,ening his bac0,ac0 and seeing the sna0e. Cesar died without regaining consciousness. !he ,olice investigation resulted in ,in,ointing 9eli,e as the cul,rit and he was charged with (omicide for CesarGs death. 'n his defense% 9eli,e claimed that he did not 0now about CesarGs wea0 heart and that he only intended to ,lay a ,ractical /o0e on Cesar.

's 9eli,e liable for the death of Cesar or will his defense ,ros,er$ Why$ (;<}
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% 9eli,e is liable for the death of Cesar but he shall be given the benefit of the mitigating circumstance that he did not intend to commit so grave a wrong as that which was committed (&rt. 1?% ,ar. ?% "#C).
When 9eli,e intruded into CesarGs room without the latterGs consent and too0 liberty with the letterGs bac0,ac0 where he ,laced the rubber sna0e. 9eli,e was already committing a felony. &nd any act done by him while committing a felony is no less wrongful% considering that they were ,art of 7,lans to get even with Cesar7. 9eli,eGs claim that he intended only 7to ,lay a ,ractical /o0e on Cesar7 does not ,ersuade% considering that they are not friends but in fact rivals in courting 6ary/ane. !his case is ,arallel to the case of $eop"e vs. $.6ay% et al.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

14 of 86 caused
the death of Cesar is not a crime% no criminal liability may arise therefrom. Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct of Scaring (%&&6) 8elle saw >aston stealing the ,ri3ed coc0 of a neighbor and re,orted him to the ,olice. !hereafter% >aston% while driving a car saw 8elle crossing the street. 'ncensed that 8elle had re,orted him% >aston decided to scare her by trying to ma0e it a,,ear that he was about to run her over. (e revved the engine of his car and drove towards her but he a,,lied the bra0es. Since the road was sli,,ery at that time% the vehicle s0idded and hit 8elle causing her death. Was gaston criminally liable$ What is the liability of >aston$ Why$ (C<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1037.&
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

+es% >aston is liable for 8elleGs death because by his acts of revving the engine of his car and driving towards 8elle is felonious% and such felonious act was the ,ro5imate cause of the vehicle to s0id and hit 8elle% resulting in the latterGs death. Stated otherwise% the death of 8elle was the direct% natural and logical conse1uence of >astonGs felonious act. ($eop"e v. ,rpa# 27 S*+, 1037&.

+es% >aston is liable for 8elleGs death because even though >aston has no intent to 0ill 8elle rather /ust to scare 8elle. 7!o scare7 does not indicate intent to 0ill. (owever% under &rt. C of the "evised #enal Code% ,rovides in ,art that criminal liability shall be incurred by any ,erson committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. 'n other words% the rule is that when a ,erson% by a felonious act% generates in the mind of another a sense of imminent danger% ,rom,ting the latter to esca,e from or avoid such danger and in the ,rocess% sustains in/uries or dies% the ,erson committing the felonious act is res,onsible for such in/uries or death . (US vs. Va"de5# 41 $%i"# 1497- $eop"e vs. ,pra# 27 S*+,
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; 2mme"iate Cause (%&&1) !he conduct of wife & aroused the ire of her husband 8. 'ncensed with anger almost beyond his control% 8 could not hel, but inflict ,hysical in/uries on &. 6oments after 8 started hitting & with his fists% & suddenly com,lained of severe chest ,ains. 8% reali3ing that & was indeed in serious trouble% immediately brought her to the hos,ital. Fes,ite efforts to alleviate &Gs ,ains% she died of heart attac0. 't turned out that she had been suffering from a lingering heart ailment. What crime% if any% could 8 be held guilty of$ B<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

8 could be held liable for ,arricide because his act of hitting his wife with fist blows and therewith inflicting ,hysical in/uries on her% is felonious. & ,erson committing a felonious act incurs criminal liability although the wrongful conse1uence is different from what he intended (&rt. C% ,ar. 1% "evised #enal Code).

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

&lthough & died of heart attac0% the said attac0 was generated by 8Gs felonious act of hitting her with his fists. Such felonious act was the immediate cause of the heart attac0% having materially contributed to and hastened &Gs death. )ven though 8 may have acted without intent to 0ill his wife% lac0 of such intent is of no moment when the victim dies. (owever% 8 may be given the mitigating circumstance of having acted without intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed (&rt. 1?% ,ar. ?% "evised #enal Code).
Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (199 ) 8hey elo,ed with Scott. Whereu,on% 8heyGs father% "obin% and brother% "ustom% went to ScottGs house. U,on reaching the house% "ustom in1uired from Scott about his sisterGs whereabouts% while "obin shouted and threatened to 0ill Scott. !he latter then went downstairs but "ustom held his (ScottGs) waist. 6eanwhile *live% the elder sister of Scott% carrying her twoJmonth old child% a,,roached "ustom and Scott to ,acify them. *live attem,ted to remove "ustomGs hand from ScottGs waist. 8ut "ustom ,ulled *liveGs hand causing her to fall over her baby. !he baby then died moments later. 's "ustom criminally liable for the death of the child$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

,erson committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. 'n U.S. vs. Va"de5 41 $%i". 497. where the victim who was threatened by the accused with a 0nife% /um,ed into the river but because

+es% "ustom is criminally liable for the death of the child because his felonious act was the ,ro5imate cause of such death. 't was "ustomGs act of ,ulling *liveGs hand which caused the latter to fall on her baby. (ad 't not been for said act of "ustom% which is undoubtedly felonious (at least slight coercion) there was no cause for *live to fall over her baby. 'n short% "ustomGs felonious act is the cause of the evil caused. &ny ,erson ,erforming a felonious act is criminally liable for the direct% natural and logical conse1uence thereof although different from what he intended (,rt. 4# par. 1# + *- $eop"e vs# $.6ay# et a"# 0+ )o. 74324# )ov. 18# 1988&. Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (199*)

While the crew of a steamer ,re,ared to raise anchor at the #asig "iver% &% evidently im,atient with the ,rogress of wor0% began to use abusive language against the men. 8% one of the members of the crew% remonstrated saying that they could wor0 best if they were not insulted. & too0 8Gs attitude as a dis,lay of insubordination and% rising in a rage% moved towards 8 wielding a big 0nife and threatening to stab 8. &t the instant when & was only a few feet from 8% the latter% a,,arently believing himself to be in great and immediate ,eril% threw himself into the water% disa,,eared beneath the surface% and drowned. 6ay & be held criminally liable for the death of 8$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. & can be held criminally liable for the death of 8% &rticle C of the "evised #enal Code ,rovides in ,art that criminal liability shall be incurred by any

15 of 86
of the strong current or because he did not 0now how to swim% he drowned% the Su,reme Court affirmed the conviction for homicide of the accused because% if a ,erson against whom a criminal assault is directed believes himself to be in danger of death or great bodily harm and in order to esca,e /um,s into the water% im,elled by the instinct of selfJ ,reservation% the assailant is res,onsible for the homicide in case death results by drowning. Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (1999)
Furing the robbery in a dwelling house% one of the cul,rits ha,,ened to fire his gun u,ward in the ceiling without meaning to 0ill anyone. !he owner of the house who was hiding thereat was hit and 0illed as a result.

was on occasion of the robbery. Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (%&&1)
Luis Cru3 was dee,ly hurt when his offer of love was re/ected by his girlfriend 6arivella one afternoon when he visited her. When he left her house% he wal0ed as if he was slee,wal0ing so much so that a teenage snatcher was able to grab his cell ,hone and flee without being chased by Luis. &t the ne5t L"! station% he boarded one of the coaches bound for 8aclaran. While seated% he ha,,ened to read a news,a,er left on the seat and noticed that the headlines were about the sin0ing of the Su,er 9erry while on its way to Cebu. (e went over the list of missing ,assengers who were ,resumed dead and came across the name of his grandfather who had raised him from childhood after he was or,haned. (e was shoc0ed and his mind went blan0 for a few minutes% after which he ran amuc0 and% using his balisong% started stabbing at the ,assengers who then scam,ered away% with three of them 2um,ing out of the train and landing on the road below. &ll the three ,assengers died later of their in/uries at the hos,ital.

!he defense theori3ed that the 0illing was a mere accident and was not ,er,etrated in connection with% or for ,ur,oses of% the robbery. Will you sustain the defense$ Why$ (C<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% ' will not sustain the defense. !he act being felonious and the ,ro5imate cause of the victimGs death% the offender is liable therefore although it may not be intended or different from what he intended.

's Luis liable for the death of the three ,assengers who /um,ed out of the moving train$ State your reasons. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he offender shall be ,rosecuted for the com,osite crime of robbery with homicide% whether the 0illing was intentional or accidental% as long as the 0illing
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

+es% Luis is liable for their deaths because he was committing a felony when he started stabbing at the ,assengers and such wrongful act was the ,ro5imate cause of said ,assengersG /um,ing out of the train- hence their deaths.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

16 of 86
2#% &ries and "andal ,lanned to 0ill )lsa% a resident of 8arangay #ula% Laurel% 8atangas. !hey as0ed the assistance of )lla% who is familiar with the ,lace. *n &,ril ?% 1DD % at about 1AKAA in the evening% 2#% &ries and "andal% all armed with automatic wea,ons% went to 8arangay #ula. )lla% being the guide% directed her com,anions to the room in the house of )lsa. Whereu,on% 2#% &ries and "andal fired their guns at her room. 9ortunately% )lsa was not around as she attended a ,rayer meeting that evening in another barangay in Laurel. 2#% et al% were charged and convicted of attem,ted murder by the "egional !rial Court at !anauan% 8atangas. *n a,,eal to the Court of &,,eals% all the accused ascribed to the trial court the sole error of finding them guilty of attem,ted murder. 'f you were the ,onente% how will you decide the a,,eal$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Under &rticle C% "evised #enal Code% any ,erson committing a felony shall incur criminal liability although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. 'n this case% the death of the three ,assengers was the direct% natural and logical conse1uence of LuisG felonious act which created an immediate sense of danger in the minds of said ,assengers who tried to avoid or esca,e from it by /um,ing out of the train.
($eop"e vs. ,rpa# 27 S*+, 1737- U.S. vs. Va"de5# 41 $%i". 4972

Criminal Lia3ility; .elonious (ct; Pro/imate Cause (%&& ) *n his way home from office% MM rode in a /ee,ney. Subse1uently% LL boarded the same /ee,ney. U,on reaching a secluded s,ot in =C% LL ,ulled out a grenade from his bag and announced a holdJu,. (e told MM to surrender his watch% wallet and cell,hone. 9earing for his life% MM /um,ed out of the vehicle. 8ut as he fell% his head hit the ,avement% causing his instant death . 's LL liable for MMGs death$ )5,lain briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% LL is liable for MMGs death because his acts of ,ulling out a grenade and announcing a holdJu,% cou,led with a demand for the watch% wallet and cell,hone of MM is felonious% and such felonious act was the ,ro5imate cause of MMGs /um,ing out of the /ee,ney% resulting in the latterGs death. Stated otherwise% the death of MM was the direct% natural and logical conse1uence of LLGs felonious act which created an immediate sense of danger in the mind of MM who tried to avoid such danger by /um,ing out of the /ee,ney ($eop"e v. ,rpa# 27
S*+, 1037&.

Criminal Lia3ility; 2mpossi3le Crime (%&& ) *M and +* were both courting their coJem,loyee% SU). 8ecause of their bitter rivalry% *M decided to get rid of +* by ,oisoning him. *M ,oured a substance into +*Gs coffee thin0ing it was arsenic. 't turned out that the substance was white sugar substitute 0nown as )1ual. 4othing ha,,ened to +* after he dran0 the coffee. What criminal liability did *M incur% if any$ )5,lain briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'f ' were the ,onente% ' will set aside the /udgment convicting the accused of attem,ted murder and instead find them guilty of im,ossible crime under &rt. C% ,ar. % "#C% in relation to &rt. ;D% "#C. Liability for im,ossible crime arises not only when the im,ossibility is legal% but li0ewise when it is factual or ,hysical im,ossibility% as in the case at bar. )lsaGs absence from the house is a ,hysical im,ossibility which renders the crime intended 'nherently inca,able of accom,lishment. !o convict the accused of attem,ted murder would ma0e &rt. C% ,ar. ,ractically useless as all circumstances which ,revented the consummation of the offense will be treated as an incident inde,endent of the actorGs will which is an element of attem,ted or frustrated felony (3ntod vs. *,# 215 S*+, 52&. Criminal Lia3ility4 2mpossi3le Crimes (199-) 8uddy always resented his classmate% 2un. *ne day. 8uddy ,lanned to 0ill 2un by mi5ing ,oison in his lunch. 4ot 0nowing where he can get ,oison% he a,,roached another classmate% 2erry to whom he disclosed his evil ,lan. 8ecause he himself harbored resentment towards 2un% 2erry gave 8uddy a ,oison% which 8uddy ,laced on 2unGs food. (owever% 2un did not die because% un0nown to both 8uddy and 2erry% the ,oison was actually ,owdered mil0. 1% What crime or crimes% if any% did 2erry and 8uddy commit$ H?<I . Su,,ose that% because of his severe allergy to ,owdered mil0% 2un had to be hos,itali3ed for 1A days for ingesting it. Would your answer to the first 1uestion be the same$ H <I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

*M incurred criminal liability for an im,ossible crime of murder. Criminal liability shall be incurred by any ,erson ,erforming an act which would be an offense against ,ersons or ,ro,erty% were it not for the inherent im,ossibility of its accom,lishment or on account of the em,loyment of inade1uate or ineffectual means (&rt. C% ,ar. % "9C). 'n the ,roblem given% the im,ossibility of accom,lishing the crime of murder% a crime against ,ersons% was due to the em,loyment of ineffectual means which *M thought was ,oison. !he law im,utes criminal liability to the offender although no crime resulted% only to su,,ress his criminal ,ro,ensity because sub/ectively% he is a criminal though ob/ectively% no crime was committed. Criminal Lia3ility; 2mpossi3le Crimes (199 )

1. 2erry and 8uddy are liable for the soJcalled 7im,ossible crime7 because% with intent to 0ill% they tried to

,oison 2un and thus ,er,etrate 6urder% a crime against ,ersons. 2un was not ,oisoned only because the wouldJbe
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

0illers were unaware that what they mi5ed with the food of 2un

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) was

,owdered mil0% not ,oison. 'n short% the act done with criminal intent by 2erry and 8uddy% would have constituted a crime against ,ersons were it not for the inherent inefficacy of the means em,loyed. Criminal liability is incurred by them although no crime resulted% because their act of trying to ,oison 2un is criminal.

5880& it was held that the omission or failure of election ins,ectors and ,oll cler0s to include a voterGs name in the

. 4o% the answer would not be the same as above. 2erry and 8uddy would be liable instead for less serious ,hysical in/uries for causing the hos,itali3ation and medical attendance for 1A days to 2un. !heir act of mi5ing with the food eaten by 2un the matter which re1uired such medical attendance% committed with criminal intent% renders them liable for the resulting in/ury. Criminal Lia3ility; 2mpossi3le Crimes; 7i"napping (%&&&)
Carla% C years old% was 0idna,,ed by )nri1ue% the tricycle driver ,aid by her ,arents to bring and fetch her to and from school. )nri1ue wrote a ransom note demanding #;AA%AAA.AA from CarlaGs ,arents in e5change for CarlaGs freedom. )nri1ue sent the ransom note by mail. (owever% before the ransom note was received by CarlaGs ,arents% )nri1ueGs hideout was discovered by the ,olice. Carla was rescued while )nri1ue was arrested and incarcerated. Considering that the ransom note was not received by CarlaGs ,arents% the investigating ,rosecutor merely filed a case of 7'm,ossible Crime to Commit Nidna,,ing7 against )nri1ue. 's the ,rosecutor correct$ Why$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% the ,rosecutor is not correct in filing a case for 7im,ossible crime to commit 0idna,,ing7 against )nri1ue. 'm,ossible crimes are limited only to acts which when ,erformed would be a crime against ,ersons or ,ro,erty. &s 0idna,,ing is a crime against ,ersonal security and not against ,ersons or ,ro,erty% )nri1ue could not have incurred an 7im,ossible crime7 to commit 0idna,,ing. !here is thus no im,ossible crime of 0idna,,ing. 8ala in Se #s9 8ala Prohi3ita (199*) 1. Fistinguish between crimes mala in se and crimes mala ,rohibita. . 6ay an act be malum in se and be% at the same time% malum ,rohibitum$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Crimes mala in se are felonious acts committed by dolo or cul,a as defined in the "evised #enal Code. Lac0 of criminal intent is a valid defense% e5ce,t when the crime results from criminal negligence. *n the other hand% crimes mala ,rohibita are those considered wrong only because they are ,rohibited by statute. !hey constitute violations of mere rules of convenience designed to secure a more orderly regulation of the affairs of society.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% an act may be malum in se and malum ,rohibitum at the same time. 'n $eop"e v. S.ni8o# et a9. (*, 50 70

17 of 86 registry
list of voters is wrong ,er se because it disenfranchises a voter of his right to vote. 'n this regard it is considered as malum in se. Since it is ,unished under a s,ecial law (Sec. 1A1 and 1A?% "evised )lection Code)% it is considered malum ,rohibitum. 8ala in Se #s9 8ala Prohi3ita (1999) Fistinguish 7 mala in se7 from 7 mala ,rohibita7(?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

good% and thus good faith or lac0 of criminal intent in doing the ,rohibited act is not a defense. 'n crimes mala in se% the acts are by nature wrong% evil or bad% and so generally condemned. !he moral trait of the offender is involved- thus% good faith or lac0 of criminal 'ntent on the ,art of the offender is a defense% unless the crime is the result of criminal negligence. Corres,ondingly% modifying circumstances are considered in ,unishing the offender. 8ala in Se #s9 8ala Prohi3ita (%&&1) Fistinguish% in their res,ective conce,ts and legal im,lications% between crimes mala in se and crimes mala ,rohibits. C<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'n 7mala in se7% the acts constituting the crimes are inherently evil% bad or wrong% and hence involves the moral traits of the offender- while in 7mala ,rohibita7% the acts constituting the crimes are not inherently bad% evil or wrong but ,rohibited and made ,unishable only for ,ublic good. &nd because the moral trait of the offender is 'nvolved in 7mala in se7. 6odifying circumstances% the offenderGs e5tent of ,artici,ation in the crime% and the degree of accom,lishment of the crime are ta0en into account in im,osing the ,enaltyK these are not so in 7mala ,rohibita7 where criminal liability arises only when the acts are consummated.

In concept: Crimes mala in se are those where the acts or omissions ,enali3ed are inherently bad% evil% or wrong that they are almost universally condemned. Crimes mala ,rohibita are those where the acts ,enali3ed are not inherently bad% evil% or wrong but ,rohibited by law for ,ublic good% ,ublic welfare or interest and whoever violates the ,rohibition are ,enali3ed. In legal implications: 'n crimes mala in se% good faith or lac0 of criminal intent: negligence is a defense% while in crimes mala ,rohibita% good faith or lac0 of criminal intent or malice is not a defense- it is enough that the ,rohibition was voluntarily violated.

8ala in Se #s9 8ala Prohi3ita (%&&1) 8riefly state what essentially distinguishes a crime mala ,rohibita from a crime mala in se. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'n crimes mala ,rohibita% the acts are not by nature wrong% evil or bad. !hey are ,unished only because there is a law ,rohibiting them for ,ublic
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

&lso% criminal liability is generally incurred in crimes mala in se even when the crime is only attem,ted or frustrated% while in crimes mala ,rohibita% criminal liability is generally incurred only when the crime is consummated.

consummated is correct% "&. ?A1D is a s,ecial law ,unishing acts mala ,rohibita. &s a rule% attem,ted

&lso in crimes mala in se% mitigating and aggravating circumstances are a,,reciated in im,osing the ,enalties% while in crimes mala ,rohibita% such circumstances are not a,,reciated unless the s,ecial law has ado,ted the scheme or scale of ,enalties under the "evised #enal Code. 8ala Prohi3ita; (ctual 2n:ury 0e;uire" (%&&&)
6r. Carlos >abisi% a customs guard% and 6r. "ico +to% a ,rivate 'ndividual% went to the office of 6r. Fiether *cuarto% a customs bro0er% and re,resented themselves as agents of 6oonglow Commercial !rading% an 'm,orter of childrenGs clothes and toys. 6r. >abisi and 6r. +to engaged 6r. *cuarto to ,re,are and file with the 8ureau of Customs the necessary 'm,ort )ntry and 'nternal "evenue Feclaration covering 6oonglowGs shi,ment. 6r. >abisi and 6r. +to submitted to 6r. *cuarto a ,ac0ing list% a commercial invoice% a bill of lading and a Sworn 'm,ort Futy Feclaration which declared the shi,ment as childrenGs toys% the ta5es and duties of which were com,uted at #@A%AAA.AA. 6r. *cuarto filed the aforementioned documents with the 6anila 'nternational Container #ort. (owever% before the shi,ment was released% a s,ot chec0 was conducted by Customs Senior &gent 2ames 8andido% who discovered that the contents of the van (shi,ment) were not childrenGs toys as declared in the shi,,ing documents but 1%AAA units of video cassette recorders with ta5es and duties com,uted at #@AA%AAA.AA. & hold order and warrant of sei3ure and detention were then issued by the Fistrict Collector of Customs. 9urther investigation showed that 6oonglow is nonJe5istent. Conse1uently% 6r. >abisi and 6r. +to were charged with and convicted for violation of Section ?(e) of ".&. ?A1D which ma0es it unlawful among others% for ,ublic officers to cause any undue 'n/ury to any ,arty% including the >overnment. 'n the discharge of official functions through manifest ,artiality% evident bad faith or gross ine5cusable negligence. 'n their motion for reconsideration% the accused alleged that the decision was erroneous because the crime was not consummated but was only at an attem,ted stage% and that in fact the >overnment did not suffer any undue in/ury.

a) 's the contention of both accused correct$ )5,lain. (?<)


b) &ssuming that the attem,ted or frustrated stage of the violation charged is not ,unishable% may the accused be nevertheless convicted for an offense ,unished by the "evised #enal Code under the facts of the case$ )5,lain.

(?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% the contention of the accused that the crime was not

18 of 86 violation
of a s,ecial law is not ,unished. &ctual in/ury is re1uired. +es% both are liable for attem,ted estafa thru falsification of commercial documents% a com,le5 crime. ... 8alum in Se #s9 8alum Prohi3itum (%&&6) Fistinguish malum in se from malum ,rohibitum. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

to action for a definite result- whereas intent is the ,ur,ose to use a ,articular means to effect such results. 6otive is not an essential element of a felony and need not be ,roved for ,ur,ose of conviction% while intent is an essential element of felonies by dolo. . +es% a crime may be committed without criminal intent if such is a cul,able felony% wherein 'ntent is substituted by negligence or im,rudence% and also in a malum ,rohibitum or if an act is ,unishable by s,ecial law.

'n crimes malum in se% an act is by nature wrong% evil or bad% and so generally condemned. !he moral trait of the offender is involved- thus% good faith or lac0 of criminal 'ntent on the ,art of the offender is a defense% unless the crime is the result of criminal negligence. Corres,ondingly% modifying circumstances are considered in ,unishing the offender. 'n crimes mala ,rohibitum% an act is not by nature wrong% evil or bad. +et% it is ,unished because there is a law ,rohibiting them for ,ublic good% and thus good faith or lac0 of criminal intent in doing the ,rohibited act is not a defense. 8oti#e #s9 2ntent (1996) 1. Fistinguish intent from motive in Criminal Law. . 6ay crime be committed without criminal intent$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

8oti#e #s9 2ntent (1999) 1. Fistinguish 7motive7 from 7intent7. . When is motive relevant to ,rove a case$ When is it not necessary to be established$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1.

76otive 7 is the moving ,ower which im,els a ,erson to do an act for a definite resultwhile 7intent7 is the ,ur,ose for using a ,articular means to bring about a desired result. 6otive is not an element of a crime but intent is an element of intentional crimes. 6otive% if attending a crime% always ,recede the intent. 6otive is relevant to ,rove a case when there is doubt as to the identity of the offender or when the act committed gives rise to variant crimes and there is the need to determine the ,ro,er crime to be im,uted to the offender.

1.

6otive is the moving ,ower which im,els one


Dondee

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

committed is robbery.

't is not necessary to ,rove motive when the offender is ,ositively identified or the criminal act did not give rise to variant crimes. 8oti#e #s9 2ntent (%&& ) Fistinguish clearly but briefly between intent and motive in the commission of an offense.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'ntent is the ,ur,ose for using a ,articular means to achieve the desired result- while motive is the moving ,ower which im,els a ,erson to act for a definite result. 'ntent is an ingredient of dolo or malice and thus an element of deliberate felonieswhile motive is not an element of a crime but only considered when the identity of the offender is in doubt. 8oti#e; Proof thereof; <ot +ssential; Con#iction (%&&6) 6otive is essential in the determination of the commisJ sion of a crime and the liabilities of the ,er,etrators. What are the instances where ,roof of motive is not essential or re1uired to /ustify conviction of an accused$ >ive at least ? instances. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. . ?. C.

;.

When there is an eyewitness or ,ositive identification of the accused. When the accused admitted or confessed to the commission of the crime. 'n crimes (a"a pro%ibita. 'n direct assault% when the victim% who is a ,erson in authority or agent of a ,erson in authority was attac0ed in the actual ,erformance of his duty (&rt. 1CB% "evised #enal Code). 'n crimes committed through rec0less im,rudence.

JUSTI6YING 7 EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES


+/empting Circumstances; Co#erage (%&&&) &% brother of 8% with the intention of having a night out with his friends% too0 the coconut shell which is being used by 8 as a ban0 for coins from inside their loc0ed cabinet using their common 0ey. 9orthwith% & bro0e the coconut shell outside of their home in the ,resence of his friends. a. What is the criminal liability of &% if any$ )5,lain. (?<)
b. 's & e5em,ted from criminal liability under &rticle ?? of the "evised #enal Code for being a brother

of 8$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a) & is criminally liable for "obbery with force u,on things..... b) 4o% & is not e5em,t from criminal liability under &rt. ?? because said &rticle a,,lies only to theft% swindling or malicious mischief. (ere% the crime

19 of 86
+/empting Circumstances; 8inority (199-) 2ohn% an eightJyear old boy% is fond of watching the television ,rogram 7Meo "angers.7 *ne evening while he was engrossed watching his favorite television show% #etra% a maid changed the channel to enable her to watch 7(ome &long the "iles.7 !his enraged 2ohn who got his fatherGs revolver% and without warning% shot #etra at the bac0 of her head causing her instantaneous death. 's 2ohn criminally liable$ H <I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

to the in/ury. #om,ing lost his right eye.

a) 's Natreena criminally liable$ Why$ (?<)


b) Fiscuss the attendant circumstances and effects

thereof. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% 2ohn is not criminally liable for 0illing #etra because he is only B years old when he committed the 0illing. & minor below nine (D) years old is absolutely e5em,t from criminal liability although not from civil liability. (&rt. 1 % ,ar. % "#C). +/empting; 8inority; 11 yrs =l"; (3sence of 5iscernment (%&&&)
While they were standing in line awaiting their vaccination at the school clinic% #om,ing re,eatedly ,ulled the ,onytail of Natreena% his 11 years% months and 1? days old classmate in >rade ; at the Sam,aloc )lementary School. 'rritated% Natreena turned around and swung at #om,ing with a ball ,en. !he to, of the ball ,en hit the right eye of #om,ing which bled ,rofusely. "eali3ing what she had caused. Natreena immediately hel,ed #om,ing. When investigated% she freely admitted to the school ,rinci,al that she was res,onsible for the in/ury to #om,ingGs eye. &fter the incident% she e5ecuted a statement admitting her cul,ability. Fue
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

a) 4o% Natreena is not criminally liable although she is civilly liable. 8eing a minor less than fifteen (1;) years old although over nine (D) years of age% she is generally e5em,t from criminal liability. !he e5ce,tion is where the ,rosecution ,roved that the act was committed with discernment. !he burden is u,on the ,rosecution to ,rove that the accused acted with discernment.

!he ,resum,tion is that such minor acted without discernment% and this is strengthened by the fact that Natreena only reacted with a ball,en which she must be using in class at the time% and only to sto, #om,ingGs ve5atious act of re,eatedly ,ulling her ,onytail. 'n other words% the in/ury was accidental. b) !he attendant circumstances which may be considered areK
1. 6inority of the accused as an e5em,ting circumstance under &rticle 1 . ,aragra,h ?% "ev. #enal Code% where she shall be e5em,t from criminal liability% unless it was ,roved that she acted with discernment. She is however civilly liable'f found criminally liable% the minority of the accused as a ,rivileged mitigating circumstance. & discretionary ,enalty lower by at least two ( )

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

20 of 86
& may% however% invo0e the benefit of the mitigating circumstance of having acted in immediate vindication of a grave offense to a descendant% his daughter% under ,ar. ;% &rticle 1? of the "evised #enal Code% as amended.

degrees than that ,rescribed for the crime committed shall be im,osed in accordance with &rticle @B. ,aragra,h 1% "ev. #enal Code. !he sentence% however% should automatically be sus,ended in accordance with Section ;(a) of "e,. &ct 4o. B?@D otherwise 0nown as the 79amily Courts &ct of 1DDE7?. &lso if found criminally liable% the ordinary mitigating circumstance of not 'ntending to commit so grave a wrong as that committed% under &rticle 1?% ,aragra,h ?% "ev. #enal Code- and

C.

!he ordinary mitigating circumstance of sufficient ,rovocation on the ,art of the offended ,arty immediately ,receded the act. !ustifying #s9 +/empting Circumstances (%&& ) Fistinguish clearly but brieflyK 8etween /ustifying and e5em,ting circumstances in criminal law.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!ustifying; 5efense of Stranger (%&&%) & chanced u,on three men who were attac0ing 8 with fist blows. C% one of the men% was about to stab 8 with a 0nife. 4ot 0nowing that 8 was actually the aggressor because he had earlier challenged the three men to a fight% & shot C as the latter was about to stab 8. 6ay & invo0e the defense of a stranger as a /ustifying circumstance in his favor$ Why$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

2ustifying circumstance affects the act% not the actor- while e5em,ting circumstance affects the actor% not the act. 'n /ustifying circumstance% no criminal and% generally% no civil liability is incurred- while in e5em,ting circumstance% civil liability is generally incurred although there is no criminal liability. 2ustifying vs. )5em,ting Circumstances (1DDB) Fistinguish between /ustifying and e5em,ting circumstances. H?<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. & may invo0e the /ustifying circumstance of defense of stranger since he was not involved in the fight and he shot C when the latter was about to stab 8. !here being no indication that & was induced by revenge% resentment or any other evil motive in shooting C% his act is /ustified under ,ar ?% &rticle 11 of the "evised #enal Code% as amended. !ustifying; .ulfillment of 5uty; 0e;uisites (%&&&)
Lucresia% a store owner% was robbed of her bracelet in her home. !he following day% at about ; oGcloc0 in the afternoon% a neighbor% Jyear old 2unJ2un% who had an unsavory re,utation% came to her store to buy bottles of beer. Lucresia noticed her bracelet wound around the right arm of 2unJ2un. &s soon as the latter left% Lucresia went to a nearby ,olice station and sought the hel, of a ,oliceman on duty% #at. Willie "eyes. (e went with Lucresia to the house of 2unJ2un to confront the latter. #at. "eyes introduced himself as a ,oliceman and tried to get hold of 2unJ2un who resisted and ran away. #at. "eyes chased him and fired two warning shots in the air. 2unJ2un continued to run and when he was about E meters away% #at% "eyes shot him in the right leg. 2unJ2un was hit and he fell down but he crawled towards a fence% intending to ,ass through an o,ening underneath. When #at. "eyes was about ; meters away% he fired another shot at 2unJ2un hitting him at the right lower hi,. #at. "eyes brought 2unJ2un to the hos,ital% but because of ,rofuse bleeding% he eventually died. #at "eyes was subse1uently charged with homicide. Furing the trial% #at "eyes raised the defense% by way of e5oneration% that he acted in the fulfillment of a duty. 's the defense tenable$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. 'n Justifying CircumstancesK a. !he circumstance affects the act% not the actorb. !he act is done within legal bounds% hence considered as not a crimec. Since the act is not a crime% there is no criminald. !here being no crime nor criminal% there is no criminal nor civil liability. Whereas% in an Exempting CircumstancesK a. !he circumstance affects the actor% not the actb. !he act is felonious and hence a crime but the actor acted without voluntarinessc. &lthough there is a crime% there is no criminal because the actor is regarded only as an instrument of the crimed. !here being a wrong done but no criminal. !ustifying; 5efense of >onor; 0e;uisites (%&&%) When & arrived home% he found 8 ra,ing his daughter. U,on seeing &% 8 ran away. & too0 his gun and shot 8% 0illing him. Charged with homicide% & claimed he acted in defense of his daughterGs honor. 's & correct$ 'f not% can & claim the benefit of any mitigating circumstance or circumstances$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% & cannot validly invo0e defense of his daughterGs honor in having 0illed 8 since the ra,e was already consummated- moreover% 8 already ran away% hence% there was no aggression to defend against and no defense to s,ea0 of.

4o% the defense of #at. "eyes is not tenable. !he defense of having acted in the fulfillment of a duty re1uires as a condition% inter alia% that the in/ury or offense committed be the unavoidable or necessary conse1uence of the due ,erformance of the duty ($eop"e vs. 7anis# et.a".# 74 $%i". 257&. 't is not enough that the accused acted in fulfillment of a duty.
&fter 2unJ2un was shot in the right leg and was already crawling% there was no need for #at% "eyes to shoot him further. Clearly% #at. "eyes acted beyond the call of duty which brought about the cause of death of the

victim.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

!ustifying; S5; 5efense of >onor; 0e;uisites (199-)


*ne night% Una% a young married woman% was sound aslee, in her bedroom when she felt a man on to, of her. !hin0ing it was her husband !ito% who came home a day early from his business tri,% Una let him have se5 with her. &fter the act% the man said% 7' ho,e you en/oyed it as much as ' did.7 4ot recogni3ing the voice% it dawned u,on Lina that the man was not !ito% her husband. 9urious% Una too0 out !itoGs gun and shot the man. Charged with homicide Una denies cul,ability on the ground of defense of honor. 's her claim tenable$ H;<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!ustifying; S5; 5efense of Property; 0e;uisites (1996) & security guard% u,on seeing a man scale the wall of a factory com,ound which he was guarding% shot and

4o% UnaGs claim that she acted in defense of honor% is not tenable because the unlawful aggression on her honor had already ceased. Fefense of honor as included in selfJ defense% must have been done to ,revent or re,el an unlawful aggression. !here is no defense to s,ea0 of where the unlawful aggression no longer e5ists. !ustifying; 5efense of >onor; +lements (%&&&) *sang% a married woman in her early twenties% was slee,ing on a banig on the floor of their ni,a hut beside the seashore when she was awa0ened by the act of a man mounting her. !hin0ing that it was her husband% >ardo%who had returned from fishing in the sea% *sang continued her slee, but allowed the man% who was actually their neighbor% 2ulio% to have se5ual intercourse with her. &fter 2ulio satisfied himself% he said 7Salamat *sang7 as he turned to leave. *nly then did *sang reali3e that the man was not her husband. )nraged% *sang grabbed a balisong from the wall and stabbed 2ulio to death. When tried for homicide% *sang claimed defense of honor. Should the claim be sustained$ Why$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% *sang7s claim of defense of honor should not be sustained because the aggression on her honor had ceased when she stabbed the aggressor. 'n defense of rights under ,aragra,h 1% &rt. 11 of the "#C% 't is re1uired inter alia that there be (1) unlawful aggression% and ( ) reasonable necessity of the means em,loyed to ,revent or re,el it. !he unlawful aggression must be continuing when the aggressor was in/ured or disabled by the ,erson ma0ing a defense.

8ut if the aggression that was begun by the in/ured or disabled ,arty already ceased to e5ist when the accused attac0ed him% as in the case at bar% the attac0 made is a retaliation% and not a defense. #aragra,h 1% &rticle 11 of the Code does not govern. (ence% *sangGs act of stabbing 2ulio to death after the se5ual intercourse was finished% is not defense of honor but an immediate vindication of a grave offense committed against her% which is only mitigating.

21 of 86 0illed the
latter. U,on investigation by the ,olice who thereafter arrived at the scene of the shooting% it was discovered that the victim was unarmed. When ,rosecuted for homicide% the security guard claimed that he merely acted in selfJdefense of ,ro,erty and in the ,erformance of his duty as a security guard. 'f you were the /udge% would you convict him of homicide$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

uninvited guest. &fter seeing what a,,eared to him an armed stranger loo0ing around and out to rob the house% he fired his gun seriously in/uring the man. When the lights were turned on% the unfortunate victim turned out to be a brotherJinJlaw on his way to the 0itchen to get some light snac0s. !he accused was indicted for serious ,hysical in/uries. Should the accused% given the circumstances% be convicted or ac1uitted$ Why$ C<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. ' would convict the security guard for (omicide if ' were the 2udge% because his claim of having acted in defense of ,ro,erty and in ,erformance of a duty cannot fully be /ustified. )ven assuming that the victim was scaling the wall of the factory com,ound to commit a crime inside the same% shooting him is never /ustifiable% even admitting that such act is considered unlawful aggression on ,ro,erty rights. 'n $eop"e vs. )arvaes# 121 S*+, 329% a ,erson is /ustified to defend his ,ro,erty rights% but all the elements of selfJdefense under &rt. 11% must be ,resent. 'n the instant case% /ust li0e in 4arvaes% the second element (reasonable necessity of the means em,loyed) is absent. (ence% he should be convicted of homicide but entitled to incom,lete selfJ defense.

!he accused should be convicted because% even assuming the facts to be true in his belief% his act of shooting a burglar when there is no unlawful aggression on his ,erson is not /ustified. Fefense of ,ro,erty or ,ro,erty right does not /ustify the act of firing a gun at a burglar unless the life and limb of the accused is already in imminent and immediate danger. &lthough the accused acted out of a misa,,rehension of the facts% he is not absolved from criminal liability.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

!ustifying; S5; 5efense of Property; 0e;uisites (%&&1)


!he accused lived with his family in a neighborhood that often was the scene of fre1uent robberies. &t one time% ,ast midnight% the accused went downstairs with a loaded gun to investigate what he thought were footste,s of an
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Considering the given circumstances% namelythe fre1uent robberies in the neighborhood% the time was ,ast midnight% and the victim a,,eared to be an armed burglar in the dar0 and inside his house% the accused could have entertained an honest belief that his life and limb or those of his family are already in immediate and imminent danger. (ence% it may be reasonable to acce,t that he acted out of an honest mista0e of fact and therefore without criminal intent. &n honest mista0e of fact negatives criminal intent and thus absolves the accused from criminal liability.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

case$ )5,lain. (1<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

?ualifying; +lements of a Crime (%&&1) When would 1ualifying circumstances be deemed% if at all% elements of a crime$ C<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

& 1ualifying circumstance would be deemed an element of a crime when J a. it changes the nature of the crime% bringing about a more serious crime and a heavier ,enaltyb. it is essential to the crime involved% otherwise some other crime is committed- and
c. it is and s,ecifically alleged in the 'nformation

,roven during the trial.


ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

& 1ualifying circumstance is deemed an element of a crime when it is s,ecifically stated by law as included in the definition of a crime% li0e treachery in the crime of murder.

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
8itigating; <on,2nto/ication (%&&&)
Fes,ite the massive advertising cam,aign in media against firecrac0ers and gunJfiring during the 4ew +earGs celebrations% 2onas and 2a/a bought ten bo5es of su,er lolo and ,laJ,la in 8ocaue% 8ulacan. 8efore midnight of Fecember ?1% 1DDD% 2onas and 2a/a started their celebration by having a drin0ing s,ree at 2onaGs ,lace by e5,loding their highJ,owered firecrac0ers in their neighborhood. 'n the course of their conversation% 2onas confided to 2a/a that he has been 0ee,ing a longJtime grudge against his neighbor 2e,oy in view of the latterGs refusal to lend him some money. While under the influence of li1uor% 2onas started throwing lighted su,er lolos inside 2e,oyGs fence to irritate him and the same e5,loded inside the latterGs yard. U,on 0nowing that the throwing of the su,er lolo was deliberate% 2e,oy became furious and sternly warned 2onas to sto, his malicious act or he would get what he wanted. & heated argument between 2onas and 2e,oy ensued but 2a/a tried to calm down his friend. &t midnight% 2onas convinced 2a/a to lend him his .C; caliber ,istol so that he could use it to 0noc0 down 2e,oy and to end his arrogance. 2onas thought that after all% e5,losions were everywhere and nobody would 0now who shot 2e,oy. &fter 2a/a lent his firearm to 2onas% the latter again started started throwing lighted su,er lolos and ,laJ,las at 2e,oyGs yard in order to ,rovo0e him so that he would come out of his house. When 2e,oy came out% 2onas immediately shot him with 2a/aGs .C; caliber gun but missed his target. 'nstead% the bullet hit 2e,oyGs five year old son who was following behind him% 0illing the boy instantaneously%

a) What crime or crimes can 2onas and 2a/a be charged with$ )5,lain. ( <) b) 'f you were 2onasG and 2a/aGs lawyer% what ,ossible defenses would you set u, in favor of your clients$ )5,lain. ( <)
c) 'f you were the 2udge% how would you decide the

22 of 86
a) 2onas and 2a/a% can be charged with the com,le5 crime of attem,ted murder with homicide because a single act caused a less grave and a grave felony (&rt. CB. "#C).... b) 'f ' were 2onasG and 2a/aGs lawyer% ' will use the following defensesK a. !hat the accused had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed as they merely intended to frighten 2e,oyb. !hat 2onas committed the crime in a state of into5ication thereby im,airing his will ,ower or ca,acity to understand the wrongfulness of his act. 4onJintentional into5ication is a mitigating circumstance
($eop"e .s. orti8%# 281 S*+, 600 (1997&,rt. 15# +$*.&.

guilty. (is ,lea of not guilty before the 6unici,al Court is immaterial as it was made during ,reliminary investigation only and before a court not com,etent to render /udgment. 8itigating; Plea of Guilty; 0e;uisites (1999) 'n order that the ,lea of guilty may be mitigating% what re1uisites must be com,lied with$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

9or ,lea of guilty to be mitigating% the re1uisites areK a. !hat the accused s,ontaneously ,leaded guilty to the crime chargedb. !hat such ,lea was made before the court com,etent to try the case and render /udgment- and c. !hat such ,lea was made ,rior to the ,resentation of evidence for the ,rosecution. 8itigating; Plea of Guilty; $oluntary Surren"er (199*) &fter 0illing the victim% the accused absconded. (e succeeded in eluding the ,olice until he surfaced and surrendered to the authorities about two years later. Charged with murder% he ,leaded not guilty but% after the ,rosecution had ,resented two witnesses im,licating him to the crime% he changed his ,lea to that of guilty. Should the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and ,lea of guilty be considered in favor of the accused$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

8itigating; Plea of Guilty (1999)


&n accused charged with the crime of homicide ,leaded 7not guilty7 during the ,reliminary investigation before the 6unici,al Court. U,on the elevation of the case to the "egional !rial Court the Court of com,etent /urisdiction% he ,leaded guilty freely and voluntarily u,on arraignment. Can his ,lea of guilty before the "!C be considered s,ontaneous and thus entitle him to the mitigating circumstance of s,ontaneous ,lea of guilty under &rt. 1?(E)% "#C$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% his ,lea of guilty before the "egional !rial Court can be considered s,ontaneous% for which he is entitled to the mitigating circumstance of ,lea of
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

.oluntary surrender should be considered as a mitigating circumstance. &fter two years% the ,olice were still unaware of the whereabouts of the accused and the latter

Dondee

already started with the ,resentation of its evidence (&rt. 1?% ,ar. E. "evised #enal Code). 8itigating; $oluntary Surren"er (1996)
(ilario% u,on seeing his son engaged in a scuffle with "ene% stabbed and 0illed the latter. &fter the stabbing% he brought his son home. !he Chief of #olice of the town% accom,anied by several ,olicemen% went to (ilarioGs house% (ilario% u,on seeing the a,,roaching ,olicemen% came down from his house to meet them and voluntarily went with them to the #olice Station to be investigated in connection with the 0illing. When eventually charged with and convicted of homicide% (ilario% on a,,eal% faulted the trial court for not a,,reciating in his favor the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. 's he entitled to such a mitigating circumstance$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% (ilario is entitled to the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. !he cru5 of the issue is whether the fact that (ilario went home after the incident% but came down and met the ,olice officers and went with them is considered 7.oluntary surrender%7 !he voluntariness of surrender is tested if the same is s,ontaneous showing the intent of the accused to submit himself unconditionally to the authorities. !his must be either (a) because he ac0nowledges his guilt% or (b) because he wishes to save them the trouble and e5,enses necessarily incurred in his search and ca,ture. !hus% the act of the accused in hiding after commission of the crime% but voluntarily went with the ,olicemen who had gone to his hiding ,lace to investigate% was held to be mitigating circumstance. ($eop"e vs. Dayrit# 8ited in +eyes: *o((entaries# p. 299&

8itigating; $oluntary Surren"er; +lements (1999) When is surrender by an accused considered voluntary% and constitutive of the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(+eyes: *o((entaries# p. 303&. Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) could

& surrender by an offender is considered voluntary when it is s,ontaneous% indicative of an intent to submit unconditionally to the authorities. !o be mitigating% the surrender must beK

have continued to elude arrest. &ccordingly% the surrender of the accused should be considered mitigating because it was done s,ontaneously% indicative of the remorse or re,entance on the ,art of said accused and therefore% by his surrender% the accused saved the >overnment e5,enses% efforts% and time.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

.oluntary surrender may not be a,,reciated in favor of the accused. !wo years is too long a time to consider the surrender as s,ontaneous ($eop"e .s. ,b"ao# 183 S*+, 658&. 9or sure the government had already incurred considerable efforts and e5,enses in loo0ing for the accused. #lea of guilty can no longer be a,,reciated as a mitigating circumstance because the ,rosecution had

23 of 86
a. b. c. s,ontaneous% i.e.% indicative of ac0nowledgment of guilt and not for convenience nor conditionalmade before the government incurs e5,enses% time and effort in trac0ing down the offenderGs whereabouts- and made to a ,erson in authority or the latterGs agents.
c.

identification% what crime did the four commit$ )5,lain.


Under the facts of the case% what aggravating circumstances may be a,,reciated against the four$

)5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

AGGRA8ATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(ggra#ating Circumstances (1996) 2ose% Fomingo% 6anolo% and 9ernando% armed with bolos% at about one oGcloc0 in the morning% robbed a house at a desolate ,lace where Fanilo% his wife% and three daughters were living. While the four were in the ,rocess of ransac0ing FaniloGs house% 9ernando% noticing that one of FaniloGs daughters was trying to get away% ran after her and finally caught u, with her in a thic0et somewhat distant from the house. 9ernando% before bringing bac0 the daughter to the house% ra,ed her first. !hereafter% the four carted away the belongings of Fanilo and his family. a. What crime did 2ose% Fomingo% 6anolo and 9ernando commit$ )5,lain. b. Su,,ose% after the robbery% the four too0 turns in ra,ing the three daughters of Fanilo inside the latterGs house% but before they left% they 0illed the whole family to ,revent
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

a) 2ose% Fomingo% and 6anolo committed "obbery% while 9ernando committed com,le5 crime of "obbery with "a,e...

b) !he crime would be "obbery with (omicide because the 0illings were by reason (to ,revent identification) and on the occasion of the robbery. !he multi,le ra,es committed and the fact that several ,ersons were 0illed Hhomicide)% would be considered as aggravating circumstances. !he ra,es are synonymous with 'gnominy and the additional 0illing synonymous with cruelty% ($eop"e
vs. So"is# 182 S*+,- $eop"e vs. $"a6a# 202 S*+, 531&

c) !he aggravating circumstances which may be considered in the ,remises areK 1. 8and because all the four offenders are armed. 4octumity because evidently the offenders too0 advantage of nighttime?. dwelling- and C. Uninhabited ,lace because the house where the crimes were committed was 7at a desolate ,lace7 and obviously the offenders too0 advantage of this circumstance in committing the crime.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

(ggra#ating Circumstances; Generis #s9 ?ualifying (1999) Fistinguish generic aggravating circumstance from 1ualifying aggravating circumstance.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a descendant (daughter) of the offender and considering that the crime is one against chastity.

Generic Aggravating CircumstancesK a. affects only the im,osition of the ,enalty ,rescribed% but not the nature of the crime committedb. can be offset by ordinary mitigating circumstancesc. need not be alleged in the 'nformation as long as ,roven during the trial% the same shall be considered in im,osing the sentence. Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances: a. must be alleged in the 'nformation and ,roven during trialb. cannot be offset by mitigating circumstancesc. affects the nature of the crime or brings about a ,enalty higher in degree than that ordinarily ,rescribed. (ggra#ating Circumstances; 7in"s @ Penalties (1999) 4ame the four (C) 0inds of aggravating circumstances and state their effect on the ,enalty of crimes and nature thereof. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he four (C) 0inds of aggravating circumstances areK 1) >)4)"'C &>>"&.&!'4> or those that can generally a,,ly to all crimes% and can be offset by mitigating circumstances% but if not offset% would affect only the ma5imum of the ,enalty ,rescribed by law) S#)C'9'C &>>"&.&!'4> or those that a,,ly only to ,articular crimes and cannot be offset by mitigating circumstancesK
?) =U&L'9+'4> C'"CU6S!&4C)S or those that change the nature of the crime to a graver one% or brings about a ,enalty ne5t higher in degree% and cannot be offset by mitigating circumstances-

C) '4()")4! &>>"&.&!'4> or those that essentially accom,any the commission of the crime and does not affect the ,enalty whatsoever. (ggra#ating; Cruelty; 0elationship (199 )
8en% a widower% driven by bestial desire% ,o0ed a gun on his daughter Meny% forcibly undressed her and tied her legs to the bed. (e also burned her face with a lighted cigarrete. Li0e a madman% he laughed while ra,ing her.

What aggravating circumstances are ,resent in this case$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a) Cruelty% for burning the victimGs face with a


lighted cigarrete% thereby deliberately augmenting the victimGs suffering by acts clearly unnecessary to the ra,e% while the offender delighted and en/oyed seeing the victim suffer in ,ain ($eop"e vs. 9.8as# 181 S*+, 316&.

b) "elationshi,% because the offended ,arty is

24 of 86
(ggra#ating; 8ust 3e allege" in the information (%&&&) "ico% a member of the &l,ha "ho fraternity% was 0illed by #ocholo% a member of the rival grou,% Sigma #hi *mega. #ocholo was ,rosecuted for homicide before the "egional !rial Court in 8inan% Laguna. Furing the trial% the ,rosecution was able to ,rove that the 0illing was committed by means of ,oison in consideration of a ,romise or reward and with cruelty. 'f you were the 2udge% with what crime will you convict #ocholo$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

bac0. "affy a,,roached Fino% but suddenly% 8obby% Steve% Fanny and 4onoy surrounded the duo. !hen 8obby stabbed Fino. Steve% Fanny% 4onoy and 2ohnny 0e,t on hitting Fino and "affy with roc0s. &s a result. Fino died% 8obby% Steve% Fanny% 4onoy and 2ohnny were charged with homicide. Can the court a,,reciate the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and band$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

#ocholo should be convicted of the crime of homicide only because the aggravating circumstances which should 1ualify the crime to murder were not alleged in the 'nformation.
!he circumstances of using ,oison% in consideration of a ,romise or reward% and cruelty which attended the 0illing of "ico could only be a,,reciated as generic aggravating circumstances since none of them have been alleged in the information to 1ualify the 0illing to murder. & 1ualifying circumstance must be alleged in the 'nformation and ,roven beyond reasonable doubt during the trial to be a,,reciated as such.

4o% nighttime cannot be a,,reciated as an aggravating circumstance because there is no indication that the offenders deliberately sought the cover of dar0ness to facilitate the commission of the crime or that they too0 advantage of nighttime ($eop"e vs. De "os +eyes# 203 S*+, 707&. 8esides% /udicial notice can be ta0en of the fact that #adre 9aura Street is wellJlighted.

(owever% band should be considered as the crime was committed by more than three armed malefactors- in a recent Su,reme Court decision% stones or roc0s are considered deadly wea,ons. (ggra#ating; 0eci"i#ism (%&&1)
2uan de Castro already had three (?) ,revious convictions by final /udgment for theft when he was found guilty of "obbery with (omicide. 'n the last case% the trial 2udge considered against the accused both recidivism and habitual delin1uency. !he accused a,,ealed and contended that in his last conviction% the trial court cannot consider against him a finding of recidivism and%

(ggra#ating; <ighttime; Aan" (199 ) &t about DK?A in the evening% while Fino and "affy were wal0ing along #adre 9aura Street% 6anila. 2ohnny hit them with a roc0 in/uring Fino at the
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

death within a few hours.

again% of habitual delin1uency. 's the a,,eal meritorious$ )5,lain. (;<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% the a,,eal is not meritorious. "ecidivism and habitual delin1uency are correctly considered in this case because the basis of recidivism is different from that of habitual delin1uency.
2uan is a recidivist because he had been ,reviously convicted by final /udgment for theft and again found guilty for "obbery with (omicide% which are both crimes against ,ro,erty% embraced under the same !itle (!itle !en% 8oo0 !woI of the "evised #enal Code. !he im,lication is that he is s,eciali3ing in the commission of crimes against ,ro,erty% hence aggravating in the conviction for "obbery with (omicide. (abitual delin1uency% which brings about an additional ,enalty when an offender is convicted a third time or more for s,ecified crimes% is correctly considered ...

(ggra#ating; 0eci"i#ism #s9 ?uasi,0eci"i#ism (199-) Fistinguish between recidivism and 1uasiJ recidivism. H <I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'n reci ivism J 1. !he convictions of the offender are for crimes embraced in the same !itle of the "evised #enal Code- and . !his circumstance is generic aggravating and therefore can be effect by an ordinary mitigating circumstance. Whereas in !uasi"reci ivlsm J 1. !he convictions are not for crimes embraced in the same !itle of the "evised #enal Code% ,rovided that it is a felony that was committed by the offender before serving sentence by final /udgment for another crime or while serving sentence for another crime- and . !his circumstance is a s,ecial aggravating circumstance which cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance. (ggra#ating; Treachery @ 'nlawful +ntry (199*)
!he accused and the victim occu,ied ad/acent a,artments% each being a se,arate dwelling unit of one big house. !he accused sus,ected his wife of having an illicit relation with the victim. *ne afternoon% he saw the victim and his wife together on board a vehicle. 'n the evening of that day% the accused went to bed early and tried to slee,% but being so annoyed over the sus,ected relation between his wife and the victim% he could not slee,. Later in the night% he resolved to 0ill victim. (e rose from bed and too0 hold of a 0nife. (e entered the a,artment of the victim through an unloc0ed window. 'nside% he saw the victim soundly aslee,. (e thereu,on stabbed the victim% inflicting several wounds% which caused his

25 of 86
Would you say that the 0illing was attended by the 1ualifying or aggravating circumstances of evident ,remeditation% treachery% nighttime and unlawful entry$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

which is not the ,ro,er ,lace for entrance into the house

(,rt. 14. par. 18. +evised $ena" *ode# $eop"e vs. <ar.6a 61
$%i". 318&.

ALTERNATI8E CIRCUMSTANCES
(lternati#e Circumstances; 2nto/ication (%&&%) & was invited to a drin0ing s,ree by friends. &fter having had a drin0 too many% & and 8 had a heated argument% during which & stabbed 8. &s a result% 8 suffered serious ,hysical in/uries. 6ay the into5ication of & be considered aggravating or mitigating$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. )vident ,remeditation cannot be considered against the accused because he resolved to 0ill the victim 7later in the night7 and there was no sufficient la,se of time between the determination and e5ecution% to allow his conscience to overcome the resolution of his will.

. !")&C()"+ may be ,resent because the accused stabbed the victim while the latter was sound aslee,. &ccordingly% he em,loyed means and methods which directly and s,ecially insured the e5ecution of the act without ris0 himself arising from the defense which the victim might have made
($eop"e vs. De;.ina. 60 $%i". 279 $eop"e vs. /iranda# et at. 90 $%i". 91&.

?. 4ighttime cannot be a,,reciated because there is no showing that the accused deliberately sought or availed of nighttime to insure the success of his act. !he 'ntention to commit the crime was conceived shortly before its commission ($eop"e vs $ardo. 79 $%i"# 568&. 6oreover% nighttime is absorbed in treachery.
C. U4L&W9UL )4!"+ may be a,,reciated as an aggravating circumstance% inasmuch as the accused entered the room of the victim through the window% Version 1994-2006 Updated by Dondee

!he into5ication of & may be ,rima facie considered mitigating since it was merely incidental to the commission of the crime. 't may not be considered aggravating as there is no clear indication from the facts of the case that it was habitual or intentional on the ,art of &. &ggravating circumstances are not to be ,resumed- they should be ,roved beyond reasonable doubt

PERSONS C-&:&! ++2 L& 1+" 4)6ELONIES


(nti,.encing Law; .encing (1996)
9lora% who was engaged in the ,urchase and sale of /ewelry% was ,rosecuted for the violation of #.F. 1@1 % otherwise 0nown as the &ntiJ9encing Law% for having been found to be in ,ossession of recently stolen 2ewelry valued at #1AA%AAA.AA at her /ewelry sho, at Ma,ote

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

What are the elements of fencing$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

"oad% Las #inas% 6etro 6anila. She testified during the trial that she merely bought the same from one named Cecilino and even ,roduced a recei,t covering the sale. Cecilino% in the ,ast% used to deliver to her /ewelries for sale but is ,resently nowhere to be found. Convicted by the trial court for violation of the &ntiJ 9encing Law% she argued (or her ac1uittal on a,,eal% contending that the ,rosecution failed to ,rove that she 0new or should have 0nown that the 2ewelries recovered from her were the ,roceeds of the crime of robbery or theft.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he elements of fencing areK a. a crime of robbery or theft has been committed-

4o% 9loraGs defense is not wellJta0en because mere ,ossession of any article of value which has been the sub/ect of theft or robbery shall be ,rima facie evidence of fencing (#.F.4o. 1@1 ). !he burden is u,on the accused to ,rove that she ac1uired the /ewelry legitimately. (er defense of having bought the 2ewelry from someone whose whereabouts is un0nown% does not overcome the ,resum,tion of fencing against her ($a(int.an vs $eop"e# 0.+ 111426# 11 1."y 1994&. 8uying ,ersonal ,ro,erty ,uts the buyer on caveat because of the ,hrases that he should have 0nown or ought to 0now that it is the ,roceed from robbery or theft. 8esides% she should have followed the administrative ,rocedure under the decree that of getting a clearance from the authorities in case the dealer is unlicensed in order to esca,e liability.

(nti,.encing Law; .encing #s9 Theft or 0o33ery (1996) What is the difference between a fence and an accessory to theft or robbery$ )5,lain. 's there any similarity between them$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

*ne difference between a fence and an accessory to theft or robbery is the ,enalty involved- a fence is ,unished as a ,rinci,al under #.F. 4o. 1@1 and the ,enalty is higher% whereas an accessory to robbery or theft under the "evised #enal Code is ,unished two degrees lower than the ,rinci,al% unless he bought or ,rofited from the ,roceeds of theft or robbery arising from robbery in #hili,,ine highways under #.F. 4o. ;? where he is ,unished as an accom,lice% hence the ,enalty is one degree lower. &lso% fencing is a malum ,rohibitum and therefore there is no need to ,rove criminal intent of the accused- this is not so in violations of "evised #enal Code.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% there is a similarity in the sense that all the acts of one who is an accessory to the crimes of robbery or theft are included in the acts defined as fencing. 'n fact% the accessory in the crimes of robbery or theft could be ,rosecuted as such under the "evised #enal Code or as a fence under #.F. 4o. 1@1 . (Di5on$a(int.an vs. $eop"e# 234 S*+, 63=

(nti,.encing Law; .encing; +lements (1996)

26 of 86
b. accused% who is not a ,rinci,al or accom,lice in the crime% buys% receives% ,ossesses% 0ee,s% ac1uires% conceals% or dis,oses% or buys and sells% or in any manner deals in any article% item % ob/ect or anything of value% which has been derived from the ,roceeds of said crimethe accused 0nows or should have 0nown that said article% item% ob/ect or anything of value has been derived from the from the ,roceeds of the crime of robbery or theft- and there is on the ,art of the accused% intent to gain for himself or for another.

2ose commit$ Fiscuss their criminal liabilities. H1A<I


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Ning committed the com,osite crime of "a,e with homicide as a single indivisible offense% not a com,le5 crime% and !heft. ...
FomingGs acts% having been done with 0nowledge of the commission of the crime and obviously to conceal the body of the crime to ,revent its discovery% ma0es him an accessory to the crime of ra,e with homicide under &rt. 1D% ,ar. of the "ev. #enal Code% but he is e5em,t from criminal liability therefor under &rticle A of the Code% being an ado,ted brother of the ,rinci,al.

c.

d.

Criminal Lia3ility; (ccessories @ .ence (199-) Ning went to the house of Laura who was alone. Laura offered him a drin0 and after consuming three bottles of beer. Ning made advances to her and with force and violence% ravished her. !hen Ning 0illed Laura and too0 her /ewelry.
Foming% NingGs ado,ted brother% learned about the incident. (e went to LauraGs house% hid her body% cleaned everything and washed the bloodstains inside the room.

2ose incurs criminal liability either as an accessory to the crime of theft committed by Ning% or as fence. &lthough he is a legitimate brother of Ning% the e5em,tion under &rticle A does not include the ,artici,ation he did% because he ,rofited from the effects of such theft by selling the /ewelry 0nowing that the same was ta0en from Laura. *r 2ose may be ,rosecuted for fencing under the &ntiJ9encing Law of 1DED (#F 4o. 1@1 ) since the /ewelry was the ,roceeds of theft and with intent to gain% he received it from Ning and sold it. Criminal Lia3ility; <on,+/emption as (ccessory (%&& ) FC8% the daughter of 6C8% stole the earrings of L+M% a stranger. 6C8 ,awned the earrings with !8' #awnsho, as a ,ledge for #;AA loan. Furing the trial% 6C8 raised the defense that being the mother of FC8% she cannot be

Later% Ning gave 2ose% his legitimate brother% one ,iece of /ewelry belonging to Laura. 2ose 0new that the /ewelry was ta0en from Laura but nonetheless he sold it for # %AAA. What crime or crimes did Ning% Foming and
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

held liable as an accessory. Will 6C8Gs defense ,ros,er$ "eason briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

& as0ed 8 to 0ill C because of a grave in/ustice done to & by C. & ,romised 8 a reward. 8 was willing to 0ill C% not so much because of the reward ,romised to him but

4o% 6C8Gs defense will not ,ros,er because the e5em,tion from criminal liability of an accessory by virtue of relationshi, with the ,rinci,al does not cover accessories who themselves ,rofited from or assisted the offender to ,rofit by the effects or ,roceeds of the crime. !his nonJe5em,tion of an accessory% though related to the ,rinci,al of the crime% is e5,ressly ,rovided in &rt. A of the "evised #enal Code. Criminal Lia3ility; Principal 3y 5irect Participation; Co, Principal 3y 2n"ispensa3le Cooperation (%&&&)
Fes,ite the massive advertising cam,aign in media against firecrac0ers and gunJfiring during the 4ew +earGs celebrations% 2onas and 2a/a bought ten bo5es of su,er lolo and ,laJ,la in 8ocaue% 8ulacan. 8efore midnight of Fecember ?1% 1DDD% 2onas and 2a/a started their celebration by having a drin0ing s,ree at 2onaGs ,lace by e5,loding their highJ,owered firecrac0ers in their neighborhood. 'n the course of their conversation% 2onas confided to 2a/a that he has been 0ee,ing a longJtime grudge against his neighbor 2e,oy in view of the latterGs refusal to lend him some money. While under the influence of li1uor% 2onas started throwing lighted su,er lolos inside 2e,oyGs fence to irritate him and the same e5,loded inside the latterGs yard. U,on 0nowing that the throwing of the su,er lolo was deliberate% 2e,oy became furious and sternly warned 2onas to sto, his malicious act or he would get what he wanted. & heated argument between 2onas and 2e,oy ensued but 2a/a tried to calm down his friend. &t midnight% 2onas convinced 2a/a to lend him his .C; caliber ,istol so that he could use it to 0noc0 down 2e,oy and to end his arrogance. 2onas thought that after all% e5,losions were everywhere and nobody would 0now who shot 2e,oy. &fter 2a/a lent his firearm to 2onas% the latter again started started throwing lighted su,er lolos and ,laJ,las at 2e,oyGs yard in order to ,rovo0e him so that he would come out of his house. When 2e,oy came out% 2onas immediately shot him with 2a/aGs .C; caliber gun but missed his target. 'nstead% the bullet hit 2e,oyGs five year old son who was following behind him% 0illing the boy instantaneously%

'f you were the 2udge% how would you decide the case$ )5,lain. (1<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

' would convict 2onas as ,rinci,al by direct ,artici,ation and 2a/a as coJ,rinci,al by 'ndis,ensable coo,eration for the com,le5 crime of murder with homicide. 2a/a should be held liable as coJ ,rinci,al and not only as an accom,lice because he 0new of 2onasG criminal design even before he lent his firearm to 2onas and still he concurred in that criminal design by ,roviding the firearm. Criminal Lia3ility; Principal 3y 2n"ucement (%&&%)

27 of 86 because he
also had his own longJstanding grudge against C% who had wronged him in the ,ast. 'f C is 0illed by 8% would & be liable as a ,rinci,al by inducement$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

monetary consideration% to commit arson which the latter would not have committed were it not for such reason. +oboy and +ongsi are ,rinci,als by direct ,artici,ation (,rt. 17# pars. 21 and 3# +$*&. 5estructi#e (rson (199 )
!ata owns a threeJstorey building located at 4o. ? (erran Street. #aco% 6anila. She wanted to construct a new building but had no money to finance the construction. So% she insured the building for #?%AAA%AAA.AA. She then urged +oboy and +ongsi% for monetary consideration% to burn her building so she could collect the insurance ,roceeds. +oboy and +ongsi burned the said building resulting to its total loss.

4o. & would not be liable as a ,rinci,al by inducement because the reward he ,romised 8 is not the sole im,elling reason which made 8 to 0ill C. !o bring about criminal liability of a coJ,rinci,al% the inducement made by the inducer must be the sole consideration which caused the ,erson induced to commit the crime and without which the crime would not have been committed. !he facts of the case indicate that 8% the 0iller su,,osedly induced by &% had his own reason to 0ill C out of a long standing grudge. Criminal Lia3ility; Principal; 2n"ucement @ Participation (199 )
!ata owns a threeJstorey building located at 4o. ? (erran Street. #aco% 6anila. She wanted to construct a new building but had no money to finance the construction. So% she insured the building for #?%AAA%AAA.AA. She then urged +oboy and +ongsi% for monetary consideration% to burn her building so she could collect the insurance ,roceeds. +oboy and +ongsi burned the said building resulting to its total loss.

What crime did !ata% +oboy and +ongsi commit$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!ata% +oboy and +ongsi committed the crime of destructive arson because they collectively caused the destruction of ,ro,erty by means of fire under the circumstances which e5,osed to danger the life or ,ro,erty of others (,rt# 320# par. 5#
+$*. as a(ended by +, )o. 7659&.

PENALTIES
Comple/ Crime #s9 Compoun" Crime (%&& ) Fistinguish clearly but brieflyK 8etween com,ound and com,le5 crimes as conce,ts in the #enal Code.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

What is their res,ective criminal liability$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!ata is a ,rinci,al by inducement because she directly induced +oboy and +ongsi% for a ,rice or
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

C*6#*U4F C"'6)S result when the offender committed only a single felonious act from which two or

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) more

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

crimes resulted. !his is ,rovided for in modified form in the first ,art of &rticle CB% "evised #enal Code% limiting the resulting crimes to only grave and:or less grave felonies. (ence% light felonies are e5cluded even though resulting from the same single act.

C*6#L)L C"'6)S result when the offender has to commit an offense as a necessary means for committing another offense. *nly one information shall be filed and if ,roven% the ,enalty for the more serious crime shall be im,osed. Comple/ Crime #s9 Special Comple/ Crime #s9 5elito Continua"o (%&&6) Fistinguish the following from each otherK
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&n *"F'4&"+ C*6#L)L C"'6) is made u, of two or more crimes being ,unished in distinct ,rovisions of the "evised #enal Code but alleged in one information either because they were brought about by a single felonious act or because one offense is a necessary means for committing the other offense or offenses. !hey are alleged in one information so that only one ,enalty shall be im,osed. &s to ,enalties% ordinary com,le5 crime% the ,enalty for the most serious crime shall be im,osed and in its ma5imum ,eriod
& S#)C'&L C*6#L)L C"'6)% on the other hand% is made u, of two or more crimes which are considered only as com,onents of a single indivisible offense being ,unished in one ,rovision of the "evised #enal Code. &s to ,enalties% s,ecial com,le5 crime% only one ,enalty is s,ecifically ,rescribed for all the com,onent crimes which are regarded as one indivisible offense. !he com,onent crimes are not regarded as distinct crimes and so the ,enalty for the most serious crime is not the ,enalty to be im,osed nor in its ma5imum ,eriod. 't is the ,enalty s,ecifically ,rovided for the s,ecial com,le5 crime that shall be a,,lied according to the rules on im,osition of the ,enalty. F)L'!* C*4!'4U&F*% or C*4!'4U*US C"'6)% is a term used to denote as only one crime a series of felonious acts arising from a single criminal resolution% not susce,tible of division% which are carried out in the same ,lace and at about the same time% and violating one and the same ,enal ,rovision. !he acts done must be im,elled by one criminal intent or ,ur,ose% such that each act merely constitutes a ,artial e5ecution of a ,articular crime% violating one and the same ,enal ,rovision. 't involves a concurrence of felonious acts violating a common right% a common ,enal ,rovision% and 'm,elled by a single criminal im,ulse ($eop"e vs.
9edes(a# 73 S*+, 77&.

Comple/ Crime; (3erratio ictus #s9 error in personae (199 ) Fistinguish aberratio ictus from error in ,ersonae.

28 of 86
&berratio ictus or mista0e in the blow occurs when a felonious act missed the ,erson against whom it was directed and hit instead somebody who was not the intended victim. )rror in ,ersonae% or mista0e in identity occurs when the felonious act was directed at the ,erson intended% but who turned out to be somebody else. &berratio ictus brings about at least two ( ) felonious conse1uence% ie. the attem,ted felony on the intended victim who was not hit and the felony on the unintended victim who was hit. & com,le5 crime of the first form under &rt. CB% "#C generally result. 'n error in ,ersonae only one crime is committed

do not result and the ,enalties are to be im,osed distinctly for each resulting crime.

)""*" '4 #)"S*4&) or mista0e in identity occurs when the offender actually hit the ,erson to whom the blow was directed but turned out to be different from and not the victim intended. !he criminal liability of the offender is not affected% unless the mista0e in identity resulted to a crime different from what the offender intended to commit% in which case the lesser ,enalty between the crime intended and the crime committed shall be im,osed but in the ma5imum ,eriod (,rt. 49#
+ *&.

Comple/ Crime; (3erratio 2ctusB +rror 2n Personae @ Praeter 2ntentionem (1999) What do you understand by aberratio ictusK error in ,ersonae- and ,raeter intentionem$ Fo they alter the criminal liability of an accused$ )5,lain. (C<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&8)""&!'* 'C!US or mista0e in the blow occurs when the offender delivered the blow at his intended victim but missed% and instead such blow landed on an unintended victim. !he situation generally brings about com,le5 crimes where from a single act% two or more grave or less grave felonies resulted% namely the attem,t against the intended victim and the conse1uence on the unintended victim. &s com,le5 crimes% the ,enalty for the more serious crime shall be the one im,osed and in the ma5imum ,eriod. 't is only when the resulting felonies are only light that com,le5 crimes
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

#"&)!)" '4!)4!'*4)6 or where the conse1uence went beyond that intended or e5,ected. !his is a mitigating circumstance (&rt. 1?. ,ar. ?% "#C) when there is a notorious dis,arity between the act or means em,loyed by the offender and the resulting felony% i%e.% the resulting felony could not be reasonably antici,ated or foreseen by the of fender from the act or means em,loyed by him. Comple/ Crime; (3erratio 2ctus; (ttempte" 8ur"er with >omici"e (%&&&)
Fes,ite the massive advertising cam,aign in media against firecrac0ers and gunJfiring during the 4ew +earGs celebrations% 2onas and 2a/a bought ten bo5es of su,er lolo and ,laJ,la in 8ocaue% 8ulacan. 8efore midnight of Fecember ?1% 1DDD% 2onas and 2a/a started their

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

celebration by having a drin0ing s,ree at 2onaGs ,lace by e5,loding their highJ,owered firecrac0ers in their neighborhood. 'n the course of their conversation% 2onas confided to 2a/a that he has been 0ee,ing a longJtime grudge against his neighbor 2e,oy in view of the latterGs refusal to lend him some money. While under the influence of li1uor% 2onas started throwing lighted su,er lolos inside 2e,oyGs fence to irritate him and the same e5,loded inside the latterGs yard. U,on 0nowing that the throwing of the su,er lolo was deliberate% 2e,oy became furious and sternly warned 2onas to sto, his malicious act or he would get what he wanted. & heated argument between 2onas and 2e,oy ensued but 2a/a tried to calm down his friend. &t midnight% 2onas convinced 2a/a to lend him his .C; caliber ,istol so that he could use it to 0noc0 down 2e,oy and to end his arrogance. 2onas thought that after all% e5,losions were everywhere and nobody would 0now who shot 2e,oy. &fter 2a/a lent his firearm to 2onas% the latter again started throwing lighted su,er lolos and ,laJ,las at 2e,oyGs yard in order to ,rovo0e him so that he would come out of his house. When 2e,oy came out% 2onas immediately shot him with 2a/aGs . C; caliber gun but missed his target. 'nstead% the bullet hit 2e,oyGs five year old son who was following behind him% 0illing the boy instantaneously%

for all the natural and logical conse1uences of his felonious act

a) What crime or crimes can 2onas and 2a/a be charged with$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

2onas and 2a/a% can be charged with the com,le5 crime of attem,ted murder with homicide because a single act caused a less grave and a grave felony (&rt. CB. "#C). &ttem,ted murder is a less grave felony% while consummated homicide is a grave felonyK both are ,unishable by afflictive ,enalties. Comple/ Crime; 5octrine of (3erratio 2ctus; <ot (pplica3le (1996) &t the height of an altercation% #edrito shot #aulo but missed% hitting !iburcio instead% resulting in the death of the latter. #edrito% invo0ing the doctrine of aberratio ictus% claims e5em,tion from criminal liability. 'f you were the /udge% how would you decide the case$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'f ' were the 2udge% ' will convict #edrito and find him guilty of the com,le5 crime of (omicide with &ttem,ted (omicide. !he single act of firing at #aulo resulted in the commission of two felonies% one grave (homicide) and the other less grave (attem,ted homicide) thus falling s1uarely under &rt. CB% "#C- hence% the ,enalty would be for the more serious crime (homicide} in its ma5imum ,eriod (1E years C months and 1 day to A years).

&berratio ictus (mista0e in the blow) could not be used as a defense as it is not an e5em,ting circumstance. #edrito is liable under the ,rinci,le of &rt. C% "#C% which ma0es a ,erson criminally liable

29 of 86
Comple/ Crimes; Coup "Cetat @ re3ellion @ se"ition (%&&1) 1) Can there be a com,le5 crime of cou, dGetat with rebellion$ <
) Can there be a com,le5 crime of cou, dGetat with

ob/ective as it is directed against the >overnment and led by ,ersons or ,ublic officer holding ,ublic office belonging to the military or national ,olice. &rt. CB of the Code

may a,,ly under the conditions therein ,rovided.


ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

sedition$ <
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1)

+es% if there was cons,iracy between the offender: offenders committing the cou, dGetat and the offenders committing the rebellion. 8y cons,iracy% the crime of one would be the crime of the other and vice versa. !his is ,ossible because the offender in cou, dGetat may be any ,erson or ,ersons belonging to the military or the national ,olice or a ,ublic officer% whereas rebellion does not so re1uire. 6oreover% the crime of cou, dGetat may be committed singly% whereas rebellion re1uires a ,ublic u,rising and ta0ing u, arms to overthrow the duly constituted government. Since the two crimes are essentially different and ,unished with distinct ,enalties% there is no legal im,ediment to the a,,lication of &rt. CB of the "evised #enal Code. +es% cou, dGetat can be com,le5ed with sedition because the two crimes are essentially different and distinctly ,unished under the "evised #enal Code. Sedition may not be directed against the >overnment or nonJ,olitical in ob/ective% whereas cou, dGetat is always ,olitical in

!he crime of cou, dGetat cannot be com,le5ed with the crime of rebellion because both crimes are directed against the >overnment or for ,olitical ,ur,oses% although the ,rinci,al offenders are different. !he essence may be the same and thus constitute only one crime. 'n this situation% the two crimes are not distinct and therefore% may not be ,ro,er to a,,ly &rticle CB of the Code. Comple/ Crimes; 5etermination of the Crime (1999) &% actuated by malice and with the use of a fully automatic 6J1C subJmachine gun% shot a grou, of ,ersons who were seated in a coc0,it with one burst of successive% continuous% automatic fire. 9our (C) ,ersons were 0illed thereby% each having hit by different bullets coming from the subJmachine gun of &. 9our (C) cases of murder were filed against &. !he trial court ruled that there was only one crime committed by & for the reason that% since & ,erformed only one act% he having ,ressed the trigger of his gun only once% the crime committed was murder. Conse1uently% the trial /udge sentenced & to /ust one ,enalty of reclusion ,er,etua. Was the decision of the trial /udge correct$ )5,lain. (C<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

!he decision of the trial /udge is not correct. When the offender made use of an automatic firearm% the acts committed are determined by the number of bullets discharged inasmuch as the firearm being automatic% the offender need only ,ress the trigger once and it would fire continually. 9or each death caused by a distinct and se,arate bullet% the accused incurs distinct criminal liability. (ence% it is not the act of ,ressing the trigger which should be considered as ,roducing the several felonies% but the number of bullets which actually ,roduced them. Comple/ Crimes; <ature @ Penalty 2n#ol#e" (1999) What constitutes a com,le5 crime$ (ow many crimes maybe involved in a com,le5 crime$ What is the ,enalty therefor$ (C<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

distinct crimes and so the ,enalty for the most serious crime is not the ,enalty to be im,osed nor in its ma5imum ,eriod. 't is

& com,le5 crime is constituted when a single act caused two or more grave or less grave felonies or when an offense is committed as a necessary means to commit another offense (&rt. CB% "#C). &t least two ( ) crimes are involved in a com,le5 crime- either two or more grave or less grave felonies resulted from a single act% or an offense is committed as a necessary means for committing another. !he ,enalty for the more serious crime shall be im,osed and in its ma5imum ,eriod. (&rt. CB% "#C) Comple/ Crimes; =r"inary Comple/ Crime #s9 Special Comple/ Crime (%&&1) Fistinguish between an ordinary com,le5 crime and a s,ecial com,le5 crime as to their conce,ts and as to the im,osition of ,enalties. <
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

I# C$#CE%& " &n *"F'4&"+ C*6#L)L C"'6) is made u, of two or more crimes being ,unished in distinct ,rovisions of the "evised #enal Code but alleged in one 'nformation either because they were brought about by a single felonious act or because one offense is a necessary means for committing the other offense or offenses. !hey are alleged in one 'nformation so that only one ,enalty shall be im,osed.
& S#)C'&L C*6#L)L C"'6)% on the other hand% is made u, of two or more crimes which are considered only as com,onents of a single indivisible offense being ,unished in one ,rovision of the "evised #enal Code.

AS &$ %E#A'&IES J 'n *"F'4&"+ C*6#L)L C"'6)% the ,enalty for the most serious crime shall be im,osed and in its ma5imum ,eriod.
'n S#)C'&L C*6#L)L C"'6)% only one ,enalty is s,ecifically ,rescribed for all the com,onent crimes which are regarded as one indivisible offense. !he com,onent crimes are not regarded as

30 of 86 the
,enalty s,ecifically ,rovided for the s,ecial com,le5 crime that shall be a,,lied according to the rules on im,osition of the ,enalty. Continuing =ffense #s9 5elito Continua"o (199 ) Fifferentiate delito continuado from a continuing offense.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

acts were ,erformed- the term 7continuing crime7 is more ,ertinently used with reference to the venue where the criminal action may be instituted. 5eath Penalty (%&& ) &. !he death ,enalty cannot be inflicted under which of the following circumstancesK 1) When the guilty ,erson is at least 1B years of age at the time of the commission of the crime. ) When the guilty ,erson is more than EA years of age. ?) When% u,on a,,eal to or automatic review by the Su,reme Court% the re1uired ma/ority for the im,osition of the death ,enalty is not obtained. C) When the ,erson is convicted of a ca,ital crime but before e5ecution becomes insane. ;) When the accused is a woman while she is ,regnant or within one year after delivery. )5,lain your answer or choice briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

F)L'!* C*4!'4U&F*% or C*4!'4U*US C"'6)% is a term used to denote as only one crime a series of felonious acts arising from a single criminal resolution% not susce,tible of division% which are carried out in the same ,lace and at about the same time% and violating one and the same ,enal ,rovision. !he acts done must be im,elled by one criminal intent or ,ur,ose% such that each act merely constitutes a ,artial e5ecution of a ,articular crime% violating one and the same ,enal ,rovision. 't involves a concurrence of felonious acts violating a common right% a common ,enal ,rovision% and im,elled by a single criminal im,ulse ($eop"e vs. 9e- des(a# 73 S*+, 77&. *n the other hand% a C*4!'4U'4> *99)4S) is one whose essential ingredients too0 ,lace in more than one munici,ality or city% so much so that the criminal ,rosecution may be instituted and the case tried in the com,etent court of any one of such munici,ality or city.

!he term 7C*4!'4U)F C"'6)7 or delito continuado mandates that only one information should be filed against the offender although a series of felonious
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

&. Understanding the word 7inflicted7 to mean the im,osition of the death ,enalty% not its e5ecution% the circumstance in which the death ,enalty cannot be inflicted is no. K 7when the guilty ,erson is more than EA years of age7 (&rt. CE% "evised #enal Code). 'nstead% the ,enalty shall be commuted to reclusion ,er,etua% with the accessory ,enalties ,rovided in &rticle CA% "9C. 'n circumstance no. 1 when the guilty ,erson is at least 1B years of age at the time of the commission of the

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

crime% the death ,enalty can be im,osed since the offender is already of legal age when he committed the crime. Circumstance no. ? no longer o,erates% considering the decision of the S.pre(e *o.rt in $eop"e vs. >4ren /ateo (0.+. 147678-87# 1."y 7# 2004& ,roviding an intermediate review for such cases where the ,enalty im,osed is death% reclusion ,er,etua or life im,risonment before they are elevated to the Su,reme Court.
'n circumtances nos. C O ;% the death ,enalty can be im,osed if ,rescribed by the law violated although its e5ecution shall be sus,ended when the convict becomes insane before it could be e5ecuted and while he is insane.

lost or destroyed or otherwise unavailable% the testimony% if clear and credible of the victimGs mother or any member of the family% by consanguinity or affinity% who is 1ualified to testify on matters res,ecting ,edigree such as the e5act age

Li0ewise% the death ,enalty can be im,osed u,on a woman but its e5ecution shall be sus,ended during her ,regnancy and for one year after her delivery.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

!he word 7'49L'C!)F7 is found only in &rt. B? to the effect that the death ,enalty may not be 7'49L'C!)F7 u,on a ,regnant woman% such ,enalty is to be sus,ended. 'f 7'49L'C!)F7 is to be construed as 7)L)CU!'*47% then 4o. ; is the choice. 5eath Penalty; ?ualifie" 0ape; 0e;uisites (%&& )
>. was convicted of ra,ing !C% his niece% and he was sentenced to death. 't was alleged in the information that the victim was a minor below seven years old% and her mother testified that she was only si5 years and ten months old% which her aunt corroborated on the witness stand. !he information also alleged that the accused was the victimGs uncle% a fact ,roved by the ,rosecution.

*n automatic review before the Su,reme Court% accusedJa,,ellant contends that ca,ital ,unishment could not be im,osed on him because of the inade1uacy of the charges and the insufficiency of the evidence to ,rove all the elements of the heinous crime of ra,e beyond reasonable doubt. 's a,,ellantGs contention correct$ "eason briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% a,,ellantGs contention is correct insofar as the age of the victim is concerned. !he age of the victim ra,ed has not been ,roved beyond reasonable doubt to constitute the crime as 1ualified ra,e and deserving of the death ,enalty. !he guidelines in a,,reciating age as a 1ualifying circumstance in ra,e cases have not been met% to witK

1) !he ,rimary evidence of the age of the victim is her birth certificate) 'n the absence of the birth certificate% age of the victim maybe ,roven by authentic document% such as ba,tismal certificate and school records'f the aforesaid documents are shown to have been

?)

31 of 86
or date of birth of the offended ,arty ,ursuant to Section CA% "ule 1?A of the "ules on )vidence shall be sufficient but only under the following circumstancesK (a) 'f the victim is alleged to be below ? years of age and what is sought to be ,roved is that she is less than E years old- (b) 'f the victim is alleged to be below E years of age and what is sought to be ,roved is that she is less than 1 years old- (c) 'f the victim is alleged to be below 1 years of age and what is sought to be ,roved is that she is less than 1B years old. C) 'n the absence of a certificate of live birth% authentic document% or the testimony of the victimGs mother or relatives concerning the victimGs age under the circumstances aboveJstated% com,lainantGs sole testimony can suffice% ,rovided that it is e5,ressly and clearly admitted by the accused ($eop"e .s. $r.na# 390 S*+, 577
?2002=&.

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% the a,,eal is not meritorious. "ecidivism and habitual delin1uency are correctly considered in this case because the basis of recidivism is different from that of habitual delin1uency. 2uan is a recidivist ...
(abitual delin1uency% which brings about an additional ,enalty when an offender is convicted a third time or more for s,ecified crimes% is correctly considered because 2uan had already three (?) ,revious convictions by final /udgment for theft and again convicted for "obbery With (omicide. &nd the crimes s,ecified as basis for habitual delin1uency includes% inter alia% theft and robbery.

>a3itual 5elin;uency @ 0eci"i#ism (%&&1) 2uan de Castro already had three (?) ,revious convictions by final /udgment for theft when he was found guilty of "obbery with (omicide. 'n the last case% the trial 2udge considered against the accused both recidivism and habitual delin1uency. !he accused a,,ealed and contended that in his last conviction% the trial court cannot consider against him a finding of recidivism and% again% of habitual delin1uency. 's the a,,eal meritorious$ )5,lain. (;<)
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

2n"eterminate Sentence Law (199 ) 'tos was convicted of an offense ,enali3ed by a s,ecial law. !he ,enalty ,rescribed is not less than si5 years but not more than twelve years. 4o modifying circumstance attended the commission of the crime. 'f you were the /udge% will you a,,ly the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law$ 'f so% how will you a,,ly it$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'f ' were the /udge% ' will a,,ly the ,rovisions of the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law% as the last sentence of Section 1 &ct C1A?% s,ecifically ,rovides the a,,lication thereof for violations of s,ecial laws.
Under the same ,rovision% the minimum must not be less than the minimum ,rovided therein (si5 years and one day) and the ma5imum shall not be more than the

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Code.

ma5imum ,rovided therein% i.e. twelve years.


($eop"e vs. +osa"ina +eyes# 186 S*+, 184&

2n"eterminate Sentence Law (1999) &ndres is charged with an offense defined by a s,ecial law. !he ,enalty ,rescribed for the offense is im,risonment of not less than five (;) years but not more than ten H1A) years. U,on arraignment% he entered a ,lea of guilty. 'n the im,osition of the ,ro,er ,enalty% should the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law be a,,lied$ 'f you were the 2udge trying the case% what ,enalty would you im,ose on &ndres$ (C<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(n er the law) what is the purpose for fixing the maximum an the minimum terms of the in eterminate sentence* ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law should be a,,lied because the minimum im,risonment is more than one (1) year. 'f ' were the 2udge% ' will im,ose an indeterminate sentence% the ma5imum of which shall not e5ceed the ma5imum fi5ed by law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum ,enalty ,rescribed by the same. ' have the discretion to im,ose the ,enalty within the said minimum and ma5imum. 2n"eterminate Sentence Law (1999) & was convicted of illegal ,ossession of grease guns and two !hom,son subJmachine guns ,unishable under the old law H"& 4o%CI with im,risonment of from five (;) to ten (1A) years. !he trial court sentenced the accused to suffer im,risonment of five (;) years and one (1) day. 's the ,enalty thus im,osed correct$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'ndeterminate Sentence Law does not a,,ly toK !he ,enalty im,osed% being only a straight ,enalty% is not correct because it does not com,ly with the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law which a,,lies to this case. Said law re1uires that if the offense is ,unished by any law other than the "evised #enal Code% the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence% the ma5imum term of which shall not e5ceed the ma5imum ,enalty fi5ed by the law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum ,enalty ,rescribed by the same.

2n"eterminate Sentence Law (%&&%) (ow are the ma5imum and the minimum terms of the indeterminate sentence for offenses ,unishable under the "evised #enal Code determined$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

9or crimes ,unished under the "evised #enal Code% the ma5imum term of the 'ndeterminate sentence shall be the ,enalty ,ro,erly im,osable under the same Code after considering the attending mitigating and:or aggravating circumstances according to &rt% @C of said Code. !he minimum term of the same sentence shall be fi5ed within the range of the ,enalty ne5t lower in degree to that ,rescribed for the crime under the said

32 of 86
!he ,ur,ose of the law in fi5ing the minimum term of the sentence is to set the grace ,eriod at which the convict may be released on ,arole from im,risonment% unless by his conduct he is not deserving of ,arole and thus he shall continue serving his ,rison term in 2ail but in no case to go beyond the ma5imum term fi5ed in the sentence. 2n"eterminate Sentence Law (%&&6)
(arold was convicted of a crime defined and ,enali3ed by a s,ecial ,enal law where the im,osable ,enalty is from @ months% as minimum% to ? years% as ma5imum.

a,,ly when the ,enalty im,osed is less than one year (Sec. % &rt. C1A?% as amended). c+ a straight penalty of 0 years1 234+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% because the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law will a,,ly when the minimum of the ,enalty e5ceeds one year.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER/

'f the im,osition of straight ,enalty which consists of the minimum ,eriod of the ,enalty ,rescribed by law% then it may be allowed because it favors the accused. 2n"eterminate Sentence Law; +/ceptions (1999) Under what circumstances is the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law not a,,licable$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

State with reasons whether the court may correctly im,ose the following ,enaltiesK a+ a straight penalty of ,- months.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% because the ,enalty is less than one year% a straight ,enalty may be im,osed. ($eop"e v. ,re""ano#
0.+. )o# 46501# 78tober 5# 1939&
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

Under the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law% the minimum im,osable ,enalty shall be im,osed but the ma5imum shall not e5ceed the ma5imum im,osable by law.

b+ / months) as minimum) to ,, months) as maximum.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% because 'ndeterminate Sentence Law does not


Version 1994-2006 Updated by

1) #ersons convicted of offenses ,unished with death ,enalty or life im,risonment) !hose convicted of treason% cons,iracy or ,ro,osal to commit treason?) !hose convicted of mis,rision of treason% rebellion% sedition or es,ionageC) !hose convicted of ,iracy;) !hose who are habitual delin1uents@) !hose who shall have esca,ed from confinement or evaded sentenceE) !hose who violated the terms of conditional ,ardon granted to them by the Chief )5ecutiveB) !hose whose ma5imum term of im,risonment does not e5ceed one year-

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

33 of 86
4o. & fine% whether im,osed as a single or as an alternative ,enalty% should not and cannot be reduced or converted into a ,rison term. !here is no rule for transmutation of the amount of a fine into a term of im,risonment. ($eop"e v. Da8.y8.y# 0.+. )o.
9-45127 /ay 5# 1989&

D) !hose who% u,on the a,,roval of the law (Fecember ;% 1D??). had been sentenced by final 2udgment1A) !hose sentenced to the ,enalty of destierro or sus,ension. 2n"eterminate Sentence Law; +/ceptions (%&&1) When would the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law be ina,,licable$ C<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he 'ndeterminate Sentence Law is not a,,licable toK 1) those ,ersons convicted of offenses ,unished with death ,enalty or lifeJim,risonment or reclusion ,er,etua) those convicted of treason% cons,iracy or ,ro,osal to commit treason?) those convicted of mis,rision of treason% rebellion% sedition or es,ionageC) those convicted of ,iracy;) those who are habitual delin1uents@) those who shall have esca,ed from confinement or evaded sentenceE) those who having been granted conditional ,ardon by the Chief )5ecutive shall have violated the terms thereofB) those whose ma5imum term of im,risonment does not e5ceed one yearD) those already sentenced by final /udgment at the time of a,,roval of this &ct- and 1A) those whose sentence im,oses ,enalties which do not involve im,risonment% li0e destierro. Penalties4 .ine or 2mprisonment #s9 Su3si"iary 2mprisonment (%&&6) ) and 6 are convicted of a ,enal law that im,oses a ,enalty of fine or im,risonment or both fine and im,risonment. !he /udge sentenced them to ,ay the fine% /ointly and severally% with subsidiary im,risonment in case of insolvency. 's the ,enalty ,ro,er$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Penalties4 Pecuniary Penalties #s9 Pecuniary Lia3ilities (%&&6) Fistinguish ,ecuniary ,enalties from ,ecuniary liabilities. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

#ecuniary liabilities do not include restitution% but include re,aration of damages caused% the indemnification for conse1uential damages% as well as fines and cost of the ,roceedings. #ecuniary ,enalties include fines and cost of the ,roceedings. Penalties; Comple/ Crime of +stafa (199*)
& was convicted of the com,le5 crime of estafa through falsification of ,ublic document. Since the amount 'nvolved did not e5ceed # AA.AA% the ,enalty ,rescribed by law for estafa is arresto mayor in its medium and ma5imum ,eriods. !he ,enalty ,rescribed by law for falsification of ,ublic document is ,rision mayor ,lus fine not to e5ceed #;%AAA.AA.

'm,ose the ,ro,er ,rison ,enalty.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he ,enalty is not ,ro,er. !he two accused must se,arately ,ay the fine% which is their ,enalty. Solidary liability a,,lies only to civil liabilities.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

4*% because in ,enal law when there are several offenders% the court in the e5ercise of its discretion shall determine what shall be the share of each offender de,ending u,on the degree of ,artici,ation P as ,rinci,al% accom,lice or accessory. 'f within each class of offender% there are more of them% such as more than one ,rinci,al or more than one accom,lice or accessory% the liability in each class of offender shall be subsidiary. &nyone of the may be re1uired to ,ay the civil liability ,ertaining to such offender without ,re/udice to recovery from those whose share have been ,aid by another.

!he ,ro,er ,enalty is &4+ "&4>) W'!('4 ,rision correccional (si5 (@) months and one (1) day to si5 (@) years) as 6'4'6U6% to &4+ "&4>) within ,rision mayor ma5imum (ten (1A) years and one (1) day to twelve (1 ) years) as 6&L'6U6. !his is in accordance with #eo,le us% >on3ales% E? #hil% ;CD% where 't was ruled that for the ,ur,ose of determining the ,enalty ne5t lower in degree% the ,enalty that should be considered as a starting ,oint is the whole of ,rision mayor% it being the ,enalty ,rescribed by law% and not ,rision mayor in its ma5imum ,eriod% which is only the ,enalty actually a,,lied because of &rticle CB of the "evised #enal Code. !he ,enalty ne5t lower in degree therefor is ,rision correccional and it is within the range of this ,enalty that the minimum should be ta0en.

Penalties; .actors to Consi"er (1991)


'magine that you are a 2udge trying a case% and based on the evidence ,resented and the a,,licable law% you have decided on the guilt of two ( ) accused. 'ndicate the five (;) ste,s you would follow to determine the e5act ,enalty to be im,osed. Stated differently% what are the factors you must consider to arrive at the correct ,enalty$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

5ay the 6u ge impose an alternative penalty of fine or imprisonment* Explain1 274+


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. . ?. C. ;.

the crime committedStage of e5ecution and degree of ,artici,ationFetermine the ,enaltyConsider the modifying circumstancesFetermine whether 'ndeterminate Sentence Law is a,,licable or not.

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Penalties; >omici"e wD 8o"ifying Circumstance (1996)


(omer was convicted of homicide. !he trial court a,,reciated the following modifying circumstancesK the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity% and the mitigating circumstances of ,assion and obfuscation% no intent to commit so grave a wrong% illiteracy and voluntary surrender. !he im,osable ,enalty for homicide is reclusion tem,oral the range of which is twelve (1 ) years and one (1) day to twenty ( A) years.

contains three ,eriods% each one of which forms a ,eriod in accordance with &rticle E@ and EE of the same Code% and there are

!a0ing into account the attendant aggravating and mitigating circumstances% and a,,lying the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law% determine the ,ro,er ,enalty to be im,osed on the accused.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

't a,,ears that there is one aggravating circumstance (nocturnity)% and four mitigating circumstances (,assion and obfuscation% no intent to commit so grave a wrong as that committed and voluntary surrender). #ar. C% &rt. @C should be a,,lied. (ence there will be offJsetting of modifying circumstances% which will now result in the e5cess of three mitigating circumstances. !his will therefore /ustify in reducing the ,enalty to the minimum ,eriod.
!he e5istence of an aggravating circumstance% albeit there are four aggravating% will not /ustify the lowering of the ,enalty to the ne5t lower degree under ,aragra,h ; of said &rticle% as this is a,,licable only if !()") 'S 4* &>>"&.&!'4> C'"CU6S!&4C) ,resent. Since the crime committed is (omicide and the ,enalty therefor is reclusion tem,oral% the 6&L'6U6 sentence under the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law should be the minimum of the ,enalty% which is 1 years and 1 day to 1C years and B months. !he 6'4'6U6 ,enalty will thus be the ,enalty ne5t lower in degree% which is ,rision mayor in its full e5tent (@ years and 1 day to 1 years). )rgo% the ,ro,er ,enalty would be @ years and 1 day% as minimum% to 1 years and 1 day% as ma5imum. ' believe that because of the remaining mitigating circumstances after the offJsetting it would be very logical to im,ose the minimum of the 6'4'6U6 sentence under the 'SL and the minimum of the 6&L'6U6 sentence.

Penalties; 8itigating Circumstances wDout (ggra#ating Circumstance (199*)


&ssume in the ,receding ,roblem that there were two mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstance. 'm,ose the ,ro,er ,rison ,enalty.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!here being two ( ) mitigating circumstances without any aggravating circumstance% the ,ro,er ,rison ,enalty is arresto mayor (in any of its ,eriods% ie. ranging from one (1) month and one (1) day to si5 (@) months) as 6'4'6U6 to ,rision correccional in its ma5imum ,eriod four (C) years% two ( ) months% and one (1) day to si5 (@) years as 6&L'6U6. Under &rt. @C% ,ar. ; of the "evised #enal Code% when a ,enalty

34 of 86
two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances% the ,enalty ne5t lower in degree should be im,osed. 9or ,ur,oses of the 'ndeterminate Sentence Law% the ,enalty ne5t lower in degree should be determined without regard as to whether the basic ,enalty ,rovided by the "evised #enal Code should be a,,lied in its ma5imum or minimum ,eriod as circumstances modifying liability may re1uire. !he ,enalty ne5t lower in degree to ,rision correccional. !herefore% as ,reviously stated% the minimum should be within the range of arresto mayor and the ma5imum is within the range of ,rision correctional in its ma5imum ,eriod. Penalties; Parrici"e wD 8itigating Circumstance (199*)
& and 8 ,leaded guilty to the crime of ,arricide. !he court found three mitigating circumstances% namely% ,lea of guilty% lac0 of 'nstruction and lac0 of intent to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. !he ,rescribed ,enalty for ,arricide is reclusion ,er,etua to death.

circumstances of illiteracy and lac0 of intention to commit so grave a wrong% and with no aggravating circumstance% the Su,reme Court held that the ,ro,er% ,enalty to be im,osed is reclusion ,er,etua.

Penalties; Pre#enti#e 2mprisonment (199 ) 1) When is there ,reventive im,risonment$ ) When is the accused credited with the full time of his ,reventive im,risonment% and when is he credited with C:; thereof$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1) !here is ,reventive im,risonment when Ha) an offender is detained while the criminal case against him is being heard% either because the crime committed is a ca,ital offense and not bailable% or even if the crime committed was bailable% the offender could not ,ost the re1uired bail for his ,rovisional liberty. ) &n accused is credited with the full time of his ,reventive im,risonment if he voluntarily agreed in writing to abide by the rules of the institution im,osed u,on its ,risoners% ,rovided thatK a) the ,enalty im,osed on him for the crime committed consists of a de,rivation of libertyb) he is not dis1ualified from such credit for being a recidivist% or for having been ,reviously convicted for two or more times of any crime% or for having failed to surrender voluntarily for the e5ecution of the sentence u,on being so summoned (&rt. D% "#C).

'm,ose the ,ro,er ,rinci,al ,enalty.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he ,ro,er ,enalty is reclusion ,er,etua. )ven if there are two or more mitigating circumstances% a court cannot lower the ,enalty by one degree (&rt. @?. ,ar. ?% "evised #enal Code- #eo,le vs. 9ormigones% BE #hil. @B;). 'n U.S. vs. "elador @A #hil. ;D?% where the crime committed was ,arricide with the two ( ) mitigating
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Where the accused however did not agree he would only be credited with C:; of the time he had undergone ,reventive im,risonment. Penalties; 0eclusion Perpetua (0() <o9 *969 (%&&6) Under &rticle E of the "evised #enal Code% as amended by "e,ublic &ct ("&) 4o. ED;D% reclusion ,er,etua shall be from A years and 1 day to CA years. Foes this mean that reclusion ,er,etua is now a divisible ,enalty$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&re 7reclusion ,er,etua7 and life im,risonment the same and can be im,osed interchangeably as in the foregoing sentence$ *r are they totally different$ State your reasons. (?<)

4o% because the Su,reme Court has re,eatedly called the attention of the 8ench and the 8ar to the fact that the ,enalties of reclusion ,er,etua and life im,risonment are not synonymous and should be a,,lied correctly and as may be s,ecified by the a,,licable law. "eclusion ,er,etua has a s,ecific duration of A years and 1 day to CA years (&rt. E) and accessory ,enalties (&rt. C1)% while life im,risonment has no definite term or accessory ,enalties. &lso% life im,risonment is im,osable on crimes ,unished by s,ecial laws% and not on felonies in the Code
($eop"e vs. De 0.5(an# 0.+. )os. 51385-86# 1an. 22# 1993$eop"e vs. >stre""a# 0.+. )os. 92506-07# ,pri" 28# 1993- $eop"e vs. ,"vero# 0.+. )o. 72319# 1.ne 30#1993- $eop"e vs. 9apiroso# 0.+. )o. 122507# eb. 25# 1999&.?see *ri(ina" 9a! *onspe8t.s# pa6e 156=

Penalties; 0eclusion Perpetua #s9 Life 2mprisonment (199 ) Fifferentiate reclusion ,er,etua from life im,risonment.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

")CLUS'*4 #)"#)!U& is that ,enalty ,rovided for in the "evised #enal Code for crimes defined in and ,enali3ed therein e5ce,t for some crimes defined by s,ecial laws which im,ose reclusion ,er,etua% such as violations of "e,ublic &ct @C ;% as amended by "e,ublic &ct E@;D or of #F 1B@A- while L'9) '6#"'S*46)4! is a ,enalty usually ,rovided for in s,ecial laws. "eclusion ,er,etua has a duration of twenty ( A) years and one (1) day to forty HCAI years under "e,ublic &ct E@;D% while life im,risonment has no durationreclusion ,er,etua may be reduced by one or two degrees- reclusion ,er,etuates accessory ,enalties while life im,risonment does not have any accessory ,enalties ($eop"e vs. <a6.io# 196 S*+, 459# $eop"e vs.
$ane""os# 205 S*+, 546&.

Penalties; 0eclusion Perpetua #s9 Life 2mprisonment (%&&1)


&fter trial% 2udge 2uan Laya of the 6anila "!C found 8en/amin >arcia guilty of 6urder% the victim having sustained several bullet wounds in his body so that he died des,ite medical assistance given in the *s,ital ng 6anila. 8ecause the wea,on used by 8en/amin was unlicensed and the 1ualifying circumstance of treachery was found to be ,resent. 2udge Laya rendered his decision convicting 8en/amin and sentencing him to 7reclusion ,er,etua or life im,risonment7.

35 of 86
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he ,enalty of reclusion ,er,etua and the ,enalty of life 'm,risonment are totally different from each other and therefore% should not be used interchangeably. "eclusion ,er,etua is a ,enalty ,rescribed by the "evised #enal Code% with a fi5ed duration of im,risonment from A years and 1 day to CA years% and carries it with accessory ,enalties. Life im,risonment% on the other hand% is a ,enalty ,rescribed by s,ecial laws% with no fi5ed duration of im,risonment and without any accessory ,enalty. Pro3ation Law4 Proper Perio" (%&&6)
6aganda was charged with violation of the 8ouncing Chec0s Law (8# ) ,unishable by im,risonment of not less than ?A days but not more than 1 year or a fine of not less than but not more than double the amount of the chec0% which fine shall not e5ceed # AA%AAA.AA% or both. !he court convicted her of the crime and sentenced her to ,ay a fine of #;A%AAA.AA with subsidiary im,risonment in case of insolvency% and to ,ay the ,rivate com,lainant the amount of the chec0. 6aganda was unable to ,ay the fine but filed a ,etition for ,robation. !he court granted the ,etition sub/ect to the condition% among others% that she should not change her residence without the courtQs ,rior a,,roval.

!he ,eriod shall not be less than twice the total number of days of subsidiary im,risonment. Under &ct 4o. 1E? % subsidiary im,risonment for violations of s,ecial laws shall not e5ceed @ months at the rate of one day of im,risonment for every 9 .;A. (ence% the ,ro,er ,eriod of ,robation should not be less than (@ months nor more than 1 months. Since #;A%AAA.AA fine is more than the ma5imum subsidiary im,risonment of @ months at # .;A a day. b) Su,,osing before the *rder of Fischarge was issued by the court but after the la,se of the ,eriod of ,robation% 6aganda transferred residence without ,rior a,,roval of the court. 6ay the court revo0e the *rder of #robation and order her to serve the subsidiary im,risonment$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. !he Court may revo0e her ,robation. #robation is not coterminous with its ,eriod. !here must first be issued by the court an order of final discharge based on the re,ort and recommendation of the ,robation officer. *nly then can the case of the ,robationer be terminated.
(<a"a v. /artine5# 0.+. )o. 67301# 1an.ary 29# 1990# 8itin6 Se8. 16 o4 $.D. )o. 968&

Pro3ation Law; Aarre" 3y (ppeal (199 )


*n 9ebruary ?% 1DB@% "oberto was convicted of arson through rec0less im,rudence and sentenced to ,ay a fine of #1;%AAA.AA% with subsidiary im,risonment in case of insolvency by the "egional !rial Court of =ue3on City.

a)

What is the ,ro,er ,eriod of ,robation$


Dondee

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

*n 9ebruary 1A% 1DB@% he a,,ealed to the Court of &,,eals. Several months later% he filed a motion to withdraw the a,,eal on the ground that he is a,,lying for ,robation. *n 6ay E% 1DBE% the Court of &,,eals granted the motion and considered the a,,eal withdrawn.
*n 2une 1A% 1DBE% the records of the case were remanded to the trial court. "oberto filed a 76otion for #robation7 ,raying that e5ecution of his sentence be sus,ended% and that a ,robation officer be ordered to conduct an 'nvestigation and to submit a re,ort on his ,robation. !he /udge denied the motion on the ground that ,ursuant to #residential Fecree 4o. 1DDA% which too0 effect on 2uly 1@%1DB@% no a,,lication for ,robation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has ,erfected an a,,eal from the /udgment of conviction.

,ur,oses of determining the eligibility of the accused for the

's the denial of "obertoGs motion correct$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. )ven if at the time of his conviction "oberto was 1ualified for ,robation but that at the time of his a,,lication for ,robation% he is no longer 1ualified% he is not entitled to ,robation. !he 1ualification for ,robation must be determined as of the time the a,,lication is filed in Court (<ernardo vs. 1.d6e# eta".
0+)o. 986561#)ov# 10. 1992- >d!in de "a *r.5 vs. 1.d6e *a""e@o. et a"# S$-19655# ,pri" 18# 1990# 8itin6 9"a(ado vs. *,# et a"# 0+ )o. 84859# 1.ne 28# 1989- <ernardo .s. 1.d6e <a"a6ot# eta"# 0+ 86561# )ov. 10# 1992&.

Pro3ation Law; Aarre" 3y (ppeal (%&&1)


&% a subdivision develo,er% was convicted by the "!C of 6a0ati for failure to issue the subdivision title to a lot buyer des,ite full ,ayment of the lot% and sentenced to suffer one year 'm,risonment. & a,,ealed the decision of the "!C to the Court of &,,eals but his a,,eal was dismissed. 6ay & still a,,ly for ,robation$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% & is no longer 1ualified to a,,ly for ,robation after he a,,ealed from the /udgment of conviction by the "!C. !he ,robation law (#F D@B% as amended by #F1DDA) now ,rovides that no a,,lication for ,robation shall be entertained or granted if the accused has ,erfected an a,,eal from the /udgment of conviction (Sec. C% #F D@B). Pro3ation Law; 8a/imum Term #s9 Total Term (199*)
!he accused was found guilty of grave oral defamation in si5teen (1@) informations which were tried /ointly and was sentenced in one decision to suffer in each case a ,rison term of one (1) year and one (1) day to one (1) year and eight (B) months of ,rision correccional. Within the ,eriod to a,,eal% he filed an a,,lication for ,robation under the #robation Law of 1DE@% as amended. Could he ,ossibly 1ualify for ,robation$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. 'n ran8is8o vs. *o.rt o4 ,ppea"s# 243 S*+, 384% the Su,reme Court held that in case of one decision im,osing multi,le ,rison terms% the totality of the ,rison terms should not be ta0en into account for the

36 of 86 ,robation.
!he law uses the word 7ma5imum term7% and not total term. 't is enough that each of the ,rison terms does not e5ceed si5 years. !he number of offenses is immaterial for as long as the ,enalties im,osed% when ta0en individually and se,arately% are within the ,robationable ,eriod. Pro3ation Law; =r"er 5enying Pro3ation; <ot (ppeala3le (%&&%) & was charged with homicide. &fter trial% he was found guilty and sentenced to si5 (@) years and one (1) day in ,rision mayor% as minimum% to twelve (1 ) years and one (1) day of reclusion tem,oral% as ma5imum. #rior to his conviction% he had been found guilty of vagrancy and im,risoned for ten (1A) days of arresto manor and fined fifty ,esos (#;A.AA). 's he eligible for ,robation$ Why$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o. Under Section C of the #robation Law% as amended% an order granting or denying ,robation is not a,,ealable. Pro3ation Law; Perio" Co#ere" (%&& )
#L was convicted and sentenced to im,risonment of thirty days and a fine of one hundred ,esos. #reviously% #L was convicted of another crime for which the ,enalty im,osed on him was thirty days only. 's #L entitled to ,robation$ )5,lain briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% #L may a,,ly for ,robation. (is ,revious conviction for another crime with a ,enalty of thirty days im,risonment or not e5ceeding one (1) month does not dis1ualify him from a,,lying for ,robation- the ,enalty for his ,resent conviction does not dis1ualify him either from a,,lying for ,robation% since the im,risonment does not e5ceed si5 (@) years (Se8. 9# $res.
De8ree )o. 968&.

4o% he is not entitled to the benefits of the #robation Law (#F D@B% as amended) does not e5tend to those sentenced to serve a ma5imum term of im,risonment of more than si5 years (Sec. Da). 't is of no moment that in his ,revious conviction & was given a ,enalty of only ten (1A) days of arresto mayor and a fine of #;A.AA. 8. 6ay a ,robationer a,,eal from the decision revo0ing the grant of ,robation or modifying the terms and conditions thereof$ ( <)
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Pro3ation Law; 0ight; Aarre" 3y (ppeal (1996)


'n a case for violation of Sec. B% "& @C ;% otherwise 0nown as the Fangerous Frugs &ct% accused .incent was given the benefit of the mitigating circumstances of voluntary ,lea of guilt and drun0enness not otherwise habitual. (e was sentenced to suffer a ,enalty of si5 (@) years and one (1) day and to ,ay a fine of #@%AAA.AA with the accessory ,enalties ,rovided by law% ,lus costs. .incent a,,lied for ,robation. !he ,robation officer favorably recommended his a,,lication.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

1.
.

'f you were the 2udge% what action will you ta0e on the a,,lication$ Fiscuss fully.
Su,,ose that .incent was convicted of a crime for which he was sentenced to a ma5imum ,enalty of ten (1A) years. Under the law% he is not eligible for ,robation. (e seasonably a,,ealed his conviction. While affirming the /udgment of conviction% the a,,ellate court reduced the ,enalty to a ma5imum of four (C) years and four (C) months ta0ing into consideration certain modifying circumstances. .incent now a,,lies for ,robation. (ow will you

eight months im,risonment. Could 2uan forthwith file an a,,lication for ,robation$ )5,lain. B<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% 2uan can no longer avail of the ,robation because he a,,ealed from the /udgment of conviction of the trial court% and therefore% cannot a,,ly for ,robation anymore. Section C of the #robation Law% as amended%

rule on his a,,lication$ Fiscuss fully.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. 'f ' were the /udge% ' will deny the a,,lication for ,robation. !he accused is not entitled to ,robation as Sec. D of the #robation Law% #F 4*. D@B% as amended% s,ecifically mentions that those who 7are sentenced to serve a ma5imum term of im,risonment of more than si5 years7 are not entitled to the benefits of the law.

. !he law and /uris,rudence are to the effect that a,,eal by the accused from a sentence of conviction forfeits his right to ,robation .(Se8. 4# $D )o.
968. as a(ended by $D 1990- <ernardo .s. <a"a6otran8is8o vs. *,A 9"a(ado vs. *,- De "a *r.5 vs. 1.d6e *a""e@o# *, 8ase&. '%is is t%e se8ond 8onse8.tive year t%at t%is ;.estion !as asBed. 3t is t%e sin8ere be"ie4 o4 t%e *o((ittee t%at t%ere is a need to re-eCa(ine t%e do8trine. irst"y# (.8% as t%e a88.sed !anted to app"y 4or probation %e is pros8ribed 4ro( doin6 so as t%e (aCi(.( pena"ty is )7' $+7<,'37),<9>. Se8ond"y# !%en t%e (aCi(.( pena"ty !as red.8ed to one !%i8% a""o!s probation it is b.t 4air and @.st to 6rant %i( t%at ri6%t be8a.se it is apparent t%at t%e tria" @.d6e 8o((itted an error and 4or !%i8% t%e a88.sed s%o."d not be (ade to s.44er. 1.di8ia" trib.na"s in t%is @.risdi8tion are not on"y 8o.rts o4 "a! b.t a"so o4 e;.ity. '%ird"y# t%e @.d6(ent o4 t%e appe""ate 8o.rt s%o."d be 8onsidered a ne! de8ision as t%e tria" 8o.rt:s de8ision !as va8ated- %en8e# %e 8o."d taBe advanta6e o4 t%e "a! !%en t%e de8ision is re(anded to t%e tria" 8o.rt 4or eCe8.tion ($"ease see Dissentin6 opinion in ran8is8o vs. *,&.

3t is s.66ested# t%ere4ore# t%at an eCa(inee ans!erin6 in t%is tenor s%o."d be 8redited !it% so(e points. Pro3ation Law; 0ight; Aarre" 3y (ppeal (%&&1) 2uan was convicted of the "egional !rial Court of a crime and sentenced to suffer the ,enalty of im,risonment for a minimum of eight years. (e a,,ealed both his conviction and the ,enalty im,osed u,on him to the Court of &,,eals. !he a,,ellate court ultimately sustained 2uanGs conviction but reduced his sentence to a ma5imum of four years and

37 of 86 mandates
that no a,,lication for ,robation shall be entertained or granted if the accused has ,erfected an a,,eal from the /udgment of conviction. Suspension of Sentence; ("ultsD8inors (%&&6)
!here are at least E instances or situations in criminal cases wherein the accused% either as an adult or as a minor% can a,,ly for and:or be granted a sus,ended sentence. )numerate at least ; of them. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

when he committed the crime. (e was charged with the crime ? months later. (e was ? when he was finally convicted and sentenced. 'nstead of ,re,aring to serve a /ail term% he sought a sus,ension of the sentence on the ground that he was a /uvenile offender Should he be entitled to a sus,ension of sentence$ "easons. C<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. . ?. C. ;. @. E.

Sus,ension of sentence of minor under #.F. @A? as amended by ".&. D?CC. Sus,ension of sentence of minor above 1; but below 1B years of age at the time of trial under ".&. D?CC. Sus,ension of sentence of minor above 1; but below 1B years of age at the commission of the offense% while acting with discernment. Sus,ension of sentence by reason of insanity (&rt. ED% "evised #enal Code). Sus,ension of sentence for first offense of a minor violating "2.. D1@;. (Sec. ? ) Sus,ension of sentence under the ,robation law. (#.F. D@B) Sus,ension of death sentence of a ,regnant woman. (&rt. B?% "evised #enal Code)
()7', <>)>A +.,. 9344 is o.tside t%e 8overa6e o4 t%e eCa(ination&

4o% & is not entitled to a sus,ension of the sentence because he is no longer a minor at the time of ,romulgation of the sentence. 9or ,ur,oses of sus,ension of sentence% the offenderGs age at the time of ,romulgation of the sentence is the one considered% not his age when he committed the crime. So although & was below 1B years old when he committed the crime% but he was already ? years old when sentenced% he is no longer eligible for sus,ension of the sentence. Can 6uvenile offen ers) who are reci ivists) vali ly as8 for suspension of sentence* Explain1 74
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Suspension of Sentence; 8inors (%&&1) & was months below 1B years Version 1994-2006 Updated by Dondee

of

age

+es% so long as the offender is still a minor at the time of the ,romulgation of the sentence. !he law establishing 9amily Courts% "e,. &ct B?@D% ,rovides to this effectK that if the minor is found guilty% the court should ,romulgate the sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the accused may have incurred. (owever% the sentence shall be sus,ended without the need of a,,lication ,ursuant to #F @A?% otherwise 0nown as the 7Child and +outh Welfare Code7 ("& B?@D% Sec. ;a)% 't is under #F @A? that an a,,lication for sus,ension of the

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

sentence is re1uired and thereunder it is one of the conditions for sus,ension of sentence that the offender be a first time convictK this has been dis,laced by "& B?@D. Suspension of Sentence; Eouthful =ffen"er (1996)
.ictor% "ic0y% "od and "onnie went to the store of 6ang #andoy. .ictor and "ic0y entered the store while "od and "onnie ,osted themselves at the door. &fter ordering beer "ic0y com,lained that he was shortchanged although 6ang #andoy vehemently denied it. Suddenly "ic0y whi,,ed out a 0nife as he announced 7(oldJu, itoR7 and stabbed 6ang #andoy to death. "od bo5ed the storeGs salesgirl Lucy to ,revent her from hel,ing 6ang #andoy. When Lucy ran out of the store to see0 hel, from ,eo,le ne5t door she was chased by "onnie. &s soon as "ic0y had stabbed 6ang #andoy% .ictor scoo,ed u, the money from the cash bo5. !hen .ictor and "ic0y dashed to the street and shouted% 7!uma0bo na 0ayoR7 "od was 1C and "onnie was 1E. !he money and other articles looted from the store of 6ang #andoy were later found in the houses of .ictor and "ic0y.

under the &rticles of War. Can they a,,ly for amnesty$ ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. .

Fiscuss fully the criminal liability of .ictor% "ic0y% "od and "onnie. &re the minors "od and "onnie entitled to sus,ended sentence under !he Child and +outh Welfare Code$ )5,lain.

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1 . &ll are liable for the s,ecial com,le5 crime of robbery with homicide.... . 4o% because the benefits of sus,ension of sentence is not available where the youthful offender has been convicted of an offense ,unishable by life im,risonment or death% ,ursuant to #.F. 4o. @A?% &rt. 1D % !he com,le5 crime of robbery with homicide is ,unishable by reclusion ,er,etua to death under &rt. DC (1)% "9C H $eop"e vs. 0a"it. 230
S*+, 486&.

EXTINCTION O6 CRIMINAL LIABILITY


(mnesty #s9 P5 116& (%&&6) Can former FSWF Secretary Fin0y Soliman a,,ly for amnesty$ (ow about columnist "andy Favid$ (+ou are su,,osed to 0now the crimes or offenses ascribed to them as ,ublished in almost all news,a,ers for the ,ast several months.) ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

#roclamation 11@A% which amended #roclamation E C% a,,lies only to offenses committed ,rior to 1DDD. !hus% their a,,lications shall be ineffectual and useless.
>eneral Lim and >eneral =uerubin of the Scout "angers and #hili,,ine 6arines% res,ectively% were changed with conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman

38 of 86
#roclamation 11@A% which amended #roclamation E C% a,,lies only to offenses committed ,rior to 1DDD. !hus% their a,,lications shall be ineffectual and useless. (mnesty; Crimes Co#ere" (%&&6) Under #residential #roclamation 4o. E C% amending #residential #roclamation 4o. ?CE% certain crimes are covered by the grant of amnesty. 4ame at least ; of these crimes. ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

unlawful utterrances1E. &larm and scandal1B. 'llegal #ossession of firearms. +/tinction; Criminal @ Ci#il Lia3ilities; +ffects; 5eath of accuse" pen"ing appeal (%&& ) &L was convicted of rec0less im,rudence resulting in homicide. !he trial court sentenced him to a ,rison term as well as to ,ay #1;A%AAA as civil indemnity and damages. While his a,,eal was ,ending% &L met a fatal accident. (e left a young widow% children% and a millionJ,eso estate. What is the effect% if any% of his death on his criminal as well as civil liability$ )5,lain briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Crimes covered under #residential #roclamation 4o. E CK 1. Cou, dGetat% . "ebellion or insurrection?. Fisloyalty of ,ublic officers or em,loyeesC. 'nciting to rebellion or insurrection;. Cons,iracy to commit rebellion or insurrection@. #ro,osal to commit rebellion or insurrectionE. SeditionB. Cons,iracy to commit seditionD. 'nciting to sedition1A. 'llegal &ssembly11. 'llegal &ssociation1 . Firect &ssault1?. 'ndirect &ssault1C. "esistance and disobedience to a ,erson in authority1;. !umults and other disturbances1@. Unlawful use of means of ,ublications and
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

!he death of &L while his a,,eal from the /udgment of the trial court is ,ending% e5tinguishes his criminal liability. !he civil liability insofar as it arises from the crime and recoverable under the "evised #enal Code is also e5tinguished- but indemnity and damages may be recovered in a civil action if ,redicated on a source of obligation under &rt. 11;E% Civil Code% such as law% contracts% 1uasiJ contracts and 1uasiJdelicts% but not on the basis of delicts. ($eop"e v. <ayotas# 236 S*+, 239 &.

Civil indemnity and damages under the "evised #enal Code are recoverable only if the accused had been convicted with finality before he died. +/tinction; Criminal @ Ci#il Lia3ilities; +ffects; 5eath of =ffen"e" Party (%&&&)

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

9or defrauding Lorna% &lma was charged before the 6unici,al !rial Court of 6alolos% 8ulacan. &fter a ,rotracted trial% &lma was convicted. While the case was ,ending a,,eal in the "egional !rial Court of the same ,rovince% Lorna who was then suffering from breast cancer% died. &lma manifested to the court that with LornaGs death% her (&lmaGs) criminal and civil liabilities are now e5tinguished. 's &lmaGs contention correct$ What if it were &lma who died% would it affect her criminal and civil liabilities$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

must be ,leaded and ,roved by the ,erson ,ardoned% while &64)S!+ which is a #roclamation of the Chief )5ecutive with the concurrence of Congress is a ,ublic act of which the courts should ta0e /udicial notice.

4o. &lmaGs contention is not correct. !he death of the offended ,arty does not e5tinguish the criminal liability of the offender% because the offense is committed against the State ?$eop"e vs. /iso"a# 87 $%i". 830# 833&. (ence% it follows that the civil liability of &lma based on the offense committed by her is not e5tinguished. !he estate of Lorna can continue the case. *n the other hand% if it were &lma who died ,ending a,,eal of her conviction% her criminal liability shall be e5tinguished and therewith the civil liability under the "evised #enal Code (&rt. BD% ,ar. 1% "#C). (owever% the claim for civil indemnity may be instituted under the Civil Code (&rt. 11;E) if ,redicated on a source of obligation other than delict% such as law% contracts% 1uasiJcontracts and 1uasiJ delicts ($eop"e vs. <ayotas 236 S*+, 239# 0.+.
152007# Septe(ber 2. 1994&

Par"on #s9 (mnesty (%&&6) )numerate the differences between ,ardon and amnesty. ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a)

b) c)

#&"F*4 includes any crime and is e5ercised individually by the #resident% while &64)S!+ a,,lies to classes of ,ersons or communities who may be guilty of ,olitical offenses. #&"F*4 is e5ercised when the ,erson is already convicted% while &64)S!+ may be e5ercised even before trial or investigation. #&"F*4 loo0s forward and relieves the offender of the ,enalty of the offense for which he has been convicted- it does not wor0 for the restoration of the rights to hold ,ublic office% or the right of suffrage% unless such rights are e5,ressly restored by means of ,ardon% while &64)S!+ loo0s bac0ward and abolishes the offense and its effects% as if the ,erson had committed no offense.
#&"F*4 does not alter the fact that the accused is criminally liable as it ,roduces only the e5tinction of the ,enalty% while &64)S!+ removes the criminal liability of the offender because it obliterates every vestige of the crime. #&"F*4 being a ,rivate act by the #resident%

d)

e)

39 of 86
Par"on; +ffect; Ci#il 2nter"iction (%&& )
!"+ was sentenced to death by final /udgment. 8ut subse1uently he was granted ,ardon by the #resident. !he ,ardon was silent on the ,er,etual dis1ualification of !"+ to hold any ,ublic office. &fter his ,ardon% !"+ ran for office as 6ayor of &##% his hometown. (is o,,onent sought to dis1ualify him. !"+ contended he is not dis1ualified because he was already ,ardoned by the #resident unconditionally. 's !"+GS contention correct$ "eason briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he case reached the Su,reme Court which affirmed the /udgment of conviction. Furing the ,endency of LindaGs motion for reconsideration in the said Court% the #resident e5tended to her an absolute ,ardon which she acce,ted.
8y reason of such ,ardon% she wrote the Fe,artment of 9inance re1uesting that she be restored to her former ,ost as assistant treasurer% which is still vacant. !he Fe,artment ruled that Linda may be reinstated to her former ,osition without the necessity of a new a,,ointment and directed the City !reasurer to see to it that the sum of #;%AAA.AA be satisfied.

4o% !"+Gs contention is not correct. &rticle CA of the "evised #enal Code e5,ressly ,rovides that when the death ,enalty is not e5ecuted by reason of commutation or ,ardon% the accessory ,enalties of ,er,etual absolute dis1ualification and civil interdiction during thirty (?A) years from the date of the sentence shall remain as effects thereof% unless such accessory ,enalties have been e5,ressly remitted in the ,ardon. !his is because ,ardon only e5cuses the convict from serving the sentence but does not relieve him of the effects of the conviction unless e5,ressly remitted in the ,ardon.

Claiming that she should not be made to ,ay #;%AAA.AA% Linda a,,ealed to the *ffice of the #resident. !he *ffice of the #resident dismissed the a,,eal and held that ac1uittal% not absolute ,ardon. 's the only ground for reinstatement to oneGs former ,osition and that the absolute ,ardon does not e5em,t the cul,rit from ,ayment of civil liability. 's Linda entitled to reinstatement$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Par"on; +ffect; 0einstatement (199 ) Linda was convicted by the Sandiganbayan of estafa% through falsification of ,ublic document. She was sentenced accordingly and ordered to ,ay% among others% #;%AAA.AA re,resenting the balance of the amount defrauded.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

4o% Linda is not entitled to reinstatement to her former ,osition inasmuch as her right thereto had been relin1uished or forfeited by reason of her conviction. !he absolute ,ardon merely e5tinguished her criminal liability% removed her dis1ualification% and restored her eligibility for a,,ointment to that office. She has to reJa,,ly for

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) such

1: years$ )5,lain% (;<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

,osition and under the usual ,rocedure re1uired for a new a,,ointment. 6oreover% the ,ardon does not e5tinguish the civil liability arising from the crime.
(/onsanto vs. a8toran# 1r.# 170 S*+, 191&- see ,rt. 36# +$*&

Prescription of Crimes; Aigamy (1996)


2oe and 6arcy were married in 8atanes in 1D;;. &fter two years% 2oe left 6arcy and settled in 6indanao where he later met and married Linda on 1 2une 1D@A. !he second marriage was registered in the civil registry of Favao City three days after its celebration. *n 1A *ctober 1DE; 6arcy who remained in 8atanes discovered the marriage of 2oe to Linda. *n 1 6arch 1DE@ 6arcy filed a com,laint for bigamy against 2oe. !he crime of bigamy ,rescribed in fifteen years com,uted from the day the crime is discovered by the offended ,arty% the authorities or their agents. 2oe raised the defense of ,rescri,tion of the crime% more than fifteen years having ela,sed from the celebration of the bigamous marriage u, to the filing of 6arcyGs com,laint. (e contended that the registration of his second marriage in the civil registry of Favao City was constructive notice to the whole world of the celebration thereof thus binding u,on 6arcy.

(as the crime of bigamy charged against 2oe already ,rescribed$ Fiscuss fully%
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o. !he ,rescri,tive ,eriod for the crime of bigamy is com,uted from the time the crime was discovered by the offended ,arty% the authorities or their agents. !he ,rinci,le of constructive notice which ordinarily a,,lies to land or ,ro,erty dis,utes should not be a,,lied to the crime of bigamy% as marriage is not ,ro,erty. !hus when 6arcy filed a com,laint for bigamy on E 6arch 1DE@% it was well within the reglamentary ,eriod as it was barely a few months from the time of discovery on 1A *ctober 1DE;. (Ser(onia vs. *,# 233 S*+, 155&

Prescription of Crimes; Commencement (%&&&)


*ne fateful night in 2anuary 1DDA% while ;Jyear old &lbert was urinating at the bac0 of their house% he heard a strange noise coming from the 0itchen of their neighbor and ,laymate% &ra. When he ,ee,ed inside% he saw 6ina% &raGs ste,mother% very angry and strangling the ;J year old &ra to death. &lbert saw 6ina carry the dead body of &ra% ,lace it inside the trun0 of her car and drive away. !he dead body of &ra was never found. 6ina s,read the news in the neighborhood that &ra went to live with her grand,arents in *rmoc City. 9or fear of his life% &lbert did not tell anyone% even his ,arents and relatives% about what he witnessed. !wenty and a half ( A O 1: ) years after the incident% and right after his graduation in Criminology% &lbert re,orted the crime to 48' authorities. !he crime of homicide ,rescribes in A years. Can the state still ,rosecute 6ina for the death of &ra des,ite the la,se of A O

40 of 86
+es% the State can still ,rosecute 6ina for the death of &ra des,ite the la,se of A O 1: years. Under &rticle D1% "#C% the ,eriod of ,rescri,tion commences to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended ,arty% the authorities or their agents. 'n the case at bar% the commission of the crime was 0nown only to &lbert% who was not the offended ,arty nor an authority or an agent of an authority. 't was discovered by the 48' authorities only when &lbert revealed to them the commission of the crime. (ence% the ,eriod of ,rescri,tion of A years for homicide commenced to run only from the time &lbert revealed the same to the 48' authorities.

!he ,eriod of ,rescri,tion of a crime shall commence to run only from the day on which the crime has been discovered by the offended ,arty% the authorities or their agents (&rt. D1% "evised #enal Code). *W% a ,rivate ,erson who saw the 0illing but never disclosed it% is not the offended ,arty nor has the crime been discovered by the authorities or their agents. Prescription of Crimes; Concu3inage (%&&1)
*n 2une 1% 1DBB% a com,laint for concubinage committed in 9ebruary 1DBE was filed against "oberto in the 6unici,al !rial Court of !an3a% Cavite for ,ur,oses of ,reliminary investigation. 9or various reasons% it was only on 2uly ?% 1DDB when the 2udge of said court decided the case by dismissing it for lac0 of /urisdiction since the crime was committed in 6anila. !he case was subse1uently filed with the City 9iscal of 6anila but it was dismissed on the ground that the crime had already ,rescribed. !he law ,rovides that the crime of concubinage ,rescribes in ten (1A) years.

Prescription of Crimes; Commencement (%&& ) *W is a ,rivate ,erson engaged in cattle ranching. *ne night% he saw &6 stab C. treacherously% then throw the dead manGs body into a ravine. 9or ; years% C.s body was never seen nor found- and *W told no one what he had witnessed. +esterday after consulting the ,arish ,riest% *W decided to tell the authorities what he witnessed% and revealed that &6 had 0illed C. ; years ago. Can &6 be ,rosecuted for murder des,ite the la,se of ; years$ "eason briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Was the dismissal by the fiscal correct$ )5,lain% (;<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% &6 can be ,rosecuted for murder des,ite the la,se of ; years% because the crime has not yet ,rescribed and legally% its ,rescri,tive ,eriod has not even commenced to run.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

4o% the 9iscalGs dismissal of the case on alleged ,rescri,tion is not correct. !he filing of the com,laint with the 6unici,al !rial Court% although only for ,reliminary investigation% interru,ted and sus,ended the ,eriod of ,rescri,tion in as much as the /urisdiction of a court in a criminal case is determined by the allegations in the com,laint or information% not by the result of ,roof.
($eop"e vs. 0a"ano. 75 S*+, 193&

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he motion for reconsideration should be granted.J

Prescription of Crimes; .alse Testimony (199 )


#aolo was charged with homicide before the "egional !rial Court of 6anila. &ndrew% a ,rosecution witness% testified that he saw #aolo shoot &bby during their heated argument. While the case is still ,ending% the City (all of 6anila burned down and the entire records of the case were destroyed. Later% the records were reconstituted. &ndrew was again called to the witness stand. !his time he testified that his first testimony was false and the truth was he was abroad when the crime too0 ,lace.

!he /udge immediately ordered the ,rosecution of &ndrew for giving a false testimony favorable to the defendant in a criminal case. 1. Will the case against &ndrew ,ros,er$
. #aolo was ac1uitted. !he decision became final on 2anuary 1A% 1DBE. *n 2une 1B% 1DDC a case of giving false testimony was filed against &ndrew. &s his

lawyer% what legal ste, will you ta0e$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1) +es. ... ) &s lawyer of &ndrew% ' will file a motion to 1uash the 'nformation on the ground of ,rescri,tion. !he crime of false testimony under &rt. 1BA has ,rescribed because #aolo% the accused in the ,rinci,al case% was ac1uitted on 2anuary 1A% 1DBE and therefore the ,enalty ,rescribed for such crime is arresto mayor under &rt. 1BA% ,ar. C% "#C. Crimes ,unishable by arresto mayor ,rescribes in five (;) years (&rt. DA% ,ar. ?% "#C). 8ut the case against &ndrew was filed only on 2une 1B% 1DDC% whereas the ,rinci,al criminal case was decided with finality on 2anuary 1A% 1DBE and% thence the ,rescri,tive ,eriod of the crime commenced to run. 9rom 2anuary 1A% 1DBE to 2une 1B% 1DDC is more than five (;) years. Prescription of Crimes; Simple Slan"er (199*) & was charged in an information with the crime of grave oral defamation but after trial% the court found him guilty only of the offense of sim,le slander. (e filed a motion for reconsideration contending that% under the law% the crime of sim,le slander would have ,rescribed in two months from commission% and since the information against him was filed more than four months after the alleged commission of the crime% the same had already ,rescribed. !he Solicitor >eneral o,,osed the motion on two groundsK first% in determining the ,rescri,tive ,eriod% the nature of the offense charged in the 'nformation should be considered% not the crime ,roved- second% assuming that the offense had already ,rescribed% the defense was waived by the failure of & to raise it in a motion to 1uash. "esolve the motion for reconsideration.

41 of 86
a) !he accused cannot be convicted of the offense of sim,le slander although it is necessarily included in the offense of grave slander charged in the information% because% the lesser offense had already ,rescribed at the time the information was filed
($eop"e .s. +aran6# (*,& 62 7.0. 6468- ran8is8o vs. *,# 122 S*+, 538- /a6at vs. $eop"e. 201 S*+, 21&

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

otherwise ,rosecutors can easily circumvent the rule of ,rescri,tion in light offenses by the sim,le e5,ediment of filing a graver offense which includes such light offense.
b) While the general rule is the failure of an accused to file a motion to 1uash before he ,leads to the com,laint or information% shall be deemed a waiver of the grounds of a motion to 1uash% the e5ce,tions to this areK (1) no offense was charged in the com,laint or information- ( ) lac0 of 2urisdiction- (?) e5tinction of the offense or ,enalty- and (C) double /eo,ardy. Since the ground invo0ed by the accused in his motion for reconsideration is e5tinction of the offense% then it can be raised even after ,lea. 'n fact% it may even be invo0ed on a,,eal

)5ce,tions to the rule that ac1uittal from a criminal case e5tinguishes civil liability% areK 1) When the civil action is based on obligations not arising from the act com,lained of as a felony) When ac1uittal is based on reasonable doubt or ac1uittal is on the ground that guilt has not been ,roven beyond reasonable doubt (&rt. D% 4ew Civil Code)?) &c1uittal due to an e5em,ting circumstance% li0e 'nsanityC) Where the court states in its 2udgment that the case merely involves a civil obligation;) Where there was a ,ro,er reservation for the filing of a se,arate civil action@) 'n cases of inde,endent civil actions ,rovided for in &rts. ?1% ? % ?? and ?C of the 4ew Civil CodeE) When the /udgment of ac1uittal includes a declaration that the fact from which the civil liability

might arise did not e5ist (Sapiera vs. *,# 314 S*+, 370&B) Where the civil liability is not derived or based on the criminal act of which the accused is ac1uitted
(Sapiera vs. *,. 314 S*+, 370&.

($eop"e vs. <a"a6tas&

CI8IL LIABILITY
Ci#il lia3ility; +ffect of (c;uittal (%&&&) 4ame at least two e5ce,tions to the general rule that in case of ac1uittal of the accused in a criminal case% his civil liability is li0ewise e5tinguished. ( <)
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Ci#il lia3ility; +ffect of (c;uittal (%&&&)


& was a 1EJyear old wor0ing student who was earning his 0ee, as a cigarette vendor. 8 was driving a car along busy )s,ana Street at about EKAA ,.m. 8eside 8 was C. !he car sto,,ed at an intersection because of the red signal of the traffic light. While waiting for the green signal% C bec0oned & to buy some cigarettes. & a,,roached the

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) car

and handed two stic0s of cigarettes to C. While the transaction was ta0ing ,lace% the traffic light changed to green and the car immediately s,ed off. &s the car continued to s,eed towards =uia,o% & clung to the window of the car but lost his gri, and fell down on the ,avement. !he car did not sto,. & suffered serious in/uries which eventually caused his death. C was charged with "*88)"+ with (*6'C'F). 'n the end% the Court was not convinced with moral certainty that the guilt of C has been established beyond reasonable doubt and% thus% ac1uitted him on the ground of reasonable doubt. Can the family of the victim still recover civil damages in view of the ac1uittal of C$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

)ven though the decision made no mention of his subsidiary liability% the law violated ("evised #enal Code) itself

+es% as against C% &Gs family can still recover civil damages des,ite CGs ac1uittal. When the accused in a criminal ,rosecution is ac1uitted on the ground that his guilt has not been ,roved beyond reasonable doubt% a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may be instituted. Such action re1uires only a ,re,onderance of evidence S&rt. D% CC). 'f &Gs family can ,rove the negligence of 8 by ,re,onderance of evidence% the civil action for damages against 8 will ,ros,er based on 1uasiJdelict. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another% there being fault or negligence% is obliged to ,ay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence% about ,reJ e5isting contractual relation between the ,arties% is called a 1uasiJ delict H&rt. 1E@% CC). !his is entirely se,arate and distinct from civil liability arising from negligence under the #enal Code H&rts% ?1% 1E@% 1EE% CC}.

Ci#il Lia3ility; Su3si"iary; +mployers (199-)


>uy% while driving a ,assenger /ee,ney owned and o,erated by 6a5% bum,ed Femy% a ,edestrian crossing the street. Femy sustained in/uries which re1uired medical attendance for three months. >uy was charged with rec0less im,rudence resulting to ,hysical in/uries. Convicted by the 6etro,olitan !rial Court. >uy was sentenced to suffer a straight ,enalty of three months of arresto mayor and ordered to indemnify Femy in the sum of #;%AAA and to ,ay #1%AAA as attorneyGs fees.

U,on finality of the decision% a writ of e5ecution was served u,on >uy% but was returned unsatisfied due to his insolvency. Femy moved for a subsidiary writ of e5ecution against 6a5. !he latter o,,osed the motion onJthe ground that the decision made no mention of his subsidiary liability and that he was not im,leaded in the case. (ow will you resolve the motion$ H;<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he motion is to be granted. 6a5 as an em,loyer of >uy and engaged in an industry (trans,ortation business) where said em,loyee is utili3ed% is subsidiarily civilly liable under &rticle 1A? of the "evised #enal Code.

42 of 86 mandates
for such liability and 6a5 is deemed to 0now it because ignorance of the law is never e5cused. &nd since his liability is not ,rimary but only subsidiary in case his em,loyee cannot ,ay- he need not be im,leaded in the in the criminal case. 't suffices that he was duly notified of the motion for issuance of a subsidiary writ of e5ecution and thus given the o,,ortunity to be heard. Ci#il Lia3ility; )hen 8an"atory; Criminal Lia3ility (%&&6) !he accused was found guilty of 1A counts of ra,e for having carnal 0nowledge with the same woman. 'n addition to the ,enalty of im,risonment% he was ordered to ,ay indemnity in the amount of #;A%AAA.AA for each count. *n a,,eal% the accused 1uestions the award of civil indemnity for each count% considering that the victim is the same woman. (ow would you rule on the contention of the accused$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

)ove(ber 16# 2001&

5amages; >omici"e; Temperate 5amages (%&&6) 'n a crime of homicide% the ,rosecution failed to ,resent any recei,t to substantiate the heirsG claim for an award of actual damages% such as e5,enses for the wa0e and burial. What 0ind of damages may the trial court award to them and how much$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he court may award tem,erate damages in the amount of twentyJfive (# ;%AAA.AA) thousand ,esos. Under /uris,rudence% tem,erate damages is awarded in homicide when no sufficient ,roof of actual damages is offered or if the actual damages ,roven is less than twentyJfive thousand (# ;%AAA) ($eop"e v. Sa"ona#
0.+. )o. 151251# /ay 19# 2004&.

C-&:"5 A$ &!5# N #&)! + S"(%-&#2 !* #;" L . )4 N #&)!5


Piracy in the >igh Seas @ ?ualifie" Piracy (%&&6)
While the S.S. 4agoya 6aru was negotiating the sea route from (ong0ong towards 6anila% and while still ?AA miles from &,arri% Cagayan% its engines malfunctioned. !he Ca,tain ordered the shi, to sto, for emergency re,airs lasting for almost 1; hours. Fue to e5haustion% the officers and crew fell aslee,. While the shi, was anchored% a motorboat manned by renegade +banags from Claveria% Cagayan% ,assed by and too0 advantage of the situation. !hey cut the shi,Gs engines and too0 away several heavy crates of electrical e1ui,ment and loaded them in their motorboat. !hen they left hurriedly

!he contention is unmeritorious. Under the law% every ,erson criminally liable is civilly liable. (&rt. 1AA% "evised #enal Code) Since each count charges different felonious acts and ought to be ,unished differently% the concomitant civil indemnity e5 delicto for every criminal act should be ad/udged. Said civil indemnity is mandatory u,on a finding of the fact of ra,eit is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages which are based on different /ural foundations. ($eop"e v. 1a"os@os# 0.+. )os. 132875-76#
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

2oselito and .icente%

towards &,arri. &t daybrea0% the crew found that a robbery too0 ,lace. !hey radioed the &,arri #ort &uthorities resulting in the a,,rehension of the cul,rits.

9hat crime was committe * Explain1 20134+


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

#iracy in the high seas was committed by the renegade +banags. !he cul,rits% who are neither members of the com,lement nor ,assengers of the shi,% sei3ed ,art of the e1ui,ment of the vessel while it was three hundred miles away from &,arri% Cagayan (&rt. 1 % "evised #enal Code). Supposing that while the robbery was ta8ing place) the culprits stabbe a member of the crew while sleeping1 9hat crime was committe * Explain1 20134+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he crime committed is 1ualified ,iracy% because it was accom,anied by ,hysical in/uries:homicide. !he cul,rits stabbed a member of the crew while slee,ing (&rt. 1 ?% "evised #enal Code).

C-&:"5 A$ &!5# #;" 6%!* :"!# + L . )4 #;" S# #"


$iolation of 5omicile #s9 Trespass to 5welling (%&&%) What is the difference between violation of domicile and tres,ass to dwelling$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he differences between violation of domicile and tres,ass to dwelling are1) !he offender in violation of domicile is a ,ublic officer acting under color of authority- in tres,ass to dwelling% the offender is a ,rivate ,erson or ,ublic officer acting in a ,rivate ca,acity. .iolation of domicile is committed in ? different waysK (1) by entering the dwelling of another against the will of the latter- ( ) searching ,a,ers and other effects inside the dwelling without the ,revious consent of the owner- or (?) refusing to leave the ,remises which he entered surre,titiously% after being re1uired to leave the ,remises.

?) !res,ass to dwelling is committed only in one way- that is% by entering the dwelling of another against the e5,ress or im,lied will of the latter.

C-&:"5 A$ &!5# P%1+&( O-*"(rt 11 ; 0e3ellion; Politically 8oti#ate"; Committe" 3y <P( 8em3ers (199-)
*n 6ay ;% 1DD % at about @KAA a.m.% while >overnor &legre of Laguna was on board his car traveling along the 4ational (ighway of Laguna% 2oselito and .icente shot him on the head resulting in his instant death. &t that time% 2oselito and .icente were members of the li1uidation s1uad of the 4ew #eo,leGs &rmy and they 0illed the governor u,on orders of their senior officer. Commander !iago. &ccording to

43 of 86 they were
ordered to 0ill >overnor &legre because of his corru,t ,ractices. 'f you were the ,rosecutor% what crime will you charge 2oselito and .icente$ H;<2
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'f ' were the ,rosecutor% ' would charge 2oselito and .icente with the crime of rebellion% considering that the 0illers were members of the li1uidation s1uad of the 4ew #eo,leGs &rmy and the 0illing was u,on orders of their commander- hence% ,oliticallyJmotivated. !his was the ruling in $eop"e vs. ,vi"a# 207 S*+, 1568 involving identical facts which is a movement ta0en /udicial notice of as engaged in rebellion against the >overnment.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

'f ' were the ,rosecutor% ' would charge 2oselito and .icente for the crime of murder as the ,ur,ose of the 0illing was because of his 7corru,t ,ractices 7% which does not a,,ear to be ,olitically motivated. !here is no indication as to how the 0illing would ,romote or further the ob/ective of the 4ew #eo,les &rmy. !he 0illing is murder because it was committed with treachery.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

because the common crimes were then ,enali3ed in &rt. 1?; together with the rebellion% with one ,enalty and &rt. CB of the "ev. #enal Code cannot be a,,lied. &rt. 1?; of said Code remained e5actly the same when the case of )nrile vs% Sala3ar% 1B@ SC"& 1E (1DDA) was resolved. #recisely for the reason that &rt. CB cannot a,,ly because the common crimes were ,unished as ,art of rebellion in &rt. 1?;% that this &rticle was amended% deleting the common crimes therefrom. !hat the common crimes were deleted from said &rticle% demonstrates a clear legislative intention to treat the common crimes as distinct from rebellion and remove the legal im,ediment to the a,,lication of &rt. CB. 't is noteworthy that in >nri"e vs. Sa"a5ar (s.pra& the Su,reme Court said theseK
7!here is an a,,arent need to restructure the law on rebellion% either to raise the ,enalty therefor or to clearly define and delimit the other offenses to be considered as absorbed thereby% so that if it cannot be conveniently utili3ed as the umbrella for every sort of illegal activity underta0en in its name. !he Court has no ,ower to effect such change% for it can only inter,ret the law as it stands at any given time% and what is needed lies beyond inter,retation. (o,efully% Congress will ,erceive the need for ,rom,tly sei3ing the initiative in this matter% which is ,urely with in its ,rovince%7 &nd significantly the said amendment to &rt. 1?; of the "ev. #enal Code was made at around the time the ruling in Sala3ar was handled down% obviously to

!he crime should be rebellion with murder considering that &rt. 1?; of the "evised #enal Code has already been amended by "e,. &ct 4o. @D@B% deleting from said &rticle% common crimes which used to be ,unished as ,art and ,arcel of the crime of rebellion. !he ruling in

$eop"e vs. Dernande5# 99 $%i". 515 (1994&# that rebellion may not be com,leted with common crimes committed in furtherance thereof% was
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

neutrali3e the (ernande3 and the Sala3ar rulings. !he amendment was sort of a rider to the cou, dGetat law% "e,. &ct 4o @D@B. (rt 11 ,(4 Coup "C etat @ 0ape; .rustrate" (%&&6) !a0ing into account the nature and elements of the felonies of cou, dQ etat and ra,e% may one be criminally liable for frustrated cou, dQ etat or frustrated ra,e$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

be deemed the leader of said cou, dGetat (&rt 1?;% ".#.C.)

4o% one cannot be criminally liable for frustrated cou, dQ etat or frustrated ra,e because in cou, dQ etat the mere attac0 directed against the duly constituted authorities of the "e,ublic of the #hili,,ines% or any military cam, or installation% communication networ0s% ,ublic utilities or other facilities needed for the e5ercise and continued ,ossession of ,ower would consummate the crime. !he ob/ective may not be to overthrow the government but only to destabili3e or ,araly3e the government through the sei3ure of facilities and utilities essential to the continued ,ossession and e5ercise of governmental ,owers.
*n the other hand% in the crime of ra,e there is no frustrated ra,e it is either attem,ted or consummated ra,e. 'f the accused who ,laced himself on to, of a woman% raising her s0irt and unbuttoning his ,ants% the endeavor to have se5 with her very a,,arent% is guilty of &ttem,ted ra,e. *n the other hand% entry on the labia or li,s of the female organ by the ,enis% even without ru,ture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina% consummates the crime of ra,e. 6ore so% it has long abandoned its TstrayU decision in $eop"e vs. >rina 50 $%i" 998 where the accused was found guilty of 9rustrated ra,e.

(rt 11 ,(; Coup "Cetat (%&&%)


'f a grou, of ,ersons belonging to the armed forces ma0es a swift attac0% accom,anied by violence% intimidation and threat against a vital military installation for the ,ur,ose of sei3ing ,ower and ta0ing over such installation% what crime or crimes are they guilty of$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he ,er,etrators% being ,ersons belonging to the &rmed 9orces% would be guilty of the crime of cou, dGetat% under &rticle 1?CJ& of the "evised #enal Code% as amended% because their attac0 was against vital military installations which are essential to the continued ,ossession and e5ercise of governmental ,owers% and their ,ur,ose is to sei3e ,ower by ta0ing over such installations.

:1 If the attac8 is !uelle but the lea er is un8nown) who shall be eeme the lea er thereof* 204+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he leader being un0nown% any ,erson who in fact directed the others% s,o0e for them% signed recei,ts and other documents issued in their name% or ,erformed similar acts% on behalf of the grou, shall

44 of 86
(rt 11 ,(; Coup "Cetat; <ew .irearms Law (199-) 1. (ow is the crime of cou, dGetat committed$ H?<I . Su,,osing a ,ublic school teacher ,artici,ated in a cou, dGetat using an unlicensed firearm. What crime or crimes did he commit$ H <I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

he% .>% 2> and >> have cons,ired to overthrow the government. 9ather &braham did not re,ort this information to the ,ro,er authorities. Fid 9ather &braham commit a crime$ 'f so% what crime was committed$ What is his criminal liability$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. !he crime of cou, dGetat is committed by a swift attac0% accom,anied by violence% intimidation% threat% strategy or stealth against the duly constituted authorities of the "e,ublic of the #hili,,ines% military cam,s and installations% communication networ0s% ,ublic utilities and facilities needed for the e5ercise and continued ,ossession of ,ower% carried out singly or simultaneously anywhere in the #hili,,ines by ,ersons belonging to the military or ,olice or holding ,ublic office% with or without civilian su,,ort or ,artici,ation% for the ,ur,ose of sei3ing or diminishing state ,ower. (&rt 1?CJ&% "#C).

4o% 9ather &braham did not commit a crime because the cons,iracy involved is one to commit rebellion% not a cons,iracy to commit treason which ma0es a ,erson criminally liable under &rt 11@% "9C. &nd even assuming that it will fall as mis,rision of treason% 9ather &braham is e5em,ted from criminal liability under &rt. 1 % ,ar. E% as his failure to re,ort can be considered as due to 7insu,erable cause7% as this involves the sanctity and inviolability of a confession.
Cons,iracy to commit rebellion results in criminal liability to the coJcons,irators% but not to a ,erson who learned of such and did not re,ort to the ,ro,er

. !he ,ublic school teacher committed only cou, dGetat for his ,artici,ation therein. (is use of an unlicensed firearm is absorbed in the cou, dGetat under the new firearms law ("e,. &ct 4o. B DC). (rt 116; Conspiracy to Commit 0e3ellion (199 ) .C% 2>. >> and 2> cons,ired to overthrow the #hili,,ine >overnment. .> was recogni3ed as the titular head of the cons,iracy. Several meetings were held and the ,lan was finali3ed. 22% bothered by his conscience% confessed to 9ather &braham that
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

authorities (US vs. Ver6ara# 3 $%i". 432- $eop"e vs. ,tien5a. 56 $%i".
353&.

(rt 1 -; 5irect (ssault #s9 0esistance @ 5iso3e"ience (%&&1)


&% a teacher at 6a,a (igh School% having gotten mad at L% one of his ,u,ils% because of the latterGs throwing ,a,er cli,s at his classmates% twisted his right ear. L went out of the classroom crying and ,roceeded home located at the bac0 of the school. (e re,orted to his ,arents + and M what & had done to him. + and M immediately ,roceeded to the school building and because they were running and tal0ing in loud voices% they were seen by the

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

barangay chairman% 8% who followed them as he sus,ected that an untoward incident might ha,,en. U,on seeing & inside the classroom% L ,ointed him out to his father% +% who administered a fist blow on &% causing him to fall down. When + was about to 0ic0 &% 8 rushed towards + and ,inned both of the latterGs arms. Seeing his father being held by 8% L went near and ,unched 8 on the face% which caused him to lose his gri, on +. !hroughout this incident% M shouted words of encouragement at +% her husband% and also threatened to sla, &. Some security guards of the school arrived% intervened and surrounded L% + and M so that they could be investigated in the ,rinci,alGs office. 8efore leaving% M ,assed near & and threw a small flower ,ot at him but it was deflected by 8.

e5amination boo0let% causing embarrassment to him. !he following

a) What% if any% are the res,ective criminal liability of L + and M$ (@<)


b) Would your answer be the same if 8 were a barangay

tanod only$ (C<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a) L is liable for Firect &ssault only% assuming the ,hysical in/uries inflicted on 8% the 8arangay Chairman% to be only slight and hence% would be absorbed in the direct assault. & 8arangay Chairman is a ,erson in authority (&rt. 1; % "#C) and in this case% was ,erforming his duty of maintaining ,eace and order when attac0ed. + is liable for the com,le5 crimes of Firect &ssault With Less Serious #hysical 'n/uries for the fist blow on &% the teacher% which caused the latter to fall down. 9or ,ur,oses of the crimes in &rts. 1CB and 1;1 of the "evised #enal Code% a teacher is considered a ,erson in authority% and having been attac0ed by + by reason of his ,erformance of official duty% direct assault is committed with the resulting less serious ,hysical in/uries com,leted. M% the mother of L and wife of + may only be liable as an accom,lice to the com,le5 crimes of direct assault with less serious ,hysical in/uries committed by +. (er ,artici,ation should not be considered as that of a coJ ,rinci,al% since her reactions were only incited by her relationshi, to L and +. as the mother of L and the wife of +.
b) 'f 8 were a 8arangay !anod only% the act of L of laying hand on him% being an agent of a ,erson in authority only% would constitute the crime of "esistance and Fisobedience under &rticle 1;1% since L% a high school ,u,il% could not be considered as having acted out of contem,t for authority but more of hel,ing his father get free from the gri, of 8. Laying hand on an agent of a ,erson in authority is not i,so facto direct assault% while it would always be direct assault if done to a ,erson in authority in defiance to the latter is e5ercise of authority.

(rt 1 -; 5irect (ssault; Teachers @ Professors (%&&%)


&% a lady ,rofessor% was giving an e5amination. She noticed 8% one of the students% cheating. She called the studentGs attention and confiscated his

45 of 86 day%
while the class was going on% the student% 8% a,,roached & and% without any warning% sla,,ed her. 8 would have inflicted further in/uries on & had not C% another student% come to &Gs rescue and ,revented 8 from continuing his attac0. 8 turned his ire on C and ,unched the latter. What crime or crimes% if any% did 8 commit$ Why$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

in (uthority (%&&&) Who are deemed to be ,ersons in authority and agents of ,ersons in authority$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

%ersons in authority are ,ersons directly vested with /urisdiction% whether as an individual or as a member of some court or government cor,oration% board% or commission. 8arrio ca,tains and barangay chairmen are also deemed ,ersons in authority. (&rticle 1; % "#C) Agents of persons in authority are ,ersons who by direct ,rovision of law or by election or by a,,ointment by com,etent authority% are charged with maintenance of ,ublic order% the ,rotection and security of life and ,ro,erty% such as barrio councilman% barrio ,oliceman% barangay leader and any ,erson who comes to the aid of ,ersons in authority (&rt. 1; % "#C)%

8 committed two ( ) counts of direct assaultK one for sla,,ing the ,rofessor% &% who was then conducting classes and thus e5ercising authority- and another one for the violence on the student C% who came to the aid of the said ,rofessor. 8y e5,ress ,rovision of &rticle 1; % in relation to &rticle 1CB of the "evised #enal Code% teachers and ,rofessors of ,ublic or duly recogni3ed ,rivate schools% colleges and universities in the actual ,erformance of their ,rofessional duties or on the occasion of such ,erformance are deemed ,ersons in authority for ,ur,oses of the crimes of direct assault and of resistance and disobedience in &rticles 1CB and 1;1 of said Code. &nd any ,erson who comes to the aid of ,ersons in authority shall be deemed an agent of a ,erson in authority. &ccordingly% the attac0 on C is% in the eyes of the law% an attac0 on an agent of a ,erson in authority% not /ust an attac0 on a student. (rt 1 -; Persons in (uthorityD(gents of Persons
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

'n a,,lying the ,rovisions of &rticles 1CB and 1;1 of the "ev. #enal Code% teachers% ,rofessors and ,ersons charged with the su,ervision of ,ublic or duly recogni3ed ,rivate schools% colleges and universities% and lawyers in the actual ,erformance of their ,rofessional duties or on the occasion of such ,erformance% shall be deemed ,ersons in authority. (#.F. 4o. DD% and 8atas #ambansa 8lg. BE?). (rt 166; 5eli#ery of Prisoners from !ail (%&&%)
&% a detention ,risoner% was ta0en to a hos,ital for emergency medical treatment. (is followers% all of whom were armed% went to the hos,ital to ta0e him away or

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) hel,

,olice or any ,ublic officer. C*U# FG)!&! is committed when members of the military% #hili,,ine 4ational #olice% or ,ublic officer%

him esca,e. !he ,rison guards% seeing that they were outnumbered and that resistance would endanger the lives of other ,atients% dec0led to allow the ,risoner to be ta0en by his followers. What crime% if any% was committed by &Gs followers$ Why$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&Gs followers shall be liable as ,rinci,als in the crime of delivery of ,risoner from 2ail (&rt. 1;@% "evised #enal Code). !he felony is committed not only by removing from any /ail or ,enal establishment any ,erson confined therein but also by hel,ing in the esca,e of such ,erson outside of said establishments by means of violence% intimidation% bribery% or any other means. (rt 16*; +#asion of Ser#ice of Sentence (199-) 6anny 0illed his wife under e5ce,tional circumstances and was sentenced by the "egional !rial Court of Fagu,an City to suffer the ,enalty of destierro during which he was not to enter the city. While serving sentence% 6anny went to Fagu,an City to visit his mother. Later% he was arrested in 6anila. 1. Fid 6anny commit any crime$ H?<I . 'f so% where should he be ,rosecuted$ H <I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. +es. 6anny committed the crime of evasion of service of sentence when he went to Fagu,an City% which he was ,rohibited from entering under his sentence of destierro.
& sentence im,osing the ,enalty of destierro is evaded when the convict enters any of the ,lace:,laces he is ,rohibited from entering under the sentence or come within the ,rohibited radius. &lthough destierro does not involve im,risonment% it is nonetheless a de,rivation of liberty. (#eo,le vs. &bilong. B #hil. 1E ).

. 6anny may be ,rosecuted in Fagu,an City or in 6anila where he was arrested. !his is so because evasion of service of sentence is a continuing offense% as the convict is a fugitive from /ustice in such case. ($ar."an vs. Dir. o4 $risons# 9-28519# 17

eb. 1968&
(rt9 11 ; 0e3ellion #s9 Coup "Fetat (%&& ) Fistinguish clearly but brieflyK 8etween rebellion and cou, dGetat% based on their constitutive elements as criminal offenses.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

")8)LL'*4 is committed when a multitude of ,ersons rise ,ublicly in arms for the ,ur,ose of overthrowing the duly constituted government% to be re,laced by a government of the rebels. 't is carried out by force and violence% but need not be ,artici,ated in by any member of the military% national

46 of 86
acting as ,rinci,al offenders% launched a swift attac0 thru strategy% stealth% threat% violence or intimidation against duly constituted authorities of the "e,ublic of the #hili,,ines% military cam, or installation% communication networ0s% ,ublic facilities or utilities needed for the e5ercise and continued ,ossession of governmental ,owers% for the ,ur,ose of sei3ing or diminishing state ,owers. Unli0e rebellion which re1uires a ,ublic u,rising% cou, dGetat may be carried out singly or simultaneously and the ,rinci,al offenders must be members of the military% national ,olice or ,ublic officer% with or without civilian su,,ort. !he criminal ob/ective need not be to overthrow the e5isting government but only to destabili3e or ,araly3e the e5isting government. Comple/ Crime; 5irect (ssault with mur"er (%&&&)
8ecause of the a,,roaching town fiesta in San 6iguel% 8ulacan% a dance was held in 8arangay Camias. &% the 8arangay Ca,tain% was invited to deliver a s,eech to start the dance. While & was delivering his s,eech. 8% one of the guests% went to the middle of the dance floor ma0ing obscene dance movements% brandishing a 0nife and challenging everyone ,resent to a fight. & a,,roached 8 and admonished him to 0ee, 1uiet and not to disturb the dance and ,eace of the occasion. 8% instead of heeding the advice of &% stabbed the latter at his bac0 twice when & turned his bac0 to ,roceed to the micro,hone to continue his s,eech. & fell to the ground and died. &t the time of the
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

incident & was not armed. What crime was committed$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he com,le5 crime of direct assault with murder was committed. &% as a 8arangay Ca,tain% is a ,erson in authority and was acting in an official ca,acity when he tried to maintain ,eace and order during the ,ublic dance in the 8arangay% by admonishing 8 to 0ee, 1uiet and not to disturb the dance and ,eace of the occasion. When 8% instead of heeding &Gs advice% attac0ed the latter% 8 acted in contem,t and lawless defiance of authority constituting the crime of direct assault% which characteri3ed the stabbing of &. &nd since & was stabbed at the bac0 when he was not in a ,osition to defend himself nor retaliate% there was treachery in the stabbing. (ence% the death caused by such stabbing was murder and having been committed with direct assault% a com,le5 crime of direct assault with murder was committed by 8. (rt 1 -; 5irect (ssault with mur"er (1996)
#ascual o,erated a rice thresher in 8arangay 4a,nud where he resided. "enato% a resident of the neighboring 8arangay >uihaman% also o,erated a mobile rice thresher which he often brought to 8arangay 4a,nud to thresh the ,alay of the farmers there. !his was bitterly resented by #ascual% one afternoon #ascual% and his two sons confronted "enato and his men who were o,erating their mobile rice thresher along a feeder road in 4a,nud. & heated argument ensued. & barangay ca,tain who was

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

47 of 86
!he /udge immediately ordered the ,rosecution of &ndrew for giving a false testimony favorable to the defendant in a criminal case. 1.I Will the case against &ndrew ,ros,er$ .I #aolo was ac1uitted. !he decision became final on 2anuary 1A% 1DBE. *n 2une 1B% 1DDC a case of giving false testimony was filed against &ndrew. &s his lawyer% what legal ste, will you ta0e$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

fetched by one of #ascualGs men tried to a,,ease #ascual and "enato to ,revent a violent confrontation. (owever% #ascual resented the intervention of the barangay ca,tain and hac0ed him to death. What crime was committed by #ascual$ Fiscuss fully.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

#ascual committed the com,le5 crime of homicide with assault u,on a ,erson in authority (&rts. 1CB and CD in relation to &rt% CB% "#C). & barangay chairman% is in law (&rt. 1; )% a ,erson in authority and if he is attac0ed while in the ,erformance of his official duties or on the occasion thereof the felony of direct assault is committed. &rt. CB% "#C% on the other hand% ,rovides that if a single act ,roduces two or more grave or less grave felonies% a com,le5 crime is committed. (ere% the single act of the offender in hac0ing the victim to death resulted in two felonies% homicide which is grave and direct assault which is less grave.

1) +es. 9or one to be criminally liable under &rt. 1B1% "9C% it is not necessary that the criminal case where &ndrew testified is terminated first. 't is not even re1uired of the ,rosecution to ,rove which of the two statements of the witness is false and to ,rove the statement to be false by evidence other than the contradictory statements ($eop"e vs. ,ra5o"a#
13 *o.rt o4 ,ppea"s +eport# 2nd series# p. 808&.

C-&:"5 $ &!5# P%1+&( I!#"-"5#


.alse <otes; 2llegal Possession (1999) 1. 's mere ,ossession of false money bills ,unishable under &rticle 1@B of the "evised #enal Code$ )5,lain. (?<)
. !he accused was caught in ,ossession of 1AA counterfeit # A bills. (e could not e5,lain how and why he ,ossessed the said bills. 4either could he e5,lain what he intended to do with the fa0e bills. Can he be held criminally liable for such ,ossession$

) &s lawyer of &ndrew% ' will file a motion to 1uash the 'nformation on the ground of ,rescri,tion. !he crime of false testimony under &rt. 1BA has ,rescribed because #aolo% the accused in the ,rinci,al case% was ac1uitted on 2anuary 1A% 1DBE and therefore the ,enalty ,rescribed for such crime is arresto mayor under &rt. 1BA% ,ar. C% "#C. Crimes ,unishable by arresto mayor ,rescribes in five (;) years (&rt. DA% ,ar. ?% "#C). 8ut the case against &ndrew was filed only on 2une 1B% 1DDC% whereas the ,rinci,al criminal case was decided with finality on 2anuary 1A% 1DBE and% thence the ,rescri,tive ,eriod of the crime commenced to run. 9rom 2anuary 1A% 1DBE to 2une 1B% 1DDC is more than five (;) years. .alsification; Presumption of .alsification (1999)
& falsified official or ,ublic document was found in the ,ossession of the accused. 4o evidence was introduced to show that the accused was the author of the falsification. &s a matter of fact% the trial court convicted the accused of falsification of official or ,ublic document mainly on the ,ro,osition that 7the only ,erson who could have made the erasures and the su,erim,osition mentioned is the one who will be benefited by the alterations thus made7 and that 7he alone could have the motive for ma0ing such alterations7.

Fecide. (?<}
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1.

4o. #ossession of false treasury or ban0 note alone without an intent to use it% is not ,unishable. 8ut the circumstances of such ,ossession may indicate intent to utter% sufficient to consummate the crime of illegal ,ossession of false notes. +es. Nnowledge that the note is counterfeit and intent to use it may be shown by the conduct of the accused. So% ,ossession of 1AA false bills revealK (a) 0nowledge that the bills are fa0eand (b) intent to utter the same.

.alse Testimony (199 )


#aolo was charged with homicide before the "egional !rial Court of 6anila. &ndrew% a ,rosecution witness% testified that he saw #aolo shoot &bby during their heated argument. While the case is still ,ending% the City (all of 6anila burned down and the entire records of the case were destroyed. Later% the records were reconstituted. &ndrew was again called to the witness stand. !his time he testified that his first testimony was false and the truth was he was abroad when the crime too0 ,lace.

Was the conviction of the accused ,ro,er although the conviction was ,remised merely on the aforesaid ratiocination$ )5,lain your answer. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% the conviction is ,ro,er because there is a ,resum,tion in law that the ,ossessor and user of a falsified document is the one who falsified the same. .orgery @ .alsification (1999) (ow are 7forging7 and 7falsification7 committed$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

9*">'4> or forgery is committed by giving to a

treasury or ban0 note or any instrument ,ayable to bearer or to order the a,,earance of a true and
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

genuine

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

document- or by erasing% substituting% counterfeiting% or altering by any means the figures% letters% words or signs contained therein. 9&LS'9'C&!'*4% on the other hand% is committed byK 1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting% signature or rubric. Causing it to a,,ear that ,ersons have ,artici,ated in any act or ,roceeding when they did not in fact so ,artici,ate?. &ttributing to ,ersons who have ,artici,ated in an act or ,roceeding statements other than those in fact made by themC. 6a0ing untruthful statements in a narration of facts;. &ltering true dates@. 6a0ing any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaningE. 'ssuing in an authenticated form a document ,ur,orting to be a co,y of an original document when no such original e5ists% or including in such co,y a statement contrary to% or different from% that of the genuine original- or B. 'ntercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a ,rotocol% registry% or official boo0. Gra#e Scan"al (1996)
#ia% a bold actress living on to, floor of a ,lush condominium in 6a0ati City sunbathed na0ed at its ,enthouse every Sunday morning. She was unaware that the business e5ecutives holding office at the ad/oining tall buildings re,orted to office every Sunday morning and% with the use of ,owerful binoculars% 0e,t on ga3ing at her while she sunbathed. )ventually% her sunbathing became the tal0 of the town.

Per:ury (1996)

1) What crime% if any% did #ia commit$ )5,lain% ) What crime% if any% did the business e5ecutives commit$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1) #ia did not commit a crime% the felony closest to ma0ing #ia criminally liable is >rave Scandal% but then such act is not to be considered as highly scandalous and offensive against decency and good customs. 'n the first ,lace% it was not done in a ,ublic ,lace and within ,ublic 0nowledge or view. &s a matter of fact it was discovered by the e5ecutives accidentally and they have to use binoculars to have ,ublic and full view of #ia sunbathing in the nude.
) !he business e5ecutives did not commit any crime. !heir acts could not be acts of lasciviousness Has there was no overt lustful act)% or slander% as the eventual tal0 of the town% resulting from her sunbathing% is not directly im,uted to the business e5ecutives% and besides such to,ic is not intended to defame or ,ut #ia to ridicule.

48 of 86
Sisenando ,urchased the share of the stoc0holders of )strella Cor,oration in two installments% ma0ing him the ma/ority stoc0holder thereof and eventually% its ,resident. 8ecause the stoc0holders who sold their stoc0s failed to com,ly with their warranties attendant to the sale% Sisenando withheld ,ayment of the second installment due on the shares and de,osited the money in escrow instead% sub/ect to release once said stoc0holders com,ly with their warranties. !he stoc0holders concerned% in turn% rescinded the sale in 1uestion and removed Sisenando from the #residency of the )strella Cor,oration% Sisenando then filed a verified com,laint for damages against said stoc0holders in his ca,acity as ,resident and ,rinci,al stoc0holder of )strella Cor,oration. 'n retaliation% the stoc0holders concerned% after ,etitioning the Securities and )5change Commission to declare the rescission valid% further filed a criminal case for ,er/ury against Sisenando% claiming that the latter ,er/ured himself when he stated under oath in the verification of his com,laint for damages that he is the #resident of the )strella Cor,oration when in fact he had already been removed as such.

he is the #resident of the Cor,oration% obviously% he made the allegation on the ,remise that his removal from the ,residency is not valid and that is ,recisely the issue brought about by his com,laint to the S)C. 't is a fact that Sisenando has been the #resident of the cor,oration and it is from that ,osition that the stoc0holders concerned ,ur,ortedly removed him% whereu,on he filed the com,laint 1uestioning his removal. !here is no willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood which is a re1uisite of ,er/ury. Per:ury (199*)
&% a government em,loyee% was administratively charged with immorality for having an affair with 8% a coJ em,loyee in the same office who believed him to be single. !o e5cul,ate himself% & testified that he was single and was willing to marry 8% (e induced C to testify and C did testify that 8 was single. !he truth% however% was that & had earlier married F% now a neighbor of C.

's & guilty of ,er/ury$ &re & and C guilty of subordination of ,er/ury$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Under the facts of the case% could Sisenando be held liable for ,er/ury$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% Sisenando may not be held liable for ,er/ury because 't cannot be reasonably maintained that he willfully and deliberately made an assertion of a falsehood when he alleged in the com,laint that
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

4o. & is not guilty of ,er/ury because the willful falsehood asserted by him is not material to the charge of immorality. Whether & is single or married% the charge of immorality against him as a government em,loyee could ,roceed or ,ros,er. 'n other words% &Gs civil status is not a defense to the charge of immorality% hence% not a material matter that could influence the charge.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Code% since the # %AAA was received by him 7in

!here is no crime of subornation of ,er/ury. !he crime is now treated as ,lain ,er/ury with the one inducing another as the ,rinci,al inducement% and the latter% as ,rinci,al by direct ,artici,ation ($eop"e vs. $odo" 66 $%i". 365&. Since in this case & cannot be held liable for ,er/ury% the matter that he testified to being immaterial% he cannot therefore be held res,onsible as a ,rinci,al by inducement when he induced C to testify on his status. Conse1uently% C is not liable as ,rinci,al by direct ,artici,ation in ,er/ury% having testified on matters not material to an administrative case.

Per:ury (%&&6)
&l Chua% a Chinese national% filed a ,etition under oath for naturali3ation% with the "egional !rial Court of 6anila. 'n his ,etition% he stated that he is married to Leni Chua- that he is living with her in Sam,aloc% 6anila- that he is of good moral characterand that he has conducted himself in an irre,roachable manner during his stay in the #hili,,ines. (owever% at the time of the filing of the ,etition% Leni Chua was already living in Cebu% while &l was living with 8abes !oh in 6anila% with whom he has an amorous relationshi,. &fter his direct testimony% &l Chua withdrew his ,etition for naturali3ation.

What crime or crimes% if any% did &l Chua commit$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&l Chua committed ,er/ury. (is declaration under oath for naturali3ation that he is of good moral character and residing at Sam,aloc% 6anila are false. !his information is material to his ,etition for naturali3ation. (e committed ,er/ury for this willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood which is contained in a verified ,etition made for a legal ,ur,ose. (*%oa v. $eop"e# 0.+. )o. 142011# /ar8% 14#
2003&

C-&:"5 C)::&##"* 12 P%1+&( O44&("-5


Ari3ery @ Corruption of Pu3lic =fficial (%&&1) Fe,uty Sheriff 8en "ivas received from the "!C Cler0 of Court a Writ of )5ecution in the case of )/ectment filed by 6rs. 6aria )strada vs. Luis &blan. !he /udgment being in favor of )strada% "ivas went to her lawyerGs office where he was given the necessary amounts constituting the sheriffs fees and e5,enses for e5ecution in the total amount of #;;A.AA% aside from # %AAA.AA in consideration of ,rom,t enforcement of the writ from )strada and her lawyer. !he writ was successfully enforced. a) What crime% if any% did the sheriff commit$ (?<) b) Was there any crime committed by )strada and her lawyer and if so% what crime$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a) !he sheriff committed the crime of Firect 8ribery under the second ,aragra,h of &rticle 1A% "evised #enal

49 of 86
consideration7 of the ,rom,t enforcement of the writ of e5ecution which is an official duty of the sheriff to do.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER<

1.I ;irect :ribery-

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a) *n the ,remise that even without the # %AAA% Sheriff 8en "ivas had to carry out the writ of e5ecution and not that he would be im,lementing the writ only because of the # %AAA.AA% the recei,t of the amount by said sheriff may be regarded as a gift received by reason of his office and not as a 7consideration7 for the ,erformance of an official dutyhence% only indirect 8ribery would be committed by said sheriff. b) *n the ,art of the ,laintiff and her lawyer as giver of the bribeJmoney% the crime is Corru,tion of #ublic *fficials under &rticle 1 % "evised #enal Code. 5irect Ari3ery4 2nfi"elity in the Custo"y of 5ocuments (%&&6) Furing a #4# buyJbust o,eration% Cao Shih was arrested for selling A grams of metham,hetamine hydrochloride (shabu) to a ,oseurJbuyer. Cao Shih% through an intermediary% ,aid #atric0% the )vidence Custodian of the #4# 9orensic Chemistry Section% the amount of #;AA%AAA.AA in consideration for the destruction by #atric0 of the drug. #atric0 managed to destroy the drug. State with reasons whether #atric0 committed the following crimesK (E<)
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

#atric0 committed the crimes of Firect 8ribery and 'nfidelity in the Custody of Focuments. When a ,ublic officer is called u,on to ,erform or refrain from ,erforming an official act in e5change for a gift% ,resent or consideration given to him (&rt. 1A% "evised #enal Code)% the crime committed is direct bribery. Secondly% he destroyed the shabu which is an evidence in his official custody% thus% constituting infidelity in the custody of documents under &rt. @ of the "evised #enal Code.

01< In irect bribery.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'ndirect bribery was not committed because he did not receive the bribe because of his office but in consideration of a crime in connection with his official duty.

=1< Section =2e+ of >A =-,? 2Anti"Graft an Corrupt


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

%ractices Act+.

See. ?(e)% ".&. 4o. BA1D was not committed because there was no actual in/ury to the government. When there is no s,ecific 1uantified in/ury% violation is not committed. (0ar8ia-+.eda vs
,(or# et a".# 0.+. )o. 116938# Septe(ber 20# 2001&

71< $bstruction of Justice un er %; ,@0?.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

#atric0 committed the crime of obstruction of /ustice although the feigner ,enalty im,osable on direct bribery

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) or

infidelity in the custody of documents shall be im,osed. Sec. 1 of #.F. 4o. 1B D refers merely to the im,osition of the higher ,enalty and does not ,reclude ,rosecution for obstruction of /ustice% even if the same not constitute another offense.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

there is no direct evidence of misa,,ro,riation% his failure to

*bstruction of 2ustice is not committed in this case% because the act of destroying the evidence in his custody is already ,enali3ed by another law which im,oses a higher ,enalty. (Sec. 1% #.'). 4o. 1B D) !uris"iction; 2mpeacha3le Pu3lic =fficers (%&&6) 2udge "od "eyes was a,,ointed by former #resident 9idel "amos as Fe,uty *mbudsman for the .isayas for a term of E years commencing on 2uly ;%1DD;. Si5 months thereafter% a lady stenogra,her filed with the *ffice of the *mbudsman a com,laint for acts of lasciviousness and with the Su,reme Court a ,etition for disbarment against him. 9orthwith% he filed se,arate motions to dismiss the com,laint for acts of lasciviousness and ,etition for disbarment% claiming lac0 of /urisdiction over his ,erson and office. &re both motions meritorious$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he motion to dismiss the com,laint of the Fe,uty *mbudsman for the acts of lasciviousness should be denied as only the *mbudsman is included in the list of im,eachable officers found in &rticle L' of the 1DBE Constitution. !herefore% the Sandiganbayan has /urisdiction over his ,rosecution (744i8e o4 t%e 7(b.ds(an vs. *,# 0.+. 146486# /ar8% 4# 2005&. Li0ewise% the Su,reme Court has /urisdiction over the ,etition for disbarment% as he is a member of the bar. (is motion to dismiss should be denied (See "ule 1?D and 1?D of the "ules of Court). 8al#ersation (199 )
"andy% an 48' agent% was issued by the 48' an armalite rifle (6l@) and a Smith and Wesson "evolver. Cal. ?B. &fter a year% the 48' Firector made an ins,ection of all the firearms issued. "andy% who re,orted for wor0 that morning% did not show u, during the ins,ection. (e went on absence without leave (&W*L). &fter two years% he surrendered to the 48' the two firearms issued to him. (e was charged with malversation of government ,ro,erty before the Sandiganbayan.

"andy ,ut u, the defense that he did not a,,ro,riate the armalite rifle and the revolver for his own use% that the delay in accounting for them does not constitute conversion and that actually the firearms were stolen by his friend% Chiting. Fecide the case.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

"andy is guilty as charged under &rt. 1E% "#C. (e is accountable for the firearms they issued to him in his official ca,acity. !he failure of "andy to submit the firearms u,on demand created the ,resum,tion that he converted them for his own use. )ven if

50 of 86 account
for the government ,ro,erty is enough factual basis for a finding of malversation. 'ndeed% even his e5,lanation that the guns were stolen is incredible. 9or if the firearms were actually stolen% he should have re,orted the matter immediately to the authorities. ($eop"e vs. <a6.iran # 20 S*+, 453e"i8i"da .s. 0rospe# 0+ )o. 10294# 1."y 3# 1992&

criminally liable$ What crime did he commit$ )5,lain. ( <)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

8al#ersation (1999) What constitutes the crime of malversation of ,ublic funds or ,ro,erty$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

6alversation of ,ublic funds or ,ro,erty is committed by any ,ublic officer who% by reason of the duties of his office% is accountable for ,ublic funds or ,ro,erty% shall ta0e or misa,,ro,riate or shall consent% or through abandonment or negligence% shall ,ermit any other ,erson to ta0e such ,ublic funds or ,ro,erty% wholly or ,artially% or shall otherwise be guilty of the misa,,ro,riation or malversation of such funds or ,ro,erty% (&rt% 1E% "#C)

+es% notwithstanding the restitution of the amount of the chec0% the 6unici,al !reasurer will be criminally liable as restitution does not negate criminal liability although it may be considered as a mitigating circumstance similar or analogous to voluntary surrender. ($eop"e vs. Ve"as;.e5# 73 $%i" 98&% (e will be criminally liable for malversation. (owever% if the restitution was made immediately% under vehement ,rotest against an im,utation of malversation and without leaving the office% he may not be criminally liable. 8al#ersation (%&&1)
&le5 "eyes% together with 2ose Santos% were former warehousemen of the "ustan Fe,artment Store. 'n 1DB@% the #C>> se1uestered the assets% fund and ,ro,erties of the ownersJincor,orators of the store% alleging that they constitute 7'llJgotten wealth7 of the 6arcos family. U,on their a,,lication% "eyes and Santos were a,,ointed as fiscal agents of the se1uestered firm and they were given custody and ,ossession of the se1uestered building and its contents% including various vehicles used in the firmGs o,erations. &fter a few months% an inventory was conducted and it was discovered that two ( ) delivery vans were missing. &fter demand was made u,on them% "eyes and Santos failed to give any satisfactory e5,lanation why the vans were missing or to turn them over to the #C>>- hence% they were charged with 6alversation of #ublic #ro,erty. Furing the trial% the two

8al#ersation (1999)
& 6unici,al !reasurer% accountable for ,ublic funds or ,ro,erty% encashed with ,ublic funds ,rivate chec0s drawn in favor of his wife. !he chec0s bounced% the drawer not having enough cash in the drawee ban0. !he 6unici,al !reasurer% in encashing ,rivate chec0s from ,ublic funds% violated regulations of his office. 4otwithstanding restitution of the amount of the chec0s% can the 6unici,al !reasurer nevertheless be Version 1994-2006 Updated by Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

accused claimed that they are not ,ublic accountable officers and% if any crime was committed% it should only be )stafa under &rt. ?1;% ,ar. l(b) of the "evised #enal Code. What is the ,ro,er offense committed$ State the reason(s) for your answer. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he ,ro,er offense committed was 6alversation of #ublic #ro,erty% not estafa% considering that "eyes and Santos% u,on their a,,lication% were constituted as 7fiscal agents7 of the se1uestered firm and were 7given custody and ,ossession7 of the se1uestered ,ro,erties% including the delivery vans which later they could not account for. !hey were thus made the de,ositary and administrator of ,ro,erties de,osited by ,ublic authority and hence% by the duties of their office:,osition% they are accountable for such ,ro,erties. Such ,ro,erties% having been se1uestered by the >overnment through the #C>>% are in custodia legis and therefore im,ressed with the character of ,ublic ,ro,erty% even though the ,ro,erties belong to a ,rivate individual (&rt. % "#C). !he failure of "eyes and Santos to give any satisfactory e5,lanation why the vans were missing% is ,rima facie evidence that they had ,ut the same to their ,ersonal use.

8al#ersation (%&&6)
1. 'n 1DB % the #hili,,ine 4ational 8an0 (#48)% then a government ban0ing institution% hired (enry dela "enta% a C#&% as "egional 8an0 &uditor. 'n 1DD % he resigned and was em,loyed by the #hili,,ine Fe,osit 'nsurance Cor,oration (#F'C)% another governmentJ owned and controlled cor,oration. 'n 1DD;% after the #48 management unearthed many irregularities and violations of the ban0Gs rules and regulations% dela "enta was found to have mani,ulated certain accounts involving trust funds and time de,osits of de,ositors. &fter investigation% he was charged with malversation of ,ublic funds before the Sandiganbayan. (e filed a motion to dismiss contending he was no longer an em,loyee of the #48 but of the #F'C.

's dela "entaGs contention tenable$ ( .;<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he contention of (enry dela "enta is not tenable. Fela "enta may be ,rosecuted for malversation even if he had ceased to be an em,loyee of the #48. &t the time of the commission of the offense% #48 was a government owned and controlled cor,oration and therefore% any crime committed by the "egional 8an0 &uditor% who is a ,ublic officer% is sub/ect to the /urisdiction of the Sandiganbayan (See ".&. EDE; as amended by "&. B CD).

. &fter his arraignment% the ,rosecution filed a motion for his sus,ension ,endente lite% to which he filed an o,,osition claiming that he can no longer be sus,ended as he is no longer an em,loyee of the #48 but that of the #F'C. )5,lain whether he may or may not be sus,ended.

51 of 86
Fela "enta may still be sus,ended ,endente lite des,ite holding a different ,ublic office% the #F'C% when he was charged. !he term 7office7 in Sec. 1? of ".&. ?A1D a,,lies to any office which the officer might currently be holding and not necessarily the office or ,osition in relation to which he is charged (Se6ovia
v. Sandi6anbayan# 0.+. )o. 122740# /ar8% 30#1998&.

9hat are the respective crimes) if any) committe by Allan) ;anny an Jules* Explain1
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

8al#ersation #s9 +stafa (1999) (ow is malversation distinguished from estafa$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&llan% the munici,al treasurer is liable for malversation committed through negligence or cul,a. !he government car which was assigned to him is ,ublic ,ro,erty under his accountability by reason of his duties. 8y his act of negligence% he ,ermitted the ta0ing of the car by another ,erson% resulting in malversation% consistent with the language of &rt. 1E of the "evised #enal Code.

6alversation differs from estafa in that malversation is committed by an accountable ,ublic officer involving ,ublic funds or ,ro,erty under his custody and accountability- while estafa is committed by nonJ accountable ,ublic officer or ,rivate individual involving funds or ,ro,erty for which he is not accountable to the government.
6alversationK &ntiJ9encingK Carna,,ing ( AA;) &llan% the 6unici,al !reasurer of the 6unici,ality of >erona% was in a hurry to return to his office after a dayJ long official conference. (e alighted from the government car which was officially assigned to him% leaving the ignition 0ey and the car unloc0ed% and rushed to his office. 2ules% a bystander% drove off with the car and later sold the same to his brother% Fanny for # A%AAA.AA% although the car was worth #BAA%AAA.AA.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Fanny violated the &ntiJ9encing Law. (e is in ,ossession of an item which is the sub/ect of thievery. #.F. 4o. 1@1 (&ntiJ9encing Law) under Section ; ,rovides that mere ,ossession of any good% article% item% ob/ect or any thing of value which has been the sub/ect of robbery or thievery shall be ,rima facie% evidence of fencing. 2ules is guilty of carna,,ing. (e too0 the motor vehicle belonging to another without the latterGs consent. (".&. 4o. @;?D) 9hat) if any) are their respective civil liabilities* Explain1 234+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&llan is under obligation to restitute the vehicle or ma0e re,aration if not ,ossible. 2ules must ,ay the amount he gained from the sale of the car which is # A%AAA.AA.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Fanny must ma0e re,aration corres,onding to the value of the car which is #BAA%AAA.AA. 8al#ersation; Properties; Custo"ia Legis (%&&1)
&ccused 2uan Santos% a de,uty sheriff in a "egional !rial Court% levied on the ,ersonal ,ro,erties of a defendant in a civil case before said court% ,ursuant to a writ of e5ecution duly issued by the court. &mong the ,ro,erties levied u,on and de,osited inside the 7evidence room7 of the Cler0 of Court for 6ulti,le "!C Salas were a refrigerator% a stoc0 of cassette ta,es% a dining table set of chairs and several lam,shades. U,on the defendantGs ,aying off the /udgment creditor% he tried to claim his ,ro,erties but found out that several items were missing% such as the cassette ta,es% chairs and lam,shades. &fter due and diligent sleuthing by the ,olice detectives assigned to the case% these missing items were found in the house of accused Santos% who reasoned out that he only borrowed them tem,orarily.

Mambales. *n 2anuary 1A% 1DDC% she received% as munici,al treasurer% from the Fe,artment of #ublic

'f you were the fiscal :,rosecutor% what would be the nature of the information to be filed against the accused$ Why$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'f ' were the fiscal:,rosecutor% ' would file an information for 6alversation against 2uan Santos for the cassette ta,es% chain and lam,shades which he% as de,uty sheriff% levied u,on and thus under his accountability as a ,ublic officer. Said ,ro,erties being under levy% are in custodia legis and thus im,ressed with the character of ,ublic ,ro,erty% misa,,ro,riation of which constitutes the crime of malversation although said ,ro,erties belonged to a ,rivate individual (&rt. % "#C).

2uan Santos misa,,ro,riated such ,ro,erties when% in breach of trust% he a,,lied them to his own ,rivate use and benefit. (is allegation that he only borrowed such ,ro,erties is a lame e5cuse% devoid of merit as there is no one from whom he borrowed the same. !he fact that it was only 7after due and diligent sleuthing by the ,olice detectives assigned to the case7% that the missing items were found in the house of Santos% negates his ,retension.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

&n information for !heft may be filed% considering that the sheriff had already de,osited the ,ro,erties levied u,on in the 7evidence room7 of the Cler0 of Court and may have already been relieved of his accountability therefor. 'f 2uan Santos was no longer the ,ublic officer who should be accountable for the ,ro,erties levied u,on and found in his house% his ta0ing of such ,ro,erties would no longer constitute 6alversation but !heft% as there was ta0ing with intent to gain% of ,ersonal ,ro,erty of another without the consent of the latter. 8al#ersation; Technical 8al#ersation (1996)
)li3abeth is the munici,al treasurer of 6asinloc%

52 of 86
Wor0s and (ighways% the amount of #1AA%AAA.AA 0nown as the fund for construction% rehabilitation% betterment% and 'm,rovement (C"8') for the concreting of 8arangay #hani5 "oad located in 6asinloc% Mambales% a ,ro/ect underta0en on ,ro,osal of the 8arangay Ca,tain. 'nformed that the fund was already e5hausted while the concreting of 8arangay #hani5 "oad remained unfinished% a re,resentative of the Commission on &udit conducted a s,ot audit of )li3abeth who failed to account for the #lAA%AAA C"8' fund. )li3abeth% who was charged with malversation of ,ublic funds% was ac1uitted by the Sandiganbayan of that charge but was nevertheless convicted% in the same criminal case% for illegal use of ,ublic funds. *n a,,eal% )li3abeth argued that her conviction was erroneous as she a,,lied the amount of #;A%AAA.AA for a ,ublic ,ur,ose without violating any law or ordinance a,,ro,riating the said amount for any s,ecific ,ur,ose. !he absence of such law or ordinance was% in fact% established.

it necessarily include the crime of malversation. !he Sandiganbayan should have followed the ,rocedure ,rovided in Sec. 11% "ule 11D of the "ules of Court and order the filing of the ,ro,er 'nformation. ($ar.n6ao .s. Sandi6anbayan. 197 S*+, 173.& 9rom the facts% there is no showing that there is a law or ordinance a,,ro,riating the amount to a s,ecific ,ublic ,ur,ose. &s a matter of fact% the ,roblem categorically states that the absence of such law or ordinance was% in fact% established.7 So% ,rocedurally and substantially % the SandiganbayanGs decision suffers from serious 'nfirmity.

Pu3lic =fficers; "efinition (1999) Who are ,ublic officers$ ( <)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

's the contention of )li3abeth legally tenable$ )5,lain.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

)li3abethGs contention that her conviction for illegal use of ,ublic funds (technical malversation) was erroneous% is legally tenable because she was charged for malversation of ,ublic funds under &rt. 1E of the "evised #enal Code but was convicted for 'llegal use of ,ublic funds which is defined and ,unished under &rt. A of said Code. & ,ublic officer charged with malversation may not be validly convicted of illegal use of ,ublic funds (technical malversation) because the latter crime is not necessarily included nor does
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

#ublic *fficers are ,ersons who% by direct ,rovision of the law% ,o,ular election or a,,ointment by com,etent authority% ta0es ,art in the ,erformance of ,ublic functions in the >overnment of the #hili,,ines% or ,erforms in said >overnment or in any of its branches ,ublic duties as an em,loyee% agent or subordinate official% of any ran0 or class (&rt. A?% "#C)

Pu3lic =fficers; 2nfi"elity in Custo"y of Prisoners (1996)


& chief of ,olice of a munici,ality% believing in good faith that a ,risoner serving a tenJday sentence in the munici,al /ail% would not esca,e% allowed said ,risoner to slee, at the latterGs house because the munici,al 2ail was so congested and there was no bed s,ace available. &ccordingly% the ,risoner went home to slee, every night

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) but

death.

returned to /ail early each morning% until the tenJday sentence had been fully served. Fid the Chief of #olice commit any crime$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

What crime was committed by #ascual$ Fiscuss fully.

!he Chief of #olice is guilty of violation of &rt. ?% "#C% consenting or conniving to evasion% the elements of which are (a) he is a ,ublic officer% (b) he is in charge or custody of a ,risoner% detention or ,risoner by final /udgment% (c) that the ,risoner esca,ed% and (d) there must be connivance.
"ela5ation of a ,risoner is considered infidelity% thus ma0ing the ,enalty ineffectual- although the convict may not have fled (US vs. <andino# 9 $%i". 459& it is still violative of the ,rovision. 't also includes a case when the guard allowed the ,risoner% who is serving a si5Jday sentence in the munici,al 2ail% to slee, in his house and eat there
($eop"e vs. +evi""a&.

Pu3lic =fficers; 2nfi"elity in Custo"y of Prisoners (199*) Furing a town fiesta. &% the chief of ,olice% ,ermitted 8% a detention ,risoner and his com,adre% to leave the munici,al /ail and entertain visitors in his house from 1AKAA a.m. to BKAA ,.m. 8 returned to the munici,al /ail at BK?A ,.m. Was there any crime committed by &$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% & committed the crime of infidelity in the custody of a ,risoner. Since 8 is a detention ,risoner. &s Chief of #olice% & has custody over 8. )ven if 8 returned to the munici,al 2ail at BK?A ,.m. &% as custodian of the ,risoner% has maliciously failed to ,erform the duties of his office% and when he ,ermits said ,risoner to obtain a rela5ation of his im,risonment% he consents to the ,risoner esca,ing the ,unishment of being de,rived of his liberty which can be considered real and actual evasion of service under &rticle ? of the "evised #enal Code ($eop"e vs. 9eon <andino 29 $%i". 459&.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

4o crime was committed by the Chief of #olice. 't was only an act of leniency or la5ity in the ,erformance of his duty and not in e5cess of his duty ($eop"e vs.
>van6e"ista (*,& 38 7.0. 158&.

C-&:"5 A$ &!5# P"-5)!5


Comple/ Crime; >omici"e wD (ssault,(uthority (1996)
#ascual o,erated a rice thresher in 8arangay 4a,nud where he resided. "enato% a resident of the neighboring 8arangay >uihaman% also o,erated a mobile rice thresher which he often brought to 8arangay 4a,nud to thresh the ,alay of the farmers there. !his was bitterly resented by #ascual% *ne afternoon #ascual% and his two sons confronted "enato and his men who were o,erating their mobile rice thresher along a feeder road in 4a,nud. & heated argument ensued. & barangay ca,tain who was fetched by one of #ascualGs men tried to a,,ease #ascual and "enato to ,revent a violent confrontation. (owever% #ascual resented the intervention of the barangay ca,tain and hac0ed him to

53 of 86
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

#ascual committed the com,le5 crime of homicide with assault u,on a ,erson in authority (&rts. 1CB and CD in relation to &rt% CB% "#C). & barangay chairman% is in law (&rt. 1; )% a ,erson in authority and if he is attac0ed while in the ,erformance of his official duties or on the occasion thereof the felony of direct assault is committed. &rt. CB% "#C% on the other hand% ,rovides that if a single act ,roduces two or more grave or less grave felonies% a com,le5 crime is committed. (ere% the single act of the offender in hac0ing the victim to death resulted in two felonies% homicide which is grave and direct assault which is less grave. Comple/ Crime; Parrici"e wD unintentional a3ortion (199 )
&ldrich was dismissed from his 2ob by his em,loyer. U,on reaching home% his ,regnant wife% Carmi% nagged him about money for her medicines. Fe,ressed by his dismissal and angered by the nagging of his wife% &ldrich struc0 Carmi with his fist. She fell to the ground. &s a result% she and her unborn baby died.

Carmi% with his fist% he committed the crime of maltreatment under &rt% @@% ,ar. ? of the "evised #enal Code% Since Carmi died because of the felonious act of &ldrich% he is criminally liable of ,arricide under &rt. C@% "#C in relation to &rt. C% ,ar. 1 of the same Code. Since the unborn baby of Carmi died in the ,rocess% but &ldrich had no intention to cause the abortion of his wife% &ldrich committed unintentional abortion as defined in &rt. ;E% "#C. 'nasmuch as the single act of &ldrich ,roduced two grave or less grave felonies% he falls under &rt% CB% "#C% ie. a com,le5 crime ($eop"e
vs. Sa".4ran8ia# 159 S*+, 401&.

Criminal Lia3ilities; 0ape; >omici"e @ Theft (199- <o) Ning went to the house of Laura who was alone. Laura offered him a drin0 and after consuming three bottles of beer. Ning made advances to her and with force and violence% ravished her. !hen Ning 0illed Laura and too0 her /ewelry.
Foming% NingGs ado,ted brother% learned about the incident. (e went to LauraGs house% hid her body% cleaned everything and washed the bloodstains inside the room.

What crime was committed by &ldrich$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&ldrich committed the crime of ,arricide with unintentional abortion. When &ldrich struc0 his wife%
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Later% Ning gave 2ose% his legitimate brother% one ,iece of /ewelry belonging to Laura. 2ose 0new that the /ewelry was ta0en from Laura but nonetheless he sold it for # %AAA. What crime or crimes did Ning% Foming and 2ose commit$ Fiscuss their criminal liabilities. H1A<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Ning committed the com,osite crime of "a,e with homicide as a single indivisible offense% not a com,le5 crime% and !heft. !he ta0ing of LauraGs /ewelry when she is already dead is only theft. Criminal Lia3ility; Tumultous (ffray (199*) Furing a town fiesta% a freeJforJall fight eru,ted in the ,ublic ,la3a. &s a result of the tumultuous affray% & sustained one fatal and three su,erficial stab wounds. (e died a day after. 8% C% F and ) were ,roven to be ,artici,ants in the 7rumble7% each using a 0nife against &% but it could not be ascertained who among them inflicted the mortal in/ury. Who shall be held criminally liable for the death of & and for what$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

security guard at Landmar0% his shift being from 11KAA ,.m. to EKAA a.m. *ne night% he felt sic0 and cold% hence% he decided to go home around midnight after getting

8% C% F% and ) being ,artici,ants in the tumultuous affray and having been ,roven to have inflicted serious ,hysical in/uries% or at least% em,loyed violence u,on &% are criminally liable for the latterGs death. &nd because it cannot be ascertained who among them inflicted the mortal in/ury on &% there being a freeJ forJall fight or tumultuous affray. 8% C% F% and ) are all liable for the crime of death caused in a tumultuous affray under &rticle ;1 of the "evised #enal Code.

Criminal Lia3ility; Tumultuous (ffray (%&&1) 'n a freeJforJall brawl that ensued after some customers inside a night club became unruly% guns were fired by a grou,% among them & and 8% that finally ,ut the customers bac0 to their senses. Unfortunately% one customer died. Subse1uent investigation revealed that &Gs gunshot had inflicted on the victim a slight wound that did not cause the deceasedGs death nor materially contribute to it. 't was 8Gs gunshot that inflicted a fatal wound on the deceased. & contended that his liability should% if at all% be limited to slight ,hysical in/ury. Would you agree$ Why$ @<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% ' beg to disagree with &Gs contention that his liability should be limited to slight ,hysical in/ury only. (e should be held liable for attem,ted homicide because he inflicted said in/ury with the use of a firearm which is a lethal wea,on. 'ntent to 0ill is inherent in the use of a firearm. (,raneta# 1r. v. *o.rt o4 ,ppea"s# 187 S*+, 123
?1990=&
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

+es% ' would agree to &Gs contention that his criminal liability should be for slight ,hysical in/ury only% because he fired his gun only to ,acify the unruly customers of the night club and therefore% without intent to 0ill. 8Gs gunshot that inflicted a fatal wound on the deceased may not be im,uted to & because cons,iracy cannot e5ist when there is a freeJforJall brawl or tumultuous affray. & and 8 are liable only for their res,ective act

5eath un"er +/ceptional Circumstances (%&&1)


& and 8 are husband and wife. & is em,loyed as a

54 of 86 ,ermission from his duty officer. U,on reaching the front yard of his home% he noticed that the light in the master bedroom was on and that the bedroom window was o,en. &,,roaching the front door% he was sur,rised to hear sighs and giggles inside the bedroom. (e o,ened the door very carefully and ,ee,ed inside where he saw his wife 8 having se5ual intercourse with their neighbor C. & rushed inside and grabbed C but the latter managed to wrest himself free and /um,ed out of the window% & followed suit and managed to catch C again and after a furious struggle% managed also to strangle him to death. & then rushed bac0 to his bedroom where his wife 8 was cowering under the bed covers. Still enraged% & hit 8 with fist blows and rendered her unconscious. !he ,olice arrived after being summoned by their neighbors and arrested & who was detained% in1uested and charged for the death of C and serious ,hysical 'n/uries of 8.
a) b) 's & liable for CGs death$ Why$ (;<) 's & liable for 8Gs in/uries$ Why$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

b) Li0ewise% & is liable for the serious ,hysical in/uries he inflicted on his wife 8 but under the same e5ce,tional circumstances in &rticle CE of the "evised #enal Code% for the same reasons. 5eath un"er +/ceptional Circumstances (%&&6) #ete% a security guard% arrived home late one night after rendering overtime. (e was shoc0ed to see 9lor% his wife% and 8en/ie% his best friend% com,letely na0ed having se5ual intercourse. #ete ,ulled out his service gun and shot and 0illed 8en/ie. #ete was charged with murder for the death of 8en/ie. #ete contended that he acted in defense of his honor and that% therefore% he should be ac1uitted of the crime. !he court found that 8en/ie died under e5ce,tional circumstances and e5onerated #ete of the crime% but sentenced him to destierro% conformably with &rticle CE of the "evised #enal Code. !he court also ordered #ete to ,ay indemnity to the heirs of the victim in the amount of #;A%AAA.AA. (;<) Is the efense of %ete meritorious* Explain1
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a) +es% & is liable for CGs death but under the e5ce,tional circumstances in &rticle CE of the "evised #enal Code% where only destierro is ,rescribed. &rticle CE governs since & sur,rised his wife 8 in the act of having se5ual intercourse with C% and the 0illing of C was 7'mmediately thereafter7 as the discovery% esca,e% ,ursuit and 0illing of C form one continuous act. (U.S. vs.
Var6as#

2 $%i". 194&
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

4o. & ,erson who commits acts ,enali3ed under &rticle CE of the "evised #enal Code for death or serious ,hysical in/uries inflicted under e5ce,tional circumstances is still criminally liable. (owever% this is merely an e5em,ting circumstance when the victim suffers any other 0ind of ,hysical in/ury. 'n the case at bar% #ete will suffer the ,enalty of destierro for the death of 8en/ie.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)


ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

4o. #ete did not act in defense of his honor. 9or this defense to a,,ly under &rt. 11% there must be an unlawful aggression which is defined as an attac0 or material aggression that ,oses a danger to his life or ,ersonal safely. 't must be a real aggression characteri3ed by a ,hysical force or with a wea,on to cause in/ury or damage to oneGs life. ($eop"e v. )a%ayra#
0.+. )os. 96368-69# 78tober 17# 1991- $eop"e v. Do.sin6# 0.+. )o. 64965# 1."y 18# 1991&

Fante committed frustrated homicide for the stabbing of 2ay because he had already ,erformed all the acts of

(n er Article 07A of the >evise estierro a penalty* Explain1


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

%enal Co e) is

'n the case of $eop"e v. ,bar8a# 0.+. )o. 74433# Septe(ber 14# 1987% the Court ruled that &rticle CE does not define a felony. (owever% it went on to state that the ,enalty is merely banishment of the accused% intended for his ,rotection. #unishment% therefore% is not inflicted on the accused.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

+es. &rticle CE of the "evised #enal Code does not define and ,rovide for a s,ecific crime but grants a ,rivilege or benefit to the accused for the 0illing of another or the infliction of Serious #hysical 'n/uries. Festierro is a ,unishment whereby a convict is banished to a certain ,lace and is ,rohibited from entering or coming near that ,lace designated in the sentence% not less than ; 0ms.
($eop"e v. ,ra;.e"# 0.+. )o. 9-12629# De8e(ber 9# 1959&

;i the court correctly or er %ete to pay in emnity espite his exoneration un er Article 07A of the >evise %enal Co e* Explain1
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% because the ,rivilege defined under this &rticle e5em,ts the offender from criminal liability but not from civil liability. ($eop"e v. ,bar8a# 0.+# )o.
9-74483# Septe(ber 14# 1987- ,rt. 12# +evised $ena" *ode&

>omici"e; .raustrate"; Physical 2n:uries (199 )


&t about 11KAA in the evening% Fante forced his way inside the house of 6amerto. 2ay% 6amertoGs son% saw Fante and accosted him% Fante ,ulled a 0nife and stabbed 2ay on his abdomen. 6amerto heard the commotion and went out of his room. Fante% who was about to esca,e% assaulted 6amerto. 2ay suffered in/uries which% were it not for the timely medical attendance% would have caused his death. 6amerto sustained 'n/uries that inca,acitated him for ; days.

What crime or crimes did Fante commit$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Fante committed 1ualified tres,ass to dwelling% frustrated homicide for the stabbing of 2ay% and less serious ,hysical in/uries for the assault on 6amerto. !he crime of 1ualified tres,ass to dwelling should not be com,le5ed with frustrated homicide ...

55 of 86 e5ecution which would have ,roduced the intended felony of homicide were it not for causes inde,endent of the act of Fante. Fante had the intent to 0ill /udging from the wea,on used% the manner of committing the crime and the ,art of the body stabbed. Fante is guilty of less serious ,hysical in/uries for the wounds sustained by 6amerto. !here a,,ears to be no intent to 0ill because Fante merely assaulted 6amerto without using the 0nife.
2nfantici"e (%&&6)
&na has been a bar girl:>"* at a beer house for more than years. She fell in love with *nio0% the bartender% who im,regnated her. 8ut &na did not inform him about her condition and instead% went home to Cebu to conceal her shame. (owever% her ,arents drove her away. So she returned to 6anila and stayed with *nio0 in his boarding house. U,on learning of her ,regnancy% already in an advanced state% *nio0 tried to ,ersuade her to undergo an abortion% but she refused. 8ecause of their constant and bitter 1uarrels% she suffered birth ,angs and gave birth ,rematurely to a live baby girl while *nio0 was at his ,lace of wor0. U,on coming home and learning what ha,,ened% he ,revailed u,on &na to conceal her dishonor. (ence% they ,laced the infant in a shoe bo5 and threw it into a nearby cree0. (owever% an in1uisitive neighbor saw them and with the hel, of others% retrieved the infant who was already dead from drowning. !he incident was re,orted to the ,olice who arrested &na and *nio0. !he were charged with ,arricide under &rticle C@ of the "evised #enal Code.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

&fter trial% they were convicted of the crime charged.

Was the conviction correct$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he conviction of &na and *nio0 is not correct. !hey are liable for infanticide because they 0illed a child less than three days of age (&rt. ;;% "evised #enal Code).

8ur"er @ Sec9 %6B 09(9 <o9 9166 (%&&6) Candido stabbed an innocent bystander who accidentally bum,ed him. !he innocent bystander died as a result of the stabbing. Candido was arrested and was tested to be ,ositive for the use of TshabuU at the time he committed the stabbing. What should be the ,ro,er charge against Candido$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he 0illing was not attended by any of the 1ualifying circumstances enumerated under &rticle CB of the "evised #enal Code. !he 0illing% however% constitutes murder because the commission of a crime under the influence of ,rohibited drugs is a 1ualifying% aggravating circumstance. (Sec. ;% ".&. 4o. D1@;)

8ur"er (1999)
!he accused% not intending to 0ill the victim% treacherously shot the victim while the victim was turning his bac0 to him. (e aimed at and hit the victim only on the leg. !he victim% however% died because of loss of blood. Can the accused be liable for homicide or murder% considering that treachery was clearly involved

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) but

there was no attem,t to 0ill$ )5,lain your answer. (?<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he accused is liable for the death of the victim even though he merely aimed and fired at the latterGs leg% 7not intending to 0ill the victim7% considering that the gunshot was felonious and was the ,ro5imate cause of death. &n offender is liable for all the direct% natural% and logical conse1uences of his felonious act although different from what he intended. (owever% since s,ecific intent to 0ill is absent% the crime for said death is only homicide and not murder ($eop"e vs. $.6ay and Sa(son# 167 S*+, 439&
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

9idel and 9red harbored a long standing grudge against 2orge who refused to marry their sister Lorna% after the latter got ,regnant by 2orge. &fter wee0s of surveillance% they finally cornered 2orge in )rmita% 6anila% when the latter was wal0ing home late at night. 9idel and 9red

!he accused is liable for the death of the victim in as much as his act of shooting the victim at the leg is felonious and is the ,ro5imate cause of death. & ,erson ,erforming a felonious act is criminally liable for all the direct% natural% and logical conse1uences of such act although different from what he intended. &nd since such death was attended by treachery% the same will constitute murder but the accused should be given the benefit of the mitigating circumstance that he did not intend to commit so grave a wrong as that which was committed (&rt. 1?(?)% "#C) 8ur"er; 5efinition @ +lements (1999)
Fefine murder. What are the elements of the crime$ H?<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(a) 6urder is the unlawful 0illing of a ,erson which otherwise would constitute only homicide% had it not been attended by any of the following circumstancesK 1. With treachery or ta0ing advantage of su,erior strength% or with the aid of armed men% or em,loying means to wea0en the defense or of means or ,ersons to insure or afford im,unity. 'n consideration of a ,rice% reward or ,romise?. 8y means or on the occasion of inundation% fire% ,oison% e5,losion% shi,wrec0% stranding of a vessel% derailment or assault u,on a railroad% fall of an airshi,% or by means of motor vehicles% or with the use of any other means involving great waste and ruinC. *n occasion of an earth1ua0e% eru,tion of a volcano% destructive cyclone% e,idemic or other ,ublic calamity;. With evident ,remeditation@. With cruelty% by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim% or outraging or scoffing at his ,erson or cor,se.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(b) !he elements of murder areK (1) that a ,erson was unlawfully 0illed- ( ) that such a 0illing was attended by any of the aboveJmentioned circumstances- (?) that the 0illing is not ,arricide nor infanticide- and (C) that the accused 0illed the victim. 8ur"er; +#i"ent Preme"itation (1996)

56 of 86 forcibly
brought 2orge to Mambales where they 0e,t him hogJ tied in a small ni,a house located in the middle of a rice field. !wo days later% they 0illed 2orge and dum,ed his body into the river. What crime or crimes did 9idel and 9red commit$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

& committed the following crimesK 1.I (*6'C'F) or murder as the case may be% for the 0illing of his commonJlaw wife who is not legally considered a 7s,ouse7

.I '49&4!'C'F) for the 0illing of the child as


said child is less than three (?) days old. (&rt. ;;% "#C) (owever% the ,enalty corres,onding to ,arricide shall be im,osed since & is related to the child within the degree defined in the crime of ,arricide.

9idel and 9red committed the crime of 6urder under &rt CB% "#C% the 0illing being 1ualified by evident ,remeditation. !his is due to the long standing grudge entertained by the two accused occasioned by the victimGs refusal to marry their sister after im,regnating her.

?.I #&""'C'F)

'n $eop"e vs. ,"4e8%e. 219 S*+, 85 % the intention of the accused is determinative of the crime committed. Where the intention is to 0ill the victim and the latter is forcibly ta0en to another ,lace and later 0illed% it is murder. !here is no indication that the offenders intended to de,rive the victim of his liberty. Whereas% if the victim is 0idna,,ed% and ta0en to another situs and 0illed as an afterthought% it is 0idna,,ing with homicide under &rt. @E% "#C. 8ur"er; >omici"e; 2nfantici"e; Parrici"e (1999) & 0illedK (1) a woman with whom he lived without benefit of clergy% ( ) their child who was only two days old% (?) their daughter% and (C) their ado,ted son. What crime or crimes did & commit$ (?<)
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

for the 0illing of their daughter% whether legitimate or illegitimate% as long as she is not less than three (?) days old at the time of the 0illing. C.I 6U"F)" for the 0illing of their ado,ted son as the relationshi, between & and the said son must be by blood in order for ,arricide to arise. 8ur"er; 0ecGles 2mpru"ence (%&&1)
6ang 2ose% a se,tuagenarian% was wal0ing with his tenJ year old grandson along #aseo de "o5as and decided to cross at the intersection of 6a0ati &venue but both were hit by a s,eeding C". (onda van and were sent s,rawling on the ,avement a meter a,art. !he driver% a Chinese mesti3o% sto,,ed his car after hitting the two victims but then reversed his gears and ran over 6ang 2oseGs ,rostrate body anew and third time by advancing his car forward. !he grandson suffered bro0en legs only and survived but 6ang 2ose suffered multi,le fractures and bro0en ribs% causing his instant death. !he driver was arrested and charged with 6urder for the death of 6ang

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

2ose and Serious #hysical 'n/uries through "ec0less 'm,rudence with res,ect to the grandson. &re the charges correct$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

for illegal ,ossession of firearm if no other crime is committed therewith- if a homicide or murder is

+es% the charges are correct. 9or deliberately running over 6ang 2oseGs ,rostrate body after having bum,ed him and his grandson% the driver indeed committed 6urder% 1ualified by treachery. Said driverGs deliberate intent to 0ill 6ang 2ose was demonstrated by his running over the latterGs body twice% by bac0ing u, the van and driving it forward% whereas the victim was hel,less and not in a ,osition to defend himself or to retaliate. &s to the serious ,hysical in/uries sustained by 6ang 2oseGs 1AJyear old grandson% as a result of having been hit by the s,eeding vehicle of said driver% the same were the result of rec0less im,rudence which is ,unishable as a 1uasiJoffense in &rticle ?@; of the "evised #enal Code. !he charge of "ec0less 'm,rudence "esulting to Serious #hysical 'n/uries is correct. !he ,enalty ne5t higher in degree to what ordinarily should be im,osed is called for% since the driver did not lend hel, on the s,ot% which hel, he could have given to the victims.

8ur"er; Treachery (1996)


*n his way to buy a lotto tic0et% a ,oliceman suddenly found himself surrounded by four men. *ne of them wrestled the ,olice officer to the ground and disarmed him while the other three com,anions who were armed with a hunting 0nife% an ice ,ic0% and a balisong% re,eatedly stabbed him. !he ,oliceman died as a result of the multi,le stab wounds inflicted by his assailants.

What crime or crimes were committed$ Fiscuss fully.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&ll the assailants are liable for the crime of murder% 1ualified by treachery% (which absorbed abuse of su,erior strength) as the attac0 was sudden and une5,ected and the victim was totally defenseless. Cons,iracy is obvious from the concerted acts of the assailants. Firect assault would not com,le5 the crime% as there is no showing that the assailants 0new that the victim was a ,oliceman- even if there was 0nowledge% the fact is that he was not in the ,erformance of his official duties% and therefore there is no direct assault. 8ur"er; 'se of 2llegal .irearms (%&& )
#( 0illed *2% his ,olitical rival in the election cam,aign for 6ayor of their town. !he 'nformation against #( alleged that he used an unlicensed firearm in the 0illing of the victim% and this was ,roved beyond reasonable doubt by the ,rosecution. !he trial court convicted #( of two crimesK murder and illegal ,ossession of firearms. 's the conviction correct$ "eason briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% the conviction of #( for two crimes% murder and illegal ,ossession of firearm is not correct. Under the new law on illegal ,ossession of firearms and e5,losives% "e,. &ct 4o. B DC% a ,erson may only be criminally liable

57 of 86 committed
with the use of an unlicensed firearm% such use shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance. #( therefore may only be convicted of murder and the use of an unlicensed firearm in its commission may only be a,,reciated as a s,ecial aggravating circumstance% ,rovided that such use is alleged s,ecifically in the information for 6urder. Parrici"e (1999) Who may be guilty of the crime of ,arricide$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

bitterness for having abandoned him and mother% what crime did "ic0y commit$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

his

1) "ic0y committed ,arricide because the ,erson 0illed was his own father% and the law ,unishing the crime (&rt. C@% "#C) does not re1uire that the crime be 70nowingly7 committed. Should "ic0y be ,rosecuted and found guilty of ,arricide% the ,enalty to be im,osed is &rt. CD of the "evised #enal Code for (omicide (the crime he intended to commit) but in its ma5imum ,eriod.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

&ny ,erson who 0ills his father% mother% or child% whether legitimate or illegitimate% or his ascendants or descendants% or s,ouse% shall be guilty of ,arricide. (&rt. C@% "#C) Parrici"e (1999) 'n 1DE;% #edro% then a resident of 6anila% abandoned his wife and their son% "ic0y% who was then only three years old. !wenty years later% an affray too0 ,lace in a bar in *longa,o City between #edro and his com,anions% on one hand% and "ic0y and his friends% u,on the other% without the father and son 0nowing each other. "ic0y stabbed and 0illed #edro in the fight% only to find out% a wee0 later% when his mother arrived from 6anila to visit him in /ail% that the man whom he 0illed was his own father. 1) What crime did "ic0y commit$ )5,lain. ) Su,,ose "ic0y 0new before the 0illing that #edro is his father% but he nevertheless 0illed him out of Version 1994-2006 Updated by Dondee

"ic0y should be held criminally liable only for homicide not ,arricide because the relationshi, which 1ualified the 0illing to ,arricide is virtually absent for a ,eriod of twenty years already% such that "ic0y could not ,ossibly be aware that his adversary was his father. 'n other words% the moral basis for im,osing the higher ,enalty for ,arricide is absent.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

) !he crime committed should be ,arricide if "ic0y 0new before the 0illing that #edro is his father% because the moral basis for ,unishing the crime already e5ists. (is having acted out of bitterness for having been abandoned by his father may be considered mitigating.

Parrici"e; 8ultiple Parrici"e; >omici"e (199*) &% a young housewife% and 8% her ,aramour% cons,ired to 0ill C. her husband% to whom she was lawfully married% &

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) and

8 bought ,ancit and mi5ed it with ,oison. & gave the food with ,oison to C% but before C could eat it. F% her illegitimate father% and )% her legitimate son% arrived. C. F and ) shared the food in the ,resence of & who merely watched them eating. C% F and ) died because of having ,arta0en of the ,oisoned food. What crime or crimes did & and 8 commit$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

crime of ra,e. !he in/uries suffered by the victim may% however% be considered in determining the ,ro,er ,enalty which

& committed the crime of multi,le ,arricide for the 0illing of C% her lawful husband% F% her illegitimate father% and )% her legitimate son. &ll these 0illings constitute ,arricide under &rticle C@ of the "evised #enal Code because of her relationshi, with the victims.

8 committed the crime of murder as a coJcons,irator of & in the 0illing of C because the 0illing was carried out by means of ,oison (&rt. CB. ,ar. ?% "evised #enal Code). 8ut for feloniously causing the death of F and )% 8 committed two counts of homicide. !he ,lan was only to 0ill C. 0ape (1996) >avino bo5ed his wife &lma for refusing to slee, with him. (e then violently threw her on the floor and forced her to have se5ual intercourse with him. &s a result &lma suffered serious ,hysical in/uries. (a) Can >avino be charged with ra,e$ )5,lain. (b) Can >avino be charged with serious ,hysical in/uries$ )5,lain
(c) Will your answers to (a) and (b) be the same if before the incident >avino and &lma were legally se,arated$

)5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(a) 4o. & husband cannot be charged with the


ra,e of his wife because of the matrimonial consent which she gave when she assumed the marriage relation% and the law will not ,ermit her to retract in order to charge her husband with the offense
(Sate vs. Daines# 11 9a. ,nn. 731 So. 372- 441 +, 837&.

(b) +es% he may be guilty of serious ,hysical in/uries. !his offense is s,ecially mentioned in &rt. @? HCI% ,aragra,h which im,oses a higher ,enalty for the crime of ,hysical in/uries in cases where the offense shall have been committed against any of the ,ersons enumerated in &rt C@ (the crime of ,arricide). (c) 4o% my answer will not be the same. 'f >avino% and &lma were legally se,arated at the time of the incident% then >avino could be held liable for ra,e. & legal se,aration is a se,aration of the s,ouses from bed and board (U.S. vs. 1o%nson# 27 $%i". 477# 8ited in 33
+eyes# + *# p. 853. 1981 edition&#

'n the crime of ra,e% any crime resulting from the infliction of ,hysical in/uries suffered by the victim on the occasion of the ra,e% is absorbed by the

58 of 86
shall be im,osed on the offender. Serious ,hysical in/uries cannot be absorbed in ra,e- it can be so if the in/ury is slight. 0ape; (3sence of .orce @ 2ntimi"ation (1996)
!hree ,olicemen conducting routine surveillance of a cogonal area in &nti,ole chanced u,on "uben% a 1;Jyear old tricycle driver% on to, of "owena who was 0nown to be a child ,rostitute. 8oth were na0ed from the waist down and a,,eared to be en/oying the se5ual activity. "uben was arrested by the ,olicemen des,ite his ,rotestations that "owena enticed him to have se5 with her in advance celebration of her twelfth birthday. !he town ,hysician found no semen nor any bleeding on "owenaGs hymen but for a healed scar. (er hymenal o,ening easily admitted two fingers showing that no e5ternal force had been em,loyed on her.

Similarly% the absence of s,ermato3oa does not dis,rove the consummation as the im,ortant consideration is not the emission but the ,enetration of the female body by the male organ ($eop"e vs. 1ose
37 S*+, 450- $eop"e vs. *arandan6. 52 S*+, 259&.

0ape; (nti,0ape Law of 199* (%&&%) What other acts are considered ra,e under the &ntiJ "a,e Law of 1DDE% amending the "evised #enal Code$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he other acts considered ra,e under the &ntiJ"a,e Law of 1DDE areK 1.I having carnal 0nowledge of a woman by a man by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority% .I having carnal 0nowledge of a demented woman by a man even if none of the circumstances re1uired in ra,e be ,resent- and

's "uben liable for any offense$ Fiscuss fully. &nswerSUGGESTED ANSWER3

?.I committing an act of se5ual assault by inserting


a ,ersonGs ,enis into the victimGs mouth or anal orifice% or by inserting any instrument or ob/ect% into the genital or anal orifice of another ,erson.

"uben is liable for ra,e% even if force or intimidation is not ,resent. !he gravamen of the offense is the carnal 0nowledge of a woman below twelve years of age ($eop"e vs. De"a *r.5# 56 S*+, 84& since the law doesnGt consider the consent voluntary and ,resumes that a girl below twelve years old does not and cannot have a will of her own. 'n $eop"e .s. $ere5# *, 37 70 1762% it was held that se5ual intercourse with a ,rostitute below twelve years old is ra,e.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

0ape; (nti,0ape Law of 199* (%&&%) !he &ntiJ"a,e Law of 1DDE reclassified ra,e from a crime against honor% a ,rivate offense% to that of a crime against ,ersons. Will the subse1uent marriage of the offender and the offended ,arty e5tinguish the criminal action or the ,enalty im,osed$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. 8y e5,ress ,rovision of &rticle @@JC of the "evised #enal Code% as amended% the subse1uent valid marriage between the offender and offended ,arty shall e5tinguish the criminal action or the ,enalty im,osed% although ra,e has been reclassified from a crime against chastity% to that of a crime against ,ersons.

1) !he case should not be dismissed. ... ) !he affidavit of desistance will only amount to the condonation of civil liability but not criminal liability hence the case should still ,roceed.

0ape; Consente" (3"uction (%&&%)


& with lewd designs% too0 a 1?Jyear old girl to a ni,a hut in his farm and there had se5ual intercourse with her. !he girl did not offer any resistance because she was infatuated with the man% who was goodJloo0ing and belonged to a rich and ,rominent family in the town. What crime% if any% was committed by &$ Why$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

& committed the crime of consented abduction under &rticle ?C? of the "evised #enal Code% as amended. !he said &rticle ,unishes the abduction of a virgin over 1 and under 1B years of age% carried out with her consent and with lewd designs. &lthough the ,roblem did not indicate the victim to be virgin% virginity should not be understood in its material sense% as to e5clude a virtuous woman of good re,utation% since the essence of the crime is not the in/ury to the woman but the outrage and alarm to her family (Va"depenas vs. $eop"e#16 S*+, 871
?1966=&.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

& committed 7Child &buse7 under "e,. &ct 4o. E@1A. &s defined in said law% 7child abuse7 includes se5ual abuse or any act which debases% degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being% whose age is below eighteen (1B) years. 0ape; +ffect; (ffi"a#it of 5esistance (1991)
1. &riel intimidated "achel% a mental retardate% with a bolo into having se5ual 'ntercourse with him. "achelGs mother immediately filed a com,laint% su,,orted by her sworn statement% before the City #rosecutorGs *ffice. &fter the necessary ,reliminary investigation% an information was signed by the ,rosecutor but did not contain the signature of "achel nor of her mother. Citing &rt. ?CC of the "#C (,rosecution of the crimes of ra,e% etc.)% &riel moves for the dismissal of the case. "esolve with reasons.

&fter the ,rosecution had rested its case% &riel ,resented a sworn affidavit of desistance e5ecuted by "achel and her mother stating that they are no longer interested in ,rosecuting the case and that they have ,ardoned &riel.
What effect would this affidavit of desistance have on the criminal and civil as,ects of the case$ )5,lain

fully.

59 of 86
0ape; 8ale $ictim (%&&%) &% a male% ta0es 8% another male% to a motel and there% through threat and intimidation% succeeds in inserting his ,enis into the anus of 8. What% if any% is &Qs criminal liability$ Why$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

charged and convicted of multi,le ra,es. )ach ra,e is a distinct offense and should be ,unished se,arately. )vidently% his ,rinci,al intention was to abuse 9lordeluna- the detention was only incidental to the ra,e.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

& shall be criminally liable for ra,e by committing an act of se5ual assault against 8% by inserting his ,enis into the anus of the latter. )ven a man may be a victim of ra,e by se5ual assault under ,ar. of &rticle @@J& of the "evised #enal Code% as amended% 7when the offenderGs ,enis is inserted into his mouth or anal orifice.7 0ape; 8ultiple 0apes; .orci3le (3"uction (%&&&)
9lordeluna boarded a ta5i on her way home to =ue3on City which was driven by "oger% 9lordeluna noticed that "oger was always ,lacing his car freshener in front of the car aircon ventilation but did not bother as0ing "oger why. Suddenly% 9lordeluna felt di33y and became unconscious. 'nstead of bringing her to =ue3on City% "oger brought 9lordeluna to his house in Cavite where she was detained for two ( ) wee0s. She was ra,ed for the entire duration of her detention. 6ay "oger be charged and convicted of the crime of ra,e with serious illegal detention$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% "oger may not be charged and convicted of the crime of ra,e with serious illegal detention% since the detention was incurred in ra,ing the victim during the days she was held. &t most% "oger may be ,rosecuted for forcible abduction for ta0ing 9lordeluna to Cavite against the latterGs will and with lewd designs. !he forcible abduction should be com,le5ed with one of the multi,le ra,es committed% and the other ra,es should be ,rosecuted and ,unished se,arately% in as many ra,es were charged and ,roved. 0ape; Proper Party (1991) &riel intimidated "achel% a mental retardate% with a bolo into having se5ual 'ntercourse with him. "achelGs mother immediately filed a com,laint% su,,orted by her sworn statement% before the City #rosecutorGs *ffice. &fter the necessary ,reliminary investigation% an information was signed by the ,rosecutor but did not contain the signature of "achel nor of her mother. Citing &rt. ?CC of the "#C (,rosecution of the crimes of ra,e% etc.)% &riel moves for the dismissal of the case. "esolve with reasons.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% "oger may not be charged and convicted of the crime of ra,e with serious illegal detention. "oger may be
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

!he case should not be dismissed. !his is allowed by law ($eop"e .s. 3"arde# 125 S*+, 11&. 't is enough that a

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

com,laint was filed by the offended ,arty or the ,arents in the 9iscalGs *ffice. 0ape; Statutory 0ape; 8ental 0etar"ate $ictim (1996) !he com,lainant% an eighteenJyear old mental retardate with an intellectual ca,acity between the ages of nine and twelve years% when as0ed during the trial how she felt when she was ra,ed by the accused% re,lied 76asara,% it gave me much ,leasure.7 With the claim of the accused that the com,lainant consented for a fee to the se5ual intercourse% and with the foregoing answer of the com,lainant% would you convict the accused of ra,e if you were the /udge trying the case$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

for the ,eriod of time s,ecified therein the ,erformance of any /udicial or e5ecutive order for the release of the ,risoner% or unduly delays

+es% ' would convict the accused of ra,e. Since the victim is a mental retardate with an intellectual ca,acity of a child less than 1 years old% she is legally inca,able of giving a valid consent to the se5ual 'ntercourse. !he se5ual intercourse is tantamount to a statutory ra,e because the level of intelligence is that of a child less than twelve years of age. Where the victim of ra,e is a mental retardate% violence or 'ntimidation is not essential to constitute ra,e. ($eop"e .s. 'ri(or# 0#+. 106541-42# 31 /ar 95& &s a matter of fact% "& 4o. E@;D% the (einous Crimes Law% amended &rt. ??;% "#C% by adding the ,hrase 7or is demented.7

C-&:"5 $ &!5# P"-5)! + L&1"-#2 !* S"(%-&#2


(r3itrary 5etention; +lements; Groun"s (%&&6) ,1 9hat are the = ways of committing arbitrary etention* Explain each1 201314+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he ? ways of arbitrary detention areK


a) &rbitrary detention by detaining a ,erson without legal ground committed by any ,ublic officer or em,loyee who% without legal grounds% detains a ,erson (&rt. 1 C% "evised #enal Code). Felay in the delivery of detained ,ersons to the ,ro,er /udicial authorities which is committed by a ,ublic officer or em,loyee who shall detain any ,erson for some legal ground and shall fail to deliver such ,erson to the ,ro,er /udicial authorities within the ,eriod ofK twelve (1 ) hours% for crimes or offense ,unishable by light ,enalties% or their e1uivalent- eighteen hours (1B)% for crimes or offenses ,unishable by correctional facilities% or their e1uivalent- and thirtyJsi5 (?@) hours for crimes or offenses ,unishable by afflictive or ca,ital ,enalties% or their e1uivalent (&rt. 1 ;% "evised #enal Code). Felaying release is committed by any ,ublic officer or em,loyee who delays the release

b)

c)

60 of 86 the
service of the notice of such order to said ,risoner or the ,roceedings u,on any ,etition for the liberation of such ,erson (&rt. 1 @% "evised #enal Code). 01
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

9hat are the legal groun s for etention* 20134+

establishment or ,lace where he is serving final /udgment or tem,orarily confined while his case is ,ending% or has esca,ed while being transferred from one confinement to another (Sec. ;% "ule 11?%1DB; "ules on Criminal #rocedure).

!he commission of a crime% or violent insanity or any other ailment re1uiring the com,ulsory confinement of the ,atient in a hos,ital shall be considered legal grounds for the detention of any ,erson (&rt. 1 CH I% "evised #enal Code). =1 9hen is an arrest by a peace officer or by a private person consi ere lawful* Explain1 234+ 1. When the arrest by a ,eace officer is made ,ursuant to a valid warrant. . & ,eace officer or a ,rivate ,erson may% without a warrant% arrest a ,ersonK i. When% in his ,resence% the ,erson to be arrested has committed% is actually committing% or is attem,ting to commit an offense% ii. When an offense has in fact /ust been committed% and he has ,ersonal 0nowledge of facts indicating that the ,erson to be arrested has committed it% and
iii. When the ,erson to be arrested is a ,risoner who has esca,ed from ,enal
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Gra#e Coercion (199-) 'sagani lost his gold nec0lace bearing his initials. (e saw "oy wearing the said nec0lace. 'sagani as0ed "oy to return to him the nec0lace as it belongs to him% but "oy refused. 'sagani then drew his gun and told "oy% 7'f you will not give bac0 the nec0lace to me% ' will 0ill youR7 *ut of fear for his life and against his will% "oy gave the nec0lace to 'sagani% What offense did 'sagani commit$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'sagani committed the crime of grave coercion (&rt. B@% "#C) for com,elling "oy% by means of serious threats or intimidation% to do something against the latterGs will% whether it be right or wrong. Serious threats or intimidation a,,ro5imating violence constitute grave coercion% not grave threats. Such is the nature of the threat in this case because it was committed with a gun% is a deadly wea,on. !he crime is not robbery because intent to gain% which is an essential element of robbery% is absent since the nec0lace belongs to 'sagani.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Gra#e Coercion #s9 8altreatment of Prisoner (1999) 9orcibly brought to the ,olice head1uarters% a ,erson was tortured and maltreated by agents of the law in order to com,el him to confess a crime im,uted to him. !he agents failed% however% to draw from him a confession which was their intention to obtain through the em,loyment of such means. What crime was committed by the agents of the law$ )5,lain your answer. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

return a minor under &rticle &rticle

E1% in relation to

)vidently% the ,erson tortured and maltreated by the agents of the law is a sus,ect and may have been detained by them. 'f so and he had already been boo0ed and ,ut in /ail% the crime is maltreatment of ,risoner and the fact that the sus,ect was sub/ected to torture to e5tort a confession would bring about a higher ,enalty. 'n addition to the offenderGs liability for the ,hysical in/uries inflicted. 8ut if the sus,ect was forcibly brought to the ,olice head1uarters to ma0e him admit the crime and tortured: maltreated to ma0e him confess to such crime% but later released because the agents failed to draw such confession% the crime is grave coercion because of the violence em,loyed to com,el such confession without the offended ,arty being confined in /ail. (US vs. *.si# 10 $%i" 143&
't is noted that the offended ,arty was merely 7brought7 to the ,olice head1uarters and is thus not a detention ,risoner. (ad he been validly arrested% the crime committed would be maltreatment of ,risoners.

2llegal 5etention #s9 Gra#e Coercion (1999) Fistinguish coercion from illegal detention. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Coercion may be distinguished from illegal detention as followsK in coercion% the basis of criminal liability is the em,loyment of violence or serious intimidation a,,ro5imating violence% without authority of law% to ,revent a ,erson from doing something not ,rohibited by law or to com,el him to do something against his will% whether it be right or wrong- while in 'llegal detention% the basis of liability is the actual restraint or loc0ing u, of a ,erson% thereby de,riving him of his liberty without authority of law. 'f there was no intent to loc0 u, or detain the offended ,arty unlawfully% the crime of illegal detention is not committed.

7i"napping (%&&%)
& and 8 were legally se,arated. !heir child C% a minor% was ,laced in the custody of & the mother% sub/ect to monthly visitations by 8% his father. *n one occasion% when 8 had C in his com,any% 8 decided not to return C to his mother. 'nstead% 8 too0 C with him to the United States where he intended for them to reside ,ermanently. What crime% if any% did 8 commit$ Why$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

8 committed the crime of 0idna,,ing and failure to

61 of 86
EA% of the "evised #enal Code% as amended. &rticle E1 e5,ressly ,enali3es any ,arent who shall ta0e from and deliberately fail to restore his or her minor child to the ,arent or guardian to whom custody of the minor has been ,laced. Since the custody of C% the minor% has been given to the mother and 8 has only the right of monthly visitation% the latterGs act of ta0ing C to the United Slates% to reside there ,ermanently% constitutes a violation of said ,rovisions of law. 7i"napping (%&&6)
2aime% &ndy and 2immy% laborers in the noodles factory of Lu0e !an% agreed to 0ill him due to his arrogance and miserliness. *ne afternoon% they sei3ed him and loaded him in a ta5i driven by 6ario. !hey told 6ario they will only teach Lu0e a lesson in Christian humility. 6ario drove them to a fish,ond in 4avotas where Lu0e was entrusted to )mil and Louie% the fish,ond careta0ers% as0ing them to hide Lu0e in their shac0 because he was running from the 48'. !he trio then left in 6arioGs car for 6anila where they called u, Lu0eGs family and threatened them to 0ill Lu0e unless they give a ransom within C hours. Un0nown to them% because of a lea0% the 0idna,,ing was announced over the radio and !.. )mil and Louie heard the broadcast and ,anic0ed% es,ecially when the announcer stated that there is a shootJtoJ0ill order for the 0idna,,ers. )mil and Louie too0 Lu0e to the seashore of FagatJdagatan where they smashed his head with a shovel and buried him in the sand. (owever%
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

they were seen by a barangay 0agawad who arrested them and brought them to the ,olice station. U,on interrogation% they confessed and ,ointed to 2aime% &ndy% 2immy and 6ario as those res,onsible for the 0idna,,ing. Later% the C were arrested and charged.

What crime or crimes did the @ sus,ects commit$ (;<)


ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

a)

2aime% &ndy and 2immy committed 0idna,,ing with homicide. !he original intention was to demand ransom from the family with the threat of 0illing. &s a conse1uence of the 0idna,,ing% however% Lu0e was 0illed. !hus% the victim was de,rived of his freedom and the subse1uent 0illing% though committed by another ,erson% was a conse1uence of the detention. (ence% this ,ro,erly 1ualified the crime as the s,ecial com,le5 crime of 0idna,,ing for ransom with homicide
($eop"e v. /a(arion# 0.+. )o. 137554# 78tober 1# 2003- ,rt. 267# +evised $ena" *ode&.

b)

)mil and Louie who smashed the head of the victim and buried the latter in the sand committed murder 1ualified by treachery or abuse of su,erior strength. !hey are not liable for 0idna,,ing because they did not cons,ire% nor are they aware of the intention to detain Lu0e whom they were informed was hiding from the 48' (&rt. CB% "eJ vised #enal Code).
6ario has no liability since he was not aware of the criminal intent and design of 2aime% &ndy and 2immy. (is act of bringing Lu0e to 4avotas for 7a

c)

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

lesson in Christian humility7 does not constitute a crime.


A+#"-! #&=" A!5."-3

sense and covers all forms of 0illing whether in the nature of murder or

a)

b)

2aime% &ndy and 2immy committed 0idna,,ing with ransom. &fter 0idna,,ing Lu0e% they demanded ransom with the threat of 0illing him. (owever% the 0illing of Lu0e is se,arate from the 0idna,,ing having been committed by other ,ersons% who had nothing to do with the 0idna,,ing% and who will be liable for a different crime (#enultimate ,ar. of &rt. @E% "evised #enal Code). )mil and Louie who smashed the head of the victim and buried the latter in the sand committed murder 1ualified by treachery or abuse of su,erior strength. !hey are not liable for 0idna,,ing because they did not cons,ire% nor are they aware of the intention to detain Lu0e whom they were informed was hiding from the 48' (&rt. CB% "evised #enal Code).

c)

6ario has no liability since he was not aware of the criminal intent and design of 2aime% &ndy and 2immy. (is act of bringing Lu0e to 4avotas for 7a lesson in Christian humility7 does not constitute a crime.

7i"napping wD >omici"e (%&&6)


#a3 6asi,ag wor0ed as a housemaid and yaya of the oneJ wee0 old son of the s,ouses 6artin and #o,s Nuri,ot. When #a3 learned that her EA yearJold mother was seriously ill% she as0ed 6artin for a cash advance of #1%AAA.AA but 6artin refused. *ne morning% #a3 gagged the mouth of 6artinQs son with stoc0ings- ,laced the child in a bo5- sealed it with mas0ing ta,e and ,laced the bo5 in the attic. Later in the afternoon% she demanded #;%AAA.AA as ransom for the release of his son. 6artin did not ,ay the ransom. Subse1uently% #a3 disa,,eared.

&fter a cou,le of days% 6artin discovered the bo5 in the attic with his child already dead. &ccording to the auto,sy re,ort% the child died of as,hy5iation barely three minutes after the bo5 was sealed. What crime or crimes did #a3 commit$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

#a3 committed the com,osite crime of 0idna,,ing with homicide under &rt. @E% "9C as amended by ".&. 4o. E@;D. Under the law% any ,erson who shall detain another or in any manner de,rive him of liberty and the victim dies as a conse1uence is liable for 0idna,,ing with homicide and shall be ,enali3ed with the ma5imum ,enalty.
'n this case% notwithstanding the fact that the oneJwee0 old child was merely 0e,t in the attic of his house% gagged with stoc0ings and ,laced in a bo5 sealed with ta,e% the de,rivation of liberty and the intention to 0ill becomes a,,arent. !hough it may a,,ear that the means em,loyed by #a3 was attended by treachery (0illing of an infant)% nevertheless% a se,arate charge of murder will not be ,ro,er in view of the amendment. (ere% the term 7homicide7 is used in its generic

62 of 86 otherwise.
't is of no moment that the evidence shows the death of the child too0 ,lace three minutes after the bo5 was sealed and the demand for the ransom too0 ,lace in the afternoon. !he intention is controlling here% that is% ransom was demanded.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

6urder 1ualified by treachery because the victim was only one wee0 old. !he offense was attended with the aggravating circumstance of lac0 of res,ect due to the age of the victim% cruelty and abuse of confidence. 'n
$eop"e v. 9ora (0.+. )o# 9-49430# /ar8% 30# 1982&#

4o. F&4Gs defense will not ,ros,er. .oluntary release by the offender of the offended ,arty in 0idna,,ing is not absolutory. 8esides% such release is irrelevant and immaterial in this case because the victim being a minor% the crime committed is 0idna,,ing and serious illegal detention under &rt. @E% "evised #enal Code% to which such circumstance does not a,,ly. !he circumstance may be a,,reciated only in the crime of Slight 'llegal Fetention in &rt. @B (,sistio v. San Die6o# 10 S*+, 673 ?1964=& 7i"napping; 2llegal 5etention; 8inority (%&&6)
Fang was a beauty 1ueen in a university. 2ob% a rich classmate% was so enamored with her that he ,ersistently wooed and ,ursued her. Fang% being in love with another man% re/ected him. !his angered 2ob% Sometime in Se,tember AA?% while Fang and her sister Lyn were on their way home% 2ob and his minor friend 4onoy grabbed them and ,ushed them inside a white van. !hey brought them to an abandoned warehouse where they forced them to dance na0ed. !hereafter% they brought them to a hill in a nearby barangay where they too0 turns ra,ing them. &fter satisfying their lust% 2ob ordered 4onoy to ,ush Fang down a ravine% resulting in her death. Lyn ran away but 2ob and 4onoy chased her and ,ushed her inside the van. !hen the duo drove away. Lyn was never seen again.

the Court found that a child sub/ected to similar treatment as the infant in this case would have died instantly% negating any intent to 0idna, or detain when ransom was sought. Femand for ransom did not convert the offense into 0idna,,ing with murder because the demand was merely a scheme by the offender (#a3) to conceal the body of her victim. 7i"napping; +ffects; $oluntary 0elease (%&& ) F&4% a ,rivate individual% 0idna,,ed C(U% a minor. *n the second day% F&4 released C(U even before any criminal information was filed against him. &t the trial of his case% F&4 raised the defense that he did not incur any criminal liability since he released the child before the la,se of the ?J day ,eriod and before criminal ,roceedings for 0idna,,ing were instituted. Will F&4Gs defense ,ros,er$ "eason briefly. (;<)
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

,1 9hat crime or crimes were committe by Job an #onoy* 20134+


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

2ob and 4onoy committed 1) 0idna,,ing and serious illegal detention with homicide and ra,e for the subJ se1uent death of Fang% and ) 0idna,,ing with ra,e against her sister% Lyn. !he victims% who were 0idna,,ed and detained% were subse1uently ra,ed and 0illed (as regards Fang) in the course of their detention. !he com,osite crime is committed regardless of whether the subse1uent crimes were ,ur,osely sought or merely an afterthought ($eop"e v. 9arrana6a# 0.+. )os. 138874-5#
ebr.arys# 2004&.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

money which )dgardo failed to ,ut u,. &ngered because )dgardo did not ,ut u, the money he re1uired% he re,orted )dgardo to the ,olice.

2ob and 4onoy committed counts of the com,le5 crime of forcible abduction with ra,e (&rt. ?C % "evised #enal Code) and the se,arate offense of murder against Fang. !he crime committed is abduction because there was lewd design when they too0 the victims away and subse1uently ra,ed them. !he 0illing thereafter% constitutes the se,arate offense of murder 1ualified by treachery. 01 9hat penalties shoul 20134+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

be impose on them*

Since the death ,enalty has already been ,rohibited% reclusion ,er,etua is the a,,ro,riate ,enalty ("&. D?C@). 'n the case of the minor 4onoy% his ,enalty shall be one degree lower (&rt. @B% "evised #enal Code). =1 9ill #onoyBs minority exculpate him* 20134+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Under "&. D?CC% the 2uvenile 2ustice and "eform &ct% which retroacts to the date that the crime was committed% 4onoy will be e5cul,ated if he was 1; years old or below. (owever% if he was above 1; years old but below 1B years of age% he will be liable if he acted with discernment. &s the ,roblem shows that 4onoy acted with discernment% he will be entitled to a sus,ension of sentence.
()7',<>)>A +.,. 9344 is o.tside t%e 8overa6e o4 t%e eCa(ination&

71 Is the non"recovery of 'ynBs bo y material to the criminal liability of Job an #onoy* 20134+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he nonJrecovery of LynGs body is not material to the criminal liability of 2ob and 4onoy% because the cor,us delicti of the crime which is 0idna,,ing with ra,e of Lyn has been duly ,roven.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

!he nonJrecovery of LynGs body is not material to the criminal liability of 2ob and 4onoy% because the cor,us delicti of the crime which is forcible abduction with ra,e of Lyn has been duly ,roven. 7i"napping; Proposal to 7i"nap (1996) )dgardo induced his friend .icente% in consideration of money% to 0idna, a girl he is courting so that he may succeed to ra,ing her and eventually ma0ing her accede to marry him. .icente as0ed for more

63 of 86
6ay )dgardo be charged with attem,ted 0idna,,ing$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

criminal ,roceedings against them% the crime committed was only slight illegal detention ,rescribed in &rticle @B% "#C.

4o% )dgardo may not be charged with attem,ted 0idna,,ing inasmuch as no overt act to 0idna, or restrain the liberty of the girl had been commenced. &t most% what )dgardo has done in the ,remises was a ,ro,osal to .icente to 0idna, the girl% which is only a ,re,aratory act and not an overt act. !he attem,t to commit a felony commences with the commission of overt act% not ,re,aratory act. #ro,osal to commit 0idna,,ing is not a crime.

&fter hearing% the trial court found the evidence of guilt to be strong and therefore denied the ,etition for bail. *n a,,eal% the only issue wasK Was the crime committed 0idna,,ing and serious detention or slight 'llegal detention$ Fecide.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

7i"napping; Serious 2llegal 5etention (199*) & and 8 cons,iring with each other% 0idna,,ed C and detained him. !he duo then called u, CGs wife informing her that they had her husband and would release him only if she ,aid a ransom in the amount of #1A%AAA%AAA and that% if she were to fail% they would 0ill him. !he ne5t day% C% who had /ust recovered from an illness had a rela,se. 9earing he might die if not treated at once by a doctor% & and 8 released C during the early morning of the third day of detention.
Charged with 0idna,,ing and serious illegal detention ,rovided in &rticle @E% "#C% & and 8 filed a ,etition for bail. !hey contended that since they had voluntarily released C within three days from commencement of the detention% without having been ,aid any amount of the ransom demanded and before the institution of
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

!he crime committed by & and 8 is 0idna,,ing and serious illegal detention because they made a demand for ransom and threatened to 0ill C if the latterGs wife did not ,ay the same. Without the demand for ransom% the crime could have been slight illegal detention only. !he contention of & and 8 that they had voluntary released C within three days from the commencement of the detention is immaterial as they are charged with a crime where the ,enalty ,rescribed is death (,sistio vs. San Die6o. 10S*+,673&.
!hey were ,ro,erly denied bail because the trial court found that the evidence of guilt in the information for 0idna,,ing and serious 'llegal detention is strong.

Trespass to 5welling; Pri#ate Persons (%&&6) Under what situations may a ,rivate ,erson enter any dwelling% residence% or other establishments without being liable for tres,ass to dwelling$ ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Dondee

Tresspass to 5welling; 0ule of (3sorption (199 )


&t about 11KAA in the evening% Fante forced his way inside the house of 6amerto. 2ay. 6amertoGs son% saw Fante and accosted him% Fante ,ulled a 0nife and stabbed 2ay on his abdomen. 6amerto heard the commotion and went out of his room. Fante% who was about to esca,e% assaulted 6amerto. 2ay suffered 'n/uries which% were it not for the timely medical attendance% would have caused his death. 6amerto sustained 'n/uries that inca,acitated him for ; days.

What crime or crimes did Fante commit$


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Fante committed 1ualified tres,ass to dwelling% frustrated homicide for the stabbing of 2ay% and less serious ,hysical in/uries for the assault on 6amerto.
!he crime of 1ualified tres,ass to dwelling should not be com,le5ed with frustrated homicide because when the tres,ass is committed as a means to commit a more serious offense% tres,ass to dwelling is absorbed by the greater crime% and the former constitutes an aggravating circumstance of dwelling ($eop"e vs. ,bedo5a#
53 $%i".788&.

Fante committed frustrated homicide for the stabbing of 2ay.... Fante is guilty of less serious ,hysical in/uries for the wounds sustained by 6amerto... 'n:ust $e/ation #s (cts of Lasci#iousness (199 ) When is embracing% 0issing and touching a girlGs breast considered only un/ust ve5ation instead of acts of lasciviousness$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he acts of embracing% 0issing of a woman arising either out of ,assion or other motive and the touching of her breast as a mere incident of the embrace without lewd design constitutes merely un/ust ve5ation
($eop"e vs#

(owever %
where the 0issing% embracing and the touching of the breast of a woman are done with lewd design% the same constitute acts of lasciviousness
S*+, 753&. 36na8io. *, 0+)o. 5119-+# Septe(ber 30# 1950&.
($eop"e vs. $er8iva" 0i"o# 10

C-&:"5 A$ &!5# P-)0"-#2


(rson; 5estructi#e (rson (199 )
!ata owns a threeJstorey building located at 4o. ? (erran Street. #aco% 6anila. She wanted to construct a new building but had no money to finance the construction. So% she insured the building for #?%AAA%AAA.AA. She then urged +oboy and +ongsi% for

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

!res,ass to dwelling is not a,,licable to any ,erson who shall enter anotherGs dwelling for the ,ur,ose ofK a) #reventing some serious harm to himself% its occu,ants% or a third ,erson- and b) "endering service to humanity or /ustice&ny ,erson who shall enter cafes% taverns% inns% and other ,ublic houses% while the same are o,en will li0ewise not be liable (&rt. BA% "evised #enal Code).

64 of 86 monetary
consideration% to bum her building so she could collect the insurance ,roceeds. +oboy and +ongsi burned the said building resulting to its total loss. What crime did !ata% +oboy and +ongsi commit$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

inhabited house or dwelling. !he arson is consummated because the house was in fact already burned although not totally. 'n arson% it is not re1uired that the ,remises be totally burned for the crime to be consummated. 't is enough that the ,remises suffer destruction by burning.

!ata% +oboy and +ongsi committed the crime of destructive arson because they collectively caused the destruction of ,ro,erty by means of fire under the circumstances which e5,osed to danger the life or ,ro,erty of others (,rt# 320#
par. 5# +$*. as a(ended by +, )o. 7659&.

(rson; 5estructi#e (rson (%&&&) *ne early evening% there was a fight between )ddie >utierre3 and 6ario Corte3. Later that evening% at about 11 oGcloc0% )ddie ,assed by the house of 6ario carrying a ,lastic bag containing gasoline% threw the bag at the house of 6ario who was inside the house watching television% and then lit it. !he front wall of the house started bla3ing and some neighbors yelled and shouted. 9orthwith% 6ario ,oured water on the burning ,ortion of the house. 4eighbors also rushed in to hel, ,ut the fire under control before any great damage could be inflicted and before the flames have e5tensively s,read. *nly a ,ortion of the house was burned. Fiscuss )ddieGs liability% (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(rson; <ew (rson Law (%&& ) CF is the ste,father of 9)L. *ne day% CF got very mad at 9)L for failing in his college courses. 'n his fury% CF got the leather suitcase of 9)L and burned it together with all its contents. 1. What crime was committed by CF$ . 's CF criminally liable$ )5,lain briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he crime committed by CF is arson under #res. Fecree 4o. 1@1? (the new &rson Law) which ,unishes any ,erson who burns or sets fire to the ,ro,erty of another (Section 1 of #res. Fecree 4o. 1@1?).
CF is criminally liable although he is the ste,father of 9)L whose ,ro,erty he burnt% because such relationshi, is not e5em,ting from criminal liability in the crime of arson but only in crimes of theft% swindling or estafa% and malicious mischief (&rticle ?? % "evised #enal Code). !he ,rovision (&rt. ? ?) of the Code to the effect that burning ,ro,erty of small value should be ,unished as malicious mischief has long been re,ealed by #res. Fecree 1@1?hence% there is no more legal basis to consider burning ,ro,erty of small value as malicious mischief.

)ddie is liable for destructive arson in the consummated stage. 't is destructive arson because fire was resorted to in destroying the house of 6ario which is an
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

indebtedness% or in ,ayment of a ,reJ e5isting obligation% or as de,osit or guarantee. ($eop"e vs.


)ita4an&

AP %%; 8emoran"um ChecG (199 ) 1. What is a memorandum chec0$ . 's the 7bouncing7 thereof within the ,urview of 8# 8lg. $
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. & 76emorandum Chec07 is an ordinary chec0%


with the word 76emorandum7% 76emo7 or 76em7 written across its face% signifying that the ma0er or drawer engages to ,ay its holder absolutely thus ,arta0ing the nature of a ,romissory note. 't is drawn on a ban0 and is a bill of e5change within the ,urview of Section 1B; of the 4egotiable 'nstruments Law
($eop"e vs. 1.d6e David )ita4an# 0.+. )o. 78tober 22# 1992&. 75954#

. +es% a memorandum chec0 is covered by


8atas #ambansa 4o. because the law covers any chec0 whether it is an evidence of 'ndebtedness% or in ,ayment of a ,reJe5isting obligation or as a de,osit or guarantee ($eop"e
vers.s )ita-4an&.

AP %%; 8emoran"um ChecG (1996) 1. What is a memorandum chec0 $ . 's a ,erson who issues a memorandum chec0 without sufficient funds necessarily guilty of violating 8.#. 8lg. $ )5,lain.
?. 2ane is a money lender. )dmund is a businessman who has been borrowing money from 2ane by rediscounting his ,ersonal chec0s to ,ay his loans. 'n 6arch 1DBD% he borrowed #1AA%AAA from 2ane and issued to her a chec0 for the same amount. !he chec0 was dishonored by the drawee ban0 for having been drawn against a closed account. When )dmund was notified of the dishonor of his chec0 he ,romised to raise the amount within five days. (e failed. Conse1uently% 2ane sued )dmund for violation of the 8ouncing Chec0s Law (8#. 8lg. ). !he defense of )dmund was that he gave the chec0 to 2ane to serve as a memorandum of his indebtedness to her and was not su,,osed to be encashed. 's the defense of )dmund valid$ Fiscuss

fully.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1.

& memorandum chec0 is an ordinary chec0 with the word 76emorandum7% 76emo7% or 76em7 written across the face% signifying that the ma0er or drawer engages to ,ay its holder absolutely thus ,arta0ing the nature of a ,romissory note. 't is drawn on a ban0 and is a bill of e5change within the ,urview of Section 1B; of the 4egotiable 'nstruments Law.
($eop"e vs. )ita4an# 215 S*+, 79&

. +es% a ,erson who issued a memorandum


chec0 without sufficient funds is guilty of violating 8.#. 8lg. as said law covers all chec0s whether it is an evidence of

65 of 86
?. !he defense of )dmund is 4*! valid. & memorandum chec0 u,on ,resentment is generally acce,ted by the ban0. 't does not matter whether the chec0 is in the nature of a memorandum as evidence of indebtedness. What the law ,unishes is the mere issuance of a bouncing chec0 and not the ,ur,ose for which it was issued nor the terms and conditions relating thereto. !he mere act of issuing a worthless chec0 is a malum ,rohibitum. !he understanding that the chec0 will not be ,resented at the ban0 but will be redeemed by the ma0er when the loan falls due is a mere ,rivate arrangement which may not ,revail to e5em,t it from the ,enal sanction of 8.#. 8lg. . (#eo,le vs. 4itafan)

+es% & 's liable for violation of 8#. 8lg. (8ouncing Chec0s Law)% &lthough 0nowledge by the drawer of insufficiency or lac0 of funds at the time of the issuance of the chec0 is an essential element of the violation% the law ,resumes ,rima facie such 0nowledge% unless within five (;) ban0ing days of notice of dishonor or nonJ ,ayment% the drawer ,ays the holder thereof the amount due thereon or ma0es arrangements for ,ayment in full by the drawee of such chec0s.
& mere notice by the drawer & to the ,ayee 8 before the maturity date of the chec0 will not defeat the ,resum,tion of 0nowledge created by the law- otherwise% the ,ur,ose and s,irit of 8.#. will be rendered useless.

AP %%; Presumption of 7nowle"ge (%&&%)


& a businessman% borrowed #;AA%AAA.AA from 8% a friend. !o ,ay the loan% & issued a ,ostdated chec0 to be ,resented for ,ayment ?A days after the transaction. !wo days before the maturity date of the chec0% & called u, 8 and told him not to de,osit the chec0 on the date stated on the face thereof% as & had not de,osited in the drawee ban0 the amount needed to cover the chec0. 4evertheless% 8 de,osited the chec0 in 1uestion and the same was dishonored of insufficiency of funds. & failed to settle the amount with 8 in s,ite of the latterGs demands. 's & guilty of violating 8.#. 8lg. % otherwise 0nown as the 8ouncing Chec0s Law$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+stafa @ Trust 0eceipt Law (1996) 2ulio obtained a letter of credit from a local ban0 in order to im,ort auto tires from 2a,an. !o secure ,ayment of his letter of credit% 2ulio e5ecuted a trust recei,t in favor of the ban0. U,on arrival of the tires% 2ulio sold them but did not deliver the ,roceeds to the ban0. 2ulio was charged with estafa under #.F. 4o. 11; which ma0es the violation of a trust recei,t agreement ,unishable as estafa under &rt. ?1;% ,ar. (1)% sub,ar. (b)% of the "evised #enal Code. 2ulio contended that #.F. 4o. 11; was unconstitutional because it violated the 8ill of "ights ,rovision against im,risonment for nonJ ,ayment of debt. "ule on the contention of 2ulio% Fiscuss fully.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Such contention is invalid. & trust recei,t arrangement doesnGt involve merely a sim,le loan transaction but includes li0ewise a security feature where the creditor ban0 e5tends financial assistance to the debtorJim,orter in return for the collateral or security title as to the goods or merchandise being ,urchased or im,orted. !he title of the ban0 to the security is the one sought to be ,rotected and not the loan which is a se,arate and distinct agreement. What is being ,enali3ed under #%F. 4o. 11; is the misuse or misa,,ro,riation of the goods or ,roceeds reali3ed from the sale of the goods% documents or 'nstruments which are being held in trust for the entrusteeJban0s. 'n other words% the law ,unishes the dishonesty and abuse of confidence in the handling of money or goods to the ,re/udice of the other% and hence there is no violation of the right against im,risonment for nonJ ,ayment of debt. ($eop"e vs. )ita4an# 207 S*+, 725&

e5,lained above% "osaGs negligence have allowed &urelia to

which

may

+stafa (1999) 's there such a crime as estafa through negligence$ )5,lain. ( <)
&urelia introduced "osa to .ictoria% a dealer in /ewelry who does business in !imog% =ue3on City. "osa% a resident of Cebu City% agreed to sell a diamond ring and bracelet to .ictoria on a commission basis% on condition that% if these items can not be sold% they may be returned to .ictoria forthwith.

Unable to sell the ring and bracelet% "osa delivered both items to &urelia in Cebu City with the understanding that &urelia shall% in turn% return the items to .ictoria in !imog% =ue3on City. &urelia dutifully returned the bracelet to .ictoria but sold the ring% 0e,t the cash ,roceeds thereof to herself% and issued a chec0 to .ictoria which bounced. .ictoria sued "osa for estafa under &rticle ?1;% ".#.C.% .ictoria insisting that delivery to a third ,erson of the thing held in trust is not a defense in estafa. 's "osa criminally liable for estafa under the circumstances$ )5,lain% HC<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(a)

!here is no such crime as estafa through negligence. 'n estafa% the ,rofit or gain must be obtained by the accused ,ersonally% through his own acts% and his mere negligence in allowing another to ta0e advantage of or benefit from the entrusted chattel cannot constitute estafa. ($eop"e v.
)epo(.8eno# *,# 4670 6135&

(b) 4o% "osa cannot be held criminally liable for estafa. &lthough she received the /ewelry from .ictoria under an obligation to return the same or deliver the ,roceeds thereof% she did not misa,,ro,riate it. 'n fact% she gave them to &urelia s,ecifically to be returned to .ictoria. !he misa,,ro,riation was done by &urelia% and absent the showing of any cons,iracy between &urelia and "osa% the latter cannot be held criminally liable for &meliaGs acts. 9urthermore% as

66 of 86
misa,,ro,riate the /ewelry does not ma0e her criminally liable for estafa. +stafa #s9 AP %% (1996)
!he accused was convicted under 8.#% 8lg. for having issued several chec0s which were dishonored by the drawee ban0 on their due date because the accused closed her account after the issuance of chec0s. *n a,,eal% she argued that she could not be convicted under 8.#. 8lg. by reason of the closing of her account because said law a,,lies solely to chec0s dishonored by reason of insufficiency of funds and that at the time she issued the chec0s concerned% she had ade1uate funds in the ban0. While she admits that she may be held liable for estafa under &rticle 1; of the "evised #enal Code% she cannot however be found guilty of having violated 8.#. 8lg. . 's her contention correct$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+stafa #s9 AP %% (%&&1) & and 8 agreed to meet at the latterGs house to discuss 8Gs financial ,roblems. *n his way% one of &Gs car tires blew u,. 8efore & left following the meeting% he as0ed 8 to lend him (&) money to buy a new s,are tire. 8 had tem,orarily e5hausted his ban0 de,osits% leaving a 3ero balance. &ntici,ating% however% a re,lenishment of his account soon% 8 issued & a ,ostdated chec0 with which & negotiated for a new tire. When ,resented% the chec0 bounced for lac0 of funds. !he tire com,any filed a criminal case against & and 8. What would be the criminal liability% if any% of each of the two accused$ )5,lain. B<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% the contention of the accused is not correct. &s long as the chec0s issued were issued to a,,ly on account or for value% and was dishonored u,on ,resentation for ,ayment to the drawee ban0 for lac0 of insufficient funds on their due date% such act falls within the ambit of 8.#. 8lg. . Said law e5,ressly ,unishes any ,erson who may have insufficient funds in the drawee ban0 when he issues the chec0% but fails to 0ee, sufficient funds to cover the full amount of the chec0 when ,resented to the drawee ban0 within ninety (DA) days from the date a,,earing thereon.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

& who negotiated the unfunded chec0 of 8 in buying a new tire for his car may only be ,rosecuted for estafa if he was aware at the time of such negotiation that the chec0 has no sufficient funds in the drawee ban0- otherwise% he is not criminally liable.
8 who accommodated & with his chec0 may nevertheless be ,rosecuted under 8# for having issued the chec0% 0nowing at the time of issuance that it has no funds in the ban0 and that & will negotiate it to buy a new tire% i.e.% for value. 8 may not be ,rosecuted for estafa because the facts indicate that he is not actuated by intent to defraud in issuing the chec0 which & negotiated. *bviously% 8 issued the ,ostdated chec0 only to hel, &K criminal intent or dolo is absent.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

+stafa #s9 8oney 8arGet Placement (1996)


*n 6arch ?1% 1DD;% *r,heus 9inancing Cor,oration received from 6aricar the sum of #;AA%AAA as money mar0et ,lacement for si5ty days at fifteen (1;) ,er cent interest% and the #resident of said Cor,oration issued a chec0 covering the amount including the interest due thereon% ,ostdated 6ay ?A% 1DD;. *n the maturity date% however% *r,heus 9inancing Cor,oration failed to deliver bac0 6aricarGs money ,lacement with the corres,onding interest earned% notwithstanding re,eated demands u,on said Cor,oration to com,ly with its commitment. Fid the #resident of *r,heus 9inancing Cor,oration incur any criminal liability for estafa for reason of the non,ayment of the money mar0et ,lacement$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

thing% sub/ect matter of the offense% shall be restored to the owner even though it is found in the ,ossession of a third ,erson who ac1uired it by lawful means. (&rt. 1A;% "9C)

4o% the #resident of the financing cor,oration does not incur criminal liability for estafa because a money mar0et transaction ,arta0es of the nature of a loan% such that non,ayment thereof would not give rise to estafa through misa,,ro,riation or conversion. 'n money mar0et ,lacement% there is transfer of ownershi, of the money to be invested and therefore the liability for its return is civil in nature ($ere5 vs. *o.rt o4 ,ppea"s#
127 S*+, 636- Sebreno vs. *o.rt o4 ,ppea"s eta"# 0.+. 84096# 26 1an 95&.

+stafa #s9 Theft (%&&6)


FF was engaged in the warehouse business. Sometime in 4ovember AAC% he was in dire need of money. (e% thus% sold merchandise de,osited in his warehouse to ." for #;AA%AAA.AA. FF was charged with theft% as ,rinci,al% while ." as accessory. !he court convicted FF of theft but ac1uitted ." on the ground that he ,urchased the merchandise in good faith. (owever% the court ordered ." to return the merchandise to the owner thereof and ordered FF to refund the #;AA%AAA.AA to .". FF moved for the reconsideration of the decision insisting that he should be ac1uitted of theft because being the de,ositary% he had /uridical ,ossession of the merchandise. ." also moved for the reconsideration of the decision insisting that since he was ac1uitted of the crime charged% and that he ,urchased the merchandise in good faith% he is not obligated to return the merchandise to its owner. "ule on the motions with reasons. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he motion for reconsideration should be granted. 8y de,ositing the merchandise in his warehouse% he transferred not merely ,hysical but also /uridical ,ossession. !he element of ta0ing in the crime of theft is wanting. &t the most% he could be held liable for estafa for misa,,ro,riation of the merchandise de,osited.

*n the other hand% the motion of ." must also be denied. (is ac1uittal is of no moment because the

67 of 86
+stafa; +lements (%&&6) FF ,urchased a television set for #;A%AAA.AA with the use of a counterfeit credit card. !he owner of the establishment had no in0ling that the credit card used by FF was counterfeit. What crime or crimes did FF commit$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

FF committed the crime of estafa under &rt. ?1;% ,ar. (a) of the "evised #enal Code by falsely ,retending to ,osses credit. !he elements of estafa under this ,enal ,rovision are- (1) the accused defrauded another by means of deceit- and ( ) damage or ,re/udice ca,able of ,ecuniary estimation is caused to the offended ,arty or third ,arty. !he accused also violated ".&. 4o. BCBC% which ,unishes the use or ,ossession of fa0e or counterfeit credit card. +stafa; .alsification of Commercial 5ocument (%&&&)
6r. Carlos >abisi% a customs guard% and 6r% "ico +to% a ,rivate 'ndividual% went to the office of 6r. Fiether *cuarto% a customs bro0er% and re,resented themselves as agents of 6oonglow Commercial !rading% an 'm,orter of childrenGs clothes and toys. 6r. >abisi and 6r. +to engaged 6r. *cuarto to ,re,are and file with the 8ureau of Customs the necessary 'm,ort )ntry and 'nternal "evenue Feclaration covering 6oonglowGs shi,ment. 6r. >abisi and 6r. +to submitted to 6r. *cuarto a
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

,ac0ing list% a commercial invoice% a bill of lading and a Sworn 'm,ort Futy Feclaration which declared the shi,ment as childrenGs toys% the ta5es and duties of which were com,uted at #@A%AAA.AA. 6r. *cuarto filed the aforementioned documents with the 6anila 'nternational Container #ort. (owever% before the shi,ment was released% a s,ot chec0 was conducted by Customs Senior &gent 2ames 8andido% who discovered that the contents of the van (shi,ment) were not childrenGs toys as declared in the shi,,ing documents but 1%AAA units of video cassette recorders with ta5es and duties com,uted at #@AA%AAA.AA. & hold order and warrant of sei3ure and detention were then issued by the Fistrict Collector of Customs. 9urther investigation showed that 6oonglow is nonJe5istent. Conse1uently% 6r% >abisi and 6r. +to were charged with and convicted for violation of Section ?(e) of ".&. ?A1D which ma0es it unlawful among others% for ,ublic officers to cause any undue 'n/ury to any ,arty% including the >overnment. 'n the discharge of official functions through manifest ,artiality% evident bad faith or gross ine5cusable negligence. 'n their motion for reconsideration% the accused alleged that the decision was erroneous because the crime was not consummated but was only at an attem,ted stage% and that in fact the >overnment did not suffer any undue in/ury.

&ssuming that the attem,ted or frustrated stage of the violation charged is not ,unishable% may the accused be nevertheless convicted for an offense ,unished by the "evised #enal Code under the facts of the case$ )5,lain. (?<)

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% both are liable for attem,ted estafa thru falsification of commercial documents% a com,le5 crime. !hey tried to defraud the >overnment with the use of false commercial and ,ublic documents. Famage is not necessary. +stafa; .alsification of Commercial 5ocuments (199*)
!he accused o,ened a saving account with 8an0 & with an initial de,osit of # %AAA.AA. & few days later% he de,osited in the savings account a 8an0 8 chec0 for # 1A%AAA.AA drawn and endorsed ,ur,ortedly by C. !en days later% he withdrew # 1A%AAA.AA from his savings account. C com,lained to 8an0 8 when the chec0 was deducted from his account. !wo days thereafter% the accused de,osited another 8an0 8 chec0 of # 1A%AAA.AA signed and endorsed allegedly by C. & wee0 later% the accused went to 8an0 & to withdraw #1A%AAA.AA. While withdrawing the amount% he was arrested.

in 6a0ati City covered by !C! 4o. 1DDB. &s her son needed money for his tri, abroad% Fivina mortgaged her

Convicted under two informations of estafa and attem,ted estafa both through falsification of commercial documents% he set u, the defenses that% e5ce,t for the showing that the signature of C had been forged% no further evidence was ,resented to establish (a) that he was the forger of the signature of C nor (b)% that as to the second charge C suffered any damage.

"ule on the defense.


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he defense is not tenable- (a) the ,ossessor of a falsified document is ,resumed to be the author of the falsification ($eop"e vs. Sendaydte6o# 81 S*+, 120- Eo% 'ieB vs. $eop"e# et a"# De8. 21# 1990&- (b) 'n estafa% a mere disturbance of ,ro,erty rights% even if tem,orary% would be sufficient to% cause damage. 6oreover% in a crime of falsification of a commercial document% damage or intent to cause damage is not necessary because the ,rinci,al thing ,unished is the violation of the ,ublic faith and the destruction of the truth as therein solemnly ,roclaimed.

)stafa- Fefense of *wnershi, ( AA )


& sold a washing machine to 8 on credit% with the understanding that 8 could return the a,,liance within two wee0s if% after testing the same% 8 decided not to buy it. !wo wee0s la,sed without 8 returning the a,,liance. & found out that 8 had sold the washing machine to a third ,artyJ 's 8 liable for estafa$ Why$ (;<)

SU>>)S!)F &4SW)"K
4o% 8 is not liable for estafa because he is not /ust an entrustee of the washing machine which he sold- he is the owner thereof by virtue of the sale of the washing machine to him. !he sale being on credit% 8 as buyer is only liable for the un,aid ,rice of the washing machine- his obligation is only a civil obligation. !here is no felonious misa,,ro,riation that could constitute estafa.

+stafa; Swin"ling (199-)


Fivina% is the owner of a ;AAJs1uare meter residential lot

68 of 86
lot to her neighbor Fino for #1%AAA%AAA. Later Fivina sold the same lot to &ngel for # %AAA%AAA. 'n the Feed of Sale% she e5,ressly stated that the ,ro,erty is free from any lien or encumbrance. What crime% if any% did Fivina commit$ H;<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

0o33ery un"er 0PC (%&&&)


&% 8% C% F and 8 were in a beerhouse along 6ac&rthur (ighway having a drin0ing s,ree. &t about 1 oGcloc0 in the morning% they decided to leave and so as0ed for the bill. !hey ,ooled their money together but they were still short of # %AAA.AA. ) then orchestrated a ,lan whereby &% 8% C and F would go out% flag a ta5icab and rob the ta5i driver of all his money while ) would wait for them in the beerhouse. &. 8% C and F agreed. &ll armed with balisongs% &% 8% C and F hailed the first ta5icab they encountered. &fter robbing L% the driver% of his earnings% which amounted to #1%AAA.AA only% they needed #1 %AAA.AA more to meet their bill. So% they decided to hail another ta5icab and they again robbed driver ! of his hardJearned money amounting to #1%AAA. *n their way bac0 to the beerhouse% they were a,,rehended by a ,olice team u,on the com,laint of L% the driver of the first cab. !hey ,ointed to ) as the mastermind. What crime or crimes% if any% did &% 8% C% F and 8 commit$ )5,lain fully. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Fivina committed estafa or swindling under &rt. ?1@% ,ar. of the "evised #enal Code because% 0nowing that the real ,ro,erty being sold is encumbered% she still made a misre,resentation in the Feed of Sale that the same is free from any lien or encumbrance. !here is thus a deceit or fraud causing damage to the buyer of the lot. 0o33ery (1996) 9ive robbers robbed% one after the other five houses occu,ied by different families located inside a com,ound enclosed by a si5Jfeet high hollow bloc0 fence. (ow many robberies did the five commit$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he offenders committed only one robbery in the eyes of the law because when they entered the com,ound% they were im,elled only by a single indivisible criminal resolution to commit a robbery as they were not aware that there were five families inside said com,ound% considering that the same was enclosed by a si5Jfeet high hollowJbloc0 fence. !he series of robbery committed in the same com,ound at about the same time constitutes one continued crime% motivated by one criminal im,ulse.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

&. 8% C% F and ) are liable for two ( ) counts of robbery under &rticle DC of the "ev. #enal Codenot for highway "obbery under #F ;? . !he offenders are not brigands but only committed the robbery to raise money to ,ay their bill because it ha,,ened that they were short of money to ,ay the same. 0o33ery un"er 0PC (%&&1)
& and 8 are neighbors in 8arangay 4uevo '% Silang% Cavite. & is a barangay Nagawad and 0nown to be a

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) bully%

victims. 't is (ighway "obbery under #F ;? % when the offender is a brigand or one who roams in ,ublic

while 8 is re,uted to be gay but noted for his industry and economic savvy which allowed him to amass wealth in lea,s and bounds% including registered and unregistered lands in several barangays. "esenting 8Gs riches and relying on his ,olitical influence% & decided to harass and intimidate 8 into sharing with him some of his lands% considering that the latter was single and living alone. *ne night% & bro0e into 8Gs house% forced him to bring out some titles and after ,ic0ing out a title covering AA s1uare meters in their barangay% com,elled 8 to ty,e out a Feed of Sale conveying the said lot to him for #1.AA and other valuable considerations. &ll the while% & carried a ,alti0 caliber .C; in full view of 8% who signed the deed out of fear. When & later on tried to register the deed% 8 summoned enough courage and had & arrested and charged in court after ,reliminary investigation.

What charge or charges should be filed against &$ )5,lain. (;<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he charge for "obbery under &rticle DB of the "evised #enal Code should be filed against &. Said &rticle ,rovides that any ,erson who% with intent to defraud another% by means of violence or intimidation% shall com,el him to sign% e5ecute and deliver any ,ublic instrument or document shall be held guilty of robbery.

!he ,alti0 caliber .C; firearm carried by & was obviously intended to intimidate 8 and thus% used in the commission of the robbery. 'f it could be established that & had no license or ,ermit to ,ossess and carry such firearm% it should be ta0en only as s,ecial aggravating circumstance to the crime of robbery% not sub/ect of a se,arate ,rosecution.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

*n the ,remise that the Feed of Sale which & com,elled 8 to sign% had not attained the character of a 7,ublic7 instrument or document% & should be charged for the crime of =ualified !res,ass to Fwelling under &rticle BA of the "evised #enal Code for having intruded into 8Qs house% and for the crime of >rave Coercion under &rticle B@ of same Code% for com,elling 8 to sign such deed of sale against his will.

0o33ery #s9 >ighway 0o33ery (%&&&) Fistinguish (ighway "obbery under #residential Fecree 4o. ;? from "obbery committed on a highway. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(ighway "obbery under #res. Fecree ;? differs from ordinary "obbery committed on a highway in these res,ectsK 1. 'n (ighway "obbery under #F ;? % the robbery is committed indiscriminately against ,ersons who commute in such highways% regardless of the ,otentiality they offer- while in ordinary "obbery committed on a highway% the robbery is committed only against ,redetermined

69 of 86 highways
and carries out his robbery in ,ublic highways as venue% whenever the o,,ortunity to do so arises. 't is ordinary "obbery under the "evised #enal Code when the commission thereof in a ,ublic highway is only incidental and the offender is not a brigandK and
?. 'n (ighway "obbery under #F ;? % there is fre1uency in the commission of the robbery in ,ublic highways and against ,ersons travelling thereat- whereas ordinary "obbery in ,ublic highways is only occasional against a ,redetermined victim% without fre1uency in ,ublic highways.

coins inside% was ta0en with intent to gain and bro0en outside of their home% (&rt. DD (b) ( ). "#C). b) 4o% & is not e5em,t from criminal liability under &rt. ?? because said &rticle a,,lies only to theft% swindling or malicious mischief. (ere% the crime committed is robbery. 0o33ery wD >omici"e , 09(9 <o9 *669 (%&&6)
2ose em,loyed 6ario as gardener and (enry as coo0. !hey learned that 2ose won #;AA%AAA.AA in the lotto% and decided to rob him. 6ario ,ositioned himself about ?A meters away from 2oseQs house and acted as loo0out. 9or his ,art% (enry surre,titiously gained entry into the house and 0illed 2ose who was then having his dinner. (enry found the #;AA%AAA.AA and too0 it. (enry then too0 a can of gasoline from the garage and burned the house to conceal the acts. 6ario and (enry fled% but were arrested around AA meters away from the house by alert barangay tanods. !he tanods recovered the #;AA%AAA.AA. 6ario and (enry were charged with and convicted of robbery with homicide% with the aggravating circumstances of arson% dwelling% and nighttime. 6ario moved to reconsider the decision maintaining that he was not at the scene of the crime and was not aware that (enry 0illed the victim- hence% he was guilty only of robbery% as an accom,lice. 6ario also claimed that he cons,ired with (enry to commit robbery but not to 0ill

0o33ery wD force upon things (%&&&) &% brother of 8% with the intention of having a night out with his friends% too0 the coconut shell which is being used by 8 as a ban0 for coins from inside their loc0ed cabinet using their common 0ey. 9orthwith% & bro0e the coconut shell outside of their home in the ,resence of his friends. What is the criminal liability of &% if any$ )5,lain. (?<) 's & e5em,ted from criminal liability under &rticle ?? of the "evised #enal Code for being a brother of 8$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a) & is criminally liable for "obbery with force u,on things% because the coconut shell with the
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

the criminal design. ($eop"e v. $.n5a"an# et a".. 0.+. )o.


78853# )ove(ber 8# 1991&

(enry is incorrect% since he ac1uired ,ossession of the money. !he crime of robbery with force and intimidation is consummated when the robber ac1uires ,ossession of the ,ro,erty% even if for a short time. 't is no defense that they had no o,,ortunity to dis,ose of or benefit from the money ta0en.
($eop"e v. Sa"vi"ia# et a".# 0.+. )o. 88163# ,pri" 26# 1990&

Since the crime in robbery with force and intimidation against ,ersons (robbery with homicide)% dwelling is aggravating. &rson% which accom,anied the crime of

robbery with homicide is absorbed


and is not aggravating because the "#C does not ,rovide that such crime is an

aggravating circumstance. 4ighttime% li0ewise% is not aggravating. !here is no showing that the same was ,ur,osely sought by the offenders to facilitate the commission of the crime or im,unity. 0o33ery wD >omici"e (1996) 2ose% Fomingo% 6anolo% and 9ernando% armed with bolos% at about one oGcloc0 in the morning% robbed a house at a desolate ,lace where Fanilo% his wife% and three daughters were living. While the four were in the ,rocess of ransac0ing FaniloGs house% 9ernando% noticing that one of FaniloGs daughters was trying to get away% ran after her and finally caught u, with her in a thic0et somewhat distant from the house. 9ernando% before bringing bac0 the daughter to the house% ra,ed her first. !hereafter% the four carted away the belongings of Fanilo and his family. a) What crime did 2ose% Fomingo% 6anolo and 9ernando commit$ )5,lain.
b) Su,,ose% after the robbery% the four too0 turns in ra,ing the three daughters of Fanilo inside the latterGs house% but before they left% they 0illed the whole family

a(ended by +.,. )o. 7659& ,pri" 5# 2000&

(,rt. 294# + * as
($eop"e v. +e6a"a# 0.+. )o. 130508#

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

2ose. (enry% li0ewise% moved to reconsider the decision% asserting that he is liable only for attem,ted robbery with homicide with no aggravating circumstance% considering that he and 6ario did not benefit from the #;AA%AAA.AA. (e further alleged that arson is a felony and not an aggravating circumstance- dwelling is not aggravating in attem,ted robbery with homicide- and nighttime is not aggravating because the house of 2ose was lighted at the time he was 0illed. "esolve with reasons the res,ective motions of 6ario and (enry. (E<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

6ario is not correct. 6ario cons,ired and acted in concert with (enry to commit robbery. (ence% the act of one is the act of all and the e5tent of the s,ecific ,artici,ation of each individual cons,irator becomes secondary% each being held liable for the criminal deed(s) e5ecuted by another or others. &s a cons,irator% 6ario casts his lot with his fellow cons,irators and becomes liable to any third ,erson who may get 0illed in the course of im,lementing

70 of 86 to
,revent identification% what crime did the four commit$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(a) 2ose% Fomingo% and 6anolo committed "obbery% while 9ernando committed com,le5 crime of "obbery with "a,e. Cons,iracy can be inferred from the manner the offenders committed the robbery but the ra,e was committed by 9ernando at a ,lace 7distant from the house7 where the robbery was committed% not in the ,resence of the other cons,irators. (ence% 9ernando alone should answer for the ra,e% rendering him liable for the s,ecial com,le5 crime. ($eop"e vs. *ant.ria et. a"#
0.+. 108490# 22 1.ne 19952

1. Su,,ose a ban0 em,loyee was 0illed and the bullet which 0illed him came from the firearm of the ,olice officers% with what crime shall you charge &% 8. C and F$ H?<I . Su,,ose it was robber F who was 0illed by the ,olicemen and the ,rosecutor charged &% 8 and C with "obbery and (omicide. !hey demurred arguing that they (&% 8 and C) were not the ones who 0illed robber F% hence% the charge should only be "obbery. (ow would you resolve their argument$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

b) !he crime would be "obbery with (omicide because the 0illings were by reason (to ,revent identification) and on the occasion of the robbery. !he multi,le ra,es committed and the fact that several ,ersons were 0illed Hhomicide)% would be considered as aggravating circumstances. !he ra,es are synonymous with 'gnominy and the additional 0illing synonymous with cruelty% ($eop"e
vs. So"is# 182 S*+,- $eop"e vs. $"a6a# 202 S*+, 531&

1. &% 8% C and F should be charged with the crime of robbery with homicide because the death of the ban0 em,loyee was brought about by the acts of said offenders on the occasion of the robbery. !hey shot it out with the ,oliceman% thereby causing such death by reason or on the occasion of a robbery- hence% the com,osite crime of robbery with homicide. . !he argument is valid% considering that a se,arate charge for (omicide was filed. 't would be different if the charge filed was for the com,osite crime of robbery with homicide which is a single% indivisible offense.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

0o33ery wD >omici"e (199-) &% 8% C and F all armed% robbed a ban0% and when they were about to get out of the ban0% ,olicemen came and ordered them to surrender but they fired on the ,olice officers who fired bac0 and shot it out with them.
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

. !he argument raised by &% 8 and C is not correct because their liability is not only for "obbery but for the s,ecial com,le5 crime of "obbery with homicide. 8ut the facts stated im,resses that se,arate crimes of "obbery 7and7 (omicide were charged% which is not correct. What was committed was a single indivisible offense of "obbery with homicide% not two crimes.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

0o33ery wD >omici"e (%&&1) & learned two days ago that 8 had received dollar bills amounting to V1A%AAA from his daughter wor0ing in the United States. With the intention of robbing 8 of those dollars% & entered 8Gs house at midnight% armed with a 0nife which he used to gain entry% and began 1uietly searching the drawers% shelves% and other li0ely rece,tacles of the cash. While doing that% 8 awo0e% rushed out from the bedroom% and gra,,led with & for the ,ossession of the 0nife which & was then holding. &fter stabbing 8 to death% & turned over 8Gs ,illow and found the latterGs wallet underneath the ,illow% which was bulging with the dollar bills he was loo0ing for. & too0 the bills and left the house. What crime or crimes were committed$ B<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

a conse1uence or on the occasion of a robbery% all those

!he crime committed is robbery with homicide% a com,osite crime. !his is so because &Gs ,rimordial criminal intent is to commit a robbery and in the course of the robbery% the 0illing of 8 too0 ,lace. 8oth the robbery and the 0illing were consummated% thus giving rise to the s,ecial com,le5 crime of robbery with homicide. !he ,rimary criminal intent being to commit a robbery% any 0illing on the 7occasion7 of the robbery% though not by reason thereof% is considered a com,onent of the crime of robbery with homicide as a single indivisible offense.

0o33ery wD >omici"e; Special Comple/ Crime (1996)


.ictor% "ic0y% "od and "onnie went to the store of 6ang #andoy. .ictor and "ic0y entered the store while "od and "onnie ,osted themselves at the door. &fter ordering beer "ic0y com,lained that he was shortchanged although 6ang #andoy vehemently denied it. Suddenly "ic0y whi,,ed out a 0nife as he announced 7(oldJu, itoR7 and stabbed 6ang #andoy to death. "od bo5ed the storeGs salesgirl Lucy to ,revent her from hel,ing 6ang #andoy. When Lucy ran out of the store to see0 hel, from ,eo,le ne5t door she was chased by "onnie. &s soon as "ic0y had stabbed 6ang #andoy% .ictor scoo,ed u, the money from the cash bo5. !hen .ictor and "ic0y dashed to the street and shouted% 7!uma0bo na 0ayoR7 "od was 1C and "onnie was 1E. !he money and other articles looted from the store of 6ang #andoy were later found in the houses of .ictor and "ic0y.

Fiscuss fully the criminal liability of .ictor% "ic0y% "od and "onnie.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&ll are liable for the s,ecial com,le5 crime of robbery with homicide. !he acts of "ic0y in stabbing 6ang #andoy to death% of "od in bo5ing the salesgirl to ,revent her from hel,ing 6ang #andoy% of "onnie in chasing the salesgirl to ,revent her in see0ing hel,% of .ictor in scoo,ing u, money from the cash bo5% and of "ic0y and .ictor in dashing to the street and announcing the esca,e% are all indicative of cons,iracy. !he rule is settled that when homicide ta0es ,lace as

71 of 86 who too0
,art in the robbery are guilty as ,rinci,als of the crime of robbery with homicide% unless the accused tried to ,revent the 0illing ($eop"e vs. <ae""o# 224 S*+, 218&. 9urther% the aggravating circumstance of craft could be assessed against the accused for ,retending to be customers of 6ang #andoy. 0o33ery wD 2ntimi"ation #s9 Theft (%&&%) & entered the house of another without em,loying force or violence u,on things. (e was seen by a maid who wanted to scream but was ,revented from doing so because & threatened her with a gun. & then too0 money and other valuables and left. 's & guilty of theft or of robbery$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

and so% ra,ed her. !he lady victim testified that 8 did not in any way ,artici,ate in the ra,e but 8 watched the ha,,ening from a window and did nothing to sto, the ra,e. 's 8 as criminally liable as & for robbery with ra,e$ )5,lain. (C<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

& is liable for robbery because of the intimidation he em,loyed on the maid before the ta0ing of the money and other valuables. 't is the intimidation of ,erson relative to the ta0ing that 1ualifies the crime as robbery% instead of sim,ly theft. !he nonJ em,loyment of force u,on things is of no moment because robbery is committed not only by em,loying force u,on things but also by em,loying violence against or intimidation of ,ersons. 0o33ery wD 0ape (1999) !wo young men% & and 8% cons,ired to rob a residential house of things of value. !hey succeeded in the commission of their original ,lan to sim,ly rob. &% however% was se5ually aroused when he saw the lady owner of the house
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

+es% 8 is as criminally liable as & for the com,osite crime of robbery with ra,e under &rt. DC (1). &lthough the cons,iracy of & and 8 was only to rob% 8 was ,resent when the ra,e was being committed which gave rise to a com,osite crime% a single indivisible offense of robbery with ra,e. 8 would not have been liable had he endeavored to ,revent the commission of the ra,e. 8ut since he did not when he could have done so% he in effect ac1uiesced with the ra,e as a com,onent of the robbery and so he is also liable for robbery with ra,e.

0o33ery wD 0ape; Conspiracy (%&& ) !ogether L&% +8 and MC ,lanned to rob 6iss *F. !hey entered her house by brea0ing one of the windows in her house. &fter ta0ing her ,ersonal ,ro,erties and as they were about to leave% L& decided on im,ulse to ra,e *F. &s L& was molesting her% +8 and MC stood outside the door of her bedroom and did nothing to ,revent L& from ra,ing *F. What crime or crimes did L&% +8 and MC commit% and what is the criminal liability of each$ )5,lain briefly. (;<)

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

72 of 86
!he ta0ing of the money from the victims was a mere afterthought of the 0illings. (ence% (arry committed the se,arate crime of theft and not the com,le5 crime of robbery with homicide. &lthough theft was committed against dead ,ersons% it is still legally ,ossible as the offended ,arty are the estates of the victims.

!he crime committed by L&% +8 and MC is the com,osite crime of "obbery with "a,e% a single% indivisible offense under &rt. DC(1) of the "evised #enal Code. &lthough the cons,iracy among the offenders was only to commit robbery and only L& ra,ed CF% the other robbers% +8 and MC% were ,resent and aware of the ra,e being committed by their coJ cons,irator. (aving done nothing to sto, L& from committing the ra,e% +8 and MC thereby concurred in the commission of the ra,e by their coJcons,irator L&. !he criminal liability of all% L&% +M and MC% shall be the same% as ,rinci,als in the s,ecial com,le5 crime of robbery with ra,e which is a single% indivisible offense where the ra,e accom,anying the robbery is /ust a com,onent. 0o33ery; >omici"e; (rson (1996)
(arry% an overseas contract wor0er% arrived from Saudi &rabia with considerable savings. Nnowing him to be 7loaded7% his friends 2ason% 6anuel and Fave invited him to ,o0er session at a rented beach cottage. When he was losing almost all his money which to him was his savings of a lifetime% he discovered that he was being cheated by his friends. &ngered by the betrayal he decided to ta0e revenge on the three cheats. (arry ordered several bottles of !anduay "hum and gave them to his com,anions to drin0% as they did% until they all fell aslee,. When (arry saw his com,anions already sound aslee, he hac0ed all of them to death. !hen he remembered his losses. (e rifled through the ,oc0ets of his victims and got bac0 all the money he lost. (e then ran away but not before burning the cottage to hide his misdeed. !he following day ,olice investigators found among the debris the charred bodies of 2ason% 6anuel% Fave and the careta0er of the resort.

'n burning the cottage to hide his misdeed. (arry became liable for another se,arate crime% arson. !his act of burning was not necessary for the consummation of the two ( ) ,revious offenses he committed. !he fact that the careta0er died from the bla3e did not 1ualify (arryGs crime into a com,le5 crime of arson with homicide for there is no such crime. (ence% (arry was im,ro,erly charged with the com,le5 crime of arson with 1uadru,le homicide and robbery. (arry should have been charged with three (?) se,arate crimes% murder% theft and arson. 0o33ery; 0ape (199*) &fter ra,ing the com,lainant in her house% the accused struc0 a match to smo0e a cigarette before de,arting from the scene. !he brief light from the match allowed him to notice a watch in her wrist. (e demanded that she hand over the watch. When she refused% he forcibly grabbed it from her. !he accused was charged with and convicted of the s,ecial com,le5 crime of robbery with ra,e. Was the court correct$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o. the court erred in convicting the accused of the s,ecial com,le5 crime of robbery with ra,e. !he accused should instead be held liable for two ( ) se,arate crimes of robbery and ra,e% since the ,rimary intent or ob/ective of the accused was only to ra,e the com,lainant% and his commission of the robbery was merely an afterthought. !he robbery must ,recede the ra,e. 'n order to give rise to the s,ecial com,le5 crime for which the court convicted the accused. Theft (199-) 6ario found a watch in a /ee, he was riding% and since it did not belong to him% he a,,roached ,oliceman # and delivered the watch with instruction to return the same to whoever may be found to be the owner. # failed to return the watch to the owner and% instead% sold it and a,,ro,riated for himself the ,roceeds of the sale. Charged with theft% # reasoned out that he cannot be found guilty because it was not he who found the watch and% moreover% the watch turned out to be stolen ,ro,erty. 's #Gs defense valid$ H;<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&fter ,reliminary investigation% the #rovincial #rosecutor charged (arry with the com,le5 crime of arson with 1uadru,le homicide and robbery. Was (arry ,ro,erly charged$ Fiscuss fully.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% (arry was net ,ro,erly charged. (arry should have been charged with three (?) se,arate crimes% namelyK murder% theft and arson.
(arry 0illed 2ason% 6anuel and Fave with evident ,remeditation% as there was considerable la,se of time before he decided to commit the crime and the actual commission of the crime. 'n addition% (arry em,loyed means which wea0ened the defense of 2ason% 6anuel and Fave. (arry gave them the li1uor to drin0 until they were drun0 and fell aslee,. !his gave (arry the o,,ortunity to carry out his ,lan of murder with im,unity.

4o% #Gs defense is not valid. 'n a charge for theft% it is enough that the ,ersonal ,ro,erty sub/ect thereof belongs to another and not to the offender (#). 't is irrelevant whether the ,erson de,rived of the

,ossession of the watch has or has no right to the


Version 1994-2006 Updated by

watch. !heft is

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

committed by one who% with intent to gain% a,,ro,riates ,ro,erty of another without the consent of its owner. &nd the crime is committed even when the offender receives ,ro,erty of another but ac1uires only ,hysical ,ossession to hold the same. Theft (%&&1) 9rancis >arcia% a 2ollibee waiter% found a gold bracelet in front of his wor0ing ,lace in 6a0ati and% u,on ins,ecting it% saw the name and address of the owner engraved on the inside. "emembering his ,arentsG admonition that he should not ta0e anything which does not belong to him% he delivered the bracelet to #*1 2esus "eyes of the 6a0ati =uad ,recinct with the instruction to locate the owner and return it to him. #*1 "eyes% instead% sold the bracelet and misa,,ro,riated the ,roceeds. Subse1uent events brought out the fact that the bracelet was dro,,ed by a snatcher who had grabbed it from the owner a bloc0 away from where 9rancis had found it and further investigation traced the last ,ossessor as #*1 "eyes. Charged with theft% #*1 "eyes reasoned out that he had not committed any crime because it was not he who had found the bracelet and% moreover% it turned out to have been stolen. "esolve the case with reasons. (1A<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Theft; ?ualifie" Theft (%&&%)

Charged with theft% #*1 "eyes is criminally liable. (is contention that he has not committed any crime because he was not the one who found the bracelet and it turned out to be stolen also% is devoid of merit. 't is enough that the bracelet belonged to another and the failure to restore the same to its owner is characteri3ed by intent to gain. !he act of #*1 "eyes of selling the bracelet which does not belong to him and which he only held to be delivered to its owner% is furtive misa,,ro,riation with intent to gain.
Where a finder of lost or mislaid ,ro,erty entrusts it to another for delivery to the owner% the ,erson to whom such ,ro,erty is entrusted and who acce,ts the same% assumes the relation of the finder to the owner as if he was the actual finderK if he would misa,,ro,riate it% he is guilty of theft ($eop"e vs. ,vi"a# 44 $%i". 720&.

Theft; ?ualifie" Theft (%&&%) & fire bro0e out in a de,artment store% &% ta0ing advantage of the confusion% entered the store and carried away goods which he later sold. What crime% if any% did he commit$ Why$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

& committed the crime of 1ualified theft because he too0 the goods on the occasion of and ta0ing advantage of the fire which bro0e out in the de,artment store. !he occasion of a calamity such as fire% when the theft was committed% 1ualifies the crime under &rticle ?1A of the "evised #enal Code% as amended.

73 of 86
& vehicular accident occurred on the national highway in 8ulacan. &mong the first to arrive at the scene of the accident was &% who found one of the victims already dead and the others unconscious. 8efore rescuers could come% &% ta0ing advantage of the hel,less condition of the victims% too0 their wallets and /ewelry. (owever% the ,olice% who res,onded to the re,ort of the accident% caught &. What crime or crimes did & commit$ Why$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he offense is =ualified !heft under Sec. @B of #.F. EA;% amending #.F. 4o. ??A% which ,enali3es any ,erson who directly or indirectly cuts% gathers% removes% or smuggles timber% or other forest ,roducts from any of the ,ublic forest. !he 8alara Watershed is ,rotected by the cited laws. . Furing the ,reliminary investigation and u, to the trial ,ro,er% "ene and Fante contended that if they were to be held liable% their liability should be limited only to the newlyJcut logs found in their ,ossession but not to those found outside the gate. 'f you were the /udge% what will be your ruling$ ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

& committed the crime of 1ualified theft because he too0 the wallets and /ewelry of the victims with evident intent to gain and on the occasion of a vehicular accident wherein he too0 advantage of the hel,less condition of the victims. 8ut only one crime of 1ualified theft was committed although there were more than one victim divested of their valuables% because all the ta0ing of the valuables were made on one and the same occasion% thus constituting a continued crime. Theft; ?ualifie" Theft (%&&6) 1. 9orest "anger 2ay .elasco was ,atrolling the 8alara Watershed and "eservoir when he noticed a big ,ile of cut logs outside the gate of the watershed. Curious% he scouted around and after a few minutes% he saw "ene and Fante coming out of the gate with some more newlyJcut logs. (e a,,rehended and charged them with the ,ro,er offense. What is that offense$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

!he contention is untenable% the ,resence of the newly cut logs outside the gate is circumstantial evidence% which% if unrebutted% establishes that they are the offenders who gathered the same. Theft; Stages of +/ecution (199-)
'n the /ewelry section of a big de,artment store% 2ulia snatched a cou,le of bracelets and ,ut these in her ,urse. &t the storeGs e5it% however% she was arrested by the guard after being radioed by the store ,ersonnel who caught the act in the storeGs moving camera. 's the crime consummated% frustrated% or attem,ted$ H;<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he crime is consummated theft because the ta0ing of the bracelets was com,lete after 2ulia succeeded in ,utting them in her ,urse. 2ulia ac1uired com,lete control of the bracelets after ,utting them in her ,urse-

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

hence% the ta0ing with intent to gain is com,lete and thus the crime is consummated. Theft; Stages of +/ecution (%&&&)
Sunshine% a beauteous 7colegiala7 but a sho,lifter% went to the )ver Fe,artment Store and ,roceeded to the womenGs wear section. !he saleslady was of the im,ression that she brought to the fitting room three (?) ,ieces of swimsuits of different colors. When she came out of the fitting room% she returned only two ( I ,ieces to the clothes rac0. !he saleslady became sus,icious and alerted the store detective. Sunshine was sto,,ed by the detective before she could leave the store and brought to the office of the store manager. !he detective and the manager searched her and found her wearing the third swimsuit under her blouse and ,ants. Was the theft of the swimsuit consummated% frustrated or attem,ted$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

means of committing absorbed in the

the

crime

and

therefore

!he theft was consummated because the ta0ing or as,ortation was com,lete. !he as,ortation is com,lete when the offender ac1uired e5clusive control of the ,ersonal ,ro,erty being ta0enK in this case% when Sunshine wore the swimsuit under her blouse and ,ants and was on her way out of the store. With evident intent to gain% the ta0ing constitutes theft and being com,lete% it is consummated. 't is not necessary that the offender is in a ,osition to dis,ose of the ,ro,erty%
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER<

36na8io. *, 0+)o. 5119-+# Septe(ber 30# 1950&.


($eop"e vs. $er8iva" 0i"o# 10

!he crime of theft was only frustrated because Sunshine has not yet left the store when the offense was o,,ortunely discovered and the article sei3ed from her. She does not have yet the freedom to dis,ose of the swimsuit she was ta0ing ($eop"e vs. Dino# *, 45 7.0. 3446&. 6oreover% in case of doubt as to whether it is consummated or frustrated% the doubt must be resolved in favor of the milder criminal res,onsibility.

'surpation of 0eal 0ights (1996)


!eresita is the owner of a twoJhectare land in 8ulacan which she ,lanted to rice and corn. U,on her arrival from a threeJmonth vacation in the United States% she was sur,rised to discover that her land had been ta0en over by 6anuel and !eofilo who forcibly evicted her tenantJcareta0er 2uliana% after threatening to 0ill the latter if she would resist their ta0ing of the land. !hereafter% 6anuel and !eofilo ,lowed% cultivated and a,,ro,riated the harvest for themselves to the e5clusion of !eresita.

1) What crime or crimes !eofilo commit$ )5,lain.

did

6anuel

and

) Su,,ose 6anuel and !eofilo 0illed 2uliana when the latter refused to surrender ,ossession of the land% what crime or crimes did the two commit$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1) 6anuel and !eofilo committed the crime of usur,ation of real rights under &rt. ?1 of the "evised #enal Code for em,loying violence against or intimidation of ,ersons. !he threats to 0ill em,loyed by them in forcibly entering the land is the

74 of 86 felony%
unless the intimidation resulted in a more serious felony.
} !he crime would still be usur,ation of real rights under &rt. ?1 % "#C% even if the said offenders 0illed the careta0er because the 0illing is the .iolence against ,ersons7 which is the means for committing the crime and as such% determinative only. (owever% this gives way to the ,roviso that the ,enalty ,rovided for therein is 7in addition to the ,enalty incurred in the acts of violence (murder or homicideI e5ecuted by them. !he crime is similar to a robbery where a 0illing is committed by reason thereof% giving rise only to one indivisible offense
($eop"e vs. 1.d6e ,"4e8%e# p".s t%e 4ine (entioned t%erein.

breast of a woman are done with lewd design% the same constitute acts of lasciviousness
S*+, 753&.

("ultery (%&&%) &% a married woman% had se5ual intercourse with a man who was not her husband. !he man did not 0now she was married. What crime% if any% did each of them commit$ Why$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&% the married woman% committed the crime of adultery under &rticle ??? of the "evised #enal Code% as amended% for having se5ual intercourse with a man not her husband while her marriage is still subsisting. 8ut the man who had carnal 0nowledge of her% not 0nowing her to be married% shall not be liable for adultery.

C-&:"5 A$ &!5# C; 5#&#2


(cts of Lasci#iousness #s9 'n:ust $e/ation (199 ) When is embracing% 0issing and touching a girlGs breast considered only un/ust ve5ation instead of acts of lasciviousness$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Concu3inage (199 ) &be% married to Li3a% contracted another marriage with Connie in Singa,ore. !hereafter% &be and Connie returned to the #hili,,ines and lived as husband and wife in the hometown of &be in Calamba% Laguna. 1) Can &be be ,rosecuted for bigamy$ ) 'f not% can he be ,rosecuted for any other crime$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he acts of embracing% 0issing of a woman arising either out of ,assion or other motive and the touching of her breast as a mere incident of the embrace without lewd design constitutes merely un/ust ve5ation
($eop"e .s#

1) 4o% &be may not be ,rosecuted for bigamy ...


) +es% &be% together with Connie% may be ,rosecuted for concubinage under &rt. ??C of the "evised #enal Code for having cohabited as husband and wife. 8ut concubinage being a ,rivate crime re1uires the sworn com,laint of Li3a% the offended s,ouse in accordance

(owever %
where the 0issing% embracing and the touching of the
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

with "ule 11A of the "evised "ules on Criminal #rocedure. Concu3inage (%&&%) & is married. (e has a ,aramour with whom he has se5ual relations on a more or less regular basis. !hey meet at least once a wee0 in hotels% motels and other ,laces where they can be alone. 's & guilty of any crime$ Why$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Section 1A ,rovides criminal liability for other acts of child abuse% cruelty or e5,loitation% or for other condiJ

& is guilty of the crime of concubinage by having se5ual intercourse under scandalous circumstances% with a woman who is not his wife. (aving se5ual relations on a more or less regular basis in hotels% motels and other ,laces may be considered a scandalous circumstance that offends ,ublic conscience% giving rise to criticism and general ,rotest such acts being im,rudent and wanton and setting a bad e5am,le ($eop"e vs. Santos# 86 S*+, 705
?1978=&.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

& is not guilty of any crime because a married man does not incur the crime of concubinage by merely having a ,aramour% unless under scandalous circumstances% or he 0ee,s her in the con/ugal dwelling as a mistress% or cohabits with her in any other ,lace. (is wee0ly meetings with his ,aramour does not ,er se constitute scandalous circumstance. 'n:ust $e/ation #s9 (ct of Lasci#iousness (%&&6)
)duardo =uintos% a widower for the ,ast 1A years% felt that his retirement at the age of EA gave him the o,,ortunity to engage in his favorite ,astime W voyeurism. 'f not using his highJ,owered binoculars to ,ee, at his neighborGs homes and domestic activities% his second choice was to follow sweet young girls. *ne day% he trailed a teenage girl u, to the L"! station at )FS&J 8uendia. While ascending the stairs% he stayed one ste, behind her and in a moment of bravado% ,laced his hand on her left hi, and gently massaged it. She screamed and shouted for hel,. )duardo was arrested and charged with acts of lasciviousness. 's the designation of the crime correct$ (;<)
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

!he designation of the crime as acts of lasciviousness is not correct. !here is no lewd design e5hibited by )duardo when he ,laced his hand on the left hi, of the victim and gently massaging it. !he act does not clearly show an e5clusively se5ual motivation. !he crime he committed is only un/ust ve5ation for causing annoyance% irritation or disturbance to the victim (&rt. BE% "evised #enal Code)% not acts of lasciviousness (&rt. ??@% "evised #enal Code).
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

!he crime should be *ther &cts of Child &buse under Section 1A of "&. E@1A% ,ar. b of Section ? that refers to child abuse committed by any act% deeds or words which debases% degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being. 'n relation thereto%

75 of 86 tions
,re/udicial to the childGs develo,ment. !he reaction of the victim% screaming for hel, u,on the occurrence of the touching indicates that she ,erceived her dignity was being debased or violated.

may vali ly remarry (Dorot%y


'erre# 211 S*+, 6&.

'erre

vs.

1ordan

C-&:"5 A$ &!5# #;" C&=&+ S# #%5 )4 P"-5)!5


Aigamy (199 ) 'ssa and 8obby% who were first cousins% were married in 1DE;. 'n 1DD?% 8obby was told that his marriage to 'ssa was incestous under the law then in force and therefore void ab initio. (e married Caring. Charged with bigamy% 8obby raised the defense that his first marriage is void ab initio and therefore% there is no ,revious marriage to s,ea0 of. Will you sustain 8obbyGs defense$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Aigamy (1996) 2oselito married "amona in 2uly% 1DD;% only to learn later on that "amona was ,reviously married to Favid% from whom "amona had been se,arated for more than ten years. 8elieving that his marriage to "amona was an absolute nullity% 2oselito contracted a subse1uent marriage with &nabelle. Can 2oselito be ,rosecuted for bigamy$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% 2oselito can be ,rosecuted for bigamy for his subse1uent marriage with &nabelle even though his marriage with "amona was an absolute nullity.

Fes,ite the nullity of the first marriage% 2oselito should have filed a case of dissolution of such marriage under &rt. CA% 9amily Code% before contracting a second marriage with &nabelle. Aigamy (%&& )
C8# is legally married to *)6. Without obtaining a marriage license% C8# contracted a second marriage to "S!. 's C8# liable for bigamy$ "eason briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o. ' will not sustain 8obbyGs defense% 8obby remarried in 1DD?% or after the 9amily Code too0 effect on &ugust ?% 1DBB% and therefore his ca,acity to marry in 1DD? shall be governed by said Code. 'n &rt. CA of the 9amily Code% it is mandated that the absolute nullity of a ,revious marriage maybe invo0ed for ,ur,oses of remarriage on the basis solely of a final /udgment declaring such ,revious marriage void. In short) there is a nee of a 6u icial eclaration of such nullity before :obby
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Whether C8# could be held liable for bigamy or not% de,ends on whether the second marriage is invalid or valid even without a marriage license. &lthough as a general rule% marriages solemni3ed without license are null and void ob initio% there are marriages e5em,ted from license re1uirement under Cha,ter % !itle 1 of the

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

76 of 86
they are not really the biological ,arents of said child constitutes the crime of simulation of birth. C% the unwed mother is criminally liable for 7child traffic0ing7% a violation of &rticle '.% Sec. E of "e,. &ct 4o. E@1A. !he law ,unishes inter alia the act of buying and selling of a child.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

9amily Code% such as in &rticle E which is a marriage in articulo mortis. 'f the second marriage was valid even without a marriage license% then C8# would be liable for bigamy. *therwise% C8# is not liable for bigamy but for 'llegal 6arriage in &rt. ?;A for the "evised #enal Code% s,ecifically designated as 76arriage contracted against ,rovisions of laws.7 Aigamy; Prescripti#e Perio" (1996)
2oe and 6arcy were married in 8atanes in 1D;;. &fter two years% 2oe left 6arcy and settled in 6indanao where he later met and married Linda on 1 2une 1D@A. !he second marriage was registered in the civil registry of Favao City three days after its celebration. *n 1A *ctober 1DE; 6arcy who remained in 8atanes discovered the marriage of 2oe to Linda. *n 1 6arch 1DE@ 6arcy filed a com,laint for bigamy against 2oe. !he crime of bigamy ,rescribed in fifteen years com,uted from the day the crime is discovered by the offended ,arty% the authorities or their agents. 2oe raised the defense of ,rescri,tion of the crime% more than fifteen years having ela,sed from the celebration of the bigamous marriage u, to the filing of 6arcyGs com,laint. (e contended that the registration of his second marriage in the civil registry of Favao City was constructive notice to the whole world of the celebration thereof thus binding u,on 6arcy.

!he cou,le & and 8% the unwed mother C% and the doctor being all involved in the simulation of birth of the newborn child% violate "e,. &ct 4o. E@1A. !heir acts constitute child traffic0ing which are ,enali3ed under &rticle '. of said law.

C-&:"5 A$ &!5# 9)!)Li3el (%&&%)


&. & was nominated Secretary of a Fe,artment in the )5ecutive 8ranch of the government. (is nomination was thereafter submitted to the Commission on &,,ointments for confirmation. While the Commission was considering the nomination% a grou, of concerned citi3ens caused to be ,ublished in the news,a,ers a fullJ ,age statement ob/ecting to &Gs a,,ointment !hey alleged that & was a drug de,endent% that he had several mistresses% and that he was corru,t% having acce,ted bribes or favors from ,arties transacting business in his ,revious office% and therefore he was unfit for the ,osition to which he had been nominated. &s a result of the ,ublication% the nomination was not confirmed by the Commission on &,,ointments. !he official sued the concerned citi3ens and the news,a,ers for libel and damages on account of his nonJconfirmation. (ow will you decide the case$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(as the crime of bigamy charged against 2oe already ,rescribed$ Fiscuss fully%
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o. !he ,rescri,tive ,eriod for the crime of bigamy is com,uted from the time the crime was discovered by the offended ,arty% the authorities or their agents. !he ,rinci,le of constructive notice which ordinarily a,,lies to land or ,ro,erty dis,utes should not be a,,lied to the crime of bigamy% as marriage is not ,ro,erty. !hus when 6arcy filed a com,laint for bigamy on E 6arch 1DE@% it was well within the reglamentary ,eriod as it was barely a few months from the time of discovery on 1A *ctober 1DE;. (Ser(onia vs. *,# 233 S*+, 155&

' will ac1uit the concerned citi3ens and the news,a,ers involved% from the crime of libel% because obviously they made the denunciation out of a moral or social duty and thus there is absence of malice.
Since & was a candidate for a very im,ortant ,ublic ,osition of a Fe,artment Secretary% his moral% mental and ,hysical fitness for the ,ublic trust in such ,osition becomes a ,ublic concern as the interest of the ,ublic is at sta0e. 't is ,ursuant to such concern that the denunciation was made- hence% bereft of malice.

Simulation of Airth @ Chil" TrafficGing (%&&%) & childless cou,le% & and 8% wanted to have a child they could call their own. C% an unwed mother% sold her newborn baby to them. !hereafter% & and 8 caused their names to be stated in the birth certificate of the child as his ,arents. !his was done in connivance with the doctor who assisted in the delivery of C. What are the criminal liabilities% if any% of the cou,le & and 8% C and the doctor$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

8. 'f defamatory im,utations are made not by ,ublication in the news,a,ers but by broadcast over the radio% do they constitute libel$ Why$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he cou,le & and 8% and the doctor shall be liable for the crime of simulation of birth% ,enali3ed under &rticle ?CE of the "evised #enal Code% as amended. !he act of ma0ing it a,,ear in the birth certificate of a child that the ,ersons named therein are the ,arents of the child when

+es% because libel may be committed by radio broadcast &rticle ?;; of the "evised #enal Code ,unishes libel committed by means% among others% of radio broadcast% inasmuch as the broadcast made by radio is ,ublic and may be defamatory. Li3el (%&&1) Furing a seminar wor0sho, attended by government em,loyees from the 8ureau of Customs

and the 8ureau


Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) of

anger. When 6aria called 2udge >adioma a hy,ocrite and

'nternal "evenue% &% the s,ea0er% in the course of his lecture% lamented the fact that a great ma/ority of those serving in said agencies were utterly dishonest and corru,t. !he following morning% the whole grou, of em,loyees in the two bureaus who attended the seminar% as com,lainants% filed a criminal com,laint against & for uttering what the grou, claimed to be defamatory statements of the lecturer. 'n court% & filed a motion to 1uash the information% reciting fully the above facts% on the ground that no crime were committed. 'f you were the /udge% how would you resolve the motion$ B<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

' would grant the motion to 1uash on the ground that the facts charged do not constitute an offense% since there is no definite ,erson or ,ersons dishonored. !he crime of libel or slander% is a crime against honor such that the ,erson or ,ersons dishonored must be identifiable even by innuendoesK otherwise the crime against honor is not committed. 6oreover% & was not ma0ing a malicious im,utation% but merely stating an o,inion- he was delivering a lecture with no malice at all during a seminar wor0sho,. 6alice being inherently absent in the utterance% the statement is not actionable as defamatory.

Li3el (%&&6) 'n an interview aired on television% Cindee uttered defamatory statements against )ri0a% a successful and re,utable businesswoman. What crime or crimes did Cindee commit$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Cindee committed libel for uttering defamatory remar0s tending to cause dishonor or discredit to )ri0a. Libel can be committed in television ,rograms or broadcasts% though it was not s,ecifically mentioned in the article since it was not yet in e5istence then% but is included as 7any similar means.7 Fefamatory statements aired on television is similar to radio% theatrical e5hibition or cinematogra,hic e5hibition% which are among the modes for the commission of libel. (&rts. ?;? and ?;;% "#C)

Slan"er (19--) 9or some time% bad blood had e5isted between the two families of 6aria "a3on and 2udge >adioma who were neighbors. 9irst% there was a boundary dis,ute between them which was still ,ending in court. 6ariaGs mother also filed an administrative com,laint against the /udge which was however dismissed. !he "a3ons also felt intimidated by the ,osition and alleged influence of their neighbor. 9anning fire to the situation was the ,ractice of the >adiomas of throwing garbage and animal e5crement into the "a3onGs ,remises. 'n an e5,losion of anger% 6aria called 2udge >adioma 7land grabber7% 7shameless7% and 7hy,ocrite.7 What crime was committed by 6aria% if any$ )5,lain briefly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

6aria committed the crime of slander or slight defamation only because she was under the influence of

77 of 86 land
grabber she im,uted to him the commission of crimes. Slan"er (1996)
#ia% a bold actress living on to, floor of a ,lush condominium in 6a0ati City sunbathed na0ed at its ,enthouse every Sunday morning. She was unaware that the business e5ecutives holding office at the ad/oining tall buildings re,orted to office every Sunday morning and% with the use of ,owerful binoculars% 0e,t on ga3ing at her while she sunbathed. )ventually% her sunbathing became the tal0 of the town.

eventual tal0 of the town% resulting from her sunbathing% is not directly im,uted to the business e5ecutives% and besides such to,ic is not intended to defame or ,ut #ia to ridicule.

Slan"er 3y 5ee" #s9 8altreatment (199 ) Fistinguish slander by deed from maltreatment.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1) What crime% if any% did #ia commit$ )5,lain% ) What crime% if any% did the business e5ecutives commit$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

SL&4F)" 8+ F))F is a crime committed when a ,erson ,ublicly sub/ects another to an act intended or calculated to cast dishonor% discredit or contem,t u,on the latter. &bsent the intent to cast dishonor% discredit% contem,t% or insult to the offended ,arty% the crime is only 6&L!")&!6)4! under &rt% @@. ,ar. ?% where% by deed% an offender illJtreats another without causing in/ury. Slan"er #s9 Criminal Con#ersation (%&& ) Fistinguish clearly but briefly between oral defamation and criminal conversation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1) #ia did not commit a crime% !he felony closest to ma0ing #ia criminally liable is >rave Scandal% but then such act is not to be considered as highly scandalous and offensive against decency and good customs. 'n the first ,lace% it was not done in a ,ublic ,lace and within ,ublic 0nowledge or view. &s a matter of fact it was discovered by the e5ecutives accidentally and they have to use binoculars to have ,ublic and full view of #ia sunbathing in the nude.
) !he business e5ecutives did not commit any crime. !heir acts could not be acts of lasciviousness Has there was no overt lustful act)% or slander% as the

*ral defamation% 0nown as SL&4F)"% is a malicious im,utation of any act% omission% condition or circumstance against a ,erson% done orally in ,ublic% tending to cause dishonor% discredit% contem,t% embarassment or ridicule to the latter. !his is a crime against honor ,enali3ed in &rt. ?;B of the "evised #enal Code.
C"'6'4&L C*4.)"S&!'*4. !he term is used in ma0ing a ,olite reference to se5ual intercourse as in

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

element of cor,us delicti

certain crimes% li0e ra,e% seduction and adultery. 't has no definite conce,t as a crime.

M&5("++ !")%5
Corpus 5elicti (%&&1)
&t a birthday ,arty in 8ogo% Cebu% & got into5icated and started 1uarrelling with 8 and C. &t the height of their arguments% & left and too0 a bolo from his house% after which he returned to the ,arty and threatened to stab everybody. 8 got scared and ran towards the seashore% with & chasing him% 8 ran u, a stee, incline along the shore and was cornered on to, of a cliff. *ut of fear% 8 /um,ed from the cliff into the sea% & returned to the scene of their confrontation and seeing that nobody was there% went home to slee,. !he ne5t day% 8Gs wife re,orted to the ,olice station that her husband had not yet come home. & search was conducted by the residents of the barangay but after almost two days% 8 or his body could not be located and his disa,,earance continued for the ne5t few days. 8ased on the testimony of C and other guests% who had seen & and 8 on to, of the cliff% & was arrested and charged with 6urder. 'n his defense% he claimed that since 8Gs body has not been found% there was no evidence of 7cor,us delictiG and therefore% he should be ac1uitted.

's the defense of & tenable or not$ State the reason(s) for your answer. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he defense of & is not tenable. 7Cor,us delicti7 does not refer to the body of the ,ur,orted victim which had not been found. )ven without the body of the ,ur,orted victim being found% the offender can be convicted when the facts and circumstances of a crime% the body of the crime or 7cor,us delicti7 is established. 'n other words% the nonJrecovery of the body of the victim is not a bar to the ,rosecution of & for 6urder% but the fact of death and identity of the victim must be established beyond reasonable doubt. Corpus 5elicti; 5efinition @ +lements (%&&&) a) Fefine 7cor,us delicti7. ( <) b) What are the elements of 7cor,us delicti7$ (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Corpus ;elicti literally means 7the body or substance of the crime7 or the fact that a crime has been committed% but does not include the identity of the ,erson who committed it. ($eop"e vs. $as8.a" 44 70
2789&.

Elements of corpus elicti: !he actual commission by someone of the ,articular crime charged. 't is a com,ound fact made u, of two thingsK 1. !he e5istence of a certain act or result forming the basis of the criminal charge- and . !he e5istence of a criminal agency as the cause of the act or result ?. !he identity of the offender is not a necessary

78 of 86
+ntrapment #s9 2nstigation (1996) Fistinguished entra,ment from 'nstigation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

with which to buy mari/uana cigarettes% S#* 6ercado ,ractically induced and ,rodded 2uan to commit the offense of illegal ,ossession of mari/uana. Set against the facts instigation is a valid defense available to 2uan. +ntrapment #s9 2nstigation (%&&1) Fistinguish fully between entra,ment and instigation in Criminal Law% )5em,lify each. C<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

'n '4S!'>&!'*4% the instigator ,ractically induces the ,ros,ective accused into commission of the offense and himself becomes coJ,rinci,al. 'n )4!"&#6)4!% ways and means are resorted to for the ,ur,ose of tra,,ing and ca,turing the lawbrea0er while e5ecuting his criminal ,lan. 'nstigation (1DD;)
Sus,ecting that 2uan was a drug ,usher% S#* 6ercado% leader of the 4arcom team% gave 2uan a #lAAJbill and as0ed him to buy some mari/uana cigarettes. Fesirous of ,leasing S#* 6ercado% 2uan went inside the sho,,ing mall while the officer waited at the corner of the mall. &fter fifteen minutes% 2uan returned with ten stic0s of mari/uana cigarettes which he gave to S#* 6ercado who thereu,on ,laced 2uan under arrest and charged him with violation of !he Fangerous Frugs Law by selling mari/uana cigarettes.

'n )4!"&#6)4! J 1. the criminal design originates from and is already in the mind of the lawbrea0er even before entra,ment. the law enforcers resort to ways and means for the ,ur,ose of ca,turing the lawbrea0er in flagrante delictoJ and ?. this circumstance is no bar to ,rosecution and conviction of the lawbrea0er. 'n '4S!'>&!'*4J
1. the idea and design to bring about the commission of the crime originated and develo,ed in the mind of the law enforcers-

's 2uan guilty of any offense ,unishable under !he Fangerous Frugs &ct$ Fiscuss fully.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

2uan cannot be charged of any offense ,unishable under !he Fangerous Frugs &ct. &lthough 2uan is a sus,ected drug ,usher% he cannot be charged on the basis of a mere sus,icion. 8y ,roviding the money
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

the law enforcers induce% lure% or incite a ,erson who is not minded to commit a crime and would not otherwise commit it% into committing the crime- and ?. this circumstance absolves the accused from criminal liability ($eop"e v. Dante
/ar8os# 185 S*+, 154. ?1990=&.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

Example of Entrapment: &% an antiJnarcotic agent of the >overnment acted as a ,oseur buyer of shabu and negotiated with 8% a sus,ected drug ,usher who is unaware that & is a ,olice officer. & then issued mar0ed money to 8 who handed a sachet of shabu to 8. !hereu,on% & signaled his antiJnarcotic team to closeJin and arrest 8. !his is a case of entra,ment because the criminal mind is in 8 already when & transacted with him. Example of Instigation: 8ecause the members of an antiJnarcotic team are already 0nown to drug ,ushers. &% the team leader% a,,roached and ,ersuaded 8 to act as a buyer of shabu and transact with C% the sus,ected drug ,usher. 9or the ,ur,ose% & gave 8 mar0ed money to be used in buying shabu from C. &fter C handed the sachet of shabu to 8 and the latter handed the mar0ed money to C% the team closedJin and ,laced 8 and C under arrest. Under the facts% 8 is not criminally liable for his ,artici,ation in the transaction because he was acting only under instigation by the law enforcers.

Court% the accused% being then em,loyed in the *ffice of the Fistrict )ngineer% Fe,artment of #ublic Wor0s and

S0"(& + P"! + L .5
(nti,Carnapping (ct; Carnapping wD >omici"e (199-)
Samuel% a tricycle driver% ,lied his usual route using a (onda motorcycle with a sidecar. *ne evening% "aul rode on the sidecar% ,o0ed a 0nife at Samuel and instructed him to go near the bridge. U,on reaching the bridge% "aul alighted from the motorcycle and suddenly stabbed Samuel several times until he was dead. "aul fled from the scene ta0ing the motorcycle with him.

What crime or crimes did "aul commit$ X;<I


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

"aul committed the com,osite crime of Carna,,ing with homicide under Sec. 1C of "e,. &ct 4o. @;?D% as amended% considering that the 0illing 7in the course or 7on the occasion of a carna,,ing ($eop"e vs. De "a *r.5# et a". 183 S*+, 763&. & motorcycle is included in the definition of a 7motor vehicle7 in said "e,. &ct% also 0nown as the G&ntiJ Carna,,ing &ct of 1DE G. !here is no a,,arent motive for the 0illing of the tricycle driver but for "aul to be able to ta0e the motorcycle. !he fact that the tricycle driver was 0illed brings about the ,enalty of reclusion ,er,etua to death.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

!he crime committed by "aul is carna,,ing% ,unished by Section 1C of "e,. &ct 4o. @;?D. !he 0illing of Samuel is not a se,arate crime but only an aggravating circumstance. (nti,Graft @ Corrupt Practices , 0( 1&19 (199*) & is charged with the crime defined in Section ?(e) of the &ntiJ>raft and Corru,t #ractices &ct in an 'nformation that readsK
!hat from A1 to ?A 2anuary 1DD;% in the City of #asig and within the /urisdiction of this (onorable

79 of 86
(ighways and in the discharge of his official administrative functions% did then and there willfully and unlawfully wor0 for and facilitate the a,,roval of 8Gs claim for the ,ayment of the ,rice of his land which the government had e5,ro,riated% and after the claim was a,,roved% the accused gave 8 only #1%AAA.AA of the a,,roved claim of #;%AAA and willfully and unlawfully a,,ro,riated for himself the balance of #C%AAA% thus causing undue in/ury to 8 and the >overnment.7

followed u, the ,ayment for 8Gs land which the >overnment has already a,,ro,riated% and that the accused eventually withheld for himself from the ,rice of the said land% the amount of #C%AAA for his services. 4o violation of Section ?(e) of the &ntiJ>raft and Corru,t &ct a,,ears. &t most% the accused should be merely charged administratively
ALTERNATI8E ANSWERS3

& has filed a motion to 1uash the information% contending that it does not charge an offense. 's he correct$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1. +es% & is correct in filing a motion to 1uash the information because Section ?(e) of "e,ublic &ct ?A1D a,,lies only to officers and em,loyees of government cor,orations charged with the grant of licenses or ,ermits or other concessions% and not to F#W(% which is not a government cor,oration.
. & is not correct. 'n the case of 6eforda vs. Sandiganbayan. 1;1 SC"& ?DD% which involves a substantially identical information as the 'nformation 1uoted in the 1uestion% the Su,reme Court held that the 'nformation was valid. While it is true that the information 1uoted 'n the 1uestion% failed to allege evident bad faith% gross ine5cusable negligence or manifest ,artiality% said 'nformation 's nevertheless ade1uate because it averred the three (?) elements for the violation of Section ?(c) of "&. ?A1 when it stated (1) that the accused is a ,ublic officer at the time of the commission of the crime% being em,loyed in the *ffice of the Fistrict )ngineer% F#W(- ( ) that the accused caused undue 'n/ury to 8 and the >overnment% with the statement that 8! the owner of the land% received only #1%AAA.AA instead of the full value of #;%AAA.AA- and (?)

+es% the contention of & is correct. !he information failed to allege that the undue in/ury to 8 and the government was caused by the accusedGs manifest ,artiality% evident bad faith% or gross 'ne5cusable negligence% which are necessary elements of the offense charged% ie.% violation of Section ?(e) of the &ntiJ>raft and Corru,t #ractices &ct. !he accused is em,loyed in the *ffice of the Fistrict )ngineer of the F#W( which has nothing to do with the determination and fi5ing of the ,rice of the land e5,ro,riated% and for which e5,ro,riated land the >overnment is legally obligated to ,ay. !here is no allegation in the information that the land was over,riced or that the ,ayment of the amount was disadvantageous to the >overnment. 't a,,ears that the charge was solely based on the accused having Version 1994-2006 Updated by Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) that

in the discharge of &Gs official administrative functions% he 7did then and there willfully and unlawfully wor0 for and facilitate the a,,roval of his claim 555 and 7willfully and unlawfully a,,ro,riate for himself the balance of #C%AAA.AA 5 5 57. &n information need not em,loy or use the very words or language of the statute. 't may also use words or language of similar im,ort.

of the said Law. 6rs. 64& should be liable for child abuse.

(nti,>aHing law I 0( -& 9 (%&&%) 9hat is haCing as efine by law* 204+


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(a3ing% as defined by law% is an initiation rite or ,ractice as a ,rere1uisite for admission into membershi, in a fraternity% sorority or organi3ation by ,lacing the recruit% neo,hyte or a,,licant in some embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing him to do menial% silly% foolish and similar tas0s or activities or otherwise sub/ecting him to ,hysical or ,sychological suffering or in/ury. 9hat oes the law re!uire before initiation rites may be performe * 2=4+
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Section of "e,. &ct 4o. BACD (&ntiJ(a3ing Law) re1uires that before ha3ing or initiation rites may be ,erformed% notice to the school authorities or head of organi3ations shall be given seven (E) days before the conduct of such rites. !he written notice shall indicate (a) the ,eriod of the initiation activities% not e5ceeding three (?) days- (b) the names of those to be sub/ected to such activities% and (c) an underta0ing that no ,hysical violence shall be em,loyed by anybody during such initiation rites.

C>2L5 (A'S+; 0( *61& (%&& )


6rs. 64& was charged of child abuse. 't a,,ears from the evidence that she failed to give immediately the re1uired medical attention to her ado,ted child% 8#*% when he was accidentally bum,ed by her car% resulting in his head in/uries and im,aired vision that could lead to night blindness. !he accused% according to the social wor0er on the case% used to whi, him when he failed to come home on time from school. &lso% to ,unish him for carelessness in washing dishes% she sometimes sent him to bed without su,,er.

She moved to 1uash the charge on the ground that there is no evidence she maltreated her ado,ted child habitually. She added that the accident was caused by her driverGs negligence. She did ,unish her ward for naughtiness or carelessness% but only mildly. 's her motion meritorious$ "eason briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% the motion to 1uash is not meritorious. 't is not necessary that movantGs maltreatment of a child be 7habitual7 to constitute child abuse. !he wrongful acts ,enali3ed as 7Child &buse7 under "e,. &ct 4o. E@1A refers to the maltreatment of the child% 7whether habitual or not7K this is e5,ressly stated in Sec. (b)

80 of 86
Chil" (3use; 0( *61& (%&&6)
)duardo =uintos% a widower for the ,ast 1A years% felt that his retirement at the age of EA gave him the o,,ortunity to engage in his favorite ,astime W voyeurism. 'f not using his highJ,owered binoculars to ,ee, at his neighborGs homes and domestic activities% his second choice was to follow sweet young girls. *ne day% he trailed a teenage girl u, to the L"! station at )FS&J 8uendia. While ascending the stairs% he stayed one ste, behind her and in a moment of bravado% ,laced his hand on her left hi, and gently massaged it. She screamed and shouted for hel,. )duardo was arrested and charged with acts of lasciviousness. 's the designation of the crime correct$ (;<)
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

was conducted by ,olice officers% resulting in his arrest following the discovery of 1AA grams of the said dangerous drug in his ,ossession. (e was sub/ected to a drug test and was found ,ositive for the use of mari/uana% another dangerous drug. (e was subse1uently charged with two crimesK .iolation of Section 11% &rticle '' of "& D1@; for the ,ossession of TshabuU and violation of Section 1;% &rticle '' of "& D1@; for the use of mari/uana. (;<) a+ Are the charges proper* Explain1
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o. !he use of dangerous drugs is not committed when *bie 2uan was also found to have in his ,ossession such 1uantity of any dangerous drug. (See s. 11 and
16# +,. )o. 9165&

!he crime should be *ther &cts of Child &buse under Section 1A of "&. E@1A% ,ar. b of Section ? that refers to child abuse committed by any act% deeds or words which debases% degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being. 'n relation thereto% Section 1A ,rovides criminal liability for other acts of child abuse% cruelty or e5,loitation% or for other condiJ tions ,re/udicial to the childGs develo,ment. !he reaction of the victim% screaming for hel, u,on the occurrence of the touching indicates that she ,erceived her dignity was being debased or violated.

b+ So as not to be sentence to eath) $bie Juan offers to plea guilty to a lesser offense1 Can he o so* 9hy*
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o. *bie 2uan cannot ,lead guilty to a lower offense as it is ,rohibited under the law. (Section ?% "&. 4o. D1@;) &ny ,erson charged under any ,rovision of this &ct regardless of the im,osable ,enalty shall not be allowed to avail of the ,rovision on ,leaJ bargaining. 5angerous 5rugs (ct (199-)
Su,erintendent &l Santiago% Chief of the 4arcotics Fivision% Western #olice Fistrict% received information that a certain Lee Lay ofJ4o. B !indalo Street% !ondo%

5angerous 5rug (ct4 Plea,Aargaining (%&&6) *bie 2uan is sus,ected to have in his ,ossession an uns,ecified amount of metham,hetamine hydrochloride or TshabuU. &n entra,ment o,eration
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

6anila is a member of the 1CN >ang selling shabu and mari/uana. S#*l Loren3o and S#*? #eralta were instructed to conduct surveillance and buyJbust o,erations against Lay. !heir informant contacted Lay and a meeting was arranged at !. #in,in "estaurant at KAA in the afternoon on 9ebruary 1C% 1DD?. S#*1 Loren3o and S#*? #eralta% acting as ,oseurJbuyers% ,urchased from Lay 1A stic0s of mari/uana and ,aid #;AA. Later% Lay agreed to sell to them one 0ilo of dried mari/uana fruiting to,s which he gave them at his residence. !he ,olicemen arrested Lay and a search was conducted. 9ound were ?;@ grams of mari/uana seeds% D? grams of mari/uana fruiting to,s and ;A stic0s of mari/uana cigarettes. What offense or offenses did Lay commit$ H;<I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Lay committed the offenses of illegal selling of dangerous drugs and illegal ,ossession of dangerous drugs which should be made sub/ect of se,arate informations.

!he crime of illegal selling of dangerous drugs is committed as regards the 1A stic0s of mari/uana and as regards the one (1) 0ilo of dried mari/uana fruiting to,s% which should be sub/ect of two ( ) se,arate informations because the acts were committed at different times and in different ,laces. !he crime of 'llegal ,ossession of dangerous drugs is committed as regards the mari/uana seeds% mari/uana fruiting to,s and mari/uana cigarettes which are not the sub/ect of the sale. &nother information shall be filed for this. 5angerous 5rugs (ct (%&&6)
&fter receiving reliable information that Fante *ng% a notorious drug smuggler% was arriving on #&L 9light 4*. #" 1B1% #4# Chief 'ns,ector Samuel >amboa formed a grou, of antiJdrug agents. When *ng arrived at the air,ort% the grou, arrested him and sei3ed his attache case. U,on ins,ection inside the 'mmigration holding area% the attache case yielded ; ,lastic bags of heroin weighing ;AA grams. Chief 'ns,ector >amboa too0 the attache case and boarded him in an unmar0ed car driven by #*? #e,ito Lorbes. *n the way to Cam, Crame and u,on nearing White #lains corner )FS&% Chief 'ns,ector >amboa ordered #*? Lorbes to sto, the car. !hey brought out the drugs from the case in the trun0 and got ? ,lastic sac0s of heroin. !hey then told *ng to alight from the car. *ng left with the remaining ,lastic sac0s of heroin. Chief 'ns,ector >amboa advised him to 0ee, silent and go home which the latter did. Un0nown to them% an 48' team of agents had been following them and witnessed the transaction. !hey arrested Chief 'ns,ector >amboa and #*? Lorbes. 6eanwhile% another 48' team followed *ng and li0ewise arrested him. &ll of them were later charged.

What are their res,ective criminal liabilities$ (;<)

81 of 86
Chief 'ns,ector >amboa and #*? #e,ito Lorbes who cons,ired in ta0ing the attache case are liable for the following crimes defined under "&. D1@;K a) Sec. E for misa,,ro,riation or failure to account for the confiscated or sei3ed dangerous drugs. b) Sec. C in relation to Sec. ?(ee) for their acts as ,rotector:coddler of Fante *ng who im,orted drugs 'n addition% by allowing *ng to esca,e ,rosecution for illegal im,ortation or illegal trans,ortation of dangerous drugs% where the ,enalty is life im,risonment to death% they are also liable for 1ualified bribery under &rt. 11J& of the "evised #enal Code.
With res,ect to Fante *ng% he is guilty of illegal im,ortation of dangerous drugs under Sec. C% ".&. D1@;% if #" 1B1 is an international flight. 'f #" 1B1 is a domestic flight% he is liable for violation of Sec. ;% "&. D1@; for illegal trans,ortation of dangerous drugs.

but evidently were not swift enough since & and 8 were able to run away. !wo days later% & was arrested in connection with another incident. 't a,,ears that during the o,erations% the ,olice officers were not able to sei3e the mar0ed money but were able to get ,ossession of the mari/uana tea bag. & was subse1uently ,rosecuted for violation of Section C% &rticle '' of "e,ublic &ct 4o. @C ;% otherwise 0nown as the Fangerous Frugs &ct% Furing the trial% the mar0ed money was not ,resented. Can & be held liable$ )5,lain. ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. & can be held liable. !he absence of the mar0ed money will not create a hiatus in the ,rosecutionGs evidence as long as the sale of the dangerous drugs is ade1uately ,roven and the drug sub/ect of the transaction is ,resented before the court. !here was a ,erfected contract of sale of the drug
($eop"e vs. 7n6 *o# 245 S*+, 733- $eop"e vs. Fervo."aBos# 241 S*+, 625&.

5angerous 5rugs (ct (6 %6); 8arGe" 8oney (%&&&)


&t about D oGcloc0 in the morning% a 4arcom >rou, laid a ,lan to entra, and a,,rehend &% a long sus,ected drug dealer% through a 7buyJbust7 o,eration. &t the a,,ointed time% the ,oseurJbuyer a,,roached & who was then with 8. & mar0ed #1AA bill was handed over to & who in turn% gave the ,oseurJbuyer one (1) tea bag of mari/uana leaves. !he members of the team% who were then ,ositioned behind thic0 leaves% closed in
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

5angerous 5rugs (ct (6 %6); Plea Aargaining (199-) )dgardo was charged with im,ortation of ,rohibited drugs in an information filed with the "egional !rial Court of Naloo0an City on 2une C% 1DDC. !he offense is ,unishable by reclusion ,er,etua to death. Can )dgardo avail of ,leaJ bargaining$ H <I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% )dgardo cannot avail of ,leaJbargaining because the im,osable ,enalty for his violation of the Fangerous Frugs &ct (".&. 4o. @C ;. as amended) is reclusion ,er,etua to death. Section AJ& e5,ressly ,rovides that ,leaJbargaining shall not be allowed where the im,osable

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

,enalty for the violation of said law is reclusion ,er,etua to death. (Sec. AJ&% ".&. 4o. @C ;% as amended). 5angerous 5rugs (ct; Consummation of Sale (1996) #at. 8uensuceso% ,osing as a buyer% a,,roached "onnie% a sus,ected drug ,usher% and offered to buy #?AA worth of shabu. "onnie then left% came bac0 five minutes later and handed #at% 8uensuceso an aluminum foil containing the shabu. (owever% before #at% 8uensuceso was able to deliver the mar0ed money to "onnie% the latter s,otted a ,oliceman at a distance% whom "onnie 0new to be connected with the 4arcotics Command of the #olice. U,on seeing the latter% "onnie ran away but was arrested thirty minutes later by other ,olicemen who ,ursued him. Under the circumstances% would you consider the crime of sale of a ,rohibited drug already consummated$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

offense% because ,leaJbargaining in ,rosecutions of drugJ related cases is no longer allowed by "e,. &ct 4o. D1@;%

+es% the sale of ,rohibited drug is already consummated although the mar0ed money was not yet delivered. When "onnie handed the aluminum foil containing the shabu to #at. 8uensuceso ,ursuant to their agreed sale% the crime was consummated. #ayment of the consideration is not an element of re1uisite of the crime. 'f ever% the mar0ed money is only evidentiary to strengthen the case of the ,rosecution. 5angerous 5rugs (ct; Criminal 2ntent to Posses (%&&%)
& and his fiancee 8 were wal0ing in the ,la3a when they met a grou, of ,olicemen who had earlier been ti,,ed off that & was in ,ossession of ,rohibited drugs. U,on seeing the ,olicemen and sensing that they were after him% & handed a sachet containing shabu to his fiancee 8% telling her to hide it in her handbag. !he ,olicemen saw 8 ,lacing the sachet inside her handbag. 'f 8 was unaware that & was a drug user or ,usher or that what was inside the sachet given to her was shabu% is she nonetheless liable under the Fangerous Frugs &ct$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% 8 will not be criminally liable because she is unaware that & was a drug user or ,usher or of the content of the sachet handed to her by &% and therefore the criminal intent to ,ossess the drug in violation of the Fangerous Frugs &ct is absent. !here would be no basis to im,ute criminal liability to her in the absence of animus ,ossidendi. 5angerous 5rugs (ct; Plea,Aargaining (%&& ) 64*% who is ?A years old% was charged as a drug ,usher under the Com,rehensive Fangerous Frugs &ct of AA . Furing ,reJtrial% he offered to ,lead guilty to the lesser offense concerning use of dangerous drugs. Should the 2udge allow 64*Gs ,lea to the lesser offense$ )5,lain briefly. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% the 2udge should not allow 64*Gs ,lea to a lesser

82 of 86 the
Com,rehensive Fangerous Frugs &ct of regardless of the im,osable ,enalty. >ighway 0o33ery (%&&1)
#olice Sgt. Fiego Chan% being a member of the !heft and "obbery Fivision of the Western #olice Fistrict and assigned to the South (arbor% 6anila% was ,rivy to and more or less familiar with the schedules% routes and hours of the movements of container vans% as well as the mobile ,olice ,atrols% from the ,ier area to the different e5,ort ,rocessing 3ones outside 6etro 6anila. 9rom time to time% he gave valuable and detailed information on these matters to a grou, interested in those shi,ments in said container vans. *n several instances% using the said information as their basis% the gang hi/ac0ed and ,ilfered the contents of the vans. #rior to their sale to 7fences7 in 8anawe% =ue3on City and 8ang0al% 6a0ati City% the gang 'nforms Sgt% Chan who then ins,ects the ,ilfered goods% ma0es his choice of the valuable items and dis,oses of them through his own sources or 7fences7. When the high/ac0ers were traced on one occasion and arrested% u,on custodial investigation% they im,licated Sgt. Chan and the fiscal charged them all% including Sgt. Chan as coJ,rinci,als. Sgt. Chan% in his defense% claimed that he should not be charged as a ,rinci,al but only as an accessory after the fact under #.F. ;? % otherwise 0nown as the &ntiJ#iracy and &ntiJ (ighway "obbery &ct of 1DE .

SUGGESTED ANSWER3

AA %

4o% the contention of Sgt. Chan is not valid or tenable because by e5,ress ,rovision of #.F. ;? % Section C% a ,erson who 0nowingly and in any manner% aids or ,rotects highway robbers:brigands% such as giving them information about the movement of ,olice officers or ac1uires or receives ,ro,erty ta0en by brigands% or who directly or indirectly abets the commission of highway robbery:brigandage% shall be considered as accom,lice of the ,rinci,al offenders and ,unished in accordance with the rules in the "evised #enal Code.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

4o% the contention of Sgt. Chan that he should be charged only as accessory after the fact is not tenable because he was a ,rinci,al ,artici,ant in the commission of the crime and in ,ursuing the criminal design.

&n accessory after the fact involves himself in the commission of a crime only after the crime had already been consummated% not before% 9or his criminal ,artici,ation in the e5ecution of the high/ac0ing of the container vans% Sgt. Chan is a coJ,rinci,al by indis,ensable coo,eration. 2llegal .ishing , P5 *& (1996)
U,on a laboratory e5amination of the fish sei3ed by the ,olice and agents of the 9isheries Commission% it was indubitably determined that the fish they were selling were caught with the use of e5,losives. &ccordingly% the three vendors were criminally charged with the violation

's the contention of Sgt. Chan valid and tenable$ )5,lain% (;<)
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) of

grenade belonged to &% his friend% and

Section ?? of #.F. EAC which ma0es it unlawful for any ,erson to 0nowingly ,ossess% deal in% or sell for ,rofit any fish which have been illegally caught. Furing the trial% the three vendors claimed that they bought the fish from a fishing boat which they duly identified. !he ,rosecution however claimed that the three vendors should nevertheless be held liable for the offense as they were the ones caught in ,ossession of the fish illegally caught.
*n the basis of the above facts% if you were the /udge% would you convict the three fish vendors$ )5,lain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% ' would not convict the three fish vendors if ' were the /udge. 6ere ,ossession of such fish without 0nowledge of the fact that the same were caught with the use of e5,losives does not by itself render the sellerJ ,ossessor criminally liable under #.F. EAC. &lthough the act ,enali3ed in said Fecree may be a malum ,rohibitum% the law ,unishes the ,ossession% dealing in or selling of such fish only when 70nowingly7 done that the fish were caught with the use of e5,losives- hence criminal intent is essential. !he claim by the fish vendors that they only bought the fish from fishing boats which they 7duly identified7% renders their ,ossession of such fish innocent unless the ,rosecution could ,rove that they have 0nowledge that e5,losives were used in catching such fish% and the accused had 0nowledge thereof.

2llegal Possession of .irearms I 0( -%9 (199-) Su,,osing a ,ublic school teacher ,artici,ated in a cou, dGetat using an unlicensed firearm. What crime or crimes did he commit$ H <I
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he ,ublic school teacher committed only cou, dGetat for his ,artici,ation therein. (is use of an unlicensed firearm is absorbed in the cou, dGetat under the new firearms law ("e,. &ct 4o. B DC). & ,rosecution for illegal ,ossession of firearm under the new law is allowed only if the unlicensed firearm was not used in the commission of another crime. 2llegal Possession of .irearms @ (mmunitions (%&&&)
& has long been wanted by the ,olice authorities for various crimes committed by him. &cting on an information by a ti,ster% the ,olice ,roceeded to an a,artment where & was often seen. !he ti,ster also warned the ,olicemen that & was always armed. &t the given address% a lady who introduced herself as the elder sister of &% o,ened the door and let the ,olicemen in inside% the team found & slee,ing on the floor. 'mmediately beside him was a clutch bag which% when o,ened% contained a .?B caliber ,alti0 revolver and a hand grenade. &fter verification% the authorities discovered that & was not a licensed holder of the .?B caliber ,alti0 revolver. &s for the hand grenade% it was established that only military ,ersonnel are authori3ed to carry hand grenades. Subse1uently% & was charged with the crime of 'llegal #ossession of 9irearms and &mmunition. Furing trial% & maintained that the bag containing the unlicensed firearm and hand

83 of 86
that he was not in actual ,ossession thereof at the time he was arrested. &re the allegations meritorious$ )5,lain. (?<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

&Gs allegations are not meritorious. *wnershi, is not an essential element of the crime of illegal ,ossession of firearms and ammunition. What the law re1uires is merely ,ossession% which includes not only actual ,hysical ,ossession but also constructive ,ossession where the firearm and e5,losive are sub/ect to oneGs control and management. ($eop"e .s.
De 0re8ia# 233 S*+, 716- U.S. vs. 1.an# 23 $%i". 105A $eop"e vs. Soya6# 110 $%i". 565&.

1. "&. @E1? W Code of Conduct and )thical Standards for #ublic *fficials and )m,loyees when he solicited and acce,t gifts (Sec. EHdI). . #.F. C@ W 6a0ing it ,unishable for ,ublic officials and em,loyees to receive% and for ,rivate ,ersons to give% gifts on any occasion% including Christmas. ?. 'ndirect 8ribery (&rt. 11% "evised #enal Code) for receiving gifts offered by reason of office. P5 6 (199 ) >ino was a,,ointed Collector of Customs and was assigned at the 4inoy &1uino 'nternational &ir,ort% >erry% an im,orter% hosted a dinner for 1AA ,ersons at the Westin #hili,,ine #la3a in honor of >ino. What are the offense or offenses committed by >ino and >erry$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

P5 6 @ 0( 6*11 @ 2n"irect Ari3ery (%&&6)


Commissioner 6arian !orres of the 8ureau of internal "evenue (8'") wrote solicitation letters addressed to the 9ili,inoJChinese Chamber of Commerce and 'ndustry and to certain C)*s of various multinational cor,orations re1uesting donations of gifts for her office Christmas ,arty. She used the 8ureauGs official stationery. !he res,onse was ,rom,t and overwhelming so much so that Commissioner !orresG office was overcrowded with rice coo0ers% radio sets% free3ers% electric stoves and toasters. (er staff also received several envelo,es containing cash money for the em,loyeesG Christmas luncheon.

(as Commissioner !orres committed any im,ro,riety or irregularity$ What laws or decrees did she violate$ (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es% Commissioner !orres violated the followingK


Version 1994-2006 Updated by

8oth >ino and >erry are liable for violation of #residential Fecree 4o. C@% which ,unishes any ,ublic official or em,loyee who receives% directly or indirectly% and for ,rivate ,ersons who give% offer any gift% ,resent or valuable thing on any occasion% including Christmas% when such gift or valuable thing is given by reason of his official ,osition% regardless of whether or not the same is for ,ast favor or favors% or the giver ho,es or e5,ects to receive a favor or better treatment in the future. 8eing an im,orter% >erry reasonably e5,ects future favor from >ino. 'ncluded within the ,rohibition is the throwing of ,arties or entertainment in honor of the official or em,loyee or of his immediate relatives.

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

(Sec. C% ".&. 4o. D1@A) for 0nowingly transacting money

P5 6 (199*) &% who is the ,rivate com,lainant in a murder case ,ending before a "egional !rial Court 2udge% gave a /udge a Christmas gift% consisting of big bas0et of assorted canned goods and bottles of e5,ensive wines% easily worth #1A.AAA.AA. !he /udge acce,ted the gift 0nowing it came from &. What crime or crimes% if any% were committed$
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he 2udge committed the crime of 'ndirect bribery under &rt. 11 of the "evised #enal Code. !he gift was offered to the 2udge by reason of his office. 'n addition% the 2udge will be liable for the violation of #.F. C@ which ,unishes the receiving of gifts by ,ubic officials and em,loyees on occasions li0e Christmas. Plun"er un"er 0( *&-&; Prescripti#e Perio" (1991) !hrough 0ic0bac0s% ,ercentages or commissions and other fraudulent schemes :conveyances and ta0ing advantage of his ,osition% &ndy% a former mayor of a suburban town% ac1uired assets amounting to #1A billion which is grossly dis,ro,ortionate to his lawful income. Fue to his influence and connections and des,ite 0nowledge by the authorities of his 'llJ gotten wealth% he was charged with the crime of ,lunder only after twenty ( A) years from his defeat in the last elections he ,artici,ated in. 1) 6ay &ndy still be held criminally liable$ Why$ ) Can the State still recover the ,ro,erties and assets that he illegally ac1uired% the bul0 of which is in the name of his wife and children$ "eason out.
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

1) &ndy will not be criminally liable because Section @ of "& EABA ,rovides that the crime ,unishable under this &ct shall ,rescribe in twenty years and the ,roblem as0ed whether &ndy can still be charged with the crime of ,lunder after A years. ) +es% because Section @ ,rovides that recovery of ,ro,erties unlawfully ac1uired by ,ublic officers from them or their nominees or transferees shall not be barred by ,rescri,tion% laches or esto,,el. 09(9 <o9 916& (nti,8oney Laun"ering (ct (%&&6)
Fon >abito% a ,hilanthro,ist% offered to fund several ,ro/ects of the 6ayor. (e o,ened an account in the 6ayorQs name and regularly de,osited various amounts ranging from #;AA%AAA.AA to #1 6illion. 9rom this account% the 6ayor withdrew and used the money for constructing feeder roads% barangay clinics% re,airing schools and for all other munici,al ,ro/ects. 't was subse1uently discovered that Fon >abito was actually a /ueteng o,erator and the amounts he de,osited were ,roceeds from his /ueteng o,erations.

What crime:s were committed$ Who are criminally liable$ )5,lain. (@<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

Fon >abito violated the &ntiJ6oney Laundering &ct

84 of 86 as ,ro,erty
which involves or relates to the ,roceeds of an unlawful activity such as /ueteng. 'n addition% he may be ,rosecuted for liability as a/ueteng o,erator. (".&. 4o. D BE) !he mayor who allowed the o,ening of an account in his name is li0ewise guilty for violation of the &6L&. (e% 0nowing that the money instrument or ,ro,erty involves the ,roceeds of an unlawful activity% ,erforms or fails to ,erform any act which results in the facilitation of money laundering. 0a 1&19; Pre#enti#e Suspension (1999)
& ,ublic officer was accused before the Sandiganbayan of a violation of Section ? (e) of "& 4o. ?A1D% the &ntiJ >raft and Corru,t #ractices &ct. 2ust after arraignment and even before evidence was ,resented% the Sandiganbayan issued an order for his sus,ension ,endente lite. !he accused 1uestioned the said *rder contending that it is violative of the constitutional ,rovision against an e5 ,ost facto law. Will you sustain the ob/ection of the accused$ Why$ H <I

e5J,ost facto law. )5J,ost facto law means ma0ing an innocent act a crime before it is made ,unishable. (c) !he ,reJconditions necessary to be met or satisfied before a sus,ension may be ordered areK (1) there must be ,ro,er notice re1uiring the accused to show cause at a s,ecific date of hearing why he should not be ordered sus,ended from office ,ursuant to "& ?A1D% as amended- and ( ) there must be a determination of a valid information against the accused that warrants his sus,ension. 0( 1&19; Pre#enti#e Suspension (%&&&)
& month after the arraignment of 8rad Nit Commissioner of the (ousing and Land Use "egulatory 8oard% who was charged with violation of Section ? (h) of "e,ublic &ct ?A1D H&ntiJ>raft and Corru,t #ractices &ct) before the Sandiganbayan% the *ffice of the S,ecial #rosecutor filed a 6otion to Sus,end &ccused #endente Lite ,ursuant to Section 1? of the &ntiJ>raft Law. !he Court granted the motion and sus,ended accused 8rad Nit for a ,eriod of DA days. &ccused assailed the constitutional validity of the sus,ension order on the ground that it ,arta0es of a ,enalty before 2udgment of conviction is reached and is thus violative of his constitutional right to be ,resumed innocent. (e also claimed that this ,rovision of the law on sus,ension ,endente lite a,,lies only to elective officials and not to a,,ointed ones li0e him. "ule with reasons. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(c) What ,reJconditions are necessary to be met or satisfied before ,reventive sus,ension may be ordered$ ( <)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

(b) 4o% ' will not sustain the ob/ection of the accused. Sus,ension of the accused ,endente lite is not violative of the constitutional ,rovision against
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

!he sus,ension order does not ,arta0e of a ,enalty and is thus not violative of 8rad NitGs constitutional right to

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) be

,resumed innocent. Under the law% the accused ,ublic officers shall be sus,ended from office while the criminal ,rosecution is ,ending in court (Sec. 1?% "&. ?A1D). Such ,reventive sus,ension is mandatory to ,revent the accused from ham,ering the normal course of the investigation ("ios vs. Sandiganbayan% ED SC"& ;B1 (1DDE)- 8unye vs. )scareal @ SC"& ?? (1DD?)). 4either is there merit in 8rad NitGs claim that the ,rovision on sus,ension ,endente lite a,,lies only to elective officials and not to a,,ointed ones li0e him. 't a,,lies to all ,ublic officials 'ndicted u,on a valid information under "&. 4o. ?A1D% whether they be a,,ointive or elective officials- or ,ermanent or tem,orary em,loyees% or ,ertaining to the career or nonJ career service (Segovia vs. Sandiganbayan% BB SC"& ? B H1DDBI).

#48% the "ural 8an0 of Caloocan City and his ,rivatelyJowned cor,oration% the "S 8uilders Cor,oration and !ransJ#acific &ir. &fter the

0( 1&19; Pu3lic =fficer (%&&1) !he Central 8an0 (8ang0o Sentral ng #ili,inas}% by a resolution of the monetary board% hires !heof Sto !omas% a retired manager of a leading ban0 as a consultant. !heof later receives a valuable gift from a ban0 under investigation by the Central 8an0. 6ay !heof be ,rosecuted under "e,ublic &ct 4o. ?A1D (&ntiJ>raft and Corru,t #ractices &ct) for acce,ting such a gift$ )5,lain. B<
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

4o% !heof may not be ,rosecuted under "e,. &ct ?A1D% but may be ,rosecuted for violation of #res% Fecree 4o. C@% under which such act of receiving a valuable gift is ,unished.
&lthough !heof is a 7,ublic officer7 within the a,,lication of the &ntiJ>raft and Corru,t #ractices &ct ("& ?A1D)% yet his act of receiving such gift does not a,,ear to be included among the ,unishable acts under "e,. &ct ?A1D since he is not to intervene in his official ca,acity in the investigation of the ban0 which gave the gift. #enal laws must be strictly construed against the State. 'n any case% !heof is administratively liable.
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER

+es% !heof may be ,rosecuted under "e,. &ct ?A1D because he is a 7,ublic officer7 within the ,urview of said law% and !heof received the valuable gift from a ban0 which is under investigation by the Central 8an0 where he is em,loyed as a 7,ublic officer7. "eceiving gift% directly or indirectly by a ,ublic officer from a ,arty who has a transaction with the >overnment is wrong% more so when the giftJgiver is under investigation by the government office to which the ,ublic officer is connected. 0a 6*11; Co#erage (%&&1)
"obert Sy% a well 0nown businessman and a founding member of the 6a0ati 8usiness Club% aside from being a classmate of the newlyJelected #resident of the #hili,,ines% had 'nvestments consisting of shares of stoc0s in the Urban 8an0% the

85 of 86
#resident had ta0en his oath and assumed his office% he a,,ointed "obert as (onorary Consul to the "e,ublic of .ietnam. "obert too0 his oath before the #resident and after furnishing the Fe,artment of 9oreign &ffairs with his a,,ointment ,a,ers% flew to Saigon% now (o Chi 6in City% where he organi3ed his staff% ,ut u, an office and stayed there for three months attending to trade o,,ortunities and relations with local businessman. *n the fourth month% he returned to the #hili,,ines to ma0e his re,ort to the #resident. (owever% the &ntiJ>raft League of the #hili,,ines filed a com,laint against "obert for (1) falling to file his Statement of &ssets and Liabilities within thirty (?A) days from assum,tion of office- ( ) failing to resign from his businesses% and (?) falling to divest his shares and investments in the ban0s and cor,orations owned by him% as re1uired by the Code of Conduct and )thical Standards for #ublic *fficials and )m,loyees. Will the com,laint ,ros,er$ )5,lain. (;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

days from assuming ,ublic office to file a true% detailed sworn statement of assets and liabilities. .iolations of this law are mala ,rohibita which admits of no e5cuses.

0( * 1-,+conomic Sa3otage; 2llegal 0ecruitment (%&& )


"" re,resented to &&% 88% CC and FF that she could send them to London to wor0 there as sales ladies and waitresses. She collected and received from them various amounts of money for recruitment and ,lacement fees totalling #CAA%AAA. &fter their dates of de,arture were ,ost,oned several times% the four ,ros,ects got sus,icious and went to #*)& (#hil. *verseas )m,loyment &uthority). !here they found out that "" was not authori3ed nor licensed to recruit wor0ers for em,loyment abroad. !hey sought refund to no avail.

's "" guilty of any grave offense$ )5,lain briefly. (;<)


SUGGESTED ANSWER3

!he com,laint will not ,ros,er because the Code of Conduct and )thical Standards for #ublic *fficials and )m,loyees ("e,. &ct. 4o. @E1?)% e5,ressly e5em,ts those who serve the >overnment in an honorary ca,acity from filing Statements of &ssets and Liabilities% and from resigning and divesting themselves of interest from any ,rivate enter,rise (Secs. B& and D).
ALTERNATI8E ANSWER3

+es. "" is guilty of a grave offense% having engaged in illegal recruitment constituting the offense of economic sabotage which is ,unishable with life im,risonment and a fine of #1AA.AAA.AA.
)C*4*6'C S&8*!&>) is an offense defined in ?B(b) of the Labor Code% as amended by #res. Fecree 4o. A1B% which is incurred when the illegal recruitment is carried out in large scale or by a syndicate. 't is in a large scale when there are three or more aggrieved ,arties% individually or as a grou,. &nd it is committed by a syndicate when three or more ,ersons cons,ire or

+es% the com,laint will ,ros,er under Sec. E of the &ntiJ >raft and Corru,t #ractices &ct ("e,. &ct 4o. ?A1D% as amendedI% which re1uires all ,ublic officers within ?A
Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

86 of 86

coo,erate with one another in carrying out the illegal transaction% scheme or activity. 0( *61& I Chil" +/ploitation (%&&6)
&ling 6aria received an urgent tele,hone call from 2unior% her eldest son% as0ing for # %AAA.AA to com,lete his semestral tuition fees ,re,aratory to his final e5ams in Commerce. Fistressed and disturbed% she borrowed money from her com,adre 6ang 2uan with the assurance to ,ay him within months. !wo months la,sed but &ling 6aria failed to settle her obligation. 6ang 2uan told &ling 6aria that she does not have to ,ay the loan if she will allow her youngest 1AJyear old daughter &nnie to wor0 as a housemaid in his house for months at #l%AAA.AA a month. Fes,ite &ling 6ariaGs ob/ection% 6ang 2uan insisted and brought &nnie to his house to wor0 as a maid.

1. Was a crime committed by 6ang 2uan when he brought &nnie to his house as maid for the ,ur,ose of re,aying her motherGs loan$ ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. 6ang 2uan committed the crime of e5,loitation of child labor which is committed by any ,ersons who unJ der the ,rete5t of reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant% guardian or ,erson entrusted with the custody of a minor% shall% against the latterGs will% retainh im in his service (&rt. E?% "evised #enal Code). (e can also be liable as an em,loyer for the em,loyment of a minor below 1; yrs. old% under Sec. 1 % &rt. B of "&. E@1A. . 'f &ling 6aria herself was made to wor0 as a houseJ maid in 6ang 2uanGs household to ,ay her loan% did he commit a crime$ ( .;<)
SUGGESTED ANSWER3

+es. 6ang 2uan committed the crime of involuntary servitude for rendering services under com,ulsion and ,ayment of debts. !his is committed by any ,erson who% in order to re1uire or enforce the ,ayment of a debt% shall com,el the debtor to wor0 for him% against his will% as household servant or farm laborer (&rt. EC% "evised #enal Code)

Version 1994-2006 Updated by

Dondee