You are on page 1of 153

CRIMINAL LAW 2

TITLE ONE
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE
LAW OF NATIONS (Articles 114 122)

ARTICLE 114 TREASON


is committed by a Filipino citizen or an alien residing in
the Philippines who levies war against the Philippine
Government or adheres to her enemies by giving them
aid and comfort
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is by birth, a Filipino Citizen or
an alien residing in the Philippines, even if
temporary allegiance
The offender may either be a Filipino

citizen, because a Filipino citizen


owes permanent allegiance to the
Philippine Government; or another
offender is a foreigner, an alien
temporarily residing in the
Philippines. During his temporary
stay in the Philippines, he is given
protection by the Philippine
Government under its laws therefore
it is but incumbent upon him to have
temporary allegiance to the
Philippine Government. That is why
even an alien, a foreigner
temporarily residing in the
Philippines can also commit treason
in times of war.
2.

That there is a war in which the Philippines is


involved
The second element is that there is a

war in which the Philippines is


involved. In the case of Laura vs.
Misa, treason is a war time offense.
It can be committed only in times of
war. In times of peace, Treason
remains to be dormant crime,
however, the moment when an
emergency arises, the moment a
war arises, it is immediately put into
effect as an act self-defense and
self-preservation of the Philippine
Government. Treason cannot be
committed in times of peace,
because in times of peace, there are
no traitors.

Who are these traitors?


These enemies are troops of the

enemy state which is in war with the


Philippines. Filipino men like the
MILF, NPAs, even if they are at war
with the Philippine government, they
cannot be considered as enemies

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 1

because they are still considered as


Filipino citizens. So the aliens refer
to the citizens of the enemy state
which is at war with the Philippines.
3.

That the offender either


a. L e v i e s w a r a g a i n s t t h e
Philippine government, or
b. Adheres to the enemies by
giving them aid or comfort.
The third element refers to the

mode of committing treason.


treason may be committed by
either:
a. Levies war against the
Philippine government ,requires
the concurrence of two
elements:
1) there must be an
actual of assembly of men
2) it is for the purpose
of executing or
effecting a treasonable
design by force.
This means that the said
offenders, Filipino citizens who
are said to be in collaboration
with the enemy troops in order
to hand over the Philippine
Government to the enemy
troops. Absent of that
collaboration, it cannot be
considered as treason

b. Adheres to the enemies by


giving them aid or comfort.
Adherence to the enemies
mean that the Filipino citizen or
t h e o ff e n d e r i n t e n t i o n a l l y,
intellectually and emotionally
favors
the
e n e m y.
Therefore,adherence to the
enemies is an internal state of
mind, it is mental state, you
cannot see adherence to the
enemies

How now would you know


that a person is adhering to
the enemy state?
It is manifested by his

acts of giving aid or


comfort to the enemy.
That is why these two
must concur:
1. Adherence to the
enemies

CRIMINAL LAW 2
2. Giving them aid or
comfort

Mere adherence to
the enemies, without
any act of giving aid or
comfort to the enemy
will not bring along
treason, it is the act of
giving aid or comfort
which
is
the
manifestation of the
adherence to the
enemies.

EXAMPLES OF ACTS OF ADHERING TO THE ENEMIES


BY GIVING AID OR COMFORT:
o By giving the enemies information, transportation,
arms, supplies, all of these will weaken the
defense of the Philippines and strengthen the
enemy state.
o People vs. Perez:The court said, "the act of
commandeering women or giving women to the
enemy troops in times of war, to satisfy the lust of
the enemy troops is not considered as a
treasonable act." Because according the Court,
whatever benefit is given to the enemy is merely
trivial in nature,imperceptible and it was not the
intent of the offender (unintentionally).

give rise to a separate and distinct crime? Will you charge


him for two crimes based on treason and murder?
A: There is only one crime committed by him
and the crime committed is treason. Common
crimes such as Murder, physical injuries,
homicide, arson, if they are committed in
furtherance to, in connection with or incidentally to
treason shall be absorbed in the crime of treason
because they are atrocities for war and therefore,
they are considered as absorbed in the crime of
treason. It cannot even be complex, they are
considered absorbed in the crime of treason.

There are two ways of proving treason under Article


114:
1. TESTIMONY OF TWO WITNESSES, AT
L E A S T, T O T H E S A M E O V E R T A C T,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE "TWO-WITNESS
RULE"
There must be two witnesses who will prove

only on the commission by the offender of an


overt act showing that he adheres to the
enemy. Therefore, treason cannot be proven
by mere substantial evidence. There must be
direct evidence, a witness to this act of giving
aid or comfort to the enemy.
2. CONFESSION OF THE OFFENDER OR THE
ACCUSED MADE IN AN OPEN COURT
Confession of guilt must be made before a

court. Extra-judicial confession will not give


rise to conviction in case of the crime of
treason.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if there is war which the Philippines is involved? X
was among those who committed treason against the
government. now X in committing treason killed a public
officer of the government of the Philippines, in furtherance
of his act of treason. Will such act amounting to murder

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 2

Q: What if A, B and C, conspired and agreed to commit


treason against the Philippine Government. After their
conspiracy and agreement, A went to X. A told his friend X
that he was in conspiracy with B and C to commit treason
against the Philippine Government. After A told him such
conspiracy with X, A left. X, despite knowledge of the
conspiracy to commit treason among A, B, and C, did not
disclose such information to the proper authorities. What
crime/crimes is/are committed by A, B, C, and X?
A: A, B, and C are liable for the conspiracy to
commit treason. There is a meeting of two or
more persons come to an agreement to commit
the crime of treason and decide to commit it.There
is proposal to commit treason when a person has
decided to commit the crime of treason and
proposes its execution to some other person or
persons. The moment that other person whom the
proposal was given, raise to the commission of
crime, we no longer have proposal, but we have
Conspiracy to commit treason. In the problem, A,
B, and C, conspired, agreed to commit the crime
of treason against the Philippine government,
therefore they are all liable for conspiracy to
commit treason.

Q: X, who had knowledge of the conspiracy to commit


treason among A, B, and C, however, despite that
knowledge, he did not disclose it to the proper authorities.
What is the liability of X?
A: X is liable for misprision of treason is
committed by any person who owes permanent
allegiance to the Philippine Government who fails
to disclose of knowledge to commit treason as
soon as possible to the proper authorities.In the
problem, C, despite having knowledge of the
conspiracy to commit treason among A, B, and C
did not divulge it, did not disclose it to the proper
authorities, therefore, X is liable for misprision of
treason.

TREASON can be committed both by Filipino citizens


and a foreigner temporarily residing in the Philippines,
but MISPRISION OF TREASON can only be
committed by a Filipino citizen who owes permanent

CRIMINAL LAW 2

allegiance to the Philippine government, it cannot be


committed by a foreigner residing in the Philippines.

ARTICLE 117 ESPIONAGE


There are two ways of committing espionage under Article
117:
I.
B y
ent
erin
g ,
with
out
aut
hori
t y
ther
efor
, a
war
shi
p ,
fort,
o r
nav
a l
o r
mili
tary
est
abli
s h
m e
n t
o r
res
erv
atio
n to
obt
ain
any
info
rma
tion
,
pla
ns,
pho
togr
aph
s or
oth
e r
dat
a of
a

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 3

con
fide
ntia
l
nat
ure,
rela
tive
t o
the
def
ens
e of
the
Phil
ippi
nes

The
o ff e
nde
r
can
b e
any
pers
on.
H e
can
be a
Filip
ino
citiz
en,
or a
forei
gner
, or
h e
can
be a
publ
i c
offic
e r
o r
emp
loye
e ,
o r
h e
can
be a
priv
ate
indi

CRIMINAL LAW 2

II.

vidu
al.

1.
Tha
t the
o ff e
nde
r
perf
orm
s
unla
wful
o r
una
utho
rize
d
acts
b y
the
Phili
ppin
e
gov
ern
men
t.

W h
e n
will
the
crim
e of
espi
ona
g e
aris
e?
Under the first mode, the crime of espionage
will arise moment the offender enters the
warship, fort or naval or military establishment
or reservation, without authority if his intention
is to obtain any information, plans,
photographs or other data of a confidential
nature, relative to the defense of the
Philippines.

It is not necessary that for the crime to arise


that he is successful in obtaining the data. It
is not necessary that he indeed obtained the
data. The mere act of entering without
authority is sufficient if his intention is to
obtain the data of confidential manner relative
to the defense of the Philippines.

By disclosing to the representative of a foreign


nation the contents of the articles, data or
information referred to in paragraph No. 1 of
art. 117, which he had in his possession by
reason of the public office he holds.
This mode of committing espionage can only

be committed by a public officer who has


been trusted, by reason of his public position,
of articles, data of confidential nature relative
to the defense of the Philippines.
The crime of espionage will arise the moment

the offender divulges or discloses the data


and information to a representative of a
foreign nation.
So even if he is in possession of the same,

but he does not divulge it to any


representative of a foreign nation, the crime
will not arise.

Espionage can be committed in BOTH, in times of peace


and in times of war.

ARTICLE 118 INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVES


FOR REPRISALS
ELEMENTS:

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 4

2.
Tha
t the
said
act
prov
oke
o r
give
occ
asio
n
f o r
a
war
invo
lvin
g or
liabl
e to
invo
lve
the
Phili
ppin
e s
o r
exp
ose
Filip
ino

CRIMINAL LAW 2
citiz
ens
t o
repr
isal
s on
their
pers
ons
and
pro
pert
y
whil
e
they
are
in a
forei
g n
cou
ntry.

pea
ce.

Case of CAPTAIN MENDOZA


Hostage drama in Luneta. There were Hongkong
citizens boarded the bus and here comes captain
mendoza who was no longer a member of the
military, he entered the bus, with different
weapons and grenades and even killed some
hongkong citizens. Captain mendoza performed
unlawful, unauthorized acts which expose
overseas Filipino workers in Hongkong and china
to reprisals on their person or property. In fact,
there were news at that time that Hongkong or
China would be engaging in war with the
Philippines. Head captain Mendoza, one of the
crimes that may be held against him is inciting to
war or giving motives for reprisals.

ARTICLE119 VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY


ELEMENTS:
1.
The
crim
e is
com
mitt
e d
whe
n
ther
e is
a
war
but
the
Phili
ppin
e s
i s
not
invo
lved
i n
the
said
war
and;

3.

H e
i s
not
lega
l l y
auth
oriz
e d
t o
d o
so.

Inci
ting
t o
war
con
note
s
that
ther
e is
yet
n o
war.
It is
com
mitt
e d
i n
time
s of

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 5

2.
The
com
pete
n t
auth
ority
issu
ed a

CRIMINAL LAW 2
reg
ulati
o n
f o r
the
pur
pos
e of
enfo
rcin
g
neut
ralit
y
amo
n g
Filip
ino
citiz
ens
and
;
3.

The
o ff e
nde
r
viol
ates
suc
h
reg
ulati
o n
imp
ose
d.

Her
e,
ther
e is
war
but
the
Phili
ppin
es
is
not
invo
lved
in
the
said

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 6

war.

Q: There is a war between country X and country Y. Here


comes Pedro, a Filipino citizen, he was siding with country
X. Is he liable?
A: No, he is not liable of violation of neutrality
because in the problem, it did not say that the
competent authority (the President) issued a
proclamation or regulation imposing neutrality.

The violation will only arise if there is a proclamation or


regulation imposing neutrality and a Filipino citizen
violates such declaration or regulation issued by a
competent authority.
Therefore, absence of such
declaration of neutrality, the crime of violation of
neutrality does not arise.

ARTICLE120 CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE


COUNTRY
ELEMENTS:
1. That it is in time of war in which the Philippines is
involved.
2. That the offender makes correspondence with an
enemy country or any territory occupied by enemy
troops.
3. That the correspondence is either
a. Prohibited by the Philippine Government
b. Carried on in ciphers or conventional signs
c. Containing notice or information which might
be useful to the enemy

Here, there is a war in which the Philippines is


involved.

Q: The Philippines is at war with the another country. Here


comes X, a Filipino citizen, he has a pen pal who is a
citizen of the country which is at war with the Philippines.
The competent authority or the President issued a
declaration of proclamation saying that there should be no
correspondence to the enemy state. But X missed his
penpal, and so, he wrote in a small piece of paper, "i love
you, i miss you, muamua!" Is X liable of the crime of
correspondence with the enemy?
A:X is liable because there was a declaration issued
by a competent authority that correspondence with the
hostile country is prohibited and if there is no
declaration, proclamation coming from the competent
authority prohibiting correspondence, the crime will
only arise if the said crime is carried on in ciphers or
conventional signs or Containing notice or information
which might be useful to the enemy.

ARTICLE 121 FLIGHT TO ENEMY'S COUNTRY


ELEMENTS:
1. That there is s war in which the Philippines is
involved.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
2. That the offender must be owing allegiance to the
Philippine Government
3. That the offender attempts to flee or go to enemy's
country
4. That going to the enemy country is prohibited by a
competent authority

a.
The
o ff e
nde
r s
eith
e r
AT T
A C
K or
SEI
Z E
the
ves
sel.

There must be a declaration or a proclamation issued


by a competent authority, that no Filipino shall flee to
the enemy's country and the offender violates such
proclamation.
Mere attempt will readily rise to the crime. It is not
necessary that the offender has actually gone to the
country.
There must be declaration or proclamation prohibiting
flight to enemy state.

ARTICLE 122 PIRACY


ELEMENTS:
1. The first element is where the vessel is
located. The vessel can either be on the high
seas or on Philippine waters (this was brought
about by the amendment of RA 7659). Before
the amendment of RA 7659, Piracy under
Article 122 can only be committed when the
vessel is on the high seas. But because of
this amendment brought about by RA 7659,
Piracy now under Article 122 can be
committed when the vessel is on Philippine
waters.
2.

3.

The second element provides for the


offenders. The offenders must NOT be
members of the complement or passengers of
the vessel. Therefore, the offenders must be
STRANGERS to the vessel. They must be
coming from the outside, not from the inside.

The
third
ele
men
t
refe
rs to
the
mod
e of
com
mitti
n g
pira
cy.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 7

b.
The
o ff e
nde
r s
eith
e r
SEI
Z E
I N
WH
O L
E or
I N
PAR
T
the
carg
o ,
the
equi
pme
n t
o r
the
pers
onal
belo
ngin
g s
o f
the
pas
sen
gers
o r
m e
mbe
rs of
the
com
ple

CRIMINAL LAW 2

men
t.

Bas
e d
o n
thes
e
ele
men
t s ,
you
will
noti
c e
that
pira
cy is
akin
t o
rob
bery
. It
is in
e ff e
c t
rob
bery
. It
i s
just
call
e d
pira
c y
bec
aus
e
the
obje
ct of
the
thin
g is
eith
e r
the
ves
sel
o r
the
carg
o or
equi
pme
nt of

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 8

the
said
ves
sel.
The
re is
also
the
use
o f
forc
e or
inti
mid
atio
n .
The
re is
also
the
use
o f
viol
enc
e
agai
nst
pers
ons.
The
re is
also
inte
nt to
gain
.So
it is
akin
,
simil
a r
t o
rob
bery
.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
ARTICLE122 MUTINY
COMMITTED WHEN:
1.The vessel is either on the high seas or on
Philippine waters
2.
The
OFF
E N
D E
R S
are
M E
M B
E R
S
O F
THE
C O
M P
L E
M E
N T
o r
PAS
S E
N G
E R
S
O F
THE
V E
S S
EL
3.
The
o ff e
nde
r s
rais
e a
com
moti
o n
o r
dist
urb
anc
e on
the
boa
r d
the
ship
agai
nst
the
lawf

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 9

u l
com
man
d of
the
capt
ain
o r
the
com
man
der
o f
the
ship
.
In mutiny, there is no taking because in mutiny there is no
intent to gain. Mutiny is the rising of commotion, a
resistance against the lawful command, against the lawful
authority of the commander or captain of the ship.
Since in mutiny, there is no intent to gain, mutiny is akin to
sedition. The rising of commotion, an uprising, an act of
dissent against lawful authority.

SO HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH PIRACY VS. MUTINY?


1.
I n
pira
cy,
the
o ff e
nde
r s
are
stra
nge
rs to
the
ves
sel,
whe
reas
, in
muti
ny,
the
o ff e
nde
r s
are
nec
ess
arily
insi
d e
the
ves

CRIMINAL LAW 2
sel,
they
are
eith
e r
m e
mbe
rs of
the
com
ple
men
t or
pas
sen
gers
o f
the
ves
sel
2.
I n
Pira
cy,
ther
e is
inte
nt to
gain
bec
aus
e it
i s
simil
a r
t o
rob
bery
,
whe
reas
, in
muti
ny,
ther
e is
n o
inte
nt to
gain
bec
aus
e
the
ess
enc
e of

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 10

the
crim
e is
t o
g o
agai
nst
the
lawf
u l
auth
ority
o f
the
com
man
der
o f
the
ship
.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: The vessel is on the sea going to Mindoro. So while the
ship is on its way to Mindoro, suddenly there comes a big
storm. The commander or the captain of the ship said that
they should first move towards the shore and let the storm
comes calm in order to ensure the safety of the passengers
of the vessel. The passengers of the vessel and members
of the complement didnt want the decision of the said
captain of the ship and so they seize the captain of the ship
and manned the vessel until they reach Mindoro. What
crime, if any, is committed by these members of the
complement and passengers of the vessel?
A: They are liable of MUTINY. The vessel is on
Philippine waters. The offenders are members of
the complement and they go against the lawful
authority of the captain of the ship. Therefore they
are liable of mutiny.

Q: While a vessel is on Philippine waters, here comes a


second vessel. Four men from the second vessel boarded
the first vessel and at gunpoint, took the cargo and
equipment of the said vessel. Placed them in the second
vessel and off they went. What crime is committed by these
four men?
A: They are liable of PIRACY UNDER ARTICLE
122. The vessel is on Philippine waters, the
offenders are not members of the complement or
passengers of the ship. They seize the cargo and
equipment of the vessel. Therefore, it is piracy
under Article 122.

Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters. While the vessel is


on Philippine waters, the members of the complement and
passengers of the said vessel in conspiracy with one
another took the cargo and equipment of the said vessel,

CRIMINAL LAW 2
and then they boarded a second vessel and off they went.
What crime is committed by the members of the
complement and passengers of the said vessel?
A: The members of the complement and
passengers of the vessel committed ACTS OF
PIRACY because they seize in whole or in part
the cargo or equipment of the vessel but NOT
PIRACY UNDER ARTICLE 122 because in Article
122, it is a requisite that the offenders must be
strangers to the vessel. Here, the offenders are
members of the complement and passengers of
the vessel. So the crime committed is PIRACY
BUT UNDER PD 532.

ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-ROBBERY LAW OF 1974 (PD


532)
Under PD 532, piracy is committed by attacking or seizing
the vessel or seizing in whole or in part the cargo,
equipment or personal belongings of the members of the
complement or passengers of the vessel IRRESPECTIVE
of the value thereof, committed by means of force and
violence and committed by any person whether he may a
member of the complement or passenger of the vessel or
strangers to the vessel BUT the vessel is on Philippine
waters. Therefore, for PIRACY UNDER PD 532 to arise, it
necessary that the vessel is on Philippine waters.If the
vessel is on the high seas, immediately rule out PD
532.

HOW COULD YOU KNOW IF IT IS PIRACY UNDER PD


532 OR PIRACY UNDER ARTICLE 122 OF RPC?
If the vessel is on Philippine waters, your choice is

either Piracy under PD 532 or Piracy Article 122.

W h
ere
lies
the
diffe
renc
e?

Sinc
e
Artic
l e
122
o f
R P
C is
the
mai
n
law,
w e
hav
e to
reco
ncil
e it
with
P D
532.
O r
P D
532
mus
t be
reco
ncil
e d

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 11

CRIMINAL LAW 2

with
Artic
l e
122.
Pira
c y
und
e r
P D
532,
the
offe
nde
r s
can
b e
any
per
son
. He
can
b e
a
stra
nge
r .
H e
can
b e
m e
m b
ers
o f
the
c o
mpl
e m
ent.
Therefore, where does PD 532 apply?

I t
will
appl
y
whe
n
the
offe
nde
r s
are
m e
m b
ers
o f
the
c o

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 12

mpl
e m
ent
o r
pas
sen
ger
s of
the
ves
sel
and
the
ves
sel
i s
o n
the
Phil
ippi
n e
wat
ers.

Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters, suddenly men from


the outside committed acts of piracy. What crime is
committed?
A: Piracy under Article 122
Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters. Acts of piracy were
committed by the members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel. What crime is committed?
A: Piracy under PD 532

Q: What if the vessel is on the high seas? While the vessel


is on the high seas, there comes a second vessel. Four
men from the second vessel boarded the first vessel and at
gunpoint took the cargo and equipment of the first vessel.
What crime is committed by these four men?
A: Piracy under Article 122. The vessel is on the
high seas. The offenders are not members of the
complement or the passengers of the vessel. They
seize in whole or in part the cargo and equipment
of the said vessel.

Q: While the vessel is on the high seas,members of the


complement or passengers of the vessel in conspiracy with
one anothertook away the cargo and equipment of the
vessel. What crime is committed?
NOTE: It is not piracy under Article 122

because here, the offenders are


members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel. In Article 122,
it is required that the offenders must be
strangers to the vessel. It cannot be
piracy under PD 532 because the vessel
must be on Philippine waters. In our

CRIMINAL LAW 2

problem, the vessel is on the high seas.


So, what crime is committed?
A: Again, piracy is akin to robbery. Since Piracy
under Article 122 and Piracy under PD 532 do not
apply, the crime committed is ROBBERY IN AN
UNINHABITED PLACE.

ARTICLE 123 QUALIFIED PIRACY


What are the circumstances which will qualify piracy?

Under Article 122, the following

circumstances will qualify piracy:


1. Whenever the offender have seized
a vessel by boarding or firing
upon; or
2. Whenever the offenders have
aband0ned their victims without
means of saving themselves; or
There is intent to kill.

3. W h e n e v e r t h e c r i m e i s
a c c o m p a n i e d b y m u r d e r,
homicide, physical injuries or
rape
Whenever these four

crimes accompanied the


act of piracy, it will not bring
a b o u t a s e p a ra te and
distinct crime or a separate
and distinct charge of
murder, homicide, physical
injuries or rape. These
crimes are absorbed
because they are
circumstances which will
qualify the penalty to death.
NOTE: These circumstances are
separate and distinct from each other. It
is not necessary that all of themmust be
present. The presence of one will qualify
piracy. Notice the conjunction OR. These
are qualifying circumstances which are
prejudicial to the accused therefore they
must be strictly construed.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if the vessel is on Philippine waters, and there
comes a second vessel. Four men from the second vessel
boarded the first vessel and at gunpoint, they asked the
passengers to give to them all their valuables. One woman
didnt want to give her wedding ring because it was so
precious to her and so one of the men forcibly took the
wedding ring from the finger such that the finger was
severed from it. What crime is committed?
A: QUALIFIED PIRACY because piracy was
accompanied by physical injuries.

Q: What if in the same problem, the woman didnt want to


give the ring, one of the men slapped the woman on the

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 13

face three times and the face of the woman became


reddish. She suffered slight physical injuries. What about
the fact that the injury suffered was only slight?
A: It will not make a difference although the injury
suffered was only slight. In the third circumstance
which will qualify piracy, the word physical
injuries is used in its generic sense. Therefore,
whatever be of kind of physical injuries, whether
serious or slight for as long as it was accompanied
by piracy, it will be considered as qualified piracy.

Q: What if in the same problem, the woman didnt want to


give the ring and one of the men touched the private parts
of the said woman and after touching the private parts of
the said woman with lust, he forcibly took the ring. What
crime is committed by the said men?
A: All of them will be liable for piracy. However, the
man who touched the private part of the woman
will be liable for two crimes: piracy and acts of
lasciviousness. Acts of lasciviousness is not
mentioned in Article 123. Therefore, its presence
will not qualify piracy. It will bring about a separate
and distinct charge of acts of lasciviousness.
So, only these four crimes (murder, homicide,

physical injuries and rape) will qualify piracy. If


other crime is committed and accompanied by
piracy and is not among these four crimes
mentioned in Article 123, it will bring about a
separate and distinct charge.

QUALIFIED MUTINY
Insofar as mutiny is concerned, what are the

circumstances which will qualify mutiny?


In Article 123, there is no specific mention of

qualified mutiny, however according to Reyes


and other legal luminaries, of the three
circumstances stated in Article 123,
paragraphs 2 and 3 are considered as
circumstances which will qualify mutiny. That
is:
1. whenever the offenders have
abandoned their victims without
means of saving themselves; or
2. w h e n e v e r t h e c r i m e i s
accompanied with murder,
homicide, physical injuries or
rape
According to Reyes and

other legal luminaries, only


these two are considered
qualified in mutiny because
in mutiny, the offenders are
n e c e s s a r i l y, o r d i n a r i l y
inside the vessel because
they are members of the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
complement or passengers
of the vessel.

ANTI-HIJACKING LAW (R.A. No. 6235 otherwise known


as An Act Prohibiting Certain Acts inimical to Civil
Aviation)
Under RA 6235, there are four prohibited acts.
1. By compelling the pilot of an aircraft of Philippine
registry to change its course or destination OR by
seizing or usurping control thereof while it is in
flight
2.

By compelling an aircraft of foreign registry to land


in Philippine territory OR by seizing or usurping
control thereof while the same is in Philippine
territory

3.

These are the first two prohibited acts. How could


you distinguish the first act from the second act?
If the aircraft is of Philippine registry, the
seizure or usurpation to amount in
violation of RA 6235, requires that the
aircraft must be in flight. An aircraft is in
flight the moment all its external doors
had been closed, following embarkation
until any of it external doors had been
opened for purposes of disembarkation.
On the other hand, if the aircraft is of
f o r e i g n r e g i s t r y, t h e s e i z u r e o r
usurpation did not need while it is in
flight. For as long as the aircraft of
foreign registry is within the Philippine
territory, seizure or usurpation thereof
will bring about violation of RA 6235
even if all its doors are opened; even if it
is not in flight.
Insofar as these two prohibited acts are
concerned, what are the circumstances which will
qualify the penalty?
Under RA 6235, the following
circumstances will qualify the first two
acts:
a. By firing upon the pilot or the
member of the crew or passenger
of the aircraft; or
b. By exploding or attempting to
explode by mean of a bomb or
explosive for purposes of
destroying the aircraft; or
c. W h e n e v e r t h e c r i m e i s
accompanied by murder, homicide,
serious physical injuries or rape

NOTE: In case of piracy, the law


uses the word physical injuries in
its generic sense. Whatever be the
kind of physical injury that will

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 14

4.

accompany piracy, the crime


committed is qualified piracy. But
in case of hijacking under RA
6235, the law is specific; it must
be serious physical injuries.
Therefore, if the physical injuries
that would accompany the act of
usurpation and seizure of the
aircraft would only be less serious
physical injuries or slight physical
injuries, the penalty is not
qualified. The penalty is qualified
because from the penalty of 12 to
20 years, it would become 15
years to death.

By carrying or loading on board a PASSENGER


AIRCRAFT operating as a public utility in the
Philippines materials or substances which are
explosive, flammable, corrosive or poisonous
By shipping, carrying or loading on board a
CARGO AIRCRAFT operating as a public utility in
the Philippines materials or substances which are
explosive, flammable, corrosive or poisonous in a
manner not in accordance with the rules and
regulations of the Air Transportation Office

HOW WOULD YOU DISTINGUISH THE 3RD FROM THE


4TH ACT?
If the aircraft is a PASSENGER AIRCRAFT,

the mere act of carrying or loading explosive,


flammable, corrosive or poisonous
substances will immediately constitute a
violation of RA 6235.
If however the aircraft is a CARGO

AIRCRAFT, the loading of these poisonous


substances, flammable substances, is
allowed because it is a cargo aircraft. The
crime will only arise if such act of loading is
not in accordance with the rules and
regulations of the Air Transportation Office.

HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007 (R.A. No. 9372)


Q: What if there is a bus and the bus is parked at
Lunetapark and it was full of children. And here comes X, X
had different kinds of explosive all over his body. And at
gunpoint, entered the said bus and told the children to keep
quiet. Thereafter, there is a cartolina on the glass window of
the said bus. Written on the cartolina were his demands to
the government. His demands were first, that his brother, a
member of NPA and who is being incarcerated by the
military be released and his second demand, was that
funds be transferred to his account. So these were the
demands made by X against the government. Because of
this, the parents of the children arrived, the media arrived,
all the cabinet secretaries arrived. Only the president did
not arrive. So everybody was there. They were afraid that

CRIMINAL LAW 2
the children might die so there was chaos in the entire
Philippines. It took the members of the military and police
12 hours to subdue X. So after 12 hours, they were able to
arrest X. What crime, if any, may be filed against X?
A: X will be charged of the crime of terrorism
under RA 9372, the Human Security Act of 2007.
Under Section 3 of Ra 9372, terrorism is
committed when the offender commits any of the
following acts punishable under the RPC:
a. Piracy
b. Rebellion
c. Coup dEtat
d. Murder
e. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention
f. Crimes involving Destruction

If the offender commits any of these acts


punishable under the RPC or any of the following
acts punishable under special penal laws:

1. Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High


Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
2. Article 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
3. Article 134-a (Coup dEtat), including acts committed by
private persons;
4. Article 248 (Murder);
5. Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention);
6. Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction,
or under
1. Presidential Decree No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);
2. Republic Act No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and
Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990);
3. Republic Act No. 5207, (Atomic Energy Regulatory and
Liability Act of 1968);
4. Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
5. Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-piracy and Antihighway Robbery Law of 1974); and,
6. Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended (Decree
Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful Possession,
Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or Disposition of
Firearms, Ammunitions or Explosives)

If the offender commits any of these crimes under


the RPC and any of the crimes under special
penal laws, thereby sowing and creating a
condition widespread and extraordinary fear and
panic among the populace in order to coerce the
government to give in to an unlawful demand, he
is liable of terrorism and the penalty is 40 years
imprisonment without the benefit of parole under
the Indeterminate Sentence Law. So it is the
maximum penalty of 40 years. He has to serve it
totally. Even if he has already served the

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 15

minimum, he cannot be given the benefit of parole


under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. So it is
necessary that he must commit any of these
predicate crimes and after committing these
predicate crimes, where lies the difference?
Because his act that sowed and created fear and
panic among the populace coupled with an
unlawful demand against the government.

Q: So let us say that X was charged with terrorism based


on a valid complaint or information a case of terrorism was
filed against him before the RTC. However, after trial on the
merits, the judge acquitted him. According to the judge, the
prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt therefore acquittal for reasonable doubt.
Since he is acquitted of terrorism under RA 9372, can he
still be prosecuted for his predicate crime of kidnapping and
illegal detention because he detained the children for more
than 12 hours? Can he still be prosecuted for Illegal and
Unlawful Possession of Firearms, Ammunitions or
Explosives because he was full of firearms and
ammunitions and explosives?
A: No more. Because of Section 49 of RA 9372.
Under Section 49 of RA 9372, whenever a person
has been charged of terrorism, or any act
punishable under RA 9372, based on the valid
complaint or information, sufficient information and
substance to bring about and thereafter he is
acquitted or the case is dismissed, he can no
longer be subsequently prosecuted for any other
felony or offense necessarily included in the crime
charged. The crime of kidnapping and serious
illegal detention is necessarily included in
terrorism because it is one of the predicate crimes.
Likewise, violation of PD 1866, as amended Illegal
and Unlawful Possession of Firearms is also
necessarily included in terrorism because it is one
of the predicated crimes in terrorism. Or any of
these predicated crimes, he can no longer be
charged because they are necessarily included in
terrorism. This is known as the ABSORPTION
PRINCIPLE in terrorism.

Q: But what if in the same problem, while X was waiting for


his demands to be given by the government, he saw a girl
and with lewd design, he touched the private parts of the
seven-year old girl. Therefore he committed a violation of
RA 7610 the Anti-Child Abuse Law. He was acquitted of
terrorism. Can the state prosecute him for violation of RA
7610?
A: Yes, because it is not among the predicate
crimes. It is not a crime necessarily included in
the crime of terrorism.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

The offender is a public officer or


employee. BUT NOT ALL PUBLIC
OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES can
commit arbitrary detention.
The
public officer of employee can
commit arbitrary detention are only
those who have been vested with
authority to effect arrest and
detain a person or at least to
cause the detention of a person.
Public officers who have been vested
with authority to effects arrest and detain
a person are POLICE OFFICERS. On
the other hand, public officers vested with
authority to cause the detention of a
person are MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.
They can order the detention of a person
who has been cited of contempt for
failing to accurate their proof, or we have
JUDGES they can order the summary
detention of persons cited in contempt of
court.
That he detains a person
The second element requires that the
offender detains a person.
So when is there detention?
There is detention when the

offended party is placed in


incarceration. When the offended
party is placed behind bars or when
the offended party is restrained of
his person or liberty.
In order to amount arbitrary

detention there must be an act of


restraint on the person or liberty
of the offended party. Absent that
intent, absent the actual restraint on
the person or liberty of the offended
party It can be any other crime
BUT NOT ARBITRARY
DETENTION. Therefore, Supreme
Court said that intent to detain must
be manifest, it must be evident.
Absent that, it can be any other
crime but not arbitrary detention.

2.

TITLE TWO
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE
STATE (Articles 124 133)

The acts under TITLE TWO are made criminal because


they both appease the Bill of Rights. The rights stated
under the Constitution and the first of these is under
ARTICLE 124, 125 and 126 Arbitrary Detention.

3 KINDS OF ARBITRARY DETENTION:


1. Arbitrary Detention by detaining a person without
legal ground under Article 124
2. Arbitrary Detention by failing to deliver the
detained person to the proper judicial authorities
within 12, 18 or 36 hours under Article 125
3. Arbitrary Detention by delaying the release of
prisoners despite the judicial or executive order to
do so under Article 126

ARTICLE124 ARBITRARY DETENTION BY DETAINING


A PERSON WITHOUT LEGAL GROUND
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee
Who is the offender in Article 124?

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 16

3.

That the detention is without legal grounds


The third element requires that the detention
must be without legal ground.
So when is detention without legal

grounds under Article 124?


1. When the said offended party was

arrested without a warrant of arrest.


2. When the said offended party was
arrested and his arrest and detention
does not fall under any of the

CRIMINAL LAW 2

circumstances or a valid warrantless


arrest.
3. When he is not suffering from
violent insanity or any other ailment
which requires compulsory
confinement.
All of these are not

considered valid grounds


for detention.
So to reverse, what are the valid
grounds for detention?
The following are valid grounds for

detention:
a. If the person does not receive
and detained by virtue of a
warrant of arrest.
b. If a person was arrested and
detained under any of the
circumstances for a valid
warrantless arrest
c. If a person was suffering violent
insanity or any illness which
requires compulsory
confinement.
These are the valid ground

for the arrest and detention


of a person.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So if a person, driving his vehicle entered a one way
street and in violation of the LTO rules and regulation, was
stopped by police officer, his license was taken and gave
him a ticket and was bought to the nearest PNP station and
was placed behind bars. He was detained. That was 8
oclock in the morning then the arresting officer left. And on
the afternoon, the police officer returned to the police
station. Upon his arrival, he immediately released the
incarcerated person whom he detained for entering a one
way street. Is the said police officer liable for arbitrary
detention under Article 124?
A: YES, he is liable ofARBITRARY DETENTION.
He is a public officer vested with authority to effect
arrest and detain a person. If he detained the
person, the detention was without legal ground. It
is without legal ground because entering a one
way street and violating the traffic rules and
regulation is not a ground for incarceration. It is
not a ground for a person to be placed behind
bars. If a person committed a violation of traffic
rules and regulation like entering a one way street
or beating the red light, he should only be given a
ticket. There should not even be a confiscation of
license. After that, he should be allowed to leave
but that is not a ground for him to be placed under
detention. Since the officer detained the person
without any legal ground HE IS LIABLE FOR
ARBITRARY DETENTION.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 17

Q: What if X is suspected to be a snatcher and many


complaints was filed against him. One time, when the
police officers were conducting a patrol they saw X who
was perhaps waiting for a ride. When the police officers
saw X they immediately arrested X and brought him to the
nearest police station. They told X that he is to be
investigated for he is said to be a cellphone snatcher. So
he was brought to the investigation room however, the
investigation officer was not around so the arresting officer
told him that he needs to be investigated and that he can
leave but he must make sure to come back for purposes of
investigation otherwise if he does not come back the next
time they see him they will kill him. So because of that, X
would get out of the precinct but would immediately return.
Are the police officers liable for arbitrary detention?
A: NO, the police officers are not liable for
arbitrary detention. There is no intent to restrain
or detain the person or liberty of X, the offended
party. In order to amount to arbitrary detention it is
necessary that the intent of the public officer to
restrain the person or liberty of the offended party
must be manifest and it must be evident. In this
case however, it is not.

Even if there is a threat on the part of the police


officer there is however no intent to detain X. What
are the crimes if any are the police officer liable
for?
T h e y c o m m i t t e d G R AV E T H R E AT S

because they threatened to kill X if he would


not come back. It is the grave threats that
made X come back in the police station.

ARTICLE125 ARBITRARY DETENTION BY FAILING


TO DELIVER THE DETAINED PERSON TO THE
PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES WITHIN 12, 18 OR 36
HOURS
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender here is a public officer or
employee vested with authority to effect arrest
and detain a person
2. That offender has detained a person for some
legal ground
The second element requires that the
offender arrests and detains a person
for
some legal ground.
What are these legal grounds referred to

under Article 125?


The legal ground being referred to in

Article 125 is not the fact that the


said arrest was made by virtue of a
warrant of arrest because if the
offended party was arrested by the
public officer by virtue of a valid
warrant of arrest he does not have

CRIMINAL LAW 2

3.

the obligation to deliver him to the


proper judicial authorities.
So what are these valid instances in
arresting a person?
These refer to circumstances of valid

warrantless arrests under Section 5


Rule 112 of the Rules of Court. It
requires that a peace officer or a
private individual may even without a
warrant arrest a person under the
following circumstances:
a. That in his presence the
person to be arrested has
committed, is actually
committing, or is attempting
to commit a crime. This is
otherwise known as
INFLAGRANTE DELICTO
ARREST
b. When a crime has in fact
just been committed, and
t h e p o l i c e o ff i c e r h a s
probable cause to believe
based on personal
knowledge of facts and
circumstances that the
person to be arrested is the
one who committed the
crime. This is otherwise
known as HOT PURSUIT
ARREST.
c. When the person to be
arrested is a prisoner who
has escaped from a penal
establishment or a place
where he is serving final
sentence or temporarily
detained while his case is
pending, or has escaped
while being transferred from
one penal institution to
another.
These are the

circumstances for a
valid warrantless
arrest. These are the
circumstances referred
to in the second
element of Article 125.

That the offender fails to deliver the person


arrested to the proper judicial authorities
within 12, 18 or 36 hours.
The third element requires that that the
offender fails to deliver the person arrested to
the proper judicial authorities within 12, 18 or
36 hours.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 18

What do you mean by delivery?


Delivery does not mean that you

really have to deliver the physical


body of the person arrested to the
court. It means constructive delivery
or legal delivery, meaning, the filing
of the appropriate case before the
proper court. That is delivery to
proper judicial authorities - filing of
the case before the proper court.
The law says that a public officer must
deliver to the proper judicial authorities.
So judicial authority, what does it mean?
The proper judicial authorities refers

to COURTS OF JUSTICES OR
JUDGES OF THE COURTS THAT
HAS THE POWER TO ORDER THE
INCARCERATION OR DETENTION
OF A PERSON OR HIS
TEMPORARY RESTRAIN UPON
P O S T I N G O F A P P R O P R I AT E
COMPLAIN.

The FISCAL does not belong to the


proper judicial authority because he
belongs to the executive branch. The
Fiscal is under the Department of
Justice and not under the Supreme
Court. The head of the Fiscal is
Secretary De Lima and the President
and not Chief Justice Sereno. Thats
why a Fiscal is not within the
meaning of a judicial authority.
Second, the fiscal may fix or the
fiscal may recommend the bail but
he does not have the power to fix the
bail and allow the accused to go on
temporary liberty. Only the judges
are allowed to fix the bail and order
the temporary liberty of the accused
until upon the posting of the said
bail.

The law says that a public officer must deliver the person
arrested to proper judicial authority within:
a. 12 hours, for crimes punishable by light penalties,
or their equivalent
b. 18 hours, for crimes punishable by correctional
penalties, or their equivalent
c. 36 hours, for crimes punishable by afflictive or
capital penalties, or their equivalent

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a person has been arrested Inflagrante Delicto
in possession of an unlicensed firearm. Possession of
unlicensed firearm is punished by a special penal law (P.D.
1866 as amended). Is the arresting officer required to

CRIMINAL LAW 2
deliver the accused to the proper judicial authorities? Does
Article 125 apply even to violation of special penal laws?
A: Yes, because the law says or their
equivalent. 12 hours, for crimes punishable by
light penalties, or their equivalent. That means all
their equivalent refers to their equivalent even in
cases of violation of special penal laws.
Therefore, even if the crime committed or the
crime for which the offender is being arrested is
based on violation of special penal laws, the
arresting police officer has the obligation to deliver
the person arrested to the proper judicial
authorities in consonance with Article 125 of the
Revised Penal Code.

Q: What if the police officers caught X in the actual act of


killing Y. So they saw X and Y fighting and they saw X
stabbed Y to death. Therefore, X is liable of homicide. They
arrested X and that was Saturday, 3 oclock in the
afternoon. Sunday, there is no office. The following day,
Monday, happens to be declared a special non-working
holiday. Therefore, the police officers were able to deliver X
to the proper judicial officer only on Tuesday, 8 oclock in
the morning. They were able to file the case in the Fiscals
office for purposes of proceedings Tuesday, 8 oclock in the
morning, beyond 36 hours which was required by law. Are
the police officers liable for arbitrary detention?
A: NO, the police officers are not liable for
arbitrary detention. The Secretary of the
Department of Justice has made a legal opinion
that the said 12, 18 and 36 hours refers to
WORKING HOURS. These refer to the time when
the courts are open in order to receive the cases
to be filed against them. This does not include the
crime wherein the courts are closed and they did
not receive the complaint or information to be filed
against the accused.

ARTICLE126 ARBITRARY DETENTION BY DELAYING


THE RELEASE OF PRISONERS DESPITE THE
JUDICIAL OR EXECUTIVE ORDER TO DO SO
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer or employee
2. That there is a judicial or executive order for
the release of the prisoner or detention
prisoner, or that there is a proceeding upon a
petition for the liberation of such person.
3. That the offender without good/valid reason
delays: (1) the service of the notice of such
order to the prisoner; or (2) the performance
of such judicial or executive order for the
release of the prisoner; or (3) the proceeding
upon a petition for the release of such person.
NOTE: What is punishable is the delay without valid
reason, the delay of the release of the prisoner despite the
judicial or executive order to do so.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 19

Example of judicial order for the release of a


prisoner lets say that a person has been charged
in court and the public prosecutor failed to present
any evidence for consecutive times and no
witnesses has ever been presented since the
beginning. The judge will dismiss the case and
order the release of the accused from jail. This is
an example of a judicial order for the release of a
prisoner. Or lets say the judge acquitted the
accused then he will order the release of the said
accused from jail.
How about an example of an executive order for a
release of a prisoner? A person was arrested and
placed behind bars and proceeding was filed
before the fiscals office. The fiscal ordered the
release of the prisoner. This is an example of
executive order for the release the prisoner.

Q: What if X has been charged of two crimes - Illegal sales


of dangerous drugs and illegal possession of dangerous
drugs? So, two crimes were filed against him. The illegal
possession of dangerous drugs was filed before the RTC
Branch 6 on the other hand; the illegal sale was filed before
RTC Branch 87. Two different courts were filed with. In the
illegal possession of dangerous drugs which was filed in
RTC Branch 6, no witnesses were ever presented and so
the judge immediately declared the dismissal of the case
and he ordered that X should already be released from jail.
However, the case for illegal sale of dangerous drugs under
RTC Branch 87 is still ongoing. The jail warden receives
the order coming from the judge RTC Branch 6 that X
should be released. The jail warden did not compel. Is the
jail warden liable for arbitrary detention under Article 126 Arbitrary Detention by delaying the release of prisoners
despite the judicial or executive order to do so?
A: NO, the jail warden is not liable for arbitrary
detention under Article 126 because there is still
another pending case against the said prisoner
before another court. Therefore, it is incumbent
upon him not to compel with the judge of Branch 6
since there is another case in Branch 87 which is
still ongoing. What the law punishes is delay
without valid reason for the release of the
prisoner.

ARTICLE127 EXPULSION
Expulsion is committed by public officers or employees who
shall expel any person from the Philippines or who compels
him to change his residence without any lawful authority to
do so.Again, the offender is a public officer or employee
who acts either:
a. By expelling a person from the Philippines
b. By compelling a person to change his
residence

What the law prohibits is that if this public officer


or employee expels him from the Philippines or

CRIMINAL LAW 2
compels him to change his residence without
lawful authority to do so because there are
persons who have been authorized by law to
deport a person from the Philippines or to compel
a person to change his residence.

3.

He either enters the dwelling of another against


the will of the latter or searching for papers or
other effects found therein without the consent of
the owner, or after having surreptitiously entered
the dwelling, being discovered and asked to leave,
he refuses to leave.

The courts on the other hand, have the power to


compel a person to change his place of residence.
Lets say the offender is a concubine and the
penalty to be imposed to a concubine is destierro.
Therefore, the concubine is prohibited from
entering a particular place based on the judgment
of the court. Now, theprohibited place from which
she is prohibited from entering is the place where
she lives. She cannot enter the said place
therefore; the court is empowered to compel her
to change her place of residence because she
cannot enter the place wherein her house is
situated.

VIOLATION OF DOMICILE (ARTICLE 128, 129, 130)


a public officer or employee entered into a

dwelling of another which is not armed with a


search warrant
different prohibited acts constituting violation of

domicile:
I.
By entering any dwelling against the will
of the owner thereof; or
II.
By searching papers or other effects
found therein without the previous
consent of such owner; or
III. By refusing to leave the premises, after
having surreptitiously entered

ARTICLE128 VIOLATION OF DOMICILE


ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer or employee

He was not authorized by a judicial order to enter


the dwelling and/or make a search therein for
papers or other effects
The second element requires that

entering upon the dwelling of another


which is not authorized by a judicial
order. The judicial order refers to a
search warrant

For example, the President has the power to


deport or expel a person from the Philippines.
Another example is a foreigner who is known to
be a persona non grata; the President may order
his deportation to his home.

Page 20

The third elements provides for the different modes of


violation of domicile
(These three modes are separate and distinct from each
other do not look for all the three modes in a problem,
violation of one of them will bring about violation of
domicile)

1.
-

2.

Who is the offender in the violation of domicile?


He must be a public officer or employee

acting under color of authority


A public officer or employee is said to be

acting under color of authority if he has been


vested with the authority to implement a
search warrant, but when he entered in the
said dwelling, he is not armed with a search
warrant. Therefore, he was acting under color
of authority.
Even if he is a public officer or employee, but

he did not act under color of authority, is liable


only, not for violation of domicile, but is either
liable for qualified trespass to dwelling or
trespass to property because the public
officer or employee is acting under his private
capacity.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

2.

3.
-

By entering any dwelling against the will of the


owner thereof; or
There must a prohibition, an opposition from entering.
It can either be an implied or expressed opposition
from entering.
Example:
implied opposition the door is closed. It can
be said that the owner is saying that No one
can enter my house
expressed prohibition when the owner is
inside the house and the officer knocks upon
the door and upon seeing the officer, the owner
closes the door.
if there are sayings Do not enter, No entry
It does not mean entering without the consent. An
entry without the consent is not an entry against the
will.
When you say entry against the will, there must be an
opposition or a prohibition from entering the dwelling.

By searching papers or other effects found therein


without the previous consent of the owner; or
The consent of the owner matters. Even if the public
officer or employee is allowed inside, the fact that he is
allowed inside does not mean that he is allowed to
conduct the search.
He must ask first for the previous consent of the owner
before proceeding with the search. Without the
previous consent of the owner to conduct the search,
any search would be a violation of domicile.

By refusing to leave the premises, after having


surreptitiously entered the dwelling
it is his refusal to leave the premises that will bring
about the violation of domicile, NOT the surreptitiously
entering. But it is required that entering must be done
surreptitiously.
Surreptitious entering means entering the dwelling

CRIMINAL LAW 2
-

secretly, candidly.
Therefore, it is important that he mus-t refuse to leave
after being discovered and asked to leave in order to
amount to violation of domicile.
Mere surreptitious entering will not bring about
violation of domicile.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q:What if the door of the house was opened, a police
officer without being armed with a search warrant, entered
the door of the house and went up to the sala. The owner
of the house saw him and asked him to leave, and he left.
Is he liable for violation of domicile?
A: He is not liable for violation of domicile.
When the door of the house is open, there is no
prohibition; there is no opposition from entering.
Anybody may enter even without a search
warrant; therefore, since there is no prohibition or
opposition from entering, violation of domicile
cannot be committed under the first act. Under the
second act, it cannot be committed because he
did not conduct the search. The third act also not
done because the entering of the house is not
done surreptitiously.

Q: What if in the same problem, the door of the house was


opened, a public officer with the intent to conduct a search
warrant entered the house, when he was in the sala, the
owner of the house saw him and told him to leave. He did
not leave; he just stayed there and sat on the sofa. Is he
liable for violation of domicile?
A: He is not liable for violation of domicile.
Under the first act, is entry against the will? NO,
the door was opened. Therefore, there was no
opposition or prohibition from entering. Under the
second act, he did not conduct a search. Under the
third act, is the entering done surreptitiously? NO,
because the door of the house was opened;
therefore, he did not violate any of the following
acts amounting to violation of domicile.
But he did not leave the house, although the

owner of the house asked him to leave. Is he


liable?
Yes. He is liable for unjust vexation.
(Nangiinislangsiya)
Although he did not the house, he cannot
be liable for violation of domicile
because his act does not constitute
the acts prohibited by Article 128.

Q: The door of the house was closed, but it was not locked.
A police officer without a search warrant opened the door,
realizing it was not locked, entered the house and went up
to the sala intending to conduct the search. Before he could
conduct the search, the owner of the house saw him, and
told him to leave and he left. Is he liable for violation of
domicile?
A: Yes. He is laible for violation of domicile.
Even if he left the said place upon being told to do

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 21

it, he is already liable because his entry was


against the will of the owner. The door was closed
although it was not locked. Therefore, there was
an implied opposition, an implied prohibition from
entering.When he entered without a search
warrant intending to conduct a search is already a
violation of domicile

Q: What if the police officer knocked on the door of the


house of X. X opened the door, upon seeing the public
officers, X allowed them to enter. The police officer told X
that they were looking for a stolen car stereo in the
neighborhood; we are going to conduct a search in your
house. X said, "No, you cannot conduct a search inside my
house. The police officers agreed and left the house. Are
they liable for violation of domicile?
A: They are not liable. It is not entry against the
will. They did not conduct a search. The entry was
not done surreptitiously. It does not fall any of the
acts, therefore, they are not liable for violation of
domicile.

Q: In the same problem, when they told the owner that they
were conducting a search for the stolen car stereo, the
owner of the house said, No, you cannot conduct a
search. There is nothing stolen inside my house but the
police officers proceeded with the search.
A: This time, they are liable for violation of
domicile because they made a search without the
previous consent of the owner under the second
act of Art. 128

Q: What if in the same problem, the owner of the house


told the police officers, No you cannot conduct a search,
there is nothing stolen inside my house The police officers
obliged, they were going to leave the house, obeying the
order of the owner. However, on their way out, before they
could go out, they saw near the door, a table and on top of
it, there were drug paraphernalia, contraband. And so, they
seized and confiscated the contraband and then thereafter
they leave the house. Are they liable for violation of
domicile? Are the evidences confiscated admissible against
the owner?
A: They are not liable of violation of domicile.
When they were told not to conduct the search,
they did not conduct the search and they were
about to leave, therefore, not liable for violation of
domicile. But they confiscated the drug
paraphernalia that they saw. Yes, the confiscated
drug paraphernalia were admissible against the
owner because they were contraband. They are
illegal per se. And the police officers saw them
without conducting the search, they saw them
inadvertently. Even without conducting the search,
the police officers would see contraband,
narcotics, in their presence, in their plain view,
they are mandated by law to seize and confiscate

CRIMINAL LAW 2

the same under the plain view doctrine. So in this


case, these drug paraphernalia where under the
plain view and therefore under the obligation to
seize and confiscate them and these are
admissible as evidence against the owner of the
house.

Q: What if a police officer was conducting a surveillance of


X, a well-known drug pusher, so he was always within the
vicinity of the house of X. One time, it was the birthday of
X, the gate of the house was open, and the door of the
house was opened. The police officer disguised himself as
one of the guests and he entered the house together with
the flow of the guests. His intention was to conduct a
search. He was already about to conduct the search when
the owner of the house recognized him. The owner of the
house came up to him. I know you, you are a police officer.
Get out of my house right now and he left. Is he liable for
violation of domicile?
A: No, he is not liable for violation of domicile.
The entry was done surreptitiously, secretly,
candidly, he was in disguise. It was not against the
will of the owner because the gates and the door
were open. He did not conduct the search
because the owner saw him before he could do
so. The entry was done surreptitiously. He was
discovered and ordered to leave, and he left.
Therefore, he is not liable for violation of domicile
However, upon being discovered and ordered to

leave and stayed in the house.


Here, he is not liable for violation of
domicile.

Under Articles 129 and 130, there is still violation of


domicile despite the public officer or employee is
armed with a search warrant.

ARTICLE129 SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY


OBTAINED AND ABUSE IN THE SERVICE OF THOSE
LEGALLY OBTAINED
Prohibited acts violation of domicile is

committed through:
I.By procuring a search warrant without just
cause
When a public officer or employee
conducts a search and the search
warrant was an illegally procured
search warrant. It was procured
without just cause.

SEARCH WARRANT is an order in writing, issued in the


name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge
and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search
for personal property described therein and to bring to court
the particular things to be seized.

Before a search warrant may be issue, the following


are the requisites to a valid search warrant:

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 22

1.
2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

It is required that it is for one specific offense.


There must be probable cause
The probable cause must be determined personally by
the issuing judge
The said probable cause was determined by the
issuing judge personally through searching questions
and answers in writing, under oath or affirmation as the
testimony given by applicant of the said search warrant
or any witnesses he may produce.
The applicant of the search warrant and his witnesses
must testify only as to facts personally known to them
The said search warrant must specifically state the
place to be searched and the place to be seized.
If any of these requisites is wanting, then the said
search warrant is illegally procured. It is procured
without just cause
A search conducted by virtue of a search warrant
illegally procured without just cause is a kin to a search
without a search warrant.

Q: What if the police officer was armed with a search


warrant, he procured the search warrant illegally without
just cause. The police had an enemy, B, then proceeded to
a judge to issue a search warrant testifying under oath, the
he is positive under his surveillance that B was in
possession of an unlicensed firearm inside his house. The
judge believed the police and issued a search warrant
against B. The police officer is now armed with a search
warrant, and went to the house of B and showed it to B. B,
upon reading the search warrant, knew it was maliciously
procured, it was procured without just cause. Should B
allow the police officer to conduct the search?
A: Yes. Even if the said search warrant was
procured without just cause, the police officer
must be allowed to enter and conduct the search,
because of the so-called, REGULARITY OF
PERFORMANCE OF DUTY on the part of the
judge in issuing the said search warrant. He is
armed with a search warrant issued by the judge
and therefore, he must allow him to enter his
house and to conduct his search.
What now would be the remedy of the owner

of the house?
The owner of the house has the following
remedies:
1. He can file a motion to quash the
said warrant
2. He can file a motion to suppress the
evidence that have been confiscated
inside the house.
In addition to these motions, he can file a
case of violation of domicile against
the said public officer who conducted
the search. Violation of domicile under
Art. 129 because he procured the said
search warrant without just cause.
So in other words, the said police officers
must be allowed to enter and allowed
to conduct the search and the owner of
the house shall have the
abovementioned remedies thereafter.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

II.By exceeding his authority or by using


unnecessary severity in executing a
search warrant legally procured

A search warrant is valid only for a period of 10


days from the date of its issuance appearing on
the search warrant.

ILLUSTRATION:
A search warrant was dated Dec. 1, a police officer
received it on Dec 3. The search was conducted Dec. 13.
The said search warrant is already invalid.
When they conducted the said search on Dec. 13,
they already exceeded the authority in the said
search warrant. Therefore, they are liable of
violation of domicile under Article 129.

Q: What if the said search warrant says that they could


conduct the search, anytime of the day. They conducted
the search at night time.
A: They are liable of violation of domicile under
Article 129 because they exceeded the authority
in the said search warrant.

A search warrant may only be conducted at day time. It


may only be implemented at day time, EXCEPTIONS:
When there is a specific order in the

search warrant stating that if can be


conducted at anytime of the day or night.
Absence of such order in the said search

warrant, a search warrant can only be


implemented at day time.

Q: What if a search warrant was issued against X, the


place to be search is located at 123 valentiono St. They
police went there. The house was owned not by X, but by
Y. So they look for the house of X, the house of X was 321
valentino St. They presented a search warrant to X. X said,
you cannot conduct a search inside my house. The
address in the search warrant is 123 valentinost. and my
address is 321 valentinost. Nevertheless, the officers
conducted the search and they found the illegal items
inside the house. Are the police officers liable of violation of
domicile? Are the confiscated admissible evidence against
the owner?
A: The officers are liable for the violation of
domicile. When they conducted the said search,
on a house that has a different address from that
said search warrant, they exceeded their authority
in the said search warrant. The search warrant is
so worded, expressly, as to the thing or place to
be searched. The police officer cannot exercise
discretion. They have to follow what is stated in
the search warrant. The moment they did not
follow what is stated in the search warrant, then
they exceeded the authority.

In that case, when there is variance between what

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 23

is stated in the search warrant and the actual facts


of the case to be searched, the have to go back to
the judge that issued the said search warrant and
they have to ask or move for the amendment of
the said search warrant.

Q: What if the third punishable act under Art. 129


amounting to the violation of domicile, when the public
officer or employee exercised excessive severity in the
implementation of the said search warrant.

What if a search warrant is issued against X, the


police officers went to the house of X, upon reaching the
house of X, they showed the warrant to X and he allowed
them to enter. The search warrant said that they could
search for dangerous drugs, particularly, shabu. In
searching for shabu, they turned upside down and
deliberately destroyed each and every furniture and
appliance inside the house of X. When the wife of X saw
this, she told the police officers to stop, but she was
slapped twice. she then suffered less serious physical
injuries. In deliberately destroying the furniture and
appliances of X, the public officers committed malicious
mischief. In slapping the wife, they committed less serious
physical injuries. What crime/crimes would you file against
the police officers?
A: You have to file 3 cases:
1. Violation of domicile because they
exercised excessive severity in the
implementation of the said search warrant.
They need not destroy the property. They
need not slap the wife. All of these are
excess of the search warrant.
Therefore they should be filed in

violation of Art. 129, violation of


domicile, for exercising excessive
severity.
1. Malicious mischief for destroying the
furniture and appliances
2. less serious physical injuries for slapping
the wife

Are you going to file all 3 cases or is it absorbed and


must be file within the court?
Violation of domicile cannot absorb malicious
mischief nor less serious physical injuries.
Although in reality, these two are merely the
manifestations of the excess in the
implementation of the said search warrant, they
cannot be absorbed, they cannot be complex.
Under Art. 129, he expressly prohibits such
absorption and such complexity of crimes
Under Article 129, the liability for violation of
domicile shall be in addition to the liability
attaching to the offender for commission of any
other crime. Therefore, if aside from violation of
domicile, Another crime is committed by the
police officers, they had to be charged with all
these cases. Art. 129 prohibits the complexing
of a crime. It also prohibits the absorption of
this crime, therefore all 3 cases must be filed
against the said police officers.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

ARTICLE130 SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT


WITNESSES
Prohibited act:

I.
By conducting a search in the absence of the
owner of the house, or any member of his
family, or two witnesses residing in the same
locality

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if under Article 130, violation of domicile is
committed when the search was conducted in the absence
of the owner of the house, or any member of his family or
two witnesses residing from the same locality.
A search warrant was issued against X and the police
officers went to the house of X. They showed the search
warrant to X and they were allowed inside to conduct the
search. In conducting the search, the search was
witnessed by 2 barangay tanods who came with them, who
arrived with them in the house of X. in the conduct of the
search, they told the owner of the house, X, that his wife
and his two children to remain in the sala while they
conduct the search inside the bedroom of X. In conducting
the search in the bedroom of X, the search was witnessed
by 2 barangay tanods and they found 2 plastic sachets of
shabu underneath the pillow inside the bedroom of X. Are
the police officers liable of violation of domicile under Article
130? Are the evidence seized admissible against the
owner?
A: The police officers are liable of violation of
domicile under Article 130.
Article 130 provides for an hierarchy of witnesses
who must be present in the conduct of the search.
The law says it must witnessed by the owner of
the house, it is only in the absence of the owner of
the house that it must be witnessed by any
member of his family. It is only in the absence of
the owner of the house or any member of his
family that there must be 2 witnesses residing
from the same locality.
In the problem, the owner of the house was
there, the members of his family were there
but, they were not allowed to witness the said
search. Therefore, the said search was
conducted in violation of Article 130 and any
evidence confiscated will be inadmissible
against the owner of the house for being fruits
of poisonous tree under the exclusionary rule in
Political Law

GALVANTE VS. CASIMIRO


The Supreme Court says,
There is no such crime as illegal search. So, what
is prohibited only the searching of the dwelling under Article
129. But, in case of search under vehicle or any other
places, there is no such thing as illegal search. The remedy
is to file an action for damages, a civil action for damages.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 24

ARTICLE131 PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION AND


DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS
This is committed by a public officer or employee

who commits any of the following acts:


I.
By prohibiting or by interrupting, without
legal ground, the holding of a peaceful
meeting, or by dissolving the same. (any
peaceful meeting)
II.
By hindering any person from joining any
lawful association or from attending any
of its meetings.
III. By prohibiting or hindering any person
from addressing, either alone or together
with others, any petition to the authorities
for the correction of abuses or redress of
grievances.

For the crime to arise, it is necessary that the meeting


that was prevented, interrupted or dissolved must be a
peaceful meeting and it must be for any lawful
purpose. If the meeting is not a peaceful meeting or if
the meeting is not for lawful purpose, a public officer or
employee has all the rights to prevent, interrupt or
dissolve the said meeting.

This is in the exercise of the freedom of speech,


freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. However,
these 3 freedoms are not absolute. The Supreme Court has
enjoined the power of the State to regulate these meetings
through permits.

Before any of these peaceful meetings for a lawful purpose


may be held in a public place, there must be a permit
coming from the local authority of the place. The permit is
only to regulate the said meeting and not to prohibit it.
Regulate as to the time, place and to the date, so that the
public would not be in inconvenience.

ARTICLE132 INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS


WORSHIP
ELEMENTS:
1. This is committed by an offender who is again
a public officer or employee.
2. Then there is a religious ceremony or
manifestations of any religion are about to
take place or are going on.
3. That the offender prevents or disturbs the
said religious worship or religious ceremony.
If the offender makes us of violence or threats in

committing the crime, such use of violence or


threats would not constitute a separate and
distinct charge. Rather it is considered as an
aggravating or qualifying circumstance which
would mean an imposition of a higher penalty.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there is a barrio fiesta and the priest is about
to celebrate the mass. Here comes X and he went to the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
priest and point the gun to the priest. Then the priest was
about to celebrate the mass. At first the priest did not mind
him. But X intentionally pointed the gun to the head of the
priest and said, I will kill you if you will celebrate the mass!
So the priest did not celebrate the mass and all the faithful
went out of the church. What crime if any is committed by
X?
A: X is liable for interruption of religious
worship under Article 132. What about the fact
that he pointed a gun at the head of the priest?
Would it constitute a separate and distinct crime of
grave threats? It will not. The fact that threats
were employed in the commission of the crime
would only mean the penalty will be imposed in its
maximum period.
It would be considered an
aggravating circumstance in committing the crime
of interruption of religious worship. BUT, IT WILL
BRING ABOUT A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT
CHARGE FOR GRAVE THREATS OR EVEN
UNDER LIGHT THREATS.

3.

ARTICLE133 OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS


ELEMENTS:
1. Committed by a public officer or employee or
a private individual.
The first element provides for the

offender. The offender may be a


public officer or employee or a
private individual. This is the only
crime under Title Two where the
offender can be a private individual.
From Article 124 to Article 132 under
Title Two, the offender can ONLY be
a public officer or employee. The
only exception is Article 133,
offending the religious feelings
wherein the offender can either be a
public officer or employee or a
private individual. The reason is,
whoever may be the offender, a
public officer or employee or a
private individual, there will be the
same offense made on the feelings
of the faithful.
2.

The said offender performs acts (1) in a place


devoted to religious worship, or (2) during the
celebration of any religious ceremony.
The second element requires that

the offender performs acts


notoriously offensive to the feelings
of the faithful. Acts notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the
faithful are those acts directed
against their religious dogma, ritual,
faith of the religion, or mocks,
ridicule, or scoffs of the said dogma,

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 25

ritual, faith or he attempts to damage


the object of veneration of a certain
religion. The law says notoriously
offensive, according to Reyes, it
means that it is offensive to all
kinds of religion. If the same thing
would be done to any religion they
will also be offended.

That the acts must be notoriously offensive to


the feelings of the faithful.
The third element requires that the

said acts notoriously offensive to the


feelings of the faithful can be
committed only (1) in a place
devoted to religious worship, or (2)
during the celebration of any
religious ceremony. The law uses
the word or therefore, if the act is
done in a place devoted to religious
worship, it is not necessary that
there be a religious ceremony
ongoing. Because it can either be
with or without a religious ceremony
for as long as the place is devoted
for religious worship.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if X (A private individual) entered a catholic
church after that the tabernacle was opened and he took
out the chalice and inside the chalice was the host which
was being received by Catholics during communion. He
poured the host in the floor then he destroyed them, spit on
them and stepped on them. Is he liable under Article 133?
A: YES. The act he performed is notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the Catholics. If the
same act is done to the object of veneration of the
Buddhists or if the same act is done to the object
of veneration of the Muslims, they will also be
offended. Therefore, it is notoriously offensive to
the feelings of the faithful because even if it is
applied to other religions they would be offended
too. And it was done in a place devoted to
religious worship because it is done inside the
church even if no religious ceremony is ongoing.

Q: What if inside the PICC there was this art exhibit


ongoing and one artist, this was a controversy before right?
There was this picture of Jesus Christ and on the picture of
Jesus Christ he put a representation of a penis on his face.
Is the said artist liable under Article 133 offending the
religious feelings?
A: NO. He cannot be liable for offending
religious feelings under Article 133. Because
the PICC is not a place devoted for religious
worship and the art exhibit is not a celebration of a
religious ceremony. Therefore, since the last

CRIMINAL LAW 2
element is not present even if it offends religious
feelings, he cannot be held liable under Article 133
for the absence of the 3rd element.

TITLE THREE
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER (Articles
134 160)

ARTICLE134 - REBELLION OR INSURRECTION


ELEMENTS:
1. That there must be (a) public uprising, and (b)
taking arms against the Government
2. That the purpose of the uprising or movement
is either
a.
to remove from the allegiance to said
Government or its laws:
1. the territory of the Philippines or
any part thereof; or
2. any body of land, naval or other
armed forces; or
b.
to deprive the Chief Executive or
Congress, wholly or partially, of any their
powers or prerogatives.
The essence or the gravamen of REBELLION is :

The armed uprising against the Philippine


Government. So it is a public uprising with the taking
up of arms. AN ARMED PUBLIC UPRISING.
In case of Rebellion, it can be committed by any

person, or with a participation of the public.

ARTICLE134-A COUP DETAT


ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a person or persons belonging
to the military or police or holding any public office
or employment;
2. That it is committed by means of a swift attack
accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth;
3. That the attack is directed against duly constituted
authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or
any military camp or installation, communication
networks, public utilities or other facilities needed
for the exercise and continued possession of
power;
4. That the purpose of the attack is to seize or
diminish state power.

Committed by any person or persons belonging to the


military or police or holding any public office or
employment, with or without civilian support, carried
out singly or simultaneously anywhere in the
Philippines for the purpose of seizing or diminishing
state power.
The essence of COUP DETAT is a swift attack
directed against the duly constituted authorities, with or
without civilians.
REBELLION

COUP DETAT

E s s e n c e a n A r m e d Essence swift attack


public Uprising against the against the duly constituted
Government
authorities

THE LEADERS - Any person who


(a) promotes
(b) maintains or
(c) heads a rebellion or insurrection

THE PARTICIPANTS Any person who


(a) participates
(b) executes the commands of others in rebellion or
insurrection

Crime of the Masses, it It can be committed with or


involves a multitude of without the participation of
people
the public because it says,
with or without civilian
support, provided it has
been committed by any
member of the military, the
police or those holding
public
office
or
employment.
Purpose Overthrow the
Government of the
Philippines and replace it
with the Government of the
Rebels

Purpose only to diminish


state power, to destabilize
the government, not
entirely to overthrow the
government.

Can only be committed by Can be committed not only


m e a n s o f f o r c e a n d by means of force and
violence
violence but also by means
of intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth

THE LEADERS - Any person who


(a) leads
(b) directs or
(c) command others to undertake a coup detat


Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 26

CRIMINAL LAW 2
THE PARTICIPANTS Any member of the Government
who
(a) participates
(b) executes the commands of others in undertaking a coup
detat

crime such as murder, if the commission


of the crimes was done in furtherance of
Rebellion. Therefore, it is necessary that
there must be evidence shown in what
way the said killing has promoted,
fostered the idea of the Rebels. Absent
any connection with the commission of
the common crime and the furtherance of
rebellion, the appropriate charge is only
murder, homicide, arson or physical
injuries as the case maybe.

Any person who is not in the Government service who


(a) Participates
(b) Supports
(c) Finances
(d) abets or
(e) aids in the undertaking of a coup detat

What if common crimes are committed in the


course of Rebellion?
Common crimes committed in furtherance of,

incident to or in connection with Rebellion are


considered as ABSORBED in the crime of
Rebellion known as the THEORY OF
ABSORPTION IN REBELLION.

THEORY OF ABSORPTION IN REBELLION


Whenever in the course of committing rebellion,

murder, homicide, arson, physical injuries, other


common crimes are committed, and these
common crimes are in furtherance to, incident to,
in connection with Rebellion is considered as
absorbed in the crime of Rebellion. Therefore,
only one charge of Rebellion should be charged
against the said offender.

ENRILE v SALAZAR
Senator Juan Ponce Enrile was charged with the Following
crimes:
1. charged with Rebellion
2. charged with multipleMurder
3. Multiple frustrated murder
4. violation of PD 1829 obstruction of Justice because
he harbored or concealed then Colonel Gregorio
Honasan.

What did the Supreme Court say?


The Supreme Court said:

only one charge and it should be rebellion. The


violation of PD 1829, the multiple murder and
multiple frustrated murder are absorbed in
Rebellion under the theory of absorption in
Rebellion.
The Supreme Court further said that although
violation of PD 1829 is a violation of a special
penal law, still if it is committed in furtherance of
Rebellion, it can still be absorbed in the crime of
Rebellion.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a police officer was on his way to the office,
suddenly here comes a member of the NPA, he saw the
police officer and shot him. What crime is committed? is it
Rebellion or murder?
Rebellion can only be absorbed common

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 27

A: In the case, the proper charged would be


murder. There was no evidence showing in what
way the said NPA has promoted the ideas of the
Rebels in killing of the said police officer. Absent of
that evidence, it would be a charge of murder and
not rebellion.
Rebellion is a continuing crime. Therefore, these
NPA who rebelled against the Government, to
overthrow the Government, that one time uprising
is sufficient, they are already considered as rebels
because it is a continuing offense.

GONZALES v ABAYA
Senator Trillanes and company was charged with 2 crimes,
coup detat in the RTC of Makati and the violation of articles
of war, particularly acts of unbecoming of an officer and a
gentleman filed before the military court. While the case
was pending in the RTC of Makati, the lawyer filed a
petition, a motion, saying that the violation of the articles of
war should be absorbed by the case filed before the RTC of
Makati. Can Coup detat absorb the violations of article of
war?
The Supreme Court ruled in the NEGATIVE.
According to the Supreme Court, for the theory of
absorption to apply, it is necessary that both
cases must be heard or may be heard before
the same civilian court.
In this case, the coup detat must be heard in a
civilian court, RTC of Makati, whereas the
violations of the articles of war can be heard
only before a military court. Therefore, one
cannot absorb the other.
Second reasoning given by the Supreme Court,
for the theory to absorption to apply, it is
necessary that both crimes are punished by the
same penal statute
Third reasoning, violation of the articles of war is
sui generis. It is a kind of its own. Nothing
compares to it. Therefore, it cannot be
absorbed by any other crime.

ARTICLE136 CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO


C O M M I T C O U P D E T A T, R E B E L L I O N O R
INSURRECTION
There is CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT

REBELLION when two or more persons come


into an agreement concerning the commission of
rebellion (to rise publicly and take arms against
the Government to any of the purposes of

CRIMINAL LAW 2
rebellion) and decide to commit it.
There is PROPOSAL TO COMMIT REBELLION
when a person who decides to commit rebellion
proposes its execution to another person it is
necessary that the other person would not agree,
if that person agree, then it is already conspiracy
to commit rebellion
Conspiracy is a bilateral act which involves two or

more persons, whereas proposal is a unilateral act


only one person decides to commit the crime and
he proposes its execution to another person.
There is a conspiracy to commit coup detat the same
way of committing it. Also the proposal to commit coup
detat.

purposes of sedition can either be political in nature or


social in nature.

A R T I C L E 1 3 8 I N C I T I N G TO R E B E L L I O N O R
INSURRECTION
Inciting to Rebellion is a crime under the Revised Penal
Code.
ELEMENTS:
1. It is committed by any person who does not take
up arms or is not in open hostility with the
Government
2. he incites others to uprise for any of the purposes
of rebellion (incite others to the execution of any of
the acts of rebellion)
3. by means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, banners or other representations
tending to the same end.
There is NO SUCH CRIME AS INCITING TO COUP

DETAT.

SEDITION (ARTICLE 139)


ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender rise (1) publicly, and (2)
tumultuously;
2. That they employ force, intimidation or other
means outside of legal methods;
3. That the offenders employ any of those means to
attain any of the following objectives:
a.
To prevent the promulgation or execution
of any law or the holding of any popular
election
b.
To prevent the National Government, or
any provincial or municipal government,
or any public officer thereof from freely
exercising its or his functions, or prevents
the execution of any administrative order;
c.
To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon
the person or property of any public
officer or employee;
d.
To commit, for any political or social end,
any act of hate or revenge against
private persons or any social class; and
e.
To despoil, for any political or social end,
any person, municipality or province or
the National Government of all its
property or any part thereof
There is a public uprising again but no taking up of

arms but it is done tumultuously by means of


force, intimidation or any other means outside the
legal methods.

Therefore, based on the objects of sedition, the

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 28

The purpose of sedition is not to overthrow the


government but to go against what the
government wants to implement. To go against a
new law, an administrative order or public officer
or employee.
It is a disturbance, a commotion against the lawful
command of the authority.
The rallies that you see everyday, the rallies
against a new law to be implemented, they are
considered as ordinary protest or rallies, but the
moment they are carried outside of legal methods,
by means of force and violence, they will become
to be a seditious act.

So, sedition is like any other rally, it only becomes


seditious because there is the public uprising, done
tumultuously, by means of force, violation or any other
means outside of the legal method.
REBELLION

SEDITION

Both have a public uprising


Objective Political in Objective can either be
nature
Political or social in nature
To o v e r t h r o w t h e
Government and to replace
the it with the Government
of the Rebels

ARTICLE141 CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION


There is a crime conspiracy to commit sedition but

not proposal to commit sedition. A proposal to


commit sedition is not a punishable act under the
RPC.

ARTICLE142 INCITING TO SEDITION


ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is not a participant (does not take
direct part) in the crime of sedition
2. He incites others to uprise for any of the purposes
of sedition
3. By means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, cartoon, banners, or other
representation tending to the same end.

Inciting to Rebellion or Inciting to Sedition can only


be committed by a person who is not a participant
in the Rebellion or the Sedition, because if he is a
participant in the Rebellion or Sedition, the
appropriate charge is Rebellion or Sedition as the
case may be. Not merely inciting to Rebellion or
Sedition.

Inciting to Sedition is committed not only by


inciting others for any of the purposes of sedition.
Different acts of inciting to sedition:
I.Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the
acts which constitute sedition by means of

CRIMINAL LAW 2
speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems,
etc.
II.Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend
to disturb the public peace
III.Writing, publishing or circulating scurrilous libels
against the Government, or any of the duly
constituted authorities thereof, which tend to
disturb the public peace.

USE OF UNLICENSED FIREARM (PD 1866 as amended


by RA 8294 otherwise known as the laws on illegal/
unlawful possession, manufacture, dealing in,
acquisition or disposition of firearms, ammunition or
explosives or instruments used in the manufacture of
firearms, ammunition or explosives)

See: People vs. Ladjaalam and Celino Sr. vs. People


Under Section 1 If the use of an unlicensed

firearm is in furtherance of, incident to, or in


connection with the crime of rebellion or sedition,
or attempted coup dtat, such use of unlicensed
firearm shall be absorbed in the crime of rebellion,
sedition or attempted coup dtat.

Therefore, the use of unlicensed firearm in case of


rebellion or sedition, or attempted coup dtat will
not bring about a separate or distinct charge.
There is only one crime that is rebellion or
sedition, or attempted coup dtat. The use of
unlicensed firearm is not even an aggravating
circumstance. It is absorbed in the crime of
rebellion or sedition, or attempted coup dtat.
Under the same Section 1 of PD 1866 as
amended by RA 8294, if the use of an unlicensed
firearm is in the crime of homicide or murder, as
the case may be, the use of unlicensed firearm
shall be considered as an aggravating
c i r c u m s t a n c e . S o i n t h e l a w, i t i s a n
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE.
W H AT K I N D O F A G G R AVAT I N G
CIRCUMSTANCE?
As decided by the Supreme Court in number

of cases, it is a SPECIAL AGGRAVATING


CIRCUMSTANCE which cannot be offset by
any mitigating circumstance. The Supreme
Court also held that the use of the word
homicide or murder under Section 1 is in its
generic sense, therefore, whatever be the
kind of killing for as long as the unlicensed
firearm is used, such use of unlicensed
firearm is considered as a SPECIAL
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So if a son had an argument with his father, in the
course of the argument with his father, the son killed the

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 29

father, the firearm was recovered. What crime or crimes


would you file against the son?
A: The son is liable of the crime ofPARRICIDE,
for having killed his own father. The use of
unlicensed firearm shall be considered as a
SPECIAL AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE.
Because as held by the Supreme Court, the use
of the word murder is in its generic sense,
therefore it includes any kind wherein the
imposable penalty is RECLUSION PERPETUA
TO DEATH such as Parricide.

Under Section 1 of PD 1866 as amended, it also provided


that a person can only be held liable of illegal possession of
unlicensed firearm provided that no other crime was
committed by the person arrested. It is necessary that no
other crime was committed by the person arrested.

PEOPLE VS. LADJAALAM


The police officers armed with a warrant of arrest
went to the house of WalpanLadjaalam to effect
the warrant of arrest. WalpanLadjaalam, upon
seeing the police officers, fired shots at the
officers. Hence, he was charged with direct
assault with multiple attempted homicide. Aside
from that, he was also charged with illegal
possession of unlicensed firearms. He was
convicted of both crimes before the Regional Trial
Court. On appeal before the Supreme Court, SC
said the illegal possession of firearms case should
be dismissed. He should be acquitted in the said
case because he committed another crime, and
that is, DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MULTIPLE
ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE.

What about in the case of CELINO, SR. VS. PEOPLE?


In this case, it was election time, there was a
COMELEC gun ban. A person was found in
possession of an unlicensed firearm. Arrested, he
was charged of 2 crimes: (1) violation of the
COMELEC gun ban, and (2) illegal possession of
unlicensed firearms. During the arraignment for
the violation of the COMELEC gun ban, he
pleaded not guilty. However, during the
arraignment for illegal possession of an
unlicensed firearm, he filed a motion to quash the
information. According to him, he cannot be
charged of illegal possession of an unlicensed
firearm because the law says that you can only be
charged of illegal possession of an unlicensed
firearm provided that no other crime is committed
by the person arrested. He said here, he
committed violation of COMELEC gun ban,
therefore, he can no longer be liable for violation
of PD 1866 that is Illegal Possession of
Unlicensed Firearm.
IS HIS CONTENTION CORRECT?

CRIMINAL LAW 2

His contention is wrong because according


to the Supreme Court, when the law says
provided that no other crime is committed by
the person arrested, the word committed
means that there is already a final
determination of guilt a final conviction of
guilt based on a successful prosecution or a
judicial admission. Therefore, the word
committed means he has already been held
guilty beyond reasonable doubt a final
judgment.

In the case of CELINO SR., he was not yet convicted. He


was only being prosecuted. He was only being charged of
illegal possession of unlicensed firearm. Therefore, both
cases can proceed. He can be charged both of illegal
possession of unlicensed firearms and violation of
COMELEC gun ban. However, the moment he is convicted
of violation of COMELEC gun ban, he should be acquitted
of illegal possession of unlicensed firearm, because this
time, the law says provided that no other crime is
committed by the person arrested. Therefore, a final
conviction is necessary before the illegal possession
of unlicensed firearm may be dismissed or he may be
acquitted of the same. So that is the relation of PD 1866
to sedition, rebellion and coup dtat.

ARTICLE143 ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE


MEETING OF THE ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR BODIES
Punishes acts preventing the meeting of Congress

The crime is committed if there is a projected or

actual meeting of the Congress and the offender,


by means of force or fraud, prevents such meeting
The offender here is any person: he may be a

private individual, public officer or employee


It is necessary that the offender prevents the

meeting of the Congress or any of its committees,


or constitutional committees or any provincial city
or municipal board.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there is a meeting of the Sangguniang
Panlungsod. It was being presided by the Vice Mayor as
the presiding officer of the city council. During the session
of the SangguniangPanlungsod, here comes the mayor
together with some police officers. They entered the
session of and disturbed and prevented the said meeting
by force. What crime, if any, was committed?
A: It is the violation of Article 143 ACTS
TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF
CONGRESS AND SIMILAR BODIES.

ARTICLE144 DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS


Punishes disturbance of proceedings

In disturbance of proceedings, there is a meeting

of Congress or of any of its committees or


subcommittees, constitutional commissions or

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 30

committees or divisions thereof, or of any


provincial board or city or municipal council or
board
The offender either disturbs any of such
proceedings or he behaves while in the presence
of such proceedings in such a manner as to
interrupt the proceedings or impair the respect
due it.
So here, it is necessary that the offender, who was
present in the meeting, either he disturbs the said
proceeding, or while being there, he performed an
act which impair the respect due to them or which
interrupted the said proceeding

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: The FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILLwas on the
committee level. It was votation time. On the right side of
the said place or meeting, there were some observers or
people who were coming from the media. On the left side,
there were ordinary people who do not agree on the
freedom of information bill. It was time to vote for the
passage of Freedom of Information bill, the members of the
committee were voting when suddenly some members of
the media immediately pulled out a placard and shouted:
YES TO FREEDOM TO INFORMATION BILL!Are they
liable of any crime?
A: YES. They are liable of disturbance of
proceedings under Article 144. Because while
in the presence of the said meeting, they behaved
in such a manner as to interrupt the proceedings,
or impair the respect due it.

ARTICLE145 VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY


IMMUNITY
Punishes violation of parliamentary immunity

There are TWO (2) ACTS


PUNISHED IN

VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY:


1. Penalty: Prision Mayor committed
by any person who by means of
force, intimidation, fraud or threat, or
any other means and by said means,
he tried to prevent any member of
the Congress either from attending
any meeting of the Congress or its
committees or subcommittees,
constitutional commissions or
committees or divisions thereof ,
from expressing his opinions or
casting his vote
can be committed by

anyone (private
individual, public officer
or employee)
2.

Penalty: PrisionCorreccional can


only be committed by a public officer
or employee who shall, while the

CRIMINAL LAW 2

Congress is in regular or special


session, arrest or search any
member thereof, except in case such
member has committed a crime
punishable under this Code by a
penalty higher than prision mayor.
Offender should be

only a public officer or


employee and not any
individual because any
individual cannot make
a search or arrest a
member of the
Congress
It is necessary that at

the time of the arrest,


the member of
Congress,
the
Congress must be in
its regular or special
session.
Likewise, it is

necessary that the said


member of Congress
has committed a crime
which is not higher
than Prision Mayor.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: How about in the case of Panfilo Lacson?
A: The case against Sen. Lacson was fortunately
dismissed by the Court of Appeals. But let us say,
it is not dismissed by the Court of Appeals, he was
being charged of double murder Dacer-Corbito
double murder slay. He went into hiding. Let us
say that he made his appearance. Can he be
arrested even if the Congress is in regular or
special session? YES. Because the crime
committed by him is punishable by a crime
committer higher than prision mayor. It is
punishable by reclusion perpetua. Therefore, had
it not been dismissed by Congress and he
apparently appeared and the Congress is in
regular or special session, he could be arrested.

Q: What if a Congressman is charged with the crime of libel


before the RTC. The RTC issued a warrant of arrest
against the Congressman. The police officers armed with a
warrant of arrest went inside the walls of Congress and
they arrested the said Congressman. Are the police officers
liable under this Article?
A:YES, they are liable for violation of
parliamentary immunity under the second.
Because at the time the Congress is in its regular
session and they arrested the said Congressman,
Libel under Article 355 is punishable only by
Prision Correcional in its minimum and medium

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 31

period, therefore it is below Prision Mayor, hence,


the Congressman cannot be arrested while the
Congress is in its regular or special session.

Q: What if Congressman A is charged with the crime of


attempted homicide. The fiscal found probable cause, the
case was filed in court. The court agrees with the fiscal and
a warrant of arrest was issued against Congressman A.
The warrant of arrest was issued by the judge on
December 24, the police officers had possession of the
said warrant of arrest on December 25, on Christmas Day.
While Congressman was inside his house, the police
officers arrived and arrested the said Congressman for
having been charged of the crime of Attempted Homicide.
The penalty for Attempted Homicide is Prision Correcional
because under Article 249, the penalty for Homicide is
Reclusion Temporal and the attempted is two degrees
lower, one degree is Prision Mayor, two degrees lower is
Prision Correcional, therefore, the penalty to be imposed in
this Attempted Homicide is Prision Correcional. So the
police officers armed with a warrant of arrest went inside
the house of the Congressman and arrested him on
Christmas Day, December 25, are the police officers liable
for violating parliamentary immunity under Article 145?
A:YES, they are liable for violation of
Parliamentary Immunity.Because during
Christmas break or during Holy week break or any
other kind of break, Congress is still in its regular
session. Because as stated in Political Law, in
Constitution, when does Congress start? 4th
Monday of July, that is when the President states
his SONA. When does Congress ends? 30 days
before the start of Congress. Therefore, during
Christmas break or during Holy week break or any
other break, the Congress is still in its regular
session. Any arrest of a member of Congress
during this time, if the said member of Congress
has not committed a crime where a penalty is
higher than Prision Mayor, shall be punished as
violation parliamentary immunity under Article 145.

ARTICLE146 ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY


There are 2 KINDS OF ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY:

I.Any meeting attended by armed persons for the


purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under this Code
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be a meeting, a
gathering or group of
persons, whether in fixed
place or moving
2. The meeting is attended by
armed persons
3. The purpose of the meeting
is to9 commit any of the
crimes punishable under
the Code

CRIMINAL LAW 2

In case of illegal assembly, it is only


necessary that there be a meeting, the
meeting must be attended by armed persons,
under the first mode. In here, when it says
armed persons, it is not required that all
those persons present in the meeting must be
with arms. It suffices that one, two or more, or
some of them would be with arms.
When we say arms, it does not only mean
firearms, it refers to any things, knives, stones,
anything which can cause violence or injury to
another person.
It is necessary however, that the purpose of
the meeting is unlawful that is to commit any
of the crimes punishable under the RPC.
Under the second mode of committing illegal
assembly, again there is a meeting, and there
is no requisite that those in attendance must
be armed, therefore, they may or may not be
with arms. But it is requires for the crime to
arise that the audience must be incited to
commit treason, rebellion, or insurrection,
sedition or assault upon a person in authority
or his agents. Otherwise, the crime will not
arise.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

In case of illegal assembly, the organizers or


leader of the meeting will be criminally liable,
as well as the persons merely present in the
said meeting.
Under Article 146, first paragraph, last
sentence it is provided that persons who are
merely present at the meeting shall be
punished by Arresto Mayor, unless they are
armed, the penalty shall be Prision
Correcional, therefore, whether you are armed
or not, you can be held criminally liable for
illegal assembly, it will only differ in the penalty.
o If you are armed - Prision Correcional
o Not armed - Arresto Mayor (lower)

II.Any meeting in which the audience, whether


armed or not, is incited to the commission of
the crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection,
sedition or assault upon a person in authority
or his agents
ELEMENTS:
4. There is a meeting, a
gathering or group of
persons, whether in fixed
place or moving
5. The audience, whether
armed or not, is incited to
the commission of the
crime of treason, rebellion,
or insurrection, sedition or
direct assault
The said gathering of

men or men, may or


may not be armed. It is
not required that they
be armed. Provided
that the audience
where incited to
commit treason,
rebellion,
or
insurrection, sedition or
assault upon a person
in authority or his
agents)

Page 32

ARTICLE147 ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS


WHAT ARE ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS?
1. Associations totally or partially organized for the
purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under the Code
2. Associations totally or partially organized for some
purpose contrary to public morals
In case of illegal associations, it is necessary that

there be a formation of a group, not merely a


meeting and in the said association, not only the
members of the association should be penalized, but
also the founders, directors and president of the said
association or organization should be held criminally
liable.

ILLEGAL
ASSEMBLY

ILLEGAL
ASSOCIATION

the purpose will


always be a violation
under the RPC. Even
under the second
mode inciting to
commit treason,
rebellion, or
insurrection, sedition
or assault upon a
person in authority or
his agents

the purpose of the


association may be for
purpose of committing
crimes violating the
RPC or even in
violation of special
penal laws, provided
that it is in violation of
special penal law, it
must be against public
morals

Necessary that there


is an actual meeting
or assembly

Not necessary that


there be an actual
meeting

Meeting and the


attendance at such
meeting are the acts
punished

Act of forming or
organizing and
membership in the
association are the acts
punished

ILLUSTRATION:

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Q: So what if A, B and C gathered 20 persons and
proposed to them the idea of committing simultaneous
bank robbery all over Metro Manila, so they will commit
robbery in 4 banks simultaneously. So these 20 men
agreed to the said commission of bank robbery, and after
they have come to the agreement, here comes the police,
the police got a tip from an informer, the police arrived and
they were all arrested. What crime or crimes if any should
they be charged of?
A:They could not be charged of any crime.
There is no such thing as conspiracy to commit
robbery. Because in robbery, robbery is only a
mode of committing the crime, it is not a crime by
itself, unlike in case of treason, rebellion, there is
such a crime of conspiracy to commit treason,
conspiracy to commit rebellion, and they are
punished by such acts. There is no such crime as
conspiracy to commit robbery. So here, conspiracy
is a mere preparatory act which is not yet
punishable by law. For them to be punished, it is
necessary that they must at least perform an overt
act directly connected to bank robbery. So here,
they just merely conspired to commit robbery
without the performance of any overt act directly
connected to robbery. Hence, they are not
criminally liable. What they did is only a
preparatory act not directly connected to robbery.
Q: Why not illegal assembly?
A: Because in the problem, it is not mentioned
that the persons were armed. Also, the crime of
bank robbery is not among the crimes mentioned
in the second act.
Q: Why not illegal association?
A: Because what they did was only a mere
meeting, it was not an organization or association.
Therefore, they are not liable of any crime.
-

LET US ADD FACTS TO THE PROBLEM.


Q: Let us say A, B, and C gathered 20 men 10 were
armed and the other 10 were not armed. Again, they
conspired and agreed to commit simultaneous bank
robbery all over Metro Manila. After their agreement here
comes the police officers, the police officers arrested them.
Of what crime or crimes may the police officer file against
them?
A:They should be charged of illegal assembly
under the first act. They have the gathering of
men and their purpose is to commit a crime
punishable under the RPC which is robbery and it
is attended by armed persons, even if only 10
were with arms, still it is considered as illegal
assembly. Because the law does not require a
number as to the persons who should be armed.
So, all of them should be held criminally liable.
A, B and C, as leaders or organizers of the said
meeting, are liable for illegal assembly. Those
persons who are armed, the penalty is higher than

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 33

those who are not armed. Prision Correcional if


they are armed
Arresto Mayor if they are not armed

Q: What if A, B and C gathered 1000 men and women.


Their intention was to incite the people to uprise against the
government to overthrow the present administration. These
1000 men and women arrived in the said designated place.
These 1000 men and women were arranging the chairs
when suddenly here comes the police officers who got a tip
about the said meeting. The police officers immediately
arrested A, B and C and the 1000 men and women. What
crime or crimes if any may these 1000 men and women be
charged of?
A:They have not committed any crime. It
cannot be under the first act of illegal assembly
because the said 1000 men and women were not
armed. It cannot be under the second act of illegal
assembly, because for one to be liable under this
act, note that even if not all of them need not to be
armed, it is required that the audience must be
incited to commit treason, rebellion, or
insurrection, sedition or assault upon a person in
authority or his agents. Here the intention of A, B
and C is to incite them to commit rebellion, BUT
there was no statement in the problem that they
were indeed incited to commit rebellion. In fact,
they were just arranging the chairs, the meeting
was only about to begin. Therefore, they have not
yet committed any crime.

Q: What if the jueteng lords of Southern Tagalog gathered,


they gathered in Batangas. So their purpose was to define
ways and means to propagate jueteng considering that the
government would not want to legalize jueteng, their
decision was define ways and means to propagate jueteng
by using minors, those 15 years of age or below as
kubrador in the case of jueteng, so that was the purpose of
their meeting. In the said meeting, they elected their wouldbe president, vice president, treasurer, etc. So they formed
an organization, an association and they said that at the
end of the month, they would meet and define ways and
means to propagate jueteng. The police officers arrived and
they were all arrested. But they are not with arms, it is not
mentioned that any of them were with arms.
A:The crime committed is illegal association
under Article 147. It is an association totally and
partially organized for some purpose contrary to
public morals. Jueteng is in violation of PD 1602,
illegal gambling as amended and it is against
public morals because it has not yet been
legalized by law.

ARTICLE148 DIRECT ASSAULT


The two forms in committing the crime of direct assault

under Article 148 are:

CRIMINAL LAW 2
I.

Without public uprising, by employing FORCE or


INTIMIDATION for the attainment of any of the
purposes enumerated defining the crimes of
rebellion and sedition.
The intention of the offender is to commit

any of the purposes of rebellion or sedition.


PURPOSES OF REBELLION:

1. To remove from the allegiance to the


Government or its laws:
a. t h e t e r r i t o r y o f t h e
Philippines or any part
thereof; or
b. any body of land, naval, or
other armed forces; or
2.
To deprive the Chief Executive or
Congress, wholly or partially, of any of
their powers or prerogatives.
PURPOSES OF SEDITION:

1. To PREVENT the promulgation or


execution of any law or the holding
of any popular election;
2. To P R E V E N T t h e N a t i o n a l
Government, or any provincial or
municipal government or any public
officer thereof from freely exercising
its or his functions, or PREVENT the
execution of any administrative
order;
3. To INFLICT any act of hate or
revenge upon the person or property
of any public officer or employee;
4. To COMMIT, for any political or
social end, any act of hate or
revenge against private persons or
any social class;
5. To DESPOIL, for any political or
social end, any person, municipality,
province, or the National
Government of all its property or any
part thereof
NOTE: The law says that there is no
public uprising, therefore whenever there
is actual commission of rebellion or
sedition, direct assault can never be
committed because the element of direct
assault in whatever form is that there be
no public uprising, on the other hand, a
necessary element in the crime of
sedition or rebellion is there be public
uprising.

ELEMENTS:
1. T h e o f f e n d e r e m p l o y s f o r c e o r
intimidation
2. AIM of the offender is to attain any of the
purposes of the crime of rebellion or any
of the objects of the crime of sedition

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 34

3.
II.

There is no public uprising

Without public uprising, by ATTACKING, by


EMPLOYING FORCE, or by SERIOUSLY
INTIMIDATING or SERIOUSLY RESISTING any
person in authority or any of his agents, while in
the performance of official duties, or on the
occasion of such performance.
Most popular form of direct assault

ELEMENTS:
1. The offender
a. Makes an attack,
b. Employs force,
c. Makes a serious intimidation, or
d. Makes a serious resistance
If the offended party is a
person in authority, the
attack or the employment of
force need not be serious
because under Article 148, the
mere act of laying of hands in
the person in authority is
already qualified direct assault.
Therefore, the mere act of
pushing a person in authority is
already qualified direct assault
because the offender already
laid hands upon a person in
authority. Hence, it need not be
s e r i o u s . H o w e v e r, i f t h e
offended party is a mere
agent of a person in
authority, it is necessary that
the employment of force must
be serious. The reason is that
in order to show defiance of
law against a mere agent of
person in authority, it is
necessary that the attack or
force employed must be
serious in nature.
If what has been done is
intimidation or resistance, to
amount to direct assault, it
must always be serious
whether the offended party is a
person in authority or a mere
agent of a person in authority.
2.

The second element requires that the


assault is against a person in authority or
an agent of a person in authority
Who are these so-calledpersons in

authority? (Art 152)


1. Any person directly vested
with jurisdiction, whether as
an individual or as a

CRIMINAL LAW 2

2.
3.

4.

3.

member of some court or


government-owned and
controlled corporation,
board or commission
A barangay captain and a
barangay chairman
Teachers, professors, or
persons charged with the
supervision of public or duly
recognized private schools,
colleges or institutions
Lawyers while engaged in
their professional duties or
while in the act of their
professional duties

Who is an agent of a person in


authority? (Art 152, par 2)
A person who, by direct

provision of law, by election


or by appointment by
c o m p e t e n t a u t h o r i t y, i s
charged with the
maintenance of public order
and the protection and
security of life and property
( e . g . p o l i c e o ff i c e r,
councilors). Likewise, it is
stated that any person who
comes to the aid of a person
in authority is deemed an
agent of person in authority.

The third element provides that at the


time of the assault, the person in
authority is engaged in the performance
of his official duties or the attack was on
occasion of such performance of official
duty.
Direct assault can be

committed whether the


public officer or employee.
Direct assault can be

committed whether the


public officer or agent of a
person in authority is in the
engaged in the performance
of his official duties or on
occasion of such
performance.
If a person in authority or his

agent is engaged in the


performance of his official
duty at the time of the
assault, regardless of the
motive of the offender, direct
assault will always arise.
Whether there is a personal
vendetta, whether it is a

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 35

4.

5.

public reason or whatever


reason, there is always
direct assault. There is
defiance of authority
because the person in
authority or his agent is
actually engaged in the
performance of official duty
But if the person in authority
or his agent is not engaged
in the performance of his
official duty at the time of the
assault, motive on the part of
offender becomes material.
You have to determine the
motive on the part of the
offender. If the motive on the
part of the offender is a
personal vendetta, the crime
c o m m i t t e d i s m u r d e r,
homicide, serious physical
injuries or less serious
physical injuries, as the case
may be. But if the motive is
by reason of the authorities
past performance of his
official duty, the crime
committed is still direct
assault.
The phrase on occasion of
such performance means
that the said assault was by
reason of the past
performance of official duty.
So on occasion means it is
by reason of the past
performance of official duty.

The fourth element provides that the


offender knows him to be a person in
authority or an agent of a person in
authority. So it is that the offender knows
him to be a person in authority because
otherwise, he cannot be said that he
defied the law, he defied the authority. In
the first place, he didnt know that the
person he is attacking is a person in
authority or an agent of a person in
authority.

The fifth element requires that there be


no public uprising.

QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT


There are three circumstances which will qualify direct
assault:

CRIMINAL LAW 2
1.

When the assault is committed by means of a


weapon;
WEAPON - firearms, knives or any other

items which will inflict injury.

2.

When the offender is a public officer or employee;


So when a public officer or employee attacks

a person in authority, it is always qualified


direct assault.

When the offender lays hands upon a person in


authority
Will only lie if the laying of hands is upon a

person in authority.
Any of these three circumstances will qualify direct assault.
3.

NOTE: The first two qualifying circumstance affects both a


person in authority or agent of a person in authority.
However, the third qualifying circumstance (laying hands
upon a person in authority) will only lie if the offended party
is a person in authority. Mere laying of hands to an agent of
person in authority is not qualified. It will only qualify if the
laying of hands is upon a person in authority.

COMPLEX CRIME OF DIRECT ASSAULT:


Whenever the crime of direct assault is committed, and
there is a resulting felony (e.g. death, physical injuries), you
always complex it.
Under Article 48, you should always complex it because
from a single act, two or more grave or less grave felonies
had resulted. Under Article 48, Book I, you have to complex
it. So it could be:
o Direct assault with Murder
o Direct assault with Homicide
o Direct assault with Serious Physical
Injuries
o Direct assault with Less Serious Physical
Injuries

But if the resulting felony is only SLIGHT


PHYSICAL INJURIES, you cannot complex it. It is
prohibited under Article 48 because:

1.

2.

It is only a light felony. Under Article 48, you


can only complex two or more grave or less
grave felonies but not a light felony.
Slight physical injury or light felony is
already absorbed in direct assault because
whenever you assault somebody, definitely,
somehow, any injury would happen to him.
That is why it is already absorbed in direct
assault.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if the city mayor attended the flag ceremony. It
was a mandate. So there was this flag ceremony attended
by the city mayor. After the flag ceremony, the mayor went
to the platform and was making an announcement to the

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 36

city hall employees. Suddenly here comes X. X went near


the mayor and shot the mayor on the head. The mayor
died. What crime is committed by X?
A: QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH
MURDER. The city mayor was engaged in the
performance of his official duty at the time of the
assault therefore it is direct assault. Because the
city mayor was engaged in the performance of his
official duty regardless of the motive of X, even if it
is by mayors past performance of official duty or
by reason of personal vendetta, regardless of the
motive of X, the offender, since the mayor is
engaged in the performance of his official duty, it
is direct assault.
Now, the mayor died. Therefore there is a
resulting felony of murder because obviously there
was treachery; therefore, it is direct assault with
murder.
Now, the offender made use of a weapon, he
made use of a pistol gun, a firearm which is a
qualifying circumstance, therefore, the crime
committed is QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT
WITH MURDER.
(EXAM TIP: the corresponding explanation must
be completewhat is the qualifying circumstance,
what is direct assault, what is a complex crime)

Q: What if the city mayor has just attended a Sunday mass.


He and his wife and children were getting out of the church
when suddenly here comes X. X, onboard the motorcycle
went straight to the city mayor and fired at the head of the
city mayor. The city mayor died. It was found that X was a
former employee of the city hall, who was dismissed by the
city mayor because he engaged in an anomalous
transaction. What crime is committed by X?
A : Q U A L I F I E D D I R E C T A S S A U LT W I T H
MURDER.The city mayor was not engaged in the
performance of his official duty. Since the city
mayor was not engaged in the performance of his
official duty, he is a person in authority, you have
to know the reason, the motive of the offender.
The offender was a city hall employee who was
dismissed by the city mayor, therefore the motive
was by reason of the past performance of the said
person in authority. So it is by reason of the past
performance of his official duty, the attack, the
firing was done on occasion of such performance
of official duty therefore the crime committed is
direct assault.
The mayor died. Obviously there was treachery
therefore it is direct assault with murder.
The offender made use of a firearm, which is a
qualifying circumstance in direct assault therefore
it is QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH
MURDER.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Q: What if in the same problem, here comes X, the mayor
was coming out of the church, X shot the city mayor. Now X
happened to be a former gardener who was dismissed
from the service of the household because he performed a
wrongful act while gardening. Therefore his reason was a
personal vendetta. What crime is committed by X?
A: X committed a crime ofMURDER. Obviously,
there was treachery on the part of X.
It is not direct assault because the mayor was
not engaged in the performance of his official duty
and the reason behind the assault was personal
vendetta. Therefore it cannot be said that the
attack was on occasion of such performance of
official duty.

Q: What if the judge has just rendered judgment. After


rendering the judgment, after finding the accused guilty
beyond reasonable doubt, the accused got mad. He
jumped on the judge and he boxed the judge several times.
The court interpreter, the person nearest to the judge,
came to the aid of the judge. This angered the accused.
The accused got mad at the court interpreter and he boxed
the court interpreter as well. Thereafter the security guards
arrived and took away the said accused. The judge
suffered serious physical injuries whereas the court
interpreter suffered slight physical injuries. What crime or
crimes is/are committed by the accused, first against the
judge, and second against the court interpreter?
A: As against the judge, the accused is liable
of the crime of QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT
WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES. The
judge is a person in authority under Article 152.
He was engaged in the performance of his official
duty at the time of the assault therefore the crime
committed is direct assault. It has a resulting
felony, serious physical injuries; therefore it should
be direct assault with serious physical injuries.
The accused in boxing the judge, laid hands upon
a person in authority therefore it is QUALIFIED
DIRECT ASSAULT WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES.

As against the court interpreter, the accused is


liable of the crime of DIRECT ASSAULT. At the
time the court interpreter came to the aid of a
person in authority, who was the victim of direct
assault. Note under Article 152, any person who
comes to the aid of a person in authority is
deemed an agent of a person in authority
therefore, when the court interpreter came to the
aid of the said judge, who was a person in
authority, he became an agent of a person in
authority. And under Article 148, any attack on an
agent of a person in authority is direct assault.
Therefore the crime committed is direct assault.
The said interpreter suffered slight physical injury.
You cannot complex it because it is only a light

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 37

felony. Therefore it is only direct assault not


complex. The said accused laid hands upon the
court interpreter, would you qualify it? No,
because he is mere agent of person in authority.
Therefore the crime committed is only direct
assault.

ARTICLE149 INDIRECT ASSAULT


Indirect assault can be committed only when a

direct assault is also committed


ELEMENTS:
1. An AGENT of a person in authority is the victim
of any of the forms of direct assault defined in
Article 148.
2. A person comes to the aid of such agent
3. Offender makes use of force or intimidation
upon such person coming to the aid of the
agent.

Q: What if a police officer was manning the traffic and it


was a heavy traffic so the vehicles were stuck. What if one
of the owners of the vehicles got mad at the police officer
and he went straight to the police officer, who at the time
has no pistol, and boxed the police officer. While he was
boxing a police officer a pedestrian saw the incident .the
pedestrian came to the aid of the police officer. This
angered the owner of the vehicle so he, too, boxed the said
pedestrian. The said pedestrian suffered slight physical
injuries while the police officer suffered less serious
physical injuries. What crime or crimes is/are committed by
the said owner of the vehicle against:
a. The police officer
b. The pedestrian?
A: a. DIRECT ASSAULT WITH LESS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES. The said owner of the
vehicle boxed the said police officer. The police
officer is an agent of a person in authority under
Article 152 because he was charged with the
maintenance of public order. The police officer is
in the actual performance of his official duty at the
time of the assault therefore the crime committed
is direct assault. There is also a resulting felony
which is less serious physical injuries, a less grave
felony; therefore we have to complex it, direct
assault with less serious physical injuries. The
offender laid hands upon the police officer,
however, laying of hands will not qualify because
he is a mere agent of person in authority;
therefore the crime committed against the police
officer is direct assault with less serious physical
injuries.
(NOTE: an MMDA officer is also an agent of a
person in authority because he is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the protection
and security of life and property)

CRIMINAL LAW 2
b. INDIRECT ASSAULT under Art 149. An agent
of a person in authority was the victim of direct
assault. A person came to his aid who is the
pedestrian. When the pedestrian came to the aid
of this agent of person in authority, he did not
become an agent of a person in authority under
Art 152 because under Art 152, a person would
only become an agent of a person in authority if
he came to the aid of a person in authority. Here,
the pedestrian merely came to the aid of an agent
of a person in authority who is the police officer.
Therefore, when the pedestrian came to the aid of
the police officer, he did not become also an agent
of a person in authority; as such, the crime
committed is INDIRECT ASSAULT. When the
pedestrian came to the aid of the police officer,
force and intimidation were employed against him
so the crime committed by the owner of the
vehicle against the pedestrian is indirect assault.
Are you going to complex it to the crime

of slight physical injuries?


No, because it is absorbed and it is

only a light felony.

Under Article 149, INDIRECT ASSAULT is committed if a


person in authority or an agent of a person in authority
is the victim of direct assault. Any person who came to
his aid and that person was employed with force or
intimidation by the offender.
Why is it in the given problem, when the person

under attacked is a person in authority and when


someone came to his aid, and that someone was
also attacked, the crime committed is direct assault
against that someone. But when the victim of direct
assault is a mere agent of a person in authority,
and someone came to his aid, and that someone
was also attacked, the crime is indirect assault.
The reason is that the Congress

amended Article 152 without


correspondingly amending Article 149.
Based on the amendment made by

Congress in Article 152, it is stated that


any person who comes to the aid of a
person in authority is deemed an agent
of person in authority. And if an agent of
a person in authority is attacked, such
attack is under Article 148 which is direct
assault and not indirect assault under
Article 149.
But if the victim of the said direct

assault is a mere agent of a person in


authority, and someone who comes to his
aid will not become an agent of a person
in authority; therefore when he is also
attacked, it will only be indirect assault
under Article 149.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 38

In statcon, when there are two provisions which


are contrary, you reconcile. So to reconcile, Article
149 or indirect assault will only apply if the victim
of direct assault is a mere agent of person in
authority and someone came to his aid, and that
someone was also employed with force and
intimidation.

ARTICLE150 DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED


BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, ITS COMMITTEES OR
SUBCOMMITTTES, BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL
COMMISSIONS, ITS COMMITTEES, SUBCOMITTEES
OR DIVISIONS
Acts Punished:

I.By refusing, without legal excuse, to obey


summons issued by the Congress or any of
its extensions or any of its standing
committees or subcommittees, by the
Constitutional Commissions, its committees,
subcommittees or any other body which has
the power to issue summons.
Under the first act, for the crime to arise,
it is necessary that the offenders refusal
to obey the summons is without any
legal excuse. If there is a valid reason, a
legal excuse, why the offender didnt
attend the said committee hearing of the
congress or why he failed to comply
with the said summons or any of the
acts under Art. 150; the crime will not
arise.

II.By refusing to be sworn or placed under


affirmation while being before such legislative
or constitutional body or official.
Under the second act the public official or
the person was required to appear in
the said meeting and obey the
summons however, the moment he
appeared in the said meeting, he
refused to be sworn to. He does not
want to be sworn to and he refused to
be placed under affirmation before such
legislative or constitutional body. Art.
150 is still violated.
III.By refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to
produce any books, papers, documents, or
records in his possession, when required by
them to do so in the exercise of their
functions.

IV.By refusing another from attending as a witness


in such legislative or constitutional body.
Under the fourth act punished, the said

offender did not fail to attend in the


summons; he restrained another from

CRIMINAL LAW 2
attending as a witness. He prevented
another person in attending as a witness
in such legislative or constitutional body
hearing.

V.By inducing disobedience to a summons or


refusal to be sworn by any such body or
official.
NOTE that Congress where it be the

House of Representatives or the Senate


has the power to issue summons
because they have the power to
investigate that is inquiry in aid of
legislation. Whatever be the findings in
the said investigating body, it will be used
in the making of a bill, a proposal. NOTE
that they dont have the power to file a
case so whatever be the product of their
investigation, they will give it either to the
Ombudsman or to the DOJ. It is upto the
DOJ or to the Ombudsman to file a case
because the purpose of the Senate or
the HOR is only inquiry in aid of
legislation.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if there is this committee hearing, an investigation
about anomalous transactions entered into by a former
officials of the DENR. While the said official received the
summons, he failed to appear because he was at St.
Lukes. He was confined because he was suffering from
hypertension. Can he be held liable under Art. 150?
A: He cannot be held liable because he has a
legal excuse to attend or to obey the summons
issued by the Congress. The moment that there is
a legal excuse, the crime will not arise BUT if his
measure is without any legal excuse NOTE that
aside from violation of Art. 150, he can also be
held liable or cited for contempt by the said
committee of Congress and usually when cited for
contempt, he is placed in detention in the Senate
Blue Ribbon Committee.

Q: He obeyed the summons, he appeared, he allowed


himself to be sworn in however, the moment that the
Senators asked him questions, and he refused to answer
the questions. He said: I invoke my right against selfincrimination. When he was solely required to produce the
books which were confirmed to be in his possession; He
didnt want to produce the said books because according to
him, the production of these books would incriminate
himself. Can he be held liable under Art. 150?
A: He cannot. If the answer to any of the
questions or if the conduction of the same will
incriminate the person in the said crime; he has
the right not to do so. Under the Constitution, No
person can be compelled to be a witness against

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 39

himself and asking him, requiring him, ordering


him to produce the books or to answer any
questions which would incriminate himself is akin
to making him a witness against himself and it is
unconstitutional.

ARTICLE151 RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A


PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS OF SUCH
PERSON
Punishes two acts:

I. RESISTANCE AND SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE


(PAR 1)
ELEMENTS:
1. The person in authority or his agent
a. i s e n g a g e d i n t h e
performance of official duty;
or
b. gives a lawful order to the
offender
1. Offender resists or seriously disobey
such person in authority or his agent
2. That such resistance or disobedience
will not amount to
a.direct assault (Art 148),
b.indirect assault (Art 149); or
c.disobedience to summons
issued by Congress

II. SIMPLE DISOBEDIENCE (PAR 2)


ELEMENTS:
1. An AGENT of a person in authority
a.
is engaged in the performance
of official duty; or
b. gives a lawful order to the
offender
1. The offender disobeys such order of
the agent
2. Such disobedience is not serious in
nature

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if the mayor has a project, a cleaning act
operation in order to prevent dengue. So they were
cleaning up the canals. While the mayor was cleaning up
the canals together with other city hall employees, here
comes Mang Pedro who had taken beer and was a little
tipsy. So the went there and was shouting and making
noise, disturbing the people who were busy cleaning up the
canals. And so the police officer cleaning told Mang Pedro
to go home because he was disturbing the cleaning up
operation. Mang Pedro, instead of going home, merely sat
nearby the canal being cleaned by the people. What crime,
if any, did Mang Pedro commit?
A: Mang Pedro committed SIMPLE
DISOBEDIENCE UNDER ARTICLE 151 par 2.
Article 151, second paragraph, simple
disobedience is committed when an agent of a

CRIMINAL LAW 2
person in authority is engaged in the performance
of official duty or gives a lawful order to the
offender, that the offender disobeys and such
disobedience is not of serious nature. In the
problem, it was the police officer, an agent of a
person in authority, who gave the order to Mang
Pedro and Mang Pedro disobeyed him but such
disobedience was not serious in nature because
he merely sat nearby the canal; therefore there
was no showing that such disobedience is serious
in nature so the crime committed is simple
disobedience.

A: The following are the persons in authority:


1. Municipal Mayors
2. Division Superintendent of schools
3. Public and private school teachers
4. Teacher-nurse
5. President of the sanitary division
6. Provincial Fiscal
7. Judges
8. Lawyers in actual performance of
duties
9. Sangguniang Bayan member
10.Barangay Chairman

Q: Is there direct assault with robbery? Lets say that the


city mayor was assaulted and thereafter he took the watch
of the mayor.
A: No, there is no such crime. The crime
committed is not direct assault with robbery. It is
already robbery with any resulting felony, if there
is one.
What if the original motive was to assault the city

mayor?
If the original motive is to assault the

city mayor and not to commit robbery, but the


offender took the watch, there will be two
crimes because the offender already
performed two acts.
If there are two separate and distinct

crimes, there shall be two information that will


be filed to the court. If it is a complex crime,
only one information is filed before the court.
If the intention is to rob, and in the occasion of
the said robbery, homicide, serious physical
injuries, rape, intentional mutilation, arson
was committed, the crime committed under
Article 294 is robbery with homicide, robbery
with intentional mutilation, robbery with rape,
robbery with arson or robbery with serious
physical injuries.
If the original intention was to assault the city
mayor and thereafter he committed robbery,
there will be two acts. Because his intention
was to assault and thereafter he committed
the second act of taking away the personal
property of the city mayor.
In case of DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MURDER
or HOMICIDE, it is considered a complex
crime under Article 48 because based on the
single act performed, two or more grave or
less grave offense was committed. Because
with the single act of boxing, the offender
committed direct assault and serious/less
serious physical injuries.

Q: Who is an agent of a person in authority?


A: Those who are in charged with:
The maintenance of public order; and
The protection and security of life and
property

ARTICLE152 PERSONS IN AUTHORITHY AND


AGENTS OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY
Q: Who are persons in authority?

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 40

ARTICLE153 TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES


Acts punished:

I.Causing any serious disturbances in a public


place, office or establishment;
For the said disturbance to be

considered as a violation of Art 153;


it is necessary that the said offender
deliberately intended to disturb the
said meeting or public place. It was a
planned intentional act.

II.Interrupting or disturbing performances, functions


or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act
is not included in Arts. 131 and 132;
NOTE that there is a qualification

made by law provided that the said


interruption or disturbance of public
gatherings, functions and peaceful
meetings must not fall as a violation
under Art 131 or Art 132.

III.Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or


sedition in any meeting, association or public
place.

IV.Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a


disturbance of public order in such place;
Whether this making of an outcry or

the displaying of placards or


emblems, it is necessary that such
act of displaying placards or
emblems must be an unconscious
outburst of emotion. It must not be
intentionally calculated to incite
people to rebel or to commit sedition
because otherwise, the crime would
be inciting to rebellion or inciting to
sedition.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

V.Burying with pomp the body of a person who has


been legally executed.
When you say legally executed; it

means that the said person has


committed a heinous crime. The
penalty prescribed by law is death
and so he was killed by means of
lethal injection but at present
because of Republic Act No. 9346,
we have no more death penalty.
Death Penalty is prohibited to be
imposed.

But in burying with pomp the body of


the person who has been legally
executed; the said person must be
legally executed because the said
person has committed a heinous
crime yet when he was buried he
was buried with such extravagance
as if as he is a hero, as if as the
government has committed a crime
in legally executing him therefore it
causes sympathy arising on the part
of the people hence, it was a
disturbance of public order.

If any of these prohibited acts


constituting violation of Art 153 is
committed by more than 3 persons
who are provided with arms or any
means of violence it is said to be
tumultuous therefore there must be
at least four persons who are armed
or provided with means of violence
for it to be considered as tumultuous.

SO WHERE LIES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ART


153 AND ART 131 OR 132?
Article 153 punishes TUMULTS ANS OTHER

DISTURBANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER, Article 131


punishes PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION AND
DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS, Article
132 punishes INTERRUPTING OF RELIGIOUS
FEELINGS

Articles 131 and 132 can only be committed by a


Public Officer. It cannot be committed by a private
individual whereas under Art 153, it can be
committed both by a Public Officer and a private
individual.

What if the offender is a public officer and he disturbs a


peaceful meeting. How would you distinguish if it is a
violation of Art 153 or a violation of Art 131?

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 41

First, In Art 131, the public officer must not be a


participant in the meeting that he disturb or
interrupted. He must be an outsider, a stranger in
the said meeting. On the other hand, in Art 153,
the said Public Officer must be a participant, one
in attendance in the said meeting.

Second, in Art 131, the mere intention of the


public officer is to prevent a person from freely
exercising his freedom of speech and expression
whereas in Art 153, the intention of the offender is
to disturb public peace and tranquility.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if since RH Bill was enacted into law, there was a
huge rally at the EDSA Shrine which was initiated by the
members of the CBCP. They were against this law and they
encouraged the people to file a case before the Supreme
Court questioning the constitutionality of the said law. At
first, the head of the CBCP spoke then after him another
person, a private individual spoke, the head of the
organization spoke and he kept on attacking and attacking
the President. He said that the President bribed the
members of the Congress in order to pass this bill so he
kept on attacking and attacking the President. One of the
police officers, who was assigned to maintain the peace
and order in the place, heard the attacks against the
President. This Police Officer was indebted to the President
he owed his position to the President. He went straight to
the person talking against the President and told him to
stop. When he didnt stop, the Police Officer fired shots in
the air and the people scampered away and the peaceful
meeting/gathering was dissolved/ interrupted. What crime
was committed by the Police Officer?
A: The crime committed by the Police Officer
is not Art 153 but Art 131.Because the
distinctions lie in this case. First, the said Public
Officer, a Police Officer is not a participant in the
said meeting. He is a stranger, an outsider in the
said meeting. Second, his only purpose is to
prevent the said person in freely exercising his
freedom of speech and expression, it is his right to
express his anger against the President yet the
said person prevented him in exercising such
freedom of Speech and expression therefore the
Police Officer is liable under Art 131 and not under
Art 153.

For him to be liable under Art 153, lets say that he


is a public officer, he is a participant in the said
meeting and while participating in the said
meeting, he interrupted the said meeting in order
for him to cause a disturbance of the said
meeting. The crime is Art 153.

Q: There was this peaceful gathering, lets say a public


meeting, a peaceful meeting about the increase of fares of

CRIMINAL LAW 2
the MRT and the LRT. One of the participants therein, one
of the persons therein went to the platform and took the mic
and then he incite the people, induced the people to go to
the streets, uprise, rebel against the government, to
overthrow the government. What crime was committed?
A:The crime committed was inciting to
rebellion.

Q: What if, he was among the participants. The head of the


meeting, the Public Officer was discussing about the
increase of fares of the MRT and LRT. This person could no
longer control his emotions. Suddenly he stood up and he
said: buwisitnagobyernonaitonaiinisnako. Dapatnatayong
mag rebeldesagobyernowalangginawakundi increase ng
taxes. They go and rebel against the government. What
crime was committed?
A:Tumults and other disturbances of public
order. It is just an unconscious outburst of
emotions not an intentionally calculated to incite
people to rebel against the government.

ARTICLE154 UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF


PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCESActs
punished:
I.By publishing or causing to be published by
means of printing lithography or any other
means of publication, as news any false news
which may endanger the public order, or
cause damage to the interest or credit of the
State.
II.By encouraging disobedience to the law or to the
constituted authorities or by praising,
justifying ot extolling any act punished by law,
by the same means or by words, utterances
or speeches.
III.By maliciously publishing or causing to be
published any official resolution or document
without proper authority, or before they have
been published officially.
NOTE that in the third act there is

the word Malicious. The offender


must maliciously publish or cause to
be published any official resolution. If
the publication of the official
resolution without official authority or
the publication was not done
maliciously, there was no intent to
cause damage, it was not done
maliciously. Art 154 is not violated. It
is necessary that the said publication
must be done maliciously under the
third act.
IV.By printing, publishing or distributing (or causing
the same) books, pamphlets, periodicals, or
leaflets which do not bear the real printers
name or which are classified as anonymous.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 42

It is necessary that any publication


has contained the real printers
name. It must have been
anonymous. The publisher, the
printer, the author, must be stated
even at the bottom.

Q: What if the Philippine Daily Inquirer has as its headline:


KC Concepcion said..PioloPascual is gay. So that is the
headline of the Philippine Daily Inquirer. It was posted. KC
never categorically stated that Piolo is gay, she only
impliedly stated it but she never categorically stated it. So
the Daily Inquirer published a false news and PioloPascual
filed a case in violation of Art 154 against the Philippine
Daily Inquirer. The Philippine Daily Inquirer knew that it is a
false news yet they still published it as news.
A: Art. 154 is not violated because whether or
notPiolo is gay it will not endanger public order. It
will not cause damage to the credit or interest of
the state.

Q: What if the headline of the Philippine Daily Inquirer said:


Tomorrow, Megamall will be bombed from a very reliable
source. That was the headline of the Philippine Daily
Inquirer. The Philippine Daily Inquirer later on learned that it
was false nevertheless; since it was already there they still
published it and distributed it. Can they be held liable under
Art 154?
A: Yes because the said news will endanger
public order. It can cause damage to the credit or
interest of the state. Imagine Megamall will be
bomb, no person will go to the said place, tourists
will not go to the said place therefore it will
endanger public order and can cause damage to
the interest of the state when the said newspaper
published it despite knowing that it was false
news. Art 154 is violated.

Q: What if members of the CBCP, they are against the RH


Law. They made leaflets, pamphlets and distributed it to all
persons in the church, in market.. Therein is stated: Anyone
who would obey or comply with the RH Bill which is a
Catholic will be ex-communicated. Can they be held liable
of Art 154?
A:Yes because they encouraged disobedience
to the law. It has been enacted into law and by
encouraging the people that they would be excommunicated if you will obey it, then you can be
held liable for unlawful use of means of
publication.

ARTICLE155 ALARMS AND SCANDALS


Acts punished:

I.Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or


other explosives within any town or public
place calculated to cause (which produces)
alarm or danger.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
II.Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari
or other disorderly meeting offensive to
another or prejudicial to public tranquility.
Charivari includes a medley of

discordant voices, a mock serenade


of discordant noises made on
kettles, tins, horns, etc. designed to
annoy and insult.
III.Disturbing the public peace while wandering
about at night or while engaged in any other
nocturnal amusement.
IV.Causing any disturbance or scandal in public
places while intoxicated or otherwise,
provided Art 153 is not applicable

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: In a public park, there were so many people here comes
X. X went in the middle of the park and fired shots in the
air. The people were so afraid they scampered away. What
crime is committed?
A: Alarms and Scandals under Art 155. His act
can cause damage to public peace and tranquility.

Q: What if in the same problem, in a public park, there


were so many people and here comes X. X saw his enemy
Y. He took out his firearm, aiming his firearm at Y without
any intent to kill because he knew Y would not be killed and
he discharged the firearm. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is illegal discharged
of firearms under Art. 1254.

Q: What if in the same public place, X saw his enemy Y. He


pulled out his firearm with intent to kill, he aimed his firearm
at Y, discharged the firearm but Y was not killed. What
crime was committed?
A: Attempted murder or Homicide as the case
may be.
In case of alarms and scandals, the only

intention of the offender is to cause


damage to public peace and tranquility
that is to cause alarm and danger. That is
his intention.

In Illegal Discharge of Firearms under Art


1254 his intention is to threaten the said
person or any other persons. He aimed
the firearm and discharges the firearm
pointing at a particular person absent:
intent to kill. There was no intent to kill, it
is illegal discharge of firearm.
But given in the same problem, he knows
his enemy, pointed the firearm at his
enemy but with intent to kill. He
discharged the firearm but his enemy
was not killed. It is attempted homicide or
murder as the case may be. Since there
is an intent to kill on the part of the

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 43

offender even if the victim was not killed


it is still in the attempted stage.

Q: What if in the same problem, it was in a public place, X


went to the said place, he saw his enemy Y. He went near
Y, took out his gun and poked the gun at Y but did not
discharge the said gun. What crime is committed?
A:The crime committed is other light threats.
NOTE that under other light threats the offender
merely poked the firearm at the victim without
discharging or firing the firearm. If the firearm has
been discharged, 3 crimes may be committed
depending on the intent. It can be alarms and
scandals, illegal discharge of firearms or
attempted homicide or murder as the case may
be.

Q: You have a neighbor, it was his birthday. They rented a


videoke and kept on singing along till 12mn. The guests
already left, the birthday celebrant was the only one left, its
already 1:30am and hes still singing at the top of his voice
with the use of the mic. His neighbors cannot sleep
because of his ugly voice. Everyone in the neighborhood
could hear him and cannot sleep. Can he be held liable
under Art 155 alarms and scandals?
A: Yes. He can be held liable under alarms and
scandals because his only intention that night is to
cause a disturbance of public peace and order.

Q: Lets say a person was intoxicated. He was drunk. He


was on his way home. He was singing at the top of his
voice. Is he liable for alarms and scandals?
A: No because it is normal to sing at the top of his
voice.

Q: What if he saw this lead pipe (tubo) and upon seeing


this lead pipe, he would bang all the gates that he would
pass by. Is he liable for alarms and scandals?
A: Yes because his acts caused damage to public
peace and tranquility.

ARTICLE156 DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL


ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment.
2. That the offender removes therefrom such
persons, or helps the escape of such person.

The PENALTY for the crime is QUALIFIED if violence


or intimidation has been used in the commission of the
crime also if bribery is used in delivering prisoners from
jail.

Who is the offender?


The offender is any person. He can be a private

individual or a public officer or employee provided


that he is not the custodian of the said prisoner

CRIMINAL LAW 2

because if the offender who helped in the escape


of the prisoner from jail is the custodian of the said
prisoner, the crime is under Art 223 Infidelity in the
custody of prisoners because the element of
breach of trust and confidence reposed on him by
the government.

Who is the prisoner being referred to in delivering


persons from jail?
He can be a detention prisoner or a prisoner

convicted by final judgment for as long as he is in


a jail or penal institution.
A detention prisoner is a prisoner who is

behind bars but the case against him is


ongoing either because the crime he
committed is a non-bailable offense and
evidence of guilt is strong or the crime he
committed is a bailable offense but he does
not have the enough funds to put up the
required bail.

and concealed him despite the fact that he was an escapee


from a penal institution. What are the crimes committed by
A (the prisoner), B (the friend), jail warden custodian, the
guard of the penal institution, and the friend who harbored
him?
A: A is liable of evasion of service of sentence
under Art 157. He is a prisoner convicted by final
judgment therefore he is liable for evasion of
service of sentence.

Q: What if he is not serving his sentence in Muntinlupa.


Lets say he is just a detention prisoner. Can he be held
liable for evasion of service of sentence?
A: No. Evasion of service of sentence can only be
committed by a prisoner convicted by final judgment.
In the given problem, A is convicted by final

judgment therefore A is liable for evasion of


service of sentence under Art 157.

The prisoners at the provincial jail, city jail,


municipal jail, they are merely detention
prisoners. They are not yet convicts. They are
only accused, suspects therefore they are
presumed innocent unless and until proven
that theyre guilty of the crime charged. They
are merely detention prisoners.

On the other hand, a prisoner that is


convicted by final judgment is one who has
been convicted by the lower court and who
did not appeal his conviction within the period
to perfect an appeal then the judgment
becomes final and executory. He has to serve
the sentence. Or he has been convicted then
he appealed to the higher court within the
period to perfect an appeal and the said
higher court affirmed the said conviction. The
conviction will now become final and
executory so he is now a prisoner convicted
by final judgment. Generally, they are those
who are serving sentence in Muntinlupa.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: Lets say A is a prisoner convicted by final judgment. He
is serving his sentence in Muntinlupa. B his friend visited
him. B was a rich man. He planned As escape on his
birthday. He did this by talking to the jail warden custodian.
B the friend gave the jail warden custodian P500,000.00.
He gave bribe to the jail warden custodian to allow A his
friend to escape at that night. He also went to the guard at
the entrance gate of the New Bilibid Prison and gave the
guard P100,000.00, also to allow his friend to leave at that
night. That night, A escaped and left the penal institution.
He went to the house of another friend who harbored him

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 44

B the friend is liable under Art 156


Delivering prisoners from jail qualified by
the giving of bribe therefore his penalty will
be qualified because he gave bribe money
inorder to help in the escape of his friend. He
will not be liable for another crime of
corruption of public official because the giving
of bribe is considered clearly as a qualifying
or as an aggravating circumstance in
delivering prisoners from jail.

The jail warden custodian who received the


bribed money and allowed As escape is
liable under Art 223 infidelity in the
custody of prisoners. Aside from that, he is
also liable for direct bribery because in
case of infidelity in the custody of prisoners,
the giving and receiving of bribe is not a
qualifying or aggravating circumstance
therefore the jail warden custodian will be
liable for 2 crimes; Infidelity in the custody of
prisoners and direct bribery for having
received the bribed money in the amount of
P500,000.00.

The guard at the entrance gate of the penal


institution will be liable for delivering
prisoners from jail. He is not the custodian
and he helped in the escape/removal of the
prisoner from jail. Therefore, he is liable for
delivering prisoners from jail. The fact that he
received bribed money will not make him
liable of direct bribery because in delivering
prisoners from jail, it is only a qualifying
circumstance which will only increase the
imposable penalty.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

The friend who harbored and concealed him


will be liable under PD 1829 that is
obstruction of justice. It is committed by any
person who willfully or deliberately obstructs
or impedes the investigation or the
apprehension of a criminal.
Why not an accessory?
o Because I did not mention in the problem
the crime committed by the prisoner. For
an accessory to the crime, it is necessary
that the crime committed by the prisoner
must be treason, parricide, murder,
attempt to take the life of the chief
executive or is known to be habitually
guilty of some other crime. I did not
mention the crime committed by the
prisoner. Therefore his liability is under
PD 1829 Obstruction of Justice.

ARTICLE157 EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE


(Art 157)
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a convict by final judgment.
2. That he is serving his sentence which consists in
deprivation of liberty.
3. That he evades the service of his sentence by
escaping during the term of his sentence.

Evasion of service of sentence can only be committed


by a person convicted by final judgment. It cannot be
committed by a mere detention prisoner.

PENALTY IS QUALIFIED if such evasion or escape takes


place:
1. By means of unlawful entry
2. By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs or
floors;
3. By using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit,
violence or intimidation; or
4. Through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: You often read in the newspapers, heard over the
radios, watch on TV, 5 prisoners escaped from the
Caloocan city jail, 10 prisoners escaped from Palawan
Provincial Jail. Did they commit evasion of service of
sentence?
A: No. These persons did not commit evasion of
service of sentence under art 157 because they
are merely detention prisoners. For evasion of
sentence to arise, the prisoner who has escaped
must be a prisoner convicted by final judgment.
Under Art 157, the said prisoner the said prisoner
must be serving which involves deprivation of
liberty and he escapes during the service of his
sentence by evading the service of sentence.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 45

The law says, it is a prisoner serving his sentence


which involves deprivation of liberty. It is
necessary that the sentence imposed on him must
involve deprivation of liberty either it is behind
bars or he has been convicted of a crime wherein
the penalty is destierro. Even if the penalty
prescribed is destierro, the moment he enters the
place wherein he is prohibited from entering in the
judgment of the court, he also committed evasion
of service of sentence.
Destierro under Art 27; Destierro is also a

penalty which involves deprivation of


liberty although partial not complete
deprivation of liberty because the
offender or the convict is not allowed to
enter a place designated in the judgment
of the court. The moment he enters the
said place, he commits evasion of
service of sentence.

ARTICLE158 EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE


ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS,
CONFLAGRATIONS, EARTHQUAKES, OR OTHER
CALAMITIES (ART 158)
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a convict by final judgment
who is confined in a penal institution.
2. That there is a disorder resulting from ---a. Conflagration
b. Earthquake
c. Explosion
d. Similar catastrophe
e. Mutiny in which he has not participated
3. That the offender evades the service of his
sentence by leaving the penal institution where he
is confined, on the occasion of such disorder or
during the mutiny.
4. That the offender fails to give himself up to the
authorities within 48 hours following the issuance
of a proclamation by the Chief Executive
announcing the passing away of such calamity.

It is required under Art 158 that the prisoner is serving


his sentence in a penal institution.
In this kind of evasion of service of sentence under Art
158, the crime will arise not upon the act of leaving the
penal institution but upon the convicts failure to return/
to give himself to the proper authorities within 48
hours. That is only when the crime will arise.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if there was this earthquake, X was a prisoner
convicted by final judgment. Everything was shaking and
because of the earthquake, X escaped the penal institution.
He went to the house of his mother. That night while
watching the television, he saw the president announced/
declared that the calamity had already ceased/passed

CRIMINAL LAW 2
away. Within 48hrs he returned. What is the effect on his
criminal liability?
A:If the said convict escaped and returned to
the proper authorities within 48hrs; there shall
be a credit or a deduction from his sentence.
There is 1/5 deduction/credit from his sentence.
Under Art 98 this is special time allowance for
loyalty. He was too loyal to the government that
even if he already left the penal institution he still
returned; such kind of loyalty must be rewarded.

acceptance in the part of the prisoner granted


pardon. The moment he accepts the
conditional pardon, it means it is incumbent
upon him to comply to all of the strict
conditions. The moment he violate any of the
terms and conditions he commits evasion of
service of sentence because it shows that he
just accepted the conditional pardon so as to
free himself from taking place behind bars.

Is violation of conditional pardon a substantive


offense or not?
It depends. If you will look at Art 159, there

are 2 situations. Under Art 159, if the penalty


remitted by the grant of pardon does not
exceed 6yrs, the moment he violates any of
the conditional pardon, there is a new penalty
imposed upon him that is prisioncorreccional
minimum 6 months and 1 day to 2 years and
4 months. A new penalty is imposed on him
therefore in this case, violation of the
conditional pardon is a substantive offense
because a new penalty is imposed on him.
BUT on the second part of Art 159, if the
penalty remitted is more than 6 years; no new
penalty is imposed on him for having violated
the terms of the pardon. He is only required to
serve the remainder of the sentence. In this
case, violation of the conditional pardon is not
a substantive offense because there is no
new penalty imposed for the commission of
the crime.

Q: What if 48hrs had lapsed, still he did not return. What is


the effect of his criminal liability?
A:There will be an additional penalty imposed
on him. 1/5 on the basis of the remainder of his
sentence but note that it shall not exceed six
months.

Q: There was this earthquake, everything was shaking. He


just hid under the table. He did not leave the penal
institution. He was so loyal to the government that he did
not even think to leave. Will he be given credit?
A:No. Under Art 158 there is no credit to be
given to him. Under Art 98, there is no special
time allowance of loyalty for just hiding under the
table and not leaving the penal institution.

Q: Why those who are loyal to the government and did not
leave the penal institution be not given credit? Isnt it
unfair?
A: The reason is that prisoners are considered as
accountabilities of the government. It is the duty of
the government to protect the prisoners. In times
of calamities or public disorders, the state cannot
protect these prisoners therefore the State
encourages them to leave inorder to protect
themselves. But important thing is that they show
their loyalty to the government hence they will
return.

ARTICLE159 EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE


BY VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender was a convict
2. He was granted a conditional pardon by the Chief
Executive
3. He violated any of the conditions of such pardon

TWO KINDS OF PARDON:


1. Absolute Pardon which totally extinguishes the
criminal liability
2. Conditional Pardon which partially extinguishes
criminal liability.
Conditional Pardon is said to only partially

extinguishes criminal liability because the said


pardon is subject to strict terms and
conditions. Therefore, there must be an

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 46

ARTICLE160 COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME


DURING SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR
ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender was already convicted by final
judgment of one offense.
2. He committed a new felony before beginning to
serve such sentence or while serving the same.

Who is a quasi-recidivist?
A quasi-recidivist is any person who shall commit

a felony after having been convicted by final


judgment before serving his sentence or while
serving his sentence.

Under Art 160 it is stated that the maximum penalty


prescribed by law shall be imposed therefore it is a
special aggravating circumstance.
Art 160 is a misplaced article because book 2 is
about felonies and art 160 is a special aggravating
circumstance.

TITLE FOUR

CRIMINAL LAW 2
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST (Articles 161
189)

3.

ARTICLE161 COUNTERFEITING THE GREAT SEAL


OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS,
FORGING THE SIGNATURE OR STAMP OF THE CHIEF
EXECUTIVE
Acts punished:

I.
Forging the Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippines.
II. Forging the signature of the President.
III. Forging the stamp of the President.

B. Importing false coins is committed by


any person who shall bring into the Philippine
ports any false and counterfeited coins. It is
not necessary for the offender to be liable that
he shall circulate the false coins because
there is a third act of uttering false coins.

Art 161 is the crime when the person is the one who
committed the forgery, but if the offender is not the one
who forges the great seal, signature but he knows that
the document contain a forge stamp, signature of the
President and despite such knowledge that it was a
forgery he makes use of the same, liability is under
162.

Art 162 punishes the person who, despite knowledge


of the forged signature, stamp or great seal of the
Republic of the Philippines still he makes use of the
same document.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: In an official document, the signature of the President
was forged by A then it was given to B. B knew that it was a
forgery nevertheless he made use of the same. What crime
was committed?
A:A committed a crime under 161. And B
committed a crime under 162.

ARTICLE163 MAKING AND IMPORTING AND


UTTERING FALSE COINS
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be false or counterfeited coins
2. That the offender either made, imported or uttered
such coins.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

C. Uttering false coins is committed by any


person who shall circulate, give away to
another, pass from one person to another any
counterfeited or false coins.

ARTICLE162 USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR


COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP (Art 162)
ELEMENTS:
1. That the Great Seal of the Republic was
counterfeited or the signature or stamp of the
Chief Executive was forged by another person.
2. That the offender knew of the counterfeiting or
forgery.
3. That he used the counterfeit seal or forged
signature or stamp.

When is it committed?
A. Counterfeiting (imitation of false coins)

is committed by any person who shall imitate


a genuine and authentic coin making it
appear that it is a true, genuine, and authentic
coin. The offender copies the peculiar design
of the coin and makes a spurious one out of
it.

Art 161 punishes the person who forges the great


seal of the Philippines, signature of the chief
executive and forging the stamp of the chief
executive.

That in case of uttering such false or counterfeited


coins, he connived with the counterfeiters or
importers

Page 47

In case of counterfeited or imitated false coins, it is not


necessary that the coins be the subject of
counterfeiting must be of legal tender. Even if the coin
is not a gold coin, if the offender copies or imitates or
counterfeits the peculiar design of the said coin; he
becomes liable under Art 163.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: A is in possession of a coin which was of legal tender
during the time of Marcos in 1972. It was a proven genuine
coin. He copied the said coin and made a spurious one out
of it. Is he liable under Art 163?
A: Yes he is liable for making and importing and
uttering false coins under Article 163.

Q: What if while he was in possession of the said coin; he


took out a part of the metal content of the said coin. Can he
be liable for Mutilation of coins under Art 164?
A:No, he cannot because in Art 164 or mutilation
of coins, it is necessary that the coin subject of
mutilation must be of legal tender. It must be in
present currency because otherwise, it cannot be
said that the public has been deceived.

ARTICLE164 MUTILATION OF COINS


Acts punished:

I.
Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the
further requirement that there be intent to damage
or to defraud another.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
II.

Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with the


further requirement that there must be connivance
with the mutilator or importer in case of uttering.

Mutilation is the act of taking off a part of the metal


content by filing it or substituting it for another metal of
inferior quality.
The offender gathers the metal dust that he has taken
off from the said coin.
While the offender took out a part of the metal coin, he
is in effect diminishing the intrinsic value of the said
coin therefore who would be given the said coin would
be deceived of the this crime hence a crime in violation
of public interest is committed.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: There were 3 children/adults. They were playing karakrus. So they toss the coin, however before doing that, they
would scratch the coin on the steel therefore the metal
content of the coin is diminished. Can they be held liable
under Art 164?
A: No. because there was no intent to gather the
metal dust of the said coin.
Can they be held liable of any crime?

Yes. They can be held liable under PD

247

PD 247 punishes any person who willfully or knowingly


defaces, mutilates, tears, burns or destroys any
currency notes or coins issued by the
BangkoSentralngPilipinas.
In case of violation of PD 247 it is not required that
there is intent to mutilate on the part of the offender. It
is not required that the offender has the intent to gather
the metal dust of the coin although these are required
under Art 164.

Q: In a P 1000.00 bill, a person put his cell phone no. on it.


Is he liable under PD 247?
A: Yes he is liable under PD 247.

who counterfeited the coin. The offender


is only in possession of it but in order for
him to be held liable; he must have the
knowledge that the coin is counterfeited
or mutilated and despite having such
knowledge; he has the intent to utter,
circulate, pass away, to give away to
another the said coin.

But PD 247 is akin to a dead law because no one has


been prosecuted by it.

ARTICLE165 SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED


COIN, WITHOUT CONNIVANCE
Acts punished:

I.
Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by
another person, with intent to utter the same,
knowing that it is false or mutilated.
ELEMENTS:
1. Possession,
2. With intent to utter, and
3. Knowledge
Under the first act, the offender is in

possession of the false, mutilated,


counterfeited coin. It is another person

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 48

II.

Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin


knowing the same to be false or mutilated.
ELEMENTS:
1. Actually uttering, and
2. Knowledge.
In the second act it is the act of actually

circulating or uttering the counterfeited


coin despite knowledge that it is
counterfeited or mutilated.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if A is under surveillance, reports came to the
police that he had been circulating false coins. A went to
the bakery store, he bought bread worth P 50.00. He gave
the store owner 5 P 10.00 counterfeited coins. Thereafter,
after giving the counterfeited coins, he immediately left. The
police arrived and A was gone and it was the owner of the
store who is left. The police officer asked the owner of the
store to open the cash bin. There they saw the 5 P 10.00
coins which were counterfeited. They arrested the owner of
the store. Is the owner of the store liable under Art 165?
A:No he is not liable of selling of false coins or
mutilated coins, without connivance under Article 165.
First, he was caught in possession.
Was there possession?

Yes. The counterfeited coins were found

in his cash drawer. Possession does not


only mean physical or actual possession.
Possession means constructive
possession which means that the
counterfeited or mutilated coins are in his
control and custody. Therefore the first
element of possession is present.

Was there intent to utter the counterfeited coins on

the part of the said owner?


Yes. The fact that he placed it in the cash

drawer means he can use it to buy


another thing or as a change to the
people who will buy from his bakery
therefore circulation has a way from one
person to another. Therefore the second
element is also present.

How about the third element of knowledge on his

part the coin was counterfeited?


The third element is absent evidently

based on the facts that the store owner

CRIMINAL LAW 2
has no knowledge that the coins are
counterfeited. In fact he gave bread
worth P 50.00. He was also deceived. If
he had only known that the coins were
counterfeited, he would not have given
bread worth P 50.00.
Therefore, he may not be held liable
because also he is in possession, and he
has the intent to utter the coins; he does
not have the knowledge that the said
coins were counterfeited.

e.g. Check payable to cash. Whoever is


in possession of the said check can
come to the bank. It can be transferred
by mere delivery.

ARTICLE166 FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES


OR OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO BEARER;
IMPORTING, AND UTTERING SUCH FALSE OR
FORGED NOTES AND DOCUMENTS
Acts punished:

I.Forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes or


other documents payable to bearer.
II.Importation of such false or forged obligations or
notes.
III.Uttering of such false or forged obligations or
notes in connivance with the forgers or
importers.

ARTICLE167 COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING, AND


UTTERING INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be an instrument payable to order
or other document of credit not payable to
bearer.
2. That the offender either forged, imported or
uttered such instrument.
3. That in case of uttering, he connived with the
forger or importer.

ARTICLE168 ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF


FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER
INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT
ELEMENTS:
1. That any treasury or bank note or certificate
or other obligation and security payable to
bearer, or any instrument payable to order or
other document of credit not payable to
bearer is forged or falsified by another
person.
2. That the offender knows that any of those
instruments is forged or falsified.
3. That he performs any of these acts ---a. Using any of such forged or falsified
instruments; or
b. Possessing with intent to use any of
such forged or falsified instruments.

An instrument is payable to bearer when it can be


transferred by mere delivery.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 49

On the other hand a check is payable to order where


it can be transferred by mere delivery when there is an
endorsement coming from the person named or
specified therein. It is an instrument payable to the
order of a specific person or his order.
e.g. Payable to the order of Charmaine.
This cannot be transferred from one
person to another without an order
coming from Charmaine.

ARTICLE169 HOW FORGERY IS COMMITTED (Art


169)
1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any
instrument payable to bearer or to order
mentioned therein, the appearance of a true
and genuine document.
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or
altering by any means the figures, letters,
words, or sign contained therein.

If what has been falsified is a coin; you call it


counterfeiting.
If it is the stamp, seal or signature of the President;
you call it forging.
If it is treasury or bank notes; it is considered as
forging.
It is a document; you call it falsification.

FALSIFICATION (ART 170, 171, 172)


In case of FALSIFICATION, to amount to falsification, it

is necessary that the writing that is falsified must be a


document in a legal sense of the word capable of
making rights and/or extinguishing an obligation.
Therefore, it must be complete in itself so that it would
be sufficient in evidence.
Falsification of mere forms does not amount to

falsification of a public document. Because the said


form is not yet complete in itself it has no name, no
address an unfilled-out/up form. It is not falsification.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if A was found outside the building of the LTO
office. He was carrying falsified unfilled-out/up forms of
drivers license. It was distinct, it was falsified, it was not
the real drivers license form. He was arrested by the NBI.
Can he be held liable for falsification of a public document?

A: NO. Because what he is carrying is only an


unfilled-out form. It is not yet complete in itself. It is
not yet capable of creating rights or extinguishing
an obligation. It is not yet susceptible of evidence
of the facts stated thereon.

Q: So what crime if any was committed by A?

CRIMINAL LAW 2
A: A merely committed violation of Article 176
that is mere possession of instrument or
implements for falsification, but not yet falsification
of a public document.

There 4 types of documents which may be falsified:


1. PUBLIC DOCUMENT a document which is
issued by a notary public or competent public
official with the solemnities required by law

2.

3.

4.

OFFICIAL DOCUMENT a document issued by a


public official in the exercise of his official
functions

COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT any document


defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce
or any other mercantile law

PRIVATE DOCUMENT a document, a deed or


instrument executed by a private person without
the intervention of the notary public of any other
person legally authorized, by which document
some disposition or agreement is proved,
evidenced or set forth
Is a public document distinct from an official
document?

All official documents are considered as


public documents, but not all public
documents are considered official
documents. Before a public document may
be considered as an official document, it is
necessary that it shall be issued by a public
officer in the exercise of his official functions.
There is a law that requires a public officer to
issue the said public document, then it
becomes an official document.

A PRIVATE DOCUMENT, one which has been


executed by a private person, if there is no intervention
of public official.

A PRIVATE DOCUMENT however, even though


executed by a private person without the intervention
of a notary public or a legally authorized person, can
also become a public document. That is when the said
private document is submitted to the public officer and
it becomes part of the public records. The moment the
said private document becomes part of the public
records, it is now a public document and when it is
issued and it is falsified, what is falsified is a public
document and no more a private document.

It is necessary to distinguish the kind of document that


is being falsified - whether it is a public, official,
commercial or private because of the different effects.

If what has been falsified is a PUBLIC, OFFICIAL OR


COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT, damage or intent to
cause damage to the offended party or to any other
person is not an element.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 50

On the other hand, if what has been falsified is a


PRIVATE DOCUMENT, for the crime to arise, it is
necessary that there must be damage or at least,
intent to cause damage to the private offended party or
to any other party.
If what has been falsified is a PUBLIC OR OFFICIAL
DOCUMENT, it is not necessary that there be damage
or intent to cause damage. Because a public
document an official document - is presumed
authentic and legal. It is presumed to be prima facie
evidence of the facts stated therein.
As such, the
moment it is falsified, the crime will immediately arise,
without need that there be damage on the part of the
offended party. Because in Falsification of a Public
Document, what has been violated is the
PERVERSION OF TRUTH being solemnly proclaimed
by the said document. Hence DAMAGE IS NOT AN
ELEMENT.

ARTICLE171 FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER,


EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL
MINISTER
The first kind of falsification under Article 171,

we have the falsification committed by a public


officer, employee or notary public or an
ecclesiastical minister.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer, employee, notary
public or an ecclesiastical minister.
2.

3.

He takes advantage of his official position.


The offender is said to have taken

advantage of his position or office when:


a. He has the duty to make or prepare
or to otherwise intervene in the
preparation of the document; or
b. He has the official custody of the
document which he falsifies

That the said offender falsifies a document by


committing any of the following modes stated
therein:
c. By counterfeiting or imitating any
handwriting, signature or rubric.
d. Causing it to appear that persons
have participated in any act or
proceeding when they did not in fact
so participate.
e. Attributing to persons who have
participated in an act or proceeding
statement other than those in fact
made by them
f. Making untruthful statements in a
narration of facts
g. Altering true dates
h. Making any alteration or intercalation
in a genuine document which
changes its meaning
i. Issuing in authenticated form a
document purporting to be a copy of
any original document when no such
copy a statement contrary to, or
different from that of the genuine
original

CRIMINAL LAW 2
j.

4.

Intercalating any instrument or note


relative to the issuance thereof in a
protocol, registry or official book.

k.
In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister,
the act of falsification is committed with respect to
any record or document of such character that the
falsification may affect the civil status of persons.

EXPLANATIONS:
1. The offender is a public officer, employee, notary
public or an ecclesiastical minister.
If the offender is an ecclesiastical

minister, for him to be liable under Article


171, it is necessary that the document
that he falsifies must affect the civil status
of a person.
If the document falsified by an

ecclesiastical minister will not affect the


civil status of a person, he is still liable for
falsification, but not under Art. 171, rather
under Art. 172.
So, a priest falsified the communion

certificates of one of the students/pupils


receiving the first communion, the crime
committed is falsification under Art. 172,
not under Art. 171 because a certificate
of communion will not affect the civil
status of the said child.
2.

3.

He takes advantage of his official position.


It requires that the offender takes

advantage of his official position.


The offender is said to have taken

advantage of his position or office when:


a. He has the duty to make or prepare
or to otherwise intervene in the
preparation of the document; or
b. He has the official custody of the
document which he falsifies
That the said offender falsifies a document by
committing any of the following modes stated
therein:
If you will look at Art. 171, it does not

state the kind of document that has been


falsified, it may not be stated because it
necessarily follows that the document
falsified is a public or official document
because the offender is public officer or
employee or notary public. Therefore
necessarily, the document being falsified
in Art. 171 is a public official or official
document.

Art. 171 provides for the DIFFERENT ACTS OF


FALSIFICATION. These acts of falsification are also
applicable in Art. 172:
I. BY COUNTERFEITING OR IMITATING ANY
HANDWRITING, SIGNATURE OR RUBRIC.
So what is COUNTERFEITING?

The offender is said to have counterfeited

a signature, handwriting or rubric if he


has imitated an official handwriting,
signature or rubric.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 51

II.

So there is an original handwriting or


signature and the offender imitiated or
copied the said original handwriting or
signature.

Is COUNTERFEITING the same as


FEIGNING?
Feigning a handwriting, signature or

rubric is NOT THE SAME as


counterfeiting. When you say FEIGNING,
it means simulating a handwriting,
signature or rubric. That is, making a
handwriting, signature or rubric out of
nothing which does not exist. It is an
imaginable, an inexistent handwriting,
signature or rubric.

CAUSING IT TO APPEAR THAT PERSONS HAVE


PARTICIPATED IN ANY ACT OR PROCEEDING
WHEN THEY DID NOT IN FACT SO PARTICIPATE.

Q: What if a notary public issued, he prepared or issued an


extrajudicial settlement of an estate. In the said
extrajudicial settlement of an estate, it is stated that all the
heirs of a certain decedent can already agree by
themselves to partition the property. So it is an extrajudicial
settlement of an estate and in it, the notary public made it
appear that all the 12 heirs of the decedent had
participated, but un truth and in fact, two of the heirs where
in another country and they did not participate in the
execution of this extrajudicial settlement of the estate. Is
the notary public liable?
A: YES. The notary public is LIABLE under the
second act (causing it to appear that persons
have participated in any act or proceeding
when they did not in fact so participate).He
caused it to appear that A and B participated in the
execution of the extrajudicial settlement of the
estate, when they did not in fact so participate.

III. AT T R I B U T I N G T O P E R S O N S W H O H AV E
PARTICIPATED IN AN ACT OR PROCEEDING
STATEMENT OTHER THAN THOSE IN FACT MADE
BY THEM
So under the third act, persons participated in

an act or proceeding, they made statements


therein, however, the offender in a document
may appear that these persons have made
certain statements which were not in fact
made by them.

Q: So what if in the SangguniangPanglungsod, an


ordinance was being passed. There was a votation,
majority of the councilors voted, two of the councilors
dissented and their vote were NO. they just stated that
they were voting in the negative, but, they did not give any
explanation for their dissent or the vote of NO. however, in
the minutes appeared by the Sangguniang Secretary, the
latter made it appear that the two councilors made
statements that they voted NO because the said ordinance
is contrary to law. Is the said secretary liable for
falsification?

A: YES. He is a public officer. He is the one who


prepared the minutes for the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
SangguniangPanglungsod and he made it appear
that the 2 councilors stated that the said ordinance
is contrary to law and in truth and fact, they did not
made those statements. So the said secretary is
liable for falsification.

IV. MAKING UNTRUTHFUL STATEMENTS IN A


NARRATION OF FACTS
The evidence of this act of falsification

requires:
i.That the offender makes in a document
untruthful statement in a narration of
facts;
ii.That he has legal obligation to disclose
the truth of the facts narrated by him
iii.The facts narrated by the offender are
absolutely false
iv.The untruthful narration must be such as
to effect the integrity of the document
and that the offender does so with the
intent to injure or prejudice another
person

It is necessary that the intention of the


intention of the offender must be to INJURE
ANOTHER PERSON.
In case of making false statements in a
narration of facts, it is necessary that the
offender must have the legal obligation to
disclose the truth in the said narration of facts.
Absence of such legal obligation, then it
cannot be said that he is liable for
falsification.
When you say legal obligation, there is a law
which requires him to state nothing but the
truth in the said document.

Q: So what if the offender, a public officer, falsified the


statement in his residence certificate or community tax
certificate. Although he stated his true name, he did not
state his address, citizenship, etc. So makes false
statement of facts in his residence certificate or community
tax certificate, otherwise known as cedula. So he was
charged with falsification. He contended that there is no law
which requires him to state the truth in his residence
certificate. Is his contention correct?
A: His contention is wrong. According to a ruling in
the Supreme Court, if it is a residence certificate
or community tax certificate, there need not be a
law which requires a person to state the truth in
the said residence certificate, it is inherent in the
kind of document. Since it is a residence
certificate or cedula, it is inherent that in this
document, nothing but the truth must be stated
no falsity. Because it requires identification.
V.

ALTERING TRUE DATES


It is necessary that what has been altered

must be a true date and in the alteration of


the said true date, the document will no
longer have any effect.

VI. MAKING ANY ALTERATION OR INTERCALATION IN


A GENUINE DOCUMENT WHICH CHANGES ITS
MEANING

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 52

2 ACTS:
i.
The offender makes an alteration
ii.
The offender makes an intercalation in a
genuine document which changes its
meaning
ALTERATION changes in a document
INTERCALATION there must be some
insertion made in the said document, in a
genuine document that changed the meaning
of the said document

VII. ISSUING IN AUTHENTICATED FORM A DOCUMENT


PURPORTING TO BE A COPY OF ANY ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT WHEN NO SUCH COPY A STATEMENT
CONTRARY TO, OR DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF
THE GENUINE ORIGINAL
2 ACTS PUNISHED:

1. The offender issued in an authenticated


form a document purporting to be an
authenticated copy of an original document,
but no such original exists
2. By including such copy a statement
contrary to or different from a genuine original

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a notary public issued a deed of absolute sale
and he said that it is an original copy of a deed of absolute
sale between A and B. A selling his property to B, but in
truth and in fact, no such deed of absolute sale was
executed between A and B. Is the notary public liable?
A: YES. He is liable under the second act of
falsification in the seventh act of the 3rd element in
Art. 171.

Q: What if a civil registrar issued a certificate of live birth.


So here comes A. A was asking that he should be given a
certified copy of a certificate of live birth. In the said
certificate of live birth issued by the said civil registrar, there
was a statement that A was an illegitimate child, but in the
original copy of the certificate of live birth submitted to the
office of the Office of the Civil Registrar, there was no such
statement. Is the civil registrar liable?

A: YES. He is liable under the second act of


falsification in the seventh act of the 3rd element in
Art. 171. Because he included in the said copy a
statement contrary to or different from that of a
genuine original.

VIII.INTERCALATING ANY INSTRUMENT OR NOTE


RELATIVE TO THE ISSUANCE THEREOF IN A
PROTOCOL, REGISTRY OR OFFICIAL BOOK.
INTERCALATION making any insertion in

any instrument or note

So these acts, under ARTICLE 171, are also the very


same acts punished under Art. 172.

A R T I C L E 1 7 2 FA L S I F I C AT I O N B Y P R I VAT E
INDIVIDUALS AND USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS
THREE PUNISHABLE ACTS/FELONIES?

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Falsification of a public, official or commercial
document by a private individual
So in case of FALSIFICATION OF A PUBLIC,

OFFICIAL OR COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT


by a PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL, is just the same
as ARTICLE 171 they only differ in that in
Art. 171, the offender is a public officer or
employee.
In ARTICLE 172, yes, the document falsified

is a public, official or commercial document,


but, the offender is a private individual even if
the offender is a private individual, since the
document falsified is a public, official or
commercial document, DAMAGE OR INTENT
TO CAUSE DAMAGE IS NOT AN ELEMENT.

I.

II.

III.

Falsification of private document by any


person
The document falsified is a PRIVATE

DOCUMENT. The offender is any person. He


can be a private individual, he can be a
private officer or employee for as long as the
document falsified is a private document, it
necessary that there must be damage caused
to a third person or at least the intention of
the offender is to CAUSE DAMAGE.
Absence of damage or intent to cause

damage, then falsification of a private


document will not arise.

Use of falsified document


A document has been falsified and the

offender uses the said document.


If the falsified document is used in a

JUDICIAL PROCEEDING, again, DAMAGE


or INTENT TO CAUSE DAMAGE is NOT AN
ELEMENT because it is a judicial proceeding.
But if the said falsified document is used in

any other transaction, this time, damage or


intent to cause damage is an ELEMENT.

ARTICLE173 FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS


TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES
Punishable acts

I.
Uttering fictitious, wireless, telegraph or
telephone message
II.
Falsifying wireless, telegraph or
telephone message
III. Using such falsified message

If the act punished is UTTERING FICTITIOUS,


WIRELESS, TELEGRAPH OR TELEPHONE
M E S S A G E S a n d FA L S I F Y I N G W I R E L E S S ,
TELEGRAPH OR TELEPHONE MESSAGES, note
that these can only be committed by a person working
in a department, agency or corporation which is
engaged in a business of receiving and sending
wireless, telegraph and telephone messages.
Under the third act
U S I N G FA L S I F I E D
W I R E L E S S ,
TELEGRAPH OR
T E L E P H O N E
MESSAGES, this time, it

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 53

can be committed by any


person.

Articles 174 and 175 refer to the persons who shall be


criminally liable in case of falsified document.
ARTICLE174 FALSE MEDICAL CERTIFICATES,
FALSE CERTIFICATES OF MERIT OR SERVICE, ETC
Under Art. 174, if the

offender is a PHYSICIAN
OR SURGEON who
issues a false medical
certificate in the practice
of his profession, he
becomes liable under Art.
174.
Likewise, Art. 174

punishes a PUBLIC
OFFICER who issues a
false certificate of merit,
service or good conduct,
moral character, etc.
And, under Art. 174, ANY

PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
who falsifies a medical
certificate or certificate of
merit or service or good
conduct shall be also
criminally liable.
T h e o ff e n d e r i s t h e

person who falsifies,


issues the false medical
certificate or certificate or
merit.
If the offender is not the

falsifier, but he knows


that the said document is
falsified and he makes
use of the same, his
liability is under Art. 175.

ARTICLE175 USING FALSE CERTIFICATE


Under Art. 175, the

offender knows that the


medical certificate or
certificate of merit has
been falsified and
despite that knowledge,
he makes use of the
same.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if the defense counsel is about to present his
witness. The witness is a person who was present in the
scene of the crime who actually saw the incident that is
according to the defense counsel. However, on the date of
the said hearing, the said witness failed to appear, the
defense counsel said to the judge: Your Honor, my witness
is in the hospital, he cannot even get out of bed. He is very,
very sick. The judge, however, was doubtful of the said
manifestation of the defense counsel and so the judge told
the defense counsel: Okay, let him appear in the next
hearing and make sure that he brings with him a medical
certificate to show that indeed he can testify in this hearing.
With that, the defense counsel informed the witness of the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
said order of the court. The said witness was in that time,
healthy, it is just that he was too afraid to testify. However,
in the next hearing, he is deemed required to produce a
medical certificate showing that he was bedridden. And so,
he went to his medical doctor. He asked the doctor to issue
a medical certificate saying that he was very, very sick and
that he could not get out of bed on the said date. The said
doctor issued the said medical certificate and then his
witness appeared on the second hearing and presented
him to the court. It was submitted to the records of the
court. What crime or crimes is/are committed by doctor or
the physician as well as by the witness?

A: The PHYSICIAN is liable under Art. 174. He


issues a false medical certificate in the exercise or
in the practice of his profession.
On the other hand, the WITNESS, despite
knowledge that it is a falsified medical certificate,
still made use of the same and he presented and
submitted it to the court.

immediately arise. However, the said false


representation, aside from being done
knowingly, must be such that he intended to
be known by such other person or by public
as a representative or agent of Philippine
government.
II.

ARTICLE176 MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION


OF INSTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR
FALSIFICATION
This is the felony that is if

a person was found in


possession of unfilled-out
forms of drivers license,
he can be held liable for
falsification of a public
document and liable only
in Article 176.
Under Art. 176, what was

being punished are:


1.
Making or introducing
into the Philippines any
stamps, dies, marks or other
instruments or implements for
counterfeiting or falsification.
2.
Possessing with intent to
use the instrument or
implements for counterfeiting
or falsification made in or
introduced into the
Philippines by another
person.

ARTICLE177 USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR


OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS
I.
Usurpation of authority is committed when a
person knowingly and falsely represents himself
to be an officer or agent of any department of the
Philippine government or agency thereof or of a
foreign government.
The crime will immediately arise from the mere
act of person of knowingly and falsely
representing himself to be an officer or agent
of any department or agency of the
Philippines or of a foreign country. It is not
necessary for the offender to commit any act,
to perform any act. It suffices that he falsely
represents himself to be an officer or agent of
the Philippine government. The crime will

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 54

There is usurpation of official function if any


person performs an act pertaining to a person in
authority or a public officer of the Philippine
Government or of a foreign government or agency
thereof, under pretense of official position, and
without being lawfully entitled to do so.
It is necessary that the offender performs an
act. Mere representation will not suffice. It is
necessary that he performs an act pertaining
to a person in authority or a public officer of
any department or agency of the Philippine
government or of a foreign government.
In usurpation of official functions, it is
necessary that the act pertaining to a person
in authority or a public officer must be under
pretense of official position and without being
lawfully entitled to do so.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if an administrative case was filed against the
mayor before the Office of the Ombudsman. During the
investigation of the case, the Ombudsman preventively
suspended the mayor for a period of six months. The DILG
implemented the suspension order and the vice-mayor was
made the acting mayor. However, upon advice of his
counsel, the suspended mayor began working, began
performing the acts of being a mayor after 90 days of
preventive suspension. That is because according to his
counsel, he can only be suspended for a period of 90 days.
So on the 91st day of his suspension, he again began
assuming the function of a mayor. He signed documents,
he issued memorandum, etc. as the city mayor. Is he liable
under Article 177 for usurpation of official function?
A: Yes, he is liable for usurpation of official
function under Article 177. The reason is that he
is still under preventive suspension. Unless and
until it is lifted by the Ombudsman and the said
lifting was implemented by the DILG, he remains
to be a suspended mayor. And for having acted,
for having performing an act pertaining to the
office of a mayor, he is said to be committed a
violation of Article 177, usurpation of official
function.

Q: What if there was heavy traffic. So there was no MMDA


officer or policeman manning the traffic. One of the owners
of the vehicle caught in the traffic alighted from the vehicle
and he manned the traffic to ease the flow of the traffic. The
said man performed an act pertaining to an officer of the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
MMDA, pertaining to a traffic enforcer. Is the said man
liable for usurpation of official function?
A: NO. While the man performed however he did
not do so under pretense of official position and
without being lawfully entitled to do so. There was
no intent on his part to falsely represent himself as
to be in that position. There was no false pretense
of official position therefore he cannot be held
liable under Article 177 or usurpation of official
function because his act was only done out of
pacific (promote peace; to end a conflict) spirit to
help ease the said traffic.

ARTICLE178 USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND


CONCEALING TRUE NAME
Punishes two acts:

I.
USING FICTITIOUS NAME
Committed by any person who shall

use a name other than his real name


publicly for concealing a crime, or evade
the execution of a judgment, or to cause
damage to public interest.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender uses a name other than his
real name
2. That he uses that fictitious name publicly
3. That the purpose of the offender is either:
a. to conceal a crime; or
b. to evade execution of a judgment; or
c. to cause damage to public interest.
II. CONCEALING TRUE NAME
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender conceals
a. his true name; AND
b. all other personal circumstances
2. That the purpose is only to conceal his
identity

HOW WOULD YOU DISTINGUISH IF THE CRIME


COMMITTED IS USING FICTITIOUS NAME OR
CONCEALING TRUE NAME?
In case of using fictitious name, the use of a

name other than his real name, is done publicly.


There is the element of publicity. Whereas, in case
of concealing true name, it is not necessary that
the use of another name, concealing his true and
real name must be done publicly.
Using fictitious name and concealing true

name differ in purposes. In case of using fictitious


name, the purpose is to conceal a crime, evade
the execution of judgment or to cause damage to
public interest. On the other hand, in concealing
true name, the only purpose of the offender is to
conceal his true and real identity.

ANTI-ALIAS LAW (C.A. No. 142, as amended)


SO RELATED IN ARTICLE 178 IS C.A. 142 AS AMENDED

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 55

What is an alias? What does C.A. 142, as


amended, or the Anti-Alias Law provide?
According to the SC, an alias is a name or
names use intended to be used by a person
publicly and habitually, usually in business
transaction other than the name registered at birth
for the first time before the local civil registrar.
Under C.A. 142 as amended, except as
pseudonym, in literary, cinema, television, radio
and other entertainment purposes, and in athletic
events wherein the use of a pseudonym is a
normal practice, no person can use any name
other than his name by which he is registered at
birth at the local civil registrar or by which he is
registered by the Bureau of Immigration upon his
entry into the Philippines.
The use of any other name must only be upon
approval by the judicial or competent authority.
Therefore, no person can use any other name
other than the name by which he is baptized at the
office of the civil registrar in your place other than
the name by which he is recorded in Bureau of
Immigration, if case he is a foreigner coming here
in the Philippines. He can only use his name.
EXCEPT if he is an actor, if he is an athlete, then
he is allowed to use a pseudonym. When he is a
writer of a book, then he is allowed to use a
pseudonym, a pen name other than his real name
because it is a normal practice OR if he files the
use of a substitute name before the court and he
is allowed by judicial or competent authority to use
any other name, then he can also use another
name. But outside these, a person can only use
the name by which he is registered at the office of
civil registrar.

CESARIO URSUA v. CA
The said accused made use of a different

name. he used the name of Oscar Perez in the


office of the Ombudsman as he was trying to get a
copy of the complaint filed against him. It was
however discovered that a case of violation of CA
142 was filed against him.
The SC held that he is not criminally liable. The

SC acquitted the accused because according to


the SC, the use of the name Oscar Perez in an
isolated transaction, without any showing, absent
an evidence that henceforth he wanted to be
known by the name of Oscar Perez in not within
the prohibition of CA 142 as amended. There was
no evidence that showed that henceforth he
wanted to be known by that name. There was no
showing that henceforth, he wanted to be called
by the said name therefore it cannot be said that
Oscar Perez is an alias of the accused.

PEOPLE v. ESTRADA

CRIMINAL LAW 2

In this case, the former president made use of


the name Jose Velarde in signing a trust account.
So he signed a trust account, using the name
Jose Velarde and so he was charged with
violation of CA 142 as amended.
Again, the SC said, the use by Erap of the
name Jose Velarde in a single, isolated
transcation, without any showing that henceforth
he wanted to be known by such name, is not
within the prohibition of CA 142 as amended. First,
it was not done publicly and was in fact done
secretly in the presence of Laquian and Chua and
the said act of signing does not make it public
because these two are his close friends therefore
it was done secretly, in a discreet manner. Hence,
it was not done publicly. It was also not done
habitually. The element of habituality is not
present because there was no showing that in any
other transaction, he made use of the name Jose
Velarde. Hence, he was also acquitted although
convicted by Sandiganbayan, he was acquitted by
the SC.

Q: What if a lawyer was having a massage in a sauna bath


parlor. He did not know that as a front it is a sauna bath
parlor but in truth and in fact, it was a prostitution den. At
the time that he was having this massage service, the
police raided the place because they were able to secure a
search warrant. And among those arrested was the said
attorney. The said attorney was brought to the PNP station
and he was asked of his name, ashamed to reveal his true
identity, his true name, he said that he was Y and did not
state that he was Atty. X. However, when he was asked his
residence, he stated the truth. As of the name of his wife,
he stated the truth. As of the name of his children, he
stated the truth. Is he liable for using fictitious name?
A: He is not liable for using fictitious name.
First, he did not do so publicly. Second, his use of
the name was not done to conceal a crime, to
evade the execution of sentence or to cause
damage to public interestnone of these
purposes is present; therefore he is not liable for
using fictitious name.
Is he liable for concealing true name?

No, he is not liable for concealing true

name. Although he concealed his real


name, Atty. X, he did not conceal his other
personal circumstances. He divulged his
address. He divulged the name of his wife,
the names of his children; therefore, it
cannot be said that he has the intention to
conceal his true identity. In fact, his true
identity can easily be verified just by going to
the said address; therefore he is not also
liable for concealing true name.
Is he liable under CA 142, as amended?

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 56

He is also not liable under CA 142, as


amended, because the use of the name Y in
a single transaction, in a single isolated
transaction, without any showing that
henceforth he wanted to be known as Y is
not within the prohibition of CA 142, as
amended.

ARTICLE179 ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS AND


INSIGNIA
Committed by any person who makes use of

any insignia, uniform or dress which pertains to an


office not being held by the offender or to a class
of person of which he is not a member and he
makes use of such insignia, uniform or dress
publicly and improperly.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender makes use of INSIGNIA,
UNIFORM or DRESS
2. That the insignia, uniform or dress pertains to
an office not being held by the offender or to a
class of person of which he is not a member.
3. That the said insignia, uniform or dress is used
publicly and improperly.
The offender uses the insignia, uniform or

dress of an office not held by him or a by a


class of person of which he is not a member
and he used the same publicly and improperly.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a person was wearing a uniform. So he said that
it was a uniform of a certain organization known as H world
but in fact, no such organization ever existed. Is he liable
under Article 179?
A: No, he is not liable of Illegal use of insignia,
uniform or dress Article 179. The reason is that
H world does not belong to any office, doesnt
refer to a class of persons; therefore, he is not
liable under Article 179.

Q: What if a person made use of a uniform of a prisoner.


So you see a person, he was receiving a holy communion,
he was wearing an orange t-shirt with a big letter P at the
back which means Prisoner. Can he be held liable under
Article 179?
A: He is not liable of Illegal use of insignia,
uniform or dress under Article 179. Although he used the
uniform of a prisoner, it is not an office held by the offender,
it is not also a class of persons. When you say a class of
persons of which he is a member, it refers to a dignified
class of persons. He is assuming that he belongs to the
said class of persons. Here, he is even belittling himself
because he was wearing a uniform of a prisoner. Hence, it
cannot be said that he violated Article 179.

FALSE TESTIMONY (ART 180, 181, 182)

CRIMINAL LAW 2

False testimony can either be false testimony in


criminal cases (Articles 180 and 181), false
testimony in civil cases (Article 182) and false
testimony in other cases.
False testimony in criminal cases can either be:
(1) false testimony against a defendant (Article
180) and (2) false testimony favorable to
defendant (Article 181).

ARTICLE180 FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A


DEFENDANT
In a criminal proceeding, the offender-witness

testified falsely against a defendant knowing that


his testimony is false and then the said defendant
is either acquitted or convicted.

ELEMENTS:
1. That there be a criminal proceeding
2. That the offender testifies falsely under oath
against the defendant therein.
3. That the offender who gives false testimony
knows that it is false.
4. That the defendant against whom the false
testimony is given is either acquitted or
convicted in a final judgment. (People v.
Maneja)

ARTICLE181 FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO


DEFENDANT
In a criminal proceeding, the offender-witness

testified falsely in favor of the defendant and he


knew that his testimony is indeed false.

Whether it be a false testimony against or false


testimony in favor of a defendant, it is
immaterial whether the court will consider or
not the said false testimony. The case may be
filed.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if A is being prosecuted for the crime of homicide,
for having killed the victim. So while he is being
prosecuted, the fiscal presented a witness. This witness
was also brought in by the heirs of the victim. The heirs of
the victim said that the witness saw the said act of killing.
The fiscal believed and the fiscal presented the said
witness. The witness however was not present at the scene
of the crime but in his testimony the witness said that he
was present at the scene of the crime and that he actually
saw the accused stabbing the victim to death. The
accused, A knew that the witness was testifying falsely
because he knew that at the scene of the crime, it was only
he and the victim who were present. After trial on the
merits, the judge, acquitted the said accused A. In other
words, the judge did not give weight to the testimony of the
false witness. Can A still file a case against the false
witness?

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 57

A:Yes, A can still file a case of false testimony


against the false witness. He can still file a case
of false testimony against the said false witness
even of the court did not consider the said false
testimony. Even if the court did not give any merit
on the said false testimony and acquitted him. The
crime will arise the moment the said offender
testified falsely in open court whether in favor or
against a defendant.

Q: What if in the same case, A was being prosecuted for


homicide. Then the prosecution presented the witness. The
witness testified falsely against the defendant saying that
he saw the actual act of killing. After trial on the merits, the
judge convicted the accused, the judge believed the false
testimony and so the judge convicted him. Upon conviction,
within 15 days from the promulgation of judgment, the said
accused, the said convict, filed an appeal before the CA.
While the case was pending before the CA, can the said
accused, the convicted person, already file a case of false
testimony against the false witness who testified against
him?
A:Not yet. Any case would still be a premature
case. In fact, you would not know what court will
have jurisdiction. You would not know if the court
that will have jurisdiction over the false testimony
is the RTC or the MTC because the penalty to be
imposed on the false witness is always dependent
on the penalty imposed on the convict.
Under Article 180, if the defendant has been

convicted and the penalty imposed is capital


punishment or death then the false witness shall
be imposed with a penalty of reclusion temporal. If
the defendant, upon conviction is imposed with a
penalty of reclusion perpetua and reclusion
temporal, the penalty will be imposed on the false
witness is prision mayor. If the said defendant is
convicted and the penalty imposed on him is any
other afflictive penalty, the penalty to be imposed
on the false witness is prision correcional. On the
other hand, if the penalty imposed on the said
defendant is prision correcional, arresto mayor,
fine or he was acquitted. If he was acquitted, the
penalty to be imposed on the said person who
testified falsely is arresto mayor.
So in this case, the penalty on the false

witness is always dependent on the penalty to be


imposed by the court on the defendant; therefore,
there must first be a final conviction by final
judgment.
NOTE: if it is an acquittal, the case can be

immediately filed because an acquittal is


immediately executory. You cannot appeal an
acquittal. It is immediately executory.

Q: So the case was filed against A for homicide, here


comes a witness, the witness testified falsely in favor of the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
accused. Can the private complainant, the heirs of the
victim, immediately file a case of false testimony against
the witness right after the giving thereof?
A: Yes, because in case of false testimony in
favor of the defendant, the penalty of the false
witness is not dependent on the penalty to be
imposed on the said accused or defendant.

In order to amount to perjury, it is necessary


that the said oath must be given before
an officer duly authorized to receive and
administer. Otherwise, it cannot be
considered as perjury because the
essence of perjuryis the violation of
the solemnity of oath.
If the person who received the oath is not
duly authorized, it cannot be said that
there is a violation of the solemnity of the
oath.

ARTICLE182 FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES


Right after the giving of the false testimony, the

private complainant or the aggrieved party, can


immediately file a case against the false witness
who testified in favor of the defendant.
ELEMENTS:
1. The testimony must be given in a civil case
2. The testimony must relate to the issues
presented in said case (relative or pertinent)
3. The testimony must be false
4. The false testimony must be given by the
defendant knowing the same to be false.
5. The testimony must be malicious and given with
intent to affect the issues presented in the
said case (U.S. v. Aragon)
In case of false testimony in a civil case, right after

the giving of the false testimony, the false witness


can be immediately prosecuted in court.
In order to amount in false testimony in civil cases,

there must be litigation. Take for example a sum of


money, breach of contract. If the false testimony is
given in a special proceeding, for example,
petition for nullity of marriage, petition for
separation, petition for habeas corpus, these are
special proceedings and a false testimony of a
person who testified falsely during this special
proceeding, the case is under Article 183, false
testimony in other proceedings.

ARTICLE183 PERJURY
PERJURY is the willful and deliberate

assertion of falsehood on a material matter


made before an officer duly authorized to
receive and administer oath.
ELEMENTS:
1. The accused made a statement under oath or
executed an affidavit upon a material matter
There are two ways of committing perjury:
The offender either:
1. Makes a statement under
oath (he makes a false testimony); or
2. Executes an affidavit on a
material matter (if it is an
affidavit, it is also required
under oath)
2. The said statement under oath or affidavit
was made before a competent officer duly
authorized to receive and administer oath

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 58

3.That in the said statement or affidavit, the


offender makes a willful and deliberate
assertion of falsehood
It is necessary for perjury to arise that the
o f f e n d e r d e l i b e r a t e l y, k n o w i n g l y
ascertained a falsehood. There was a
deliberate intent on his part; therefore,
good faith is a defense in perjury.
Perjury likewise cannot be committed out of
mere negligence. It is necessary that
there must be a deliberate intent on his
part to assert a falsity either in the
statement or affidavit.
4.

The said statement or affidavit containing


falsity is required by law.
If it is not required by law then it cannot be
considered as a crime.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if X made a false statement in a criminal
proceeding, what crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is FALSE TESTIMONY.

Q: A makes a statement in a labor case against B. What


crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is PERJURY.
If the false statement under oath is made in a

judicial proceeding whether it be a criminal or


civil proceeding, the crime committed is
FALSE TESTIMONY. If the said false
statement, however, is made in a non-judicial
proceeding, administrative proceedings, or
quasi-judicial proceedings, then the crime
committed is PERJURY. So if the false
testimony or the false statement is made in a
labor case, in an administrative case, in an
application for search warrant, during the
preliminary investigation, before the fiscals
office, the crime committed is perjury.

Q: What if the offender makes false narration of facts in a


cedula. The offender makes a false narration of facts in a
drivers license. What crime is committed?
A: FALSIFICATION.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

Q: What if the offender makes a false narration of facts in a


statement of assets, liabilities and net worth. So a public
officer filed a statement of assets, liabilities and net worth. It
contains falsities, false narration of facts. What is the
liability?
A: The liability is PERJURY.

WHERE LIES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN


FALSIFICATION AND PERJURY?
In falsification, the document is not required to be

under oath. In case of perjury, the document is


required to be under oath.

H O W A B O U T T H E D I F F E R E N C E O F FA L S E
STATEMENT AND PERJURY?
If the false statement is made in a judicial

proceeding, it is false testimony. If the false


statement is made in a non-judicial proceeding or
administrative proceeding or quasi-judicial
proceeding, it is perjury.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: An applicant for the bar filled out an application form for
the bar, there was a statement therein, Have you ever
been fined or convicted of any crime? and the answer was
no, however, in truth and in fact, he has already been fined
for the crime of jaywalking. He answered no and then this
application for the bar is required to be under oath. He was
looking for a notary public since it was a Sunday, there was
no office opened so he went to the legal office of his father,
hoping that there was a lawyer there. However, there was
only the janitor and he asked the janitor to sign in the
notary public part and then submitted it to the office of the
bar confidante. Is the said applicant for the bar liable for
perjury or is he liable for falsification?
A: He is liable of FALSIFICATION and not of
perjury because the person who received and
administered the oath is not a confidante officer
duly authorized to receive and administer the
oath. He was a mere janitor and not a notary
public. As such, the crime committed is
falsification. Again, the essence of perjury is the
violation of the solemnity of the oath.

Q: A wrote a love letter to the girl that he is pursuing. In the


said love letter, he stated falsities such as You are the only
one in my life. when in truth there were three of them. He
stated I love you and I miss you and they were all
falsities. He even asked it to be notarized and sent it to his
third girlfriend. Is he liable for perjury?
A: No, he is not liable for perjury. He is not
liable for perjury because the said love letter is not
required by law. The fourth element requires, to
amount to perjury, the sworn statement under oath
or the said affidavit must be required by law
because it is a crime against public interest not a
crime against personal interest.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 59

Q: What if in a case submitted in a fiscals office, so there


was a complaint and attached thereto is a sworn statement.
In the said sworn statement, the witness said that he saw
the accident. He saw the accused bumped the victim.
According to him, at the time, he was watching Saksi, when
suddenly a commotion occurred outside, he ran out of the
window, he saw at that particular time the accused hitting
the said victim with his vehicle and so he saw the accused
that caused the death of the victim. That was his statement
in the affidavit filed to the fiscals office. During
investigation, however, it was discovered he was not
watching Saksi, he was watching Bandila, the news
program in ABS-CBN and not the news program in GMA. Is
he liable of perjury?
A:No, he is not liable of perjury. Although it was
under oath, administered by a fiscal, still it is no
perjury because it is not on a material matter.
Whatever it is that he was watching at the time,
even if it is cartoon, it doesnt matter. What
matters is that he heard the commotion, he ran to
the window, and he saw the accused bumping the
victim. He saw that it was the accused who killed
the victim and that it was the car of the accused
that hit the victim. Only then, it will be considered
as perjury but whatever he was watching, it was
immaterial. It was not on a material matter;
therefore it will not amount to perjury.

SUBORNATION OF PERJURY is committed by a person


who knowingly and willfully procures another to swear
falsely and the witness suborned does testify under the
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury.
NOTE: Subornation of perjury is not expressly penalized in
RPC; but the direct induction of a person by another to
commit perjury may be punished under Article 183 in
relation to Article 7, meaning, the crime is plain perjury but
the one inducing another will be liable as principal by
inducement and the one who testified as principal by direct
participation.

ARTICLE184 OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN


EVIDENCE
Committed by any person who shall offer in

evidence any false testimony or any false witness


either in a judicial proceeding or in any official
proceeding.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender offered in evidence a false witness
or false testimony.
2. The offender knew the witness or the testimony
was false.
3. The offer was made in a judicial or official
proceeding.
Is this the same as subornation of perjury?

Subornation of perjury is committed by any

person who procures a false witness in order

CRIMINAL LAW 2

to perjures himself and testify falsely in a


case. There is no such crime as
subornation of perjury under the present
RPC because we already have Article 184.
Article 184 is committed when any person
who procures a witness and offers him as
evidence in court can be held liable under
Article 184 or he can be held liable as a
principal by inducement in false testimony or
as a principal by inducement in perjury;
therefore subornation of perjury is not
necessary and it is not a crime under
Philippine jurisdiction, under the RPC.

4. The accused had the intent to cause


the reduction of the price of the thing
auctioned.

ARTICLE185 MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS


There are two acts punishable under Article

185
I.
SOLICITING GIFT OR PROMISE
By soliciting any gift or promise as a
consideration for refraining from taking
part in any public auction.
The mere act of soliciting any gift or promise,
so that he will refrain from taking part of
the public auction, will already give rise to
the crime. It is not necessary that he
actually received the gift, it is not
necessary that he actually will not
participate in the said auction.
ELEMENTS:
1. There be a public auction.
2. The accused solicited any gift or a
promise from any of the bidders.
3. That such gift or promise was the
consideration for his refraining from
taking part in that public auction.
4. The accused had the intent to cause
the reduction of the price of the thing
auctioned.
II.

ATTEMPTING TO CAUSE BIDDERS TO


STAY AWAY
By attempting to cause bidders to stay away
from an auction by threats, gifts,
promises or any other artifice
The mere attempt to cause bidders not to
participate in the said public auction by
threats, gifts or promise will already give
rise to the crime. It is not necessary that
the bidders would not actually participate.
ELEMENTS:
1. There be a public auction
2. The accused attempted to cause the
bidders to stay away from that public
auction.
3. It was done by threats, gifts, promises
or any other artifice.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 60

In order to be liable for this crime, whether it


be the act of solicitation or the act of
attempting to cause bidders to stay away from
public auction, it is necessary that the
intention of the offender is to cause the
reduction of the price of the thing which is
the subject of the public auction. The acts
complained of must be done for the purpose
of reducing the price of the thing being
auctioned.

In public auction, it is necessary that the


public must be able to get the best price for
the thing being auctioned. If there will be less
bidders, less participants in the said public
auction, then the public will not be able to get
the best price for the thing subject of the
public auction. Here, if the non-participation of
the other bidders was caused by a person,
then he is liable under Article 185. Again, the
intention of the offender is to cause the
reduction of the price of the thing which is the
subject of the public auction.

ARTICLE186 MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN


RESTRAINT OF TRADE
Acts punished:

I.
C O M B I N AT I O N TO P R E V E N T F R E E
COMPETITION IN THE MARKET
This is committed by any person who shall
enter into any contract or agreement or
taking part in any combination whether in
the form of trust or otherwise, in restraint
of trade or commerce or to prevent by
artificial means free competition in the
market.
II.
M O N O P O LY T O R E S T R A I N F R E E
COMPETITION IN THE MARKET
This is committed by monopolizing any
merchandise or object of trade or
commerce or by combining with any
other person or persons in order to alter
the prices thereof by spreading false
rumors or making use of any other
artifice to restrain free competition in the
market.
III. M A N U FA C T U R E R , P R O D U C E R , O R
PROCESSOR OR IMPORTER COMBINING,
CONSPIRING OR AGREEING WITH ANY
PERSON TO MAKE TRANSACTIONS
PREJUDICIAL TO LAWFUL COMMERCE

CRIMINAL LAW 2
OR TO INCREASE THE MARKET PRICE
OF MERCHANDISE

1. The offender IMPORTS, SELLS or DISPOSES


any article or merchandise made of gold,
silver, other precious materials, or their alloys
2. That the STAMPS, BRANDS, or MARKS of
those articles or merchandise FAIL TO
INDICATE the actual fitness or quality of said
metals or alloys
3. The OFFENDER KNOWS that the stamps,
brands or marks fail to indicate the actual
fitness or quality of the metals or alloys.

The FIRST TWO ACTS under Article 186 can


be committed by any person and not
necessarily by manufacturers, producer or
processors. The THIRD ACT however, can be
committed only by manufacturers,
processors, producers and importers who
combined with any other person or persons in
order to commit a transaction prejudicial to
lawful commerce or to increase the market
price of any merchandise or object of
commerce
Whether it be the first, second or third act, the
mere conspiracy in order to restrain or to
prevent free competition will already give rise
to the crime. It is not necessary that there be
actual restraint in trade or commerce.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if Petron, Caltex and Shell connived, combined
and agreed with one another to hoard fuel. They know that
the fuel prices will increase by March and so they decided
to hoard it. Can they be held liable under Article 186?
Juridical corporations cannot be the subject of

criminal action. First, it cannot be said that juridical


persons can act with intent. Second, you cannot
imprison a juridical person in case of conviction.
So if the offender is a juridical entity, who shall be
held liable?
The president, the directors or any of the

members of the said corporation, association


or partnership, who knowingly permitted and
allowed this combination or monopoly in
restraint of trade or commerce. Note that they
must have knowingly permitted the same
otherwise, they cannot be held criminally
liable.

If the objects, which are the subject of this


monopoly or combination in restraint of trade
or commerce are prime commodities such as
food, motor fuel, lubricants, it is not even
necessary that there be conspiracy. A mere
proposal, a mere intial step to hoard, to
prevent free competition in the market will
already give rise to the crime.

ARTICLE187 IMPORTATION AND DISPOSITION OF


FALSELY MARKED ARTICLES
Committed by any person who shall imports,

sells or disposes any article or merchandise


made of gold, silver, other precious materials,
or their alloys
ELEMENTS:

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 61

This is considered a criminal act because the


offender, despite knowing that the articles or
merchandise that he imported are
misbranded, he still imports the same, sells
the same or disposes the same

Mere importation is a punishable act;


therefore it is not necessary for the offender
to become liable under Article 187 that he
must have sold the misbranded articles or
that he must have disposed the article
because mere importationwill already give
rise to the crime.

TITLE FIVE
CRIMES RELATIVE TO OPIUM AND OTHER
PROHIBITED DRUGS

COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002


(RA 9165)
SECTION 4 IMPORTATION OF DANGEROUS DRUGS
AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND
ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS
Is committed by:

Any person, who, unless authorized by


law, shall import or bring into the Philippines any
dangerous drug, regardless of the quantity and
purity involved.

In one Supreme Court decision, it held that: For


one to be liable for importation of dangerous
drugs, it is necessary to be proven that the
dangerous drugs that were taken in a vessel came
from a foreign country with the said dangerous
drugs on board the said vessel; therefore the
prosecution must prove that the vessel which
came into the Philippine ports had with it the
dangerous drugs. Only then can it be said that
the dangerous drugs have been imported from
another country.

SECTION 5 SALE, TRADING, ADMINISTRATION,


DISPENSATION, DELIVERY, DISTRIBUTION AND
TRANSPORTATION OF DANGEROUS DRUGS AND/OR

CRIMINAL LAW 2

CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND ESSENTIAL


CHEMICALS

Selling Dangerous Drugs


Act of giving away any dangerous drug and/or

controlled precursor and essential chemical


whether for money of any other consideration.

ELEMENTS OF SALE OF ILLEGAL DRUGS:


1. The identity of the buyer and the seller
It is necessary that the identity of the

buyer and the seller are clearly


identified.
2. The object and the consideration
3. The delivery of the thing sold and the payment
thereof

Q: How about the poseur-buyer? Is it necessary for the


poseur buyer to testify in court? What if the prosecutor
failed to have the poseur-buyer testify in court? Does it
mean to an acquittal?

Because if the dangerous drugs had


not been delivered, the third element
is lacking, the sale is abds forted,
there is only ATTEMPTED ILLEGAL
SALE of dangerous drugs not
consummated illegal sale of
dangerous drugs because the third
element is lacking.

Q: What if a person has been prosecuted for Illegal sale of


Dangerous Drugs. The said operation was a buy bust
operation. It is an entrapment procedure which is allowed
by law. Here, the criminal/evil intent originated mainly from
the offender himself thats why it is not considered as an
absolutory cause. Here, the Police Officers employed
means and methods to entrap and capture the criminal in
flagrante that is in the actual act of committing the crime.
So what if in the buy bust operation, the accused drug
seller was arrested. In the said operation, the informant
acted as the posuer buyer. He was given marked money.
The policemen ran into the place of the drug seller. Only
the poseur-buyer knocked at the door of the drug seller.
The drug seller came out and the poseur-buyer said that he
wanted to buy dangerous drugs in the amount of P200. The
drug seller said okay and gave 2 plastic sachets of
dangerous drugs to the poseur buyer. However, the
poseur-buyer without having given the marked money yet
to the drug seller negligently removed his eyeglasses so
the Police officers thought that that was the signal that the
sale has been consummated. They arrived at the said
place and arrested the drug seller. The marked money was
not given to drug seller. Does that constitute his acquittal?

A: No provided that all the elements are

present:
Note that the second element only requires the
crime must be established. The corpus delicti and
the price must be established. It does not require
that there must be giving of the price/money. It
suffices that the crime was established.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 62

When the poseur-buyer said that he wants to buy


illegal drugs for P200, the price has already been
established. Therefore, all the elements will suffice
even if the marked money has not been given by
the buyer to the seller. In fact, even if the marked
money is not presented in court it will not be a
hiatus on the evidence of the prosecution provided
that the police officers and the witnesses were
able to prove the crime of illegal sale of dangerous
drugs.

A: The testimony of the poseur-buyer is not


indispensable in a case of illegal sale of
dangerous drugs. It is not indispensable because
the transaction can be proven by the other police
officers who have witnessed the transaction.
However if the seller denies the existence of the
said transaction; it is the incumbent upon the
prosecution to grove the said transaction by the
presentation the said poseur-buyer.

General Rule: The testimony of the poseur-buyer


is not indispensable in a case of illegal sale of
dangerous drugs.
Exemption: When the accused denies the
existence of the said transaction. If the
prosecution failed to present the poseur-buyer to
testify in court, it will amount to the dismissal of
the case.

Q: Lets say there is this cigarette vendor on the side walk


and here comes a man who parked his car near the side
walk. He called the cigarette vendor and told the cigarette
vendor to deliver a package to the man inside the car which
is parked on the other side of the street. He told the
cigarette vendor that he will give him P1000 if the he
agreed to deliver the package to the man inside the car
which is parked at the other side of the street. The cigarette
vendor asked the man what is inside the package however
the man said its none of your business to know whats
inside that. I will give you P1000 if you deliver this to the
man inside that car parked at the other side of the street.
So the cigarette vendor with the P1000 got the bag and
delivered it to the man at the other side of the street. He
knocked at the window and the man lowered his window.
However at the time of the said delivery the police officers
arrived and arrested the cigarette vendor. Can he be
prosecuted for delivery of dangerous drugs? Can he be
convicted for delivery of dangerous drugs?

CRIMINAL LAW 2
A: He can be prosecuted for delivery of
dangerous drugs however it is a defense on his
part that he has no knowledge that the thing he is
delivering is dangerous drugs because under RA
9165, delivering has been defined as the act of
knowingly passing a dangerous drug to another,
personally or otherwise, and by any means, with
or without consideration. Therefore it is necessary
that the one delivering dangerous drug must have
the knowledge of the thing that he is delivering is
dangerous drug.

DELIVER an act of knowingly passing a dangerous drug


to another, personally or otherwise, and by any means, with
or without consideration.

SECTION 6 MAINTENANCE OF A DEN, DIVE, OR


RESORT
Any person who maintains a den, dive, or resort

for the use of illegal drugs are liable under this


section.

Are the owners, persons maintaining the said


dangerous drug dens are only the ones who are
criminally liable?
Under Section 7 of the act, even the

employees who are aware of the nature of the


said den, dive or resort for the use and sale of
dangerous drugs are also criminally liable.
Likewise, even persons who are not
employees which knowingly visit the same
place despite the knowledge of the nature of
such den, dive, or resort are also criminally
liable.

Q: What if the said den, dive, or resort is owned by a third


person? Lets say A and B rented a house. After giving the
down payment, A and B went to the said house. A and B
used the house as a den for illegal sale of dangerous
drugs. The police officers were able to secure a warrant
and A and B were arrested. Can the owner of the said
house be criminally liable for the maintenance of the said
den? How about the house? Can it be forfeited in favor of
the government?

A: Under Sec. 6, the said den, dive, or resort for


the use of illegal sale of dangerous drugs shall be
escheated in favor of the government provided
that the following circumstances concur:
1. The information must allege that the said
place is intentionally being used in
furtherance of illegal sale/use of
dangerous drugs.
2. Such intent must be proven by the
prosecutor.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 63

3.

The owner of the said house must be


included as an accused in the
information or complaint.
If these 3 elements are present; then the said
house shall be confiscated and escheated in
favor of the government.

SECTION 8 MANUFACTURE OF DANGEROUS


DRUGS
The presence if any controlled precursor and

essential chemical or laboratory equipment in the


clandestine laboratory is a prima facie evidence of
manufacture of any dangerous drug.

S E C T I O N 11 I L L E G A L P O S S E S S I O N O F
DANGEROUS DRUGS
ELEMENTS OF POSSESSION OF ILLEGAL

DRUGS:

1. The accused was in possession of prohibited


drug
In illegal possession of dangerous drugs;

the word possession does not only


mean actual possession of the
dangerous drug in his body. It suffices
that the said dangerous drug is found in
a place under the control and
dominion of the said offender.

Q: By virtue of a search warrant the police officers


conducted a search in the house of A to look for cocaine.
They looked inside the bedroom and underneath the pillow
on the bedroom of A, the found several sachets of cocaine.
Can it be held that A is in possession of the said drugs?

A: Yes because it is under his control


and dominion. Possession does not only
mean physical or actual possession. It
also means as constructive possession
for as long as the dangerous drugs is
under his control and dominion.
2.

Such possession is not authorized by law


The offender is not authorized by law to

possess such drugs. Dangerous drugs


are per se contraband. They are per se
illegal items. The presumption is that
such possession is without authority of
law. Therefore the burden of proof is on
the accused to prove that he has the
authority to possess unlike illegal
possession of firearms. Illegal
possession of firearms is not per se
contraband therefore in illegal
possession of firearms, it is the
prosecution who has the burden of proof
that the said person lacks license.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
3.

The accused freely and consciously


possessed the prohibited drug
There must be an animus posidendi on

the part of the said accused. This animus


posidendi on the part of the accused is a
prima facie presumed by law. The
moment a person was found in
possession of dangerous drugs, the
presumes that the person knows that the
thing in his possession is dangerous
drugs.

SECTION 12 - ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF DRUG


PARAPHERNALIA
e.g. A person was found in possession of empty
plastic sachets and other instruments used for
using dangerous drugs. He is therefore liable for
Illegal Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.

Q: What if a person was found in possession of drug


paraphernalia can they avail the benefit of probation?
A: Yes he can avail for probation. The penalty
prescribed by law for illegal possession of drug
paraphernalias is an imprisonment ranging from 6
months and 1 day to 4 years which is within the
probationable penalty. Under Sec. 24 of R.A.
9165, any person convicted for drug pushing and
drug trafficking, regardless of the penalty imposed
by the Court, cannot avail for probation.

So under Sec. 24; only those who are convicted of


drug pushing and drug trafficking which cannot
avail for probation therefore for any other violation
of Dangerous Drugs Act, for as long as the penalty
imposed by the court is 6 years and below, he can
avail for the benefit of probation. But if he is a drug
trafficker/ pusher, one who is engaged in selling
dangerous drugs, he cannot avail of the benefit of
probation even if the penalty imposed by the court
is within the probationable penalty because it is
expressly prohibited by Sec. 24 of RA 9165.

SECTION 13 ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF


DANGEROUS DRUGS DURING PARTIES, SOCIAL
GATHERINGS OR MEETINGS
in Sec. 13, if any person was found in possession

of dangerous drug in a party, social gatherings or


meetings, or in the proximate company of at least
two (2) persons; the maximum penalty prescribed
by law shall be imposed.

SECTION 15 ILLEGAL USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS


ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL USE OF
DANGEROUS DRUGS:
1. The offender was apprehended/ arrested in
the actual use of dangerous drugs.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 64

The first element requires that the


offender must be actually using,
sniffing the dangerous drugs.

2.

After a confirmatory test; he was found to be


positive for use of any dangerous drugs.
He was at the PNP Crime Lab and

after the confirmatory test, he was


found to be positive for use of
dangerous drugs.

3.

No other amount of dangerous drugs must be


found in his possession.
If any other amount of dangerous

drugs was found in his possession,


then the proper charge would no
longer be illegal use but illegal
possession of dangerous drugs.

Q: The police officers saw a man snatched the cell phone


of a woman. Since the police officers saw the man in
committing the crime inflagrante delicto of actual act of
snatching and the man runaway, they followed the man.
The man entered the house. The police officers upon
entering the house saw 3 men on a round table; they were
in the actual act of sniffing shabu. They were arrested and
they were asked to stand up and fold their arms up and
they were searched. Upon the search, they found out that
these 3 men; each of them was found a sachet of illegal
drugs in their pockets aside from the dangerous drug that
they were using. What cases will you file against the 3
men?

A: Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs. No


illegal use of dangerous drugs because the third
element is one thing. Lets say after the
confirmatory test they were found to be positive
however 3 elements must concur: 1st element:
They were caught in the actual act of sniffing
shabu. 2nd element: After confirmatory test they
were found positive of the use of dangerous drugs
however the 3rd element is lacking because they
found to have in their possession a plastic sachet
of other dangerous drugs other than the one they
used. Therefore the proper crime charged is illegal
possession of dangerous drugs.

SECTION 21 PROCEDURE IN THE SEIZURE AND


CONFISCATION OF DANGEROUS DRUG
The apprehending team which has the initial
possession of the seized/confiscated dangerous drugs
shall:
1. Inventory the dangerous drugs
2. Take photographs of the same in the
presence of the accused or from the
person whom the dangerous drugs

CRIMINAL LAW 2
have been confiscated or in the
presence of his counsel, a
representative from the media, a
representative from the Department
of Justice, and an elected public
official who shall be given a copy of
the said inventory and who shall be
required to sign the same.

Procedure:
1. Upon seizure/ confiscation of dangerous drugs,
the same must be stated in the inventory list.
2. There must be a picture taking of the dangerous
drugs in the presence of the accused or from the
person whom the dangerous drugs have been
confiscated or in the presence of his counsel, a
representative from the media, a representative
from the Department of Justice, and an elected
public official.
3. The elected public official must be required to sign
the inventory list and shall be given a copy of the
same.

Q: What if the police officers failed to comply with this


procedure? In People vs. Sta. Maria, the police officers
failed to comply with this procedure however there was
conviction. However, in the case of Dolera vs. People; the
police officers failed to comply with Sec. 21 procedure and
this time there was an acquittal. Why is there an acquittal in
the case of Dolera and why is there a conviction in the case
of Sta. Maria?

A: The Supreme Court held that even if there is


failure to comply with the procedure underlined in
Sec 21 of RA 9165 by the arresting officers, there
will still be conviction if the said non-compliance is
due to justifiable reasons and provided that the
police officers were able to preserve the integrity
and evidentiary bond of the confiscated
dangerous drugs this is in consonance with the
chain of custody rule.

If the police officers were not able to comply with


the procedure due to justifiable cause, they must
be able to preserve the integrity and evidentiary
bond of the confiscated dangerous drug that is;
right after confiscation, it must be marked to
ensure that it was the dangerous drugs taken from
the accused and must be turned over to the
forensic laboratory for testing.

CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE


What is the Chain of Custody rule? (People v

Gutierrez)
It is defined as the duly recorded authorized

movements and custody of dangerous drugs

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 65

from the time of confiscation/seizure to the


receipt in the forensic laboratory to
safekeeping to presentation in court for
destruction.

What is the purpose Chain of Custody rule?


The purpose of Chain of Custody rule is to

ensure that the dangerous drug seized/


confiscated from the accused is the very
same dangerous drug which has been
tested by the forensic chemist and it is the
very same dangerous drug presented in
court that is; there has been no

substitution of evidence.
Dangerous drugs are so small. There can be
a replacement of the effects therefore this
Chain of Custody rule will ensure that there
will be no substitution of the very same
dangerous drug seized/confiscated from the
accused at the time that they were presented
to the court.

Q: What if a person is charged for illegal possession of


dangerous drugs and during his arraignment, he pleaded
not guilty and during the pre-trial, he said that he will
change his plea if he will be allowed to plead guilty for a
lesser offense of illegal possession of drug paraphernalia.
So he wanted to avail of the plea-bargaining rule under the
rules of court. Under the plea-bargaining rule, you can
plead guilty to a lesser offense provided that the said lesser
offense is necessary included in the offense charged. Here,
the charge is illegal possession of dangerous drugs; can he
plead for a lesser offense of illegal possession of drug
paraphernalia?

A: He cannot because Sec. 28 of R.A. 9165


provides that any person charged in violation of
any of the crimes charged under this act cannot
avail of the plea-bargaining under the rules of
court. Therefore any person charged in violation of
any of the punishable acts under R.A. 9165
cannot plead guilty to a lower offense.

SECTION 25 A POSITIVE FINDING FOR THE USE OF


DANGEROUS DRUGS SHALL BE A QUALIFYING
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE

Q: A killed B. The police officers arrested A and they


brought him to the crime lab to be tested for the use of
illegal use of dangerous drugs. After testing, he was found
positive for the use of dangerous drugs. What is the effect
of it in the criminal liability of A?
A: Sec 25 states the a positive finding for the use
of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying
aggravating circumstance.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

What is the effect of a qualifying aggravating


circumstance?
It changes the nature of the crime or even

without changing the nature of the crime it will


bring about a higher imposition of penalty.

SECTION 26 ATTEMPT OR CONSPIRACY


Express exception to the general rule that in case

of violation of a penal law, there are no stages and


there is no conspiracy.

As a rule, in case of violation of penal law, we have no


attempted stages. In violation of special penal laws,
conspiracy unless expressly provided because these
are only for violation of the RPC, for felonies. One of
those exceptions is under Section 26 of RA 9165.
Under Section 26 of RA 9165, any attempt or
conspiracy of any of the following acts shall be
punished already by penalty prescribed by law:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

If any of these acts mentioned is committed by the


offender, a mere attempt; or conspiracy will
already give rise to the crime as an exception to
the rule that in case of violation of penal law, there
are no stages in the commission of the crime and
conspiracy will not lie. So if any of the crime
committed is any of these five acts, mere attempt
will lie against the offender, conspiracy will lie
against the offender.

As held in the case of People v Rolando Laylo, the


charge was only attempted illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
The sale was aborted because even before the said drug
poseur was able to transfer the dangerous drug to the
police officer, the police officers already introduced
themselves as such and arrested him. As such, we only
have attempted illegal sale of dangerous drugs.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 66

TITLE SIX
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS (Articles 200
202)

ARTICLE200 GRAVE SCANDAL


Grave Scandal a highly scandalous act
offensive to good morals, good customs and
decency committed in a public place or within
public knowledge or public view.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender performs an act or acts

Importation of any dangerous drug;


Sale, trading, administration, delivery,
distribution, transportation of dangerous drug;
Maintenance of a den, dive, or resort where
any dangerous drug is used in any form;
Manufacture of any dangerous drug;
Cultivation or culture of plants which are the
sources of dangerous drugs.

SECTON 98 LIMITED APPLICABILITY OF THE RPC


In Book I, under Article 10, the provisions of the

RPC shall apply suppletorily or supplementarily to


the provisions of the special penal laws UNLESS
the special penal law provides otherwise.
One of the exceptions is provided for in Sec 98 of

RA 9165, it is provided that the provisions of RPC,


as amended, shall not apply to the provisions of
RA 9165. The law uses the word shall; therefore

you cannot apply the provision of RPC to the


provisions of RA 9165.
Exception to Section 98: If the offender is a minor
offender.
Where the offender is a minor, the penalty

for acts punishable by life imprisonment to


death provided shall be reclusion perpetua
to death.

2. Such act or acts be HIGHLY SCANDALOUS as


offending against decency or good customs
It is necessary that the act must be

highly scandalous and offensive to


morals, offensive to decency and
offensive to good customs.
3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not
expressly falling within any other article of this
Code.
The third element requires that it must

not expressly fall within any other


article of this code. It must not
constitute any other violation in the
RPC. Grave scandal is a crime of
last resort because you only file a
complaint for grave scandal when the
said act is not punishable under any
other article in the RPC.
4. The act or act complained of be committed in a
public place or within the public knowledge or
view.
Then the fourth element provides that

the highly scandalous act must be


committed either in a public place or
within public knowledge or view. If the
highly scandalous act is committed in
a public place, the crime of grave
scandal will immediately arise. The
place being public, the law presumes
that someone may have witnessed
the commission of the highly
scandalous act. However, if the crime
is committed or if the highly
scandalous act is committed in a
private place, for the crime of grave
scandal to arise, it is necessary that it
must be witnessed by one or more
persons to be said that it is within the
public knowledge or public view.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So let us say that A and B are boyfriend and girlfriend
and it is their anniversary. They went to Luneta Park and at

CRIMINAL LAW 2
exactly 12 midnight, in the middle of Luneta Park, they
engaged in sexual intercourse. No one witnessed their
sexual intercourse. Are they liable for grave scandal?
A: YES. They are liable for grave scandal. They
have the right to engage in sexual conduct but the
fact that they performed the sexual conduct in
Luneta Park, a public place makes the act
offensive to public morals, decency and good
customs and the said act does not constitute any
other violation in the RPC because they have the
right to engage in sexual intercourse. Therefore,
the crime committed is grave scandal because
they performed the act in a public place even if no
one saw the commission of the said act still, still
because it is performed in a public place , it is
presumed that someone may have seen the
commission of the highly scandalous act.

Q: So what if a wife and a husband, celebrating their


anniversary, engaged in sexual intercourse in their terrace.
So the act is committed in their premises, in the terrace of
their house. However, the gate was open and so passersby
would see them performing the sexual intercourse. Are they
liable for grave scandal?
A: YES. They are liable for grave scandal. The
said act does not constitute another offense in the
RPC because they have the right to engage in
sexual conduct. The sexual conduct was
performed in the privacy of their home however;
people witnessed the commission of the said act.
It now becomes a highly scandalous act because
it is within the knowledge of the public or within
public view.

Q: What if A and B are boyfriend and girlfriend. The


girlfriend is 11 yrs old and the boyfriend is 21 yrs old. And
because it is their monthsary the girlfriend thought of giving
herself as a gift and engaged in sexual intercourse in a
public place Are they liable for grave scandal?
A: NO. They are not liable for grave scandal. The
man is liable for statutory rape. A man who had
sexual intercourse with a child under 12 years of
age, regardless of the consent, regardless of the
willingness of the said child, the man is liable for
statutory rape. Because in so far as criminal law is
concerned, a child under 12 yrs old has no
intelligence of his/her own and is not capable of
giving a valid consent. Therefore, even if the girl
voluntarily gave herself in so far as the law is
concerned, it is still statutory rape. It is not grave
scandal because the third element is wanting. The
said act fall under the violation of article of RPC
that is under article 266-A for rape. As I said,
grave scandal is a crime of last resort. You only
charge it when the crime committed does not
constitute any other violation in the RPC.

ARTICLE201 IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE


PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS, AND INDECENT
SHOWS
Punishes:
I.
Public proclamations of doctrines openly contrary
to public morals
II.
Publication of obscene literature. In case of
publication of obscene literature, it is the author,

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 67

III.
IV.

the editor, the owner or proprietor of the


establishment that sells the said materials SHALL
BE HELD CRIMINALLY LIABLE.
The third act punished is the exhibition of indecent
shows, plays, scenes or acts in fairs, theaters,
cinemas or any other places.
Selling, giving away or exhibiting films,,
engravings, sculptures or literature which are
offensive to public morals.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there is this building, when the person
entered the said building, on the floor of the said building
were these magazines. And the magazines contain men
and women engaging in sexual intercourse, naked women
and men, and other obscene materials. Who shall be held
liable when the place was raided by the police?
A: The author of the said literature, the editors
publishing such literature and the owner or
proprietor of the establishment where the said
magazines were being sold. They will be held
criminally liable under Article 201.

VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES (ART 202)


Q: Let us say that there is this man, a healthy man and he
can look for work but he does not want to work. So he was
just roaming around and he saw houses of prostitutes or
houses of ill-fames and he is always in this places. Can he
be held liable for vagrancy?
A:NO, because vagrancy has been
decriminalized by R.A. No. 10158 which was
approved on March 27, 2012. We no longer have
the crime of vagrancy. No person can longer be
prosecuted for being a vagrant.

How about prostitution? Is there still a crime


for prostitution?
YES.

Who is a prostitute?
A prostitute is any woman who, for money or

profit, indulges in sexual intercourse or


lascivious conduct. So it is the work or job of
a woman. Note that the law defines it to be a
woman therefore; a man cannot be
considered a prostitute. Before, if a man
engages in sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct he can be punished under Article 202
but now since vagrancy has been
decriminalized by R.A. No. 10158, he can no
longer be prosecuted. Only prostitutes who
are woman.

TITLE SEVEN
CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS (Articles
203 245)

ARTICLE203 PUBLIC OFFICERS


REQUISITES TO BE A PUBLIC OFFICER:
1. One must be taking part in the performance of
public functions in the Government or one
must be performing in said Government or in
any of its branches public duties as an

CRIMINAL LAW 2
employee, agent or subordinate official, of any
rank or class; and
2. That his authority to take part in the
performance of public functions or to perform
public duties must be
a. by direct provision of the law; or
b. by popular election; or
c. by appointment by competent authority

Whenever a person applies to a public office, he has the


so-called, OATH OF OFFICE. If he is high-ranking official,
the oath is also before a high-ranking official. If he is a
cabinet secretary, the oath is before the President or to the
Supreme Court Chief Justice. If he is only an ordinary
employee, still he has oath of office. It is a document which
is entitled, OATH OF OFFICE, he merely signs it.

Felonies under TITLE SEVEN are felonies in violation of


this oath of office, they can either be:
MISFEASANCE
A public officer
performs an
official acts in a
manner not in
accordance with
what the law
provides

(GN: Improper
performance of
some act which
might be lawfully
done)

ARTICLE
204 TO 207

NONFEASANCE

MALFEASANCE

A public officer
knowingly,
willfully refuses
or refrains from
doing an act
which is his
official duty to
do.

(GN: Omission
of some act
which ought to
be performed)

A public officer
performs in his
public office an act
prohibited by law.
(GN: Performance
of some act which
ought not to be
done

ARTICLE
210-211

ARTICLE
208

ARTICLE204 KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST


JUDGMENT
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a judge
2. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted
to him for decision
3. That the judgment is unjust
4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust

UNJUST JUDGMENT is one which is contrary to law, or


one that is not supported by evidence or both.
The source of unjust judgment can either be mere

error or ill-will. If the source of an unjust judgment is


mere error on the part of the judge, then the said judge
is not civilly, criminally, and administratively liable.

ILLUSTRATION:
In a case submitted to him for decision, the judge
wrongfully interpreted a provision of law. It is a new law,
there is no jurisprudence yet, the judge wrongfully

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 68

interpreted it. The judge cannot be held civilly,


administratively, and more so, criminally liable. The said
judgment is an unjust judgment because it was based on
this error in the interpretation of the law. However, there
was no intent on the part of the said judge. Considering the
basis of the unjust judgment is mere error. The said judge
acted in good faith.
If however, the unjust judgment is based on bad
faith, that is, it is based on ill-motive on the part of the said
judge, therefore, he can be held liable criminally, civilly and
administratively

- For him to be criminally liable, knowing that he


rendered an unjust judgment, it is necessary that
the unjust judgment is rendered out of ill-motive
or bad faith, out of greed, revenge, envy, or any
other ill-motive. Hence he is known to have
rendered an unjust judgment.

BASED ON MERE ERROR no criminal, no civil, no


administrative liability
ARTICLE205 JUDGMENT RENDERED THROUGH
NEGLIGENCE
This is again committed by a judge, who in a case
submitted to him for decision, renders manifestly unjust
judgment.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a judge
2. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted
to him for decision
3. That the judgment is manifestly unjust
4. The it is due to his inexcusable negligence or
ignorance

MANIFESTLY UNJUST JUDGMENT means that it is


evident that a judgment is unjust. A first year law student
would know that it is unjust, therefore it is manifestly unjust
judgment, because he acted in inexcusable negligence or
ignorance.

ARTICLE206 UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER


ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a judge
2. That he performs any of the following acts:
a. knowingly renders unjust interlocutory
order or decree
b. renders a manifestly unjust
interlocutory order or decree through
inexcusable negligence or ignorance

A R T I C L E 2 0 7 M A L I C I O U S D E L AY I N T H E
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a judge
2. There is a proceeding in his court
3. He delays the administration of justice

CRIMINAL LAW 2
4. The delay is malicious, that is, delay is caused
by the judge with deliberate intent to inflict
damage on either party in the case.

ARTICLE208 PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES;


NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE
ACTS PUNISHABLE:

I.
By maliciously refraining from instituting
prosecution against violators of the law
Note that the first crime, he knows that a
crime was committed but he does not
prosecute the offender;
II.
By maliciously tolerating the commission
of offenses
the second act, a crime was about to be
committed, he tolerates its commission. It
must be done with MALICE. Absent
malice, Article 208 will not apply.

ELEMENTS OF DERELICTION OF DUTY IN THE


PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES:
1. That the offender is a public officer or officer of
the law who has a duty to cause the prosecution
of, or to prosecute, offenses.
2. That there is a dereliction of the duties of his
office; that is knowing the commission of the
crime, he does not cause the prosecution of the
criminal or knowing that a crime is about to be
committed, he tolerates its commission.
3. That the offender acts with malice and
deliberate intent to favor the violator of the law.

THOSE WHO CAN CAUSE THE PROSECUTION OF THE


OFFENDERS:
- Judges
- Barangay Chairman
- Persons in authority

ARTICLE209 BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN


ATTORNEY OR SOLICITOR REVELATION OF
SECRETS
ACTS PUNISHED AS BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY

ATTORNEY:
I.
By causing damage to his client, either
a. by any malicious breach of
professional duty
b. by inexcusable negligence or
ignorance
THERE MUST BE DAMAGE TO HIS

CLIENT
II.
By revealing any of the secrets of his
client learned by him in his professional
capacity.
DAMAGE IS NOT NECESSARY

III.

Otherwise known as DERELICTION.


Can only be committed by a public officer or a officer of
the law who has the duty to cause the prosecution of
or to prosecute the offenders. The said public officer
commits dereliction of duty in the prosecution of
offenses under any of the following circumstances:
a. knowing the commission of the crime, he
does not cause the prosecution of the
criminal, or
b. knowing that a crime is about to be
committed, he tolerates its commission
and the said offender acts with malice and
deliberate intent to favor the violator of the
law
The dereliction of duty in the prosecution of offenses
cannot be committed by just any public officer.
The public officer must be charged with the
prosecution of the cases or he is the one who can
cause the prosecution of these offenders.

CHARGED WITH THE PROSECUTION OF THE


OFFENDERS:
- Fiscals
- Prosecutors
- State Prosecutors

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 69

By undertaking the defense of the


opposing party in the same case, without
the consent of his first client, after having
undertaken the defense of said first client
or after having received confidential
information from said client.
IF THE CLIENT CONSENTS TO

THE ATTORNEYS TAKING THE


DEFENSE OF THE OTHER PARTY,
THERE IS NO CRIME

ELEMENTS:
1. Causing damage to his client, either:
a. by any malicious breach of professional duty
b. by inexcusable negligence or ignorance
2. Revealing any of the secrets of his client learned
by him in his professional capacity
3. Undertaking the defense of the opposing party in
the same case, without the consent of his first
client or after having received confidential
information from said client
Under Article 209, this betrayal of trust is IN ADDITION
TO A PROPER ADMINISTRATIVE CASE which may
be filed against an attorney or solicitor. So aside from
the criminal case in violation of Article 209, he can also
be charged in a case also for disbarment, for violation
of lawyers oath of duty may be filed against him, and
these two cases can be proceeded at the same time.

ILLUSTRATION:
A lawyer for 3 consecutive times, without any
justifiable reason, failed to file his formal offer of exhibits.
During the first time he was given 15 days, he failed to file,

CRIMINAL LAW 2
second time he was given 15 days, he failed to file. On the
third time, he was given 5 days still, he failed to file, without
giving any justifiable reason for his non-compliance with the
order of the court. By reason thereof, there is no evidence
in behalf of the defense of his client was admitted by the
Court. Because only evidences offered may be admitted by
the court. And so, the judge convicted the accused, the
client was prejudiced because of the counsels malicious
breach of his professional duty. It is incumbent upon any
counsel to file a pleading within the reglementary period
provided by law or required by the court.
- For failing to do so without any justifiable reason,
he caused damage to his client by malicious
breach of his professional duty.

Q: What if Atty. A was the counsel of X, he was behind bars


for the crime of kidnapping for ransom. Atty. A visited X to
ask the facts of the case in order for him to study and to
nput up a good defense. During their conversation, X
informed his counsel, Atty. A that there will be another
kidnapping tomorrow night at 9PM in Quezon City, to be
done by his other gang mates who were at large. Atty. A,
upon knowing this information from his client X,
immediately went to the police officers of Quezon City in
order to pre-empt the commission of the crime. Is Atty. A
liable for the second act because he divulged the secrets of
his client which he learned in his professional capacity?
A: Atty. A is not liable under Article 209. The
secrets being referred to under Article 209 refers
to the past crimes of the said client and it refers
to the facts and circumstances related to the
crime which is being handed by the said Attorney
or counsel.

It does not refer to future crimes that are still


about to be committed. When a lawyer takes his
oath of office, he says, or he promise, he swears
that he shall be liable not only to the client, but
also to the STATE, to the GOVERNMENT.

It is his duty to the Government, to the State of


any future crime that is about to be committed
more than his duty to his client. Hence, in this
case, since it refers to a future crime, for the
protection of the state and the citizenry, it is
incumbent upon him to divulge, disclose or to
reveal the said secrets.

ARTICLE210 DIRECT BRIBERY


ACTS PUNISHABLE:

I.
By agreeing to perform, or by performing,
in consideration of any offer, promise, gift
or present an act constituting a crime,
in connection with the performance of his
official duties.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.
3. That such offer or promise be
accepted, or received by the public
officer with a view of committing
some crime.
4.
That the act which the offender
agrees to perform or which he
executes be connected with the
performance of his official duties.
II.

Q: What if A filed a case against B, Atty. X was the counsel


of A, A failed to give Atty. X his appearance list for 5
consecutive hearings, no appearance list. So Atty. X, filed a
motion to withdraw as counsel of A. The said motion to
withdraw was with the CONSENT OF A, because without
the consent of A, the said motion to withdraw will not be
granted by the court. So the court granted and Atty. X is no
longer the counsel of A. When B learned about this, went
immediately to the office of X and secured the services of

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

X. Atty. X signed a contract and he is now the counsel of B.


Is Atty. X liable for betrayal of trust by an attorney?
A: Atty. X is liable for betrayal of trust by an
attorney. He takes the case of B, the opposing
party, even after he has already taken the case
of A and after he has acquired valuable
information about his client. How can he prevent
himself from being convicted of the betrayal of
trust?
He must first secure the consent of the

said first client


- In the said problem, there was no consent. The
said consent was only in the motion to withdraw.
The said consent in the motion to withdraw is not
the consent on the acceptance of the case. For
every motion to withdraw, there must be a
consent written, otherwise the court will not grant
the motion to withdraw. The consent here is to
secure or to accept the service s of the other
party.
- Since consent was not given, he is liable for
betrayal of trust by an attorney.
Just remember aside from betrayal of

trust, an attorney or solicitor can also be


held liable of administrative case. So
there may be disbarment.
He can be disbarred or he can be

suspended by reason of committing any


of these acts.

Page 70

By accepting a gift in consideration of the


execution of an act which does not
constitute a crime, in connection with the
performance of his official duty.

ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

3. That such offer or promise be


accepted, or received by the public
officer in consideration of the
execution of an act, which does not
constitute a crime, but the act must
be unjust
4.
That the act which the offender
agrees to perform or which he
executes be connected with the
performance of his official duties.
III.

By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining,


from doing something which it is his
official duty to do, in consideration of gift
or promise.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.
3. That such offer or promise be
accepted, or received by the public
o ff i c e r t o r e f r a i n f r o m d o i n g
something which it is his official duty
to do so.
4.
That the act which the offender
agrees to perform or which he
executes be connected with the
performance of his official duties.

Under the First Act - By agreeing to perform or


performing, in consideration of offer or promise, gift or
present any act constituting a crime in connection with
the performance of his official duties
- If the thing which the public officer is required to
do, is an act which will constitute a crime, a mere
agreement to do so, will already give rise to
direct bribery. It is not necessary that he actually
commits the crime, it is not necessary that he
actually receives the gift or present.
A MERE AGREEMENT WILL SUFFICE.

Likewise in the Third Act - By agreeing to


refrain or by refraining from doing an act which is his
official duty to do, in consideration of an offer,
promise, gift or present.
- If the thing that a public officer is required to do, is
to refrain from doing an act which is his official
duty to do, a mere agreement to refrain to do an
act will already give rise to direct bribery. It is not
necessary to refrain from doing an act, it is not
necessary to receive the said gift.

However, if the thing that a public officer is


required to do, does not constitute a crime, under the
Second Act, mere agreement will not suffice. There
must be actual acceptance of the thing. There must be
acceptance of the gift, in consideration of the execution of
an act which does not constitute a crime in connection with
the performance of his official duty. WHY?
- because the thing that he is being required to do

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 71

is not a criminal act. It is his official thing to do,


but he doesnt want to do it without the bribe first
to be given to him. So it is only upon
ACCEPTANCE OF THE BRIBE that criminal
liability for direct bribery will arise.

Whatever may be the act constituting direct


bribery, in order to amount to direct bribery, it must always
be in connection with the performance of his official duty. If
it is not in connection with his official duty, it could other
crime like estafa or swindling, but NOT DIRECT BRIBERY.

ACEJAS, III vs. PEOPLE


It is the second act of direct bribery that has been
violated. The second act because it is the duty of the said
BID agent to return the passport. The duty to return the
passport is not a criminal act. It is also not an act of
refraining to do so. But he does not want to perform the act
without the bribe, so he becomes liable under the 2nd act.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a mother wanted her daughter to work in
another country. The daughter was still a minor, 16 years
old. So what the mother did, was to ask the civil registrar to
alter the birth date or the date in the certificate of live birth
with a promise that the first 2 months of the salary of the
daughter will be given to the civil registrar. The civil
registrar altered the date in the birth certificate. What crime/
crimes is/are committed by the civil registrar and by the
mother?
A: The civil registrar is liable for direct
bribery because he agreed to perform an act
constituting a crime in consideration of a promise
that the 2 months salary will be given to him. The
said act is in connection with his performance of
his official duty. Therefore he is liable for direct
bribery. He actually performs the act, he actually
committed a crime, therefore he is also liable for
the falsification of a public document because he
actually altered the birth date which is a very
important date in the birth certificate so he is
also liable for the falsification of a public
document.
Without the said bribe, the mother would not
have committed falsification, so are you going to
complex them? because direct bribery is a
necessary means to commit falsification.
Even if in reality, they should be complex

because direct bribery is a necessary


means to commit falsification, you cannot
complex them because ARTICLE 210
PROHIBITS SUCH COMPLEXITY OF
CRIMES.

Under Article 210, it is expressly provided that


the penalty for direct bribery shall be IN
ADDITION TO THE LIABILITY FOR THE
CRIME COMMITTED. Here, he actually altered,

CRIMINAL LAW 2
actually committed the crime, therefore his
liability for falsification is in addition for his
liability for direct bribery. Therefore, 2 separate
distinct charges have to be filed against the civil
registrar, we have direct bribery and the other
one is falsification of the public document.

The mother is liable for corruption of public


official (Art. 212). Direct bribery is the crime of
the public officer who receives the bribe. On the
other hand, the private individual or the public
officer who gives the bribe is liable for corruption
of public official under Art. 212. (Refer to Art.
212 elements)

ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with
law enforcement
2. The offender refrains from arresting or
prosecuting an offender who has committed a
crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or
death
3. The offender refrains from arresting or
prosecuting the offender in consideration of
any promise, gift or present.

The mother gives a promise under


circumstances in which the public officer
becomes liable for direct bribery. She is liable for
corruption of public official. The mother is also
liable for falsification of a public document as a
principal by inducement. Without the bribe,
without the said inducement, the said public
officer will not have committed the said
falsification.

ARTICLE211 INDIRECT BRIBERY


ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer
2. That he accepts gifts
3. That the gifts are offered to him by reason of his
office.

Indirect Bribery is committed if the public officer


accepts any gift or present by reason of his office that
he owns. In case of indirect bribery, the public officer is
not deemed required to do a thing. By the MERE
ACCEPTANCE, indirect bribery is consummated. NO
ACCEPTANCE, NO CRIME IS COMMITTED.

ILLUSTRATION:
A is the newly appointed secretary of DENR. On his
first day of office, Mr. X visited him, paid a courtesy call. Mr.
X is the president of a big logging company. They
exchanged some pleasantries, thereafter, when this
president of the logging company left, he placed a small
box on the table. When he left, the new DENR secretary
opened the box and it was a key to a car parked in front of
the building. The new DENR secretary used it and drove
the car
- He is liable for Indirect Bribery. The president of
the logging company does not require him to do
anything, it was merely given to him because he
was newly appointed as the DENR secretary. His
acceptance brings about consummated indirect
bribery; therefore, indirect bribery has no
attempted or frustrated stage because outside
acceptance, no crime is committed.

ARTICLE211-A QUALIFIED BRIBERY

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 72

Qualified bribery is committed by any public officer who


is in charge with the enforcement of the law. So, in
order to amount to qualified bribery, it is necessary that
the offender whom the public officer does not want to
prosecute must have committed a crime punishable by
reclusion perpetua and/or death.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: A police officer was conducting a patrol. He saw a man
behind the tree, looking at the other house adjacent to the
tree as if waiting for someone. So the police officer parked
his vehicle and observed what this man would do. The
moment that a man came out of the gate of the house, this
man hiding behind the tree, immediately went directly to
him and shot him 5 times, and killing him instantly. Then,
the said man rode a motorcycle and left. The police officer
chased him. The Police officer arrested him, however, he
gave the police officer P500,000 and told the police officer,
Mr. Police officer, you saw nothing, you heard nothing.
And the police officer allowed him to leave. What crime/
crimes is/are committed by the said police officer?
A: The said police officer is liable for
qualified bribery. The crime committed by the
said man is murder, because obviously, in his act
of killing, there was treachery, the other party
was defenseless and obviously the said man
deliberately and consciously adopted the ways
means and methods employed by him in killing
the victim. Since there was treachery, the crime
committed is murder, punishable by reclusion
perpetua to death. His failure to arrest and
prosecute this man constitute qualified bribery
because he did so after accepting P500,000.

Q: What if a police officer was conducting a patrol, he saw


A and B fighting, boxing each other, killing each other, until
they already on the ground. In the course thereof, A pulls
out his balisong and stabbed B several times on the heart,
a vital organ. B died instantly. Thereafter, A ran away, the
police officer tried to catch up with A and he was able to
arrest A. However A, gave the police officer P100,000. The
police officer allowed him to leave. What crime/crimes is/
are committed by the said police officer?
A: The crime committed by A in killing B is
precedent by a fight, therefore it is merely
homicide. Homicide is punishable only by
reclusion temporal. Since it is only punishable by

CRIMINAL LAW 2
reclusion temporal, therefore, qualified bribery is
not applicable.

He committed direct bribery, because he


accepts a bribe, in consideration of an act of
refraining to arrest the said criminal. He actually
refrain from arresting and prosecuting the
criminal, therefore in addition to direct bribery, he
also committed dereliction of duty in the
prosecution of offenses because he actually
committed dereliction of duty by refraining from
arresting the person who has actually committed
a crime. So this time, there are 2 crimes
committed:
DIRECT BRIBERY (ARTICLE 210) AND

DERELICTION OF DUTY IN THE

PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
(ARTICLE 208)

ARTICLE 212 CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS


ELEMENTS:
1. The offender makes offers or promises or gives
or presents to a public officer.
2. That the offers or promises are made or the
gifts or the gifts or presents given to a public
officer, under circumstances that will make the
public officer liable for direct bribery or indirect
bribery.

THE ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT (RA


3019)
PUBLIC OFFICER
- a public officer is any
elective and appointive officials and employees,
permanent or temporary, whether in the classified
or unclassified or exemption service receiving
compensation, even nominal, from the
government. (Sec 2, RA 3019)

JAVIER v SANDIGANBAYAN
Although Javier has been appointed as a
representative of the private sector, in the book
publishing board attached to the office of the
president (NBDB), she is still considered as a
public officer; first, the said board functions as a
collegial body performing public functions;
second, according to SC, she was receiving
allowance, a salary even though nominal, from the
government. Hence, she considered as a public
officer.

SECTION 3 CORRUPT PRACTICES OF PUBLIC


OFFICERS
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3:

(e) Causing any undue injury to any party including the


government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official, administrative or judicial

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 73

functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith


or gross inexcusable negligence.
ELEMENTS:
1. The said offender was in charge of his official,
administrative or judicial function
2. That he acted with manifest partiality, evident
bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence
3. The said accused caused any undue injury to
any party, including the government, or gave any
private party unwarranted benefits, advantage, or
preference in the discharge of his official
functions.

SANTOS
v PEOPLE
The Supreme Court said that there are two acts

punished under Section 3 (e) of RA 3019:


1. Causing any undue injury; or
2. Giving any private party any unwarranted
benefit, advantage or preference
The law uses the conjunctive or; therefore,
the fact that the offender causes any
undue injury to any party or the fact that
the offender gave any party unwarranted
benefit, advantage or preference, they
can be charged distinctly or separately
from each other.
The Supreme Court also stated that the

elements of Sec 3 (e) of RA 3019


UNDUE INJURY means there must be an actual
damage caused to the offended party. Absent any
actual damage caused to the offended party, then
section 3 (e) is not violated.

(g) Entering, on behalf of the government, into any


contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the
public officer profited or will profit thereby
The public officer entered into any contract or

transaction on behalf of the government. The


said contract is manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the government.

In NAVA v PALLATTAO, the violation was Section 3 (g).


The DECS officials bought laboratory science materials and
after COA audited, it was discovered that there was an
overpricing. The same is true in CAUNAN v PEOPLE
where Joey Marquez and company bought walis-tingting,
and according to the COA auditors, there was also
overpricing of these walis-tingting. But in the case of Nava,
there was conviction but in the case of Caunan, there was
an acquittal.
Where lies the difference?

In the case of Nava, the COA officials proved

the overpricing because they bought the very


same laboratory materials from the same
supplier where the DECS officials bought and

CRIMINAL LAW 2

by reason thereof, it was discovered that


there was indeed an overpricing.
However, in the case of Caunan, Joey
Marquez bought from a different supplier than
where the COA officials bought. The COA
officials bought from a Las Pinas supplier
which they compared with the price of walistingting bought by Joey Marquez. Not only did
they buy the said walis-tingting from a
different supplier, the walis-tingting bought by
COA officials was of different specifications
from that of the walis-tingting bought by Joey
Marquez and company. Hence, the Supreme
Court said that prosecution was not able to
prove beyond reasonable doubt that there
was overpricing. Because the walis-tingting
bought by Joey Marquez was very much
different from the walis-tingting bought by the
COA officials. They were not able to prove
beyond reasonable doubt that there was
overpricing because of the difference in
specifications.

In both cases, there was NO PUBLIC


BIDDING.

Will the mere lack of public bidding bring


about a violation of Section 3 (g) of RA 3019?
The Supreme Court said that mere lack of

public bidding may mean that the government


was not able to get the best price for the thing
purchased. However, it does not bring about
a violation of Section 3 (g) because what
Section 3 (g) requires is the transaction must
be manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to
the government and mere lack of public
bidding will not show such gross and manifest
disadvantage.

regulations duly promulgated by competent authority or an


offense in connection with the official duties of the latter, or
allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced to
commit such violation or offense.

Persons liable:
1. Public officer who persuades, induces, or
influences another public officer;
2. Public officer who is persuaded induced or
influenced
Note: requesting or receiving any gift, present, or benefit is
not required in this provision.

(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,


present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or for any
other person, in connection with any contract or transaction
between the Government and any other part, wherein the
public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under
the law.

Note:
the lack of demand is immaterial, the law uses the

word OR between requesting and receiving.


There must be clear intention on the part of the public

officer and consider it as his or her own property from


then on. Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by
any other sign, circumstance or act to show
acceptance is not sufficient to lead the court to
conclude that the crime has been committed
Refers to a public officer whose official intervention is

required by law in a contract or transaction

(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,


present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for himself or
for another, from any person for whom the public officer, in
any manner or capacity, has secured or obtained, or will
secure or obtain, any Government permit or license, in
consideration for the help given or to be given, without
prejudice to Section thirteen of this Act.
(d) Accepting or having any member of his family accept
employment in a private enterprise which has pending
official business with him during the pendency thereof or
within one year after its termination.

SECTION 4 PROHIBITION ON PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS


Under Section 4, it is unlawful for any private

individual who has a close personal relation


to any public officer to request, ask or receive
present from any person in any case from
which the said public officer has to control.
Close personal relation does not only

include family members. It also includes those


who have social and fraternal relations;
therefore even a private individual who is not
in conspiracy of a public officer can be held
liable under RA 3019.
Not only public officers but also private

individuals can be held liable under RA 3019.

(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the


Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted
benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his
official administrative or judicial functions through manifest
partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.
This provision shall apply to officers and employees of
offices or government corporations charged with the grant
of licenses or permits or other concessions.

Enumerated corrupt practices of Public Officials


(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public
officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules and

(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any contract


or transaction manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 74

(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request,


without sufficient justification, to act within a reasonable
time on any matter pending before him for the purpose of
obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any person interested
in the matter some pecuniary or material benefit or
advantage, or for the purpose of favoring his own interest
or giving undue advantage in favor of or discriminating
against any other interested party.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
the same, whether or not the public officer profited or will
profit thereby.
(h) Director or indirectly having financing or pecuniary
interest in any business, contract or transaction in
connection with which he intervenes or takes part in his
official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by the
Constitution or by any law from having any interest.
(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal
gain, or having a material interest in any transaction or act
requiring the approval of a board, panel or group of which
he is a member, and which exercises discretion in such
approval, even if he votes against the same or does not
participate in the action of the board, committee, panel or
group.
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against those
public officers responsible for the approval of manifestly
unlawful, inequitable, or irregular transaction or acts by the
board, panel or group to which they belong.
(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit,
privilege or benefit in favor of any person not qualified for or
not legally entitled to such license, permit, privilege or
advantage, or of a mere representative or dummy of one
who is not so qualified or entitled.
(k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on account of his
official position to unauthorized persons, or releasing such
information in advance of its authorized release date.
Note: if damage was caused, Article 229 under the RPC is
committed.

SECTION 9 PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS


Under Section 9, both private individuals and

public officers have just the same penalty. It is


six years and one month to fifteen years plus
forfeiture of the ill-gotten wealth.

S E C T I O N 7 S TAT E M E N T O F A S S E T S A N D
LIABILITIES & RA 6713
When do the officers file the statement of

assets, liabilities and net worth?


The said public officer can file his SALN

within 30 days from assumption into office. And


then it must be filed on or before the 30th day of
April of the next years and within 30 days after
separation from the service.
In RA 3019, it is stated on or before 15th of

April but there is another law which provides also


for the filing of SALN and that is RA6713 which is
the code of ethical standards for public officers.
Under RA 6713, and this is what is being

followed, it must be on or before the 30th day of


April.
So you file first within 30 days upon

assumption to office and then the years thereafter


on or before the 30th day of April and then if you
got separated from office, within 30 days from
separation from office.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 75

SECTION 8 PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF AND


DISMISSAL DUE TO UNEXPLAINED WEALTH
When is there a prima facie presumption of

graft and corrupt practices?


There arises a prima facie presumption of

graft and corrupt practices if a public officer has


been found to have in his possession money or
property, whether in his name or in that name of
another person, which is manifestly out of
proportion from his lawful income. There arises a
prima facie presumption of graft and corrupt
practices.

SECTION 10 COMPETENT COURT & RA 8429


Where do you file a case for violation of RA

3019?
You file a case of violation of Article 3019

before the Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan


has jurisdiction unless otherwise provided by law.
There is a law, RA 8429 which provides for

the jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan. Under this law,


if a public officer is of salary grade 27 and above,
it must be before the Sandiganbayan. If the public
officer is below salary grade 27, it must be before
the RPC.

SECTION 11 PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENSES


When is the prescriptive period?

Violation for RA 3019 shall prescribe

after 15 years. However, the right of the


government to forfeit or to recover ill-gotten
wealth does not prescribe. So there are no
latches and estoppel insofar as the right of
the government to recover ill-gotten wealth
is concerned.

When do you start counting the


running of the prescriptive period of
crime?
From the time the crime has been
committed or if it is not known, that is from
the time of the discovery of the said crime,
then it is from the time of the institution of
the criminal perseverance.

SECTION 13 SUSPENSION AND LOSS OF BENEFITS


Q: What if a public officer, has been charged for violation of
RA 3019, the Ombudsman found probable cause. The case
was now filed before the Sandiganbayan. Is it incumbent
upon the Sandiganbayan to immediately place him under
preventive suspension? Is preventive suspension
automatic? Is preventive suspension mandatory?
A: Preventive suspension is mandatory but it
is not automatic. There must first be a presuspension period to determine the validity of the
information. The moment the Sandiganbayan
discovers the said information is valid, sufficient in

CRIMINAL LAW 2

substance to bring about a conviction, it is now


mandatory upon the Sandiganbayan to place the
said accused public officer under preventive
suspension.
So it is not automatic because there must first be
a pre-suspension period. The only issue in the
pre-suspension period is the information filed by
the Ombudsman against the said public officer
valid, is it sufficient enough to bring about a
conviction in court? If the answer is yes,
immediately, mandatory on the part of the
Sandiganbayan, a ministerial duty, the said public
officer must be placed under preventive
suspension. It it ministerial not discretionary, not
either or.
For how long should the suspension be?
The suspension must not exceed the maximum
of ninety days, in consonance with Section 52
of the Administrative Code.

SECTION 14 - EXCEPTION
Q: What if a public officer saw an old man waiting line. So
the old man received a notice, the notice said that his
license is ready, it has already been approved. So he was
waiting in line for the release of his license, it was already
approved. The head of office saw the old man. 85 years
old, under the heat of the sun and with his frail body. So the
head of office took the man and the head of office asked
the man to his office. The head of office asked the
secretary, Is the license of this man approved? The
secretary said yes. The head of office said, get it. The
secretary took it and gave to the head of office. The head of
office, upon seeing that it is approved, and the man was
only waiting for its release, gave it to the man; therefore the
man need not wait in the long line. The man was so
thankful that the following day, the man went back to the
office with two big bilaos of bibingka to the said head of
office to say thank you. The said head of office received
two big bilaos of bibingka. Is the said head of office liable
under RA 3019?
A: No. It falls under the exception. Under
Section 14, unsolicited gifts or presents of small or
insignificant value offered or given as a mere ordinary
token of friendship or gratitude, according to local customs
or usage is excepted from the provisions of RA 3019;
therefore the said public officer will not be held criminally
liable.

RA 7080: ANTI-PLUNDER ACT


Ill-gotten wealth
means any asset, property, business enterprise or
material possession of any person within the purview of
Section two (2) hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly
through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or
business associates by any combination or series of the
following means or similar schemes:

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or


malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;

2. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift,


share, percentage, kickbacks or any/or entity in connection
with any government contract or project or by reason of the
office or position of the public officer concerned;

3. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of


assets belonging to the National government or any of its
subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or governmentowned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries;

4. By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly


any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or
participation including the promise of future employment in
any business enterprise or undertaking;

5. By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial


monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation of
decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons
or special interests;or

6. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority,


relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich
himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage
and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the
Philippines

Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder, Penalties. Any


public officer who, by himself or in connivance with
members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity,
business associates, subordinates or other persons,
amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through
a combination or series of overt or criminal acts as
described in Section 1 (d) hereof, in the aggregate amount
or total value of at least Seventy-five million pesos
(P75,000,000.00), shall be guilty of the crime of plunder
and shall be punished by life imprisonment with perpetual
absolute disqualification from holding any public office. Any
person who participated with the said public officer in the
commission of plunder shall likewise be punished. In the
imposition of penalties, the degree of participation and the
attendance of mitigating and extenuating circumstances
shall be considered by the court.

Sec. 4. Rule of Evidence. For purposes of establishing the


crime of plunder, it shall not be necessary to prove each
and every criminal act done by the accused in furtherance
of the scheme or conspiracy to amass, accumulate or
acquire ill-gotten wealth, it being sufficient to establish
beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or criminal acts
indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or conspiracy.

Sec. 6. Prescription of Crime. The crime punishable under


this Act shall prescribe in twenty (20) years. However, the
right of the State to recover properties unlawfully acquired
by public officers from them or from their nominees or
transferees shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or
estoppel.

RA 9745 Anti-Torture Act:

Page 76

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Torture refers to:
1. an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether
physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a
person for such purposes as obtaining from him/
her or a third person information or a confession;
2. punishing him/her for an act he/she or a third
person has committed or is suspected of having
committed;
3. or intimidating or coercing him/her or a third
person;
4. or for any reason based on discrimination of any
kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or
at the instigation of or with the consent or
acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of
a person in authority.

(i) The administration or drugs to induce


confession and/or reduce mental competency; or
(ii) The use of drugs to induce extreme pain or
certain symptoms of a disease; and
(14) Other analogous acts of physical torture; and
(b) "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to acts committed
by a person in authority or agent of a person in authority
which are calculated to affect or confuse the mind and/or
undermine a person's dignity and morale, such as:
(1) Blindfolding;
(2) Threatening a person(s) or his/fher relative(s)
with bodily harm, execution or other wrongful acts;

(3) Confinement in solitary cells or secret


detention places;

It does not include pain or Buffering arising only from,


inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

(4) Prolonged interrogation;


(5) Preparing a prisoner for a "show trial", public
display or public humiliation of a detainee or
prisoner;

Acts of torture:
(a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment
inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in
authority upon another in his/her custody that causes
severe pain, exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or
more parts of the body, such as:

(6) Causing unscheduled transfer of a person


deprived of liberty from one place to another,
creating the belief that he/she shall be summarily
executed;

(1) Systematic beating, headbanging, punching,


kicking, striking with truncheon or rifle butt or other
similar objects, and jumping on the stomach;

(7) Maltreating a member/s of a person's family;


(8) Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed
by the person's family, relatives or any third party;

(2) Food deprivation or forcible feeding with


spoiled food, animal or human excreta and other
stuff or substances not normally eaten;

(9) Denial of sleep/rest;


(10) Shame infliction such as stripping the person
naked, parading him/her in public places, shaving
the victim's head or putting marks on his/her body
against his/her will;

(3) Electric shock;


(4) Cigarette burning; burning by electrically
heated rods, hot oil, acid; by the rubbing of pepper
or other chemical substances on mucous
membranes, or acids or spices directly on the
wound(s);
(5) The submersion of the head in water or water
polluted with excrement, urine, vomit and/or blood
until the brink of suffocation;
(6) Being tied or forced to assume fixed and
stressful bodily position;
(7) Rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion
of foreign objects into the sex organ or rectum, or
electrical torture of the genitals;
(8) Mutilation or amputation of the essential parts
of the body such as the genitalia, ear, tongue, etc.;
(9) Dental torture or the forced extraction of the
teeth;
(10) Pulling out of fingernails;
(11) Harmful exposure to the elements such as
sunlight and extreme cold;
(12) The use of plastic bag and other materials
placed over the head to the point of asphyxiation;
(13) The use of psychoactive drugs to change the
perception, memory. alertness or will of a person,
such as:

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 77

(11) Deliberately prohibiting the victim to


communicate with any member of his/her family;
and
(12) Other analogous acts of mental/psychological
torture.
Any confession, admission or statement obtained as a
result of torture shall be inadmissible in evidence in any
proceedings, except if the same is used as evidence
against a person or persons accused of committing torture.

Rights of Tortured Victims:


(a) To have a prompt and an impartial investigation by the
CHR and by agencies of government concerned such as
the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Public Attorney's
Office (PAO), the PNP, the National Bureau of Investigation
(NBI) and the AFP. A prompt investigation shall mean a
maximum period of sixty (60) working days from the time a
complaint for torture is filed within which an investigation
report and/or resolution shall be completed and made
available. An appeal whenever available shall be resolved
within the same period prescribed herein,
(b) To have sufficient government protection against all
forms of harassment; threat and/or intimidation as a
consequence of the filing of said complaint or the
presentation of evidence therefor. In which case, the State
through its appropriate agencies shall afford security in

CRIMINAL LAW 2
order to ensure his/her safety and all other persons
involved in the investigation and prosecution such as, but
not limited to, his/her lawyer, witnesses and relatives; and
(c) To be accorded sufficient protection in the manner by
which he/she testifies and presents evidence in any fora in
order to avoid further trauma.

(4) Torture with other forms of sexual abuse and, in


consequence of torture, the victim shall have become
insane, imbecile, impotent, blind or maimed for life; and
(5) Torture committed against children.

Note:

Who are Criminally Liable. - Any person who actually


participated Or induced another in the commission of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment or who cooperated in the execution of the act
of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
or punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be
liable as principal

Any superior military, police or law enforcement officer or


senior government official who issued an order to any lower
ranking personnel to commit torture for whatever purpose
shall be held equally liable as principals.
The immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned of
the AFP or the immediate senior public official of the PNP
and other law enforcement agencies shall be held liable as
a principal to the crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman
and degrading treatment or punishment for any act or
omission, or negligence committed by him/her that shall
have led, assisted, abetted or allowed, whether directly or
indirectly, the commission thereof by his/her subordinates.
If he/she has knowledge of or, owing to the circumstances
at the time, should have known that acts of torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
shall be committed, is being committed, or has been
committed by his/her subordinates or by others within his/
her area of responsibility and, despite such knowledge, did
not take preventive or corrective action either before,
during or immediately after its commission, when he/she
has the authority to prevent or investigate allegations of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment but failed to prevent or investigate allegations
of such act, whether deliberately or due to negligence shall
also be liable as principals.
Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an
accessory if he/she has knowledge that torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment is
being committed and without having participated therein,
either as principal or accomplice, takes part subsequent to
its commission in any of the following manner:
(a) By themselves profiting from or assisting the
offender to profit from the effects of the act of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment;
(b) By concealing the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
and/or destroying the effects or instruments
thereof in order to prevent its discovery; or(c) By
harboring, concealing or assisting m the escape of
the principal/s in the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment:
Provided, That the accessory acts are done with
the abuse of the official's public functions.

Persons who have committed any act of torture


shall not benefit from any special amnesty law or
similar measures that will have the effect of
exempting them from any criminal proceedings
and sanctions. (sec 16)

Refouler- No person shall be expelled, returned or


extradited to another State where there are substantial
grounds to believe that such person shall be in danger of
being subjected to torture.
CHAPTER THREE FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL
EXACTIONS AND TRANSACTIONS

ARTICLE 213 FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC


TREASURY AND SIMILAR OFFENSES
Article 213 punishes two (2) acts:
1. Fraud against public treasury (par.1)
2. Illegal exactions (par. 2)

ELEMENTS OF FRAUD AGAINST PUBLIC TREASURY


(ART. 213, PAR. 1):
1. That the offender is a public officer
2. that he should have taken advantage of his office, that
is he intervened in the transaction of his official
capacity
3. That he entered into an agreement with any interested
party or speculator or made use of any other scheme
with regard to:
1. furnishing supplies
2. the making of contracts
3. the adjustment or settlement of accounts
relating to public property or funds
4. That the accused had intent to defraud the
Government

So here, the public officer took advantage of his official


position in entering into contract which involves the
furnishing of supplies, or which involves public funds or
property and the intention is to DEFRAUD THE
GOVERNMENT. It is not necessary that the Government,
the treasury be actually be defrauded, it suffices that
entering in the said contract, the intention of the said
offender, the public officer, is to defraud the Government.

ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL EXACTION (ART. 213, PAR. 2)


1. That the offender is a public officer entrusted with the
collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.
2. He is guilty of any of the following acts or omissions:

Aggravating Circumstances in torture:


(1) Torture resulting in the death of any person;
(2) Torture resulting in mutilation;
(3) Torture with rape;

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be


absorbed by any other crime or felony committed
as a consequence, or as a means in the conduct
or commission thereof. In which case, torture shall
be treated as a separate and independent criminal
act whose penalties shall be imposable without
prejudice to any other criminal liability provided for
by domestic and international laws. (Sec 15)

Page 78

CRIMINAL LAW 2
1.
2.
3.

Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of


sums different from or larger than those authorized
by law; or
Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided
by law, for any sum of money collected by him
officially; or
Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by
way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of
a nature different from that provided by law.

Here, the offender is a COLLECTING PUBLIC


OFFICER. A public officer who has been entrusted with
duty to collect taxes, licenses, fees or other imposts. Only
this kind of public officer can commit this crime because
ILLEGAL EXACTION involves violation of rules on
collection.

1st Act - Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of


sums different from or larger than those authorized by
law;or
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: There was this cashier in the city treasurers office. Here
comes X, X said that he is going to get a cedula (residence
certificate) and then X said, How much am I going to pay?
and then, the cashier or the collecting officer said, you
have to pay Php200 but it is actually Php20. X said, hmp,
angmahalpala, ayokona. and so he left. Is the said
collecting officer liable of any crime?
A:YES, he is liable. For merely demanding an
amount larger than that authorized by law, he is
already liable for ILLEGAL EXACTION under
Article 213, Par. 2.

Q: He is already liable, he merely demanded, but what if in


the same problem, X said he was going to get a cedula.
The collecting officer saw him and he appears to be poor
man and so X asked the collecting officer, How much am I
going to pay? and the collecting officer took pity of X and
said, Only Php 10. So, the poor man said, Oh, I have
more money, Ill get two. Is the collecting officer liable of
any crime?

A:YES, he is liable because he demanded an


amount different from that authorized by law. Note
that what the law requires is the demanding of an
amount, directly or indirectly, different from or
larger than those authorized by law. Therefore,
even if it is lower, so long as it is different from that
provided by law, and so long as it is demanded by
the said collecting officer, then it is considered as
ILLEGAL EXACTION.

It is not necessary for the said collecting officer to


have misappropriate the funds, the moment that he
misappropriates the funds, in addition to illegal
exaction, he may also be held liable for
MALVERSATION, because Illegal Exaction is only
about the rules on collection. It has nothing to do
with the appropriation or misappropriation of funds
or property. Only a violation of the rules on
collection.

2nd Act - Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided


by law, for any sum of money collected by him officially;
ILLUSTRATION:

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 79

Q: So what if it was January 2, all kinds of payment are


being made at the start of the year. So the collecting officer
in the treasurers office rans out of official receipt (O.R.).
And so he got a half sheet of typewriting paper and he note
there about the said payment and a provisional receipt and
he gave it to the same person who made the payment. Is
the said collecting officer liable of illegal exaction?
A: He IS NOT. Because he did not voluntarily
fail to issue the said O.R. He ran out of the said
O.R., it was not voluntary on his part. It was an
emergency situation. It is good that she even
gave a provisional receipt as a proof of
payment. In this case, he cannot be held liable
for illegal exaction.

3rd Act - Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way


of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature
different from that provided by law.

Here, under the third act, it does not refer to the


amount of payment. It refers to the KIND OR NATURE OF
PAYMENT. So, when the law says that it should be paid in
cash, ONLY CASH may be received by the said collecting
officer.

ILLUSTRATION:
So the collecting officer is known as a sabungero. So
here comes one of the persons who was making payment.
He has no money, but said, he has a magandangtandang.
And so, that was the payment received. He commits a
violation of illegal exaction.

Q: What if the person who demanded an amount or


different from or larger than that which is provided for by
law is an officer, a collecting officer from the Bureau of
Internal Revenue, or a collecting officer form the Bureau of
Customs. Is he liable under Article 213?
A: He is not liable for illegal exaction under
Art. 213. He is liable under the Tax Code or
under the Tariffs and Customs Code. Under Art.
213, it is expressly provided that if the
collecting officer is a collecting officer coming
from the Bureau of Internal Revenue or Bureau
of Customs is not liable under this Article. The
reason here is that, this collecting officer from
the BIR and the BOC, have the right to ask for
penalties, surcharges, and compromise.
Therefore, they can always demand and
amount different from or that which is larger
than that authorized by law. If they exceeded
that authority, then they are liable under the
Tariffs and Customs Code or under the Tax
Code, but NOT UNDER THE RPC.

ARTICLE 214 OTHER FRAUDS


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He takes advantage of his official position
3. He commits any of the frauds or deceits enumerated in
Articles 315-318

If any of the public officer commits any of the frauds or


deceits constituting ESTAFA or SWINDLING, under Art.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
315-318, and he does so by taking advantage of his official
position, his criminal liability is Other Frauds under Art. 214.
- Not estafa, Not swindling. the reason is that in
case of a public officer, there is additional
penalty. If you look at Article 214, the law says
that the penalty is the same penalty as the first
offense under Art. 315-318. But additional to
that, temporary disqualification to perpetual
disqualification for having taken advantage of his
official position. Therefore, if it is a public officer
who commits estafa or swindling, the crime is
under Art. 214 and there is an additional penalty.

ARTICLE 215 PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is an appointive public officer
2. He becomes interested, directly or indirectly in any
transaction of exchange or speculation
3. Transaction takes place within the territory subject to
his jurisdiction
4. He becomes interested in the transaction during his
incumbency

ARTICLE 216 POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED


INTEREST BY A PUBLIC OFFICER
ELEMENTS:
1. Public Officer who, directly or indirectly, became
interested in any contract or business in which it was
his official duty to intervene.
2. Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants who, in
like manner, took part in any contract or transaction
connected with the estate or property in the appraisal,
distribution or adjudication of which they had acted
3. Guardians and executors with respect to the property
belonging to their wards or the estate

CHAPTER FOUR MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS


OR PROPERTY
ARTICLE 217 MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS
OR PROPERTY (PRESUMPTION OF MALVERSATION)
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He has the custody or control of funds or property by
reason of the duties of his office
3. Those funds or property were public funds or property
for which he was accountable
4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented,
or through abandonment or negligence, permitted
another person to take them

Who is the offender?


The offender is an accountable public officer. An
accountable of public officer is an officer in the
course of the performance of his duties, receives
funds or property from the government which he
has the obligation to account later. So he has in
his custody, public funds or public property and he
has the obligation to account these to the
Government.

Punishable acts:
1. Appropriating public funds or property
2. Taking or misappropriating the same
3. Consenting, through abandonment or negligence,

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 80

permitting any other person to take such public funds


or property
Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property

4.

Malversation of Public Funds and Property can be


committed either through a positive act, that is, that the
said public officer is the one who misappropriates, takes or
appropriates the public funds and property, OR, through a
passive act, that is, through his abandonment or
negligence, he permitted others to misappropriate the
same.
-

Malversation can be committed either through a


positive act, which is through deliberate intent or
through dolo. He is the one who appropriates or
misappropriates, who took the the said public funds
or property
Passive Act which is through his abandonment or
negligence, or cupla. he allowed others to
appropriate or misappropriate the said public funds
or property

When is there prima facie presumption of malversation?


Under Article 217, there arises prima facie
presumption of malversation of public funds or
property when demand is made by a duly
authorized officer to an accountable public officer to
account for public funds or property, and the same
is not forthcoming

ILLUSTRATION:
So the COA auditor, appeared and conducted an
audit He demanded for the said amount, the said
accountable public officer cannot reduce the said amount.
There arises the prima facie presumption that he has
malverse the said public funds or property. Although that is
what is written under Article 217, last paragraph. The
Supreme Court in the number of cases said:
Mere shortage in audit will not suffice. For the Prima
facie presumption to arise the following requisites
must be present: - It is necessary that there must be
complete, thorough and reliable audit.
- In the said complete, thorough and reliable audit,
the following were discovered:
%L. The public officer indeed receive the public
funds or property. That is, he is an
accountable public officer
%L. The said public funds and property was
missing, or there was a shortage, or he
cannot produce it, and
%L. The said public officer cannot give a
justifiable reason, a legal excuse for the said
shortage or missing of public funds or
property.

If all of these are present, the Supreme Court says


that there arises the prima facie presumption that there is
malversation of public funds or property. Therefore, there
may NOT be direct evidence to convict one for
malversation of public funds or property. Obviously, there
cannot be any witness, because when you say direct
evidence, there is a witness. Of course, he would not let
anyone see him malversing the funds. It suffices in the
audit, these three things were discovered. If these three are

CRIMINAL LAW 2
discovered, then there arises the prima facie presumption
that there is a so-called MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC
FUNDS OR PROPERTY

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a man was walking, in the middle of the night, a
police officer who was conducting a patrol saw something
bulging on his waist. The police officer stopped him and
frisked him and there, they saw a firearm. They ask for the
license, the said man could not produce the license for the
said firearm. He was arrested for illegal possession of
unlicensed firearm, and the firearm was confiscated. During
the trials of the case, the fiscal move for subpoena for the
custodian of the said firearm. The custodian appeared but
failed to bring the firearm. He had already sold the said
firearm confiscated. What crime is committed by the said
custodian?
A: He is liable for Malversation under Article 217.

Q: His contention was, it cannot be malversation, because


the firearm was owned by a private person. It is not a public
property, therefore I cannot be held liable for malversation.
Is the contention correct?
A: His contention is wrong. The said firearm
has already been confiscated by public
authority, therefore it is now deemed,
CUSTODIA LEGIS. The moment it is in
custodialegis, it loses its character as a private
property and it now assumes a character of a
public property. Hence the crime committed is
Malversation.

Q: What if, there was this collecting officer, a cashier, and


there were many persons paying. And the long line persons
paying, one cashier said that he needed to answer the call
of nature, and so he asked another fellow cashier to look
after his drawer, and so, he left and went to the restroom.
But he also left the key of his drawing on the key holder.
And so, the moment he left, his fellow cashier went to his
drawer and opened it and took Php 2000 from the
collection of A on the same day. Then A arrived, and he
then accepted collections. In the afternoon, there was a
surprise audit coming from the COA. and it was discovered
that based on the receipts, The php 2000 were missing
from the collection of A. Therefore, A was charged. What
crime if any, has been committed by A? Is A liable for
malversation?

A: Yes, he is liable for malversation through


negligence. That is the passive act. That is
through his abandonment or negligence, he
permitted another person, Cashier B to
misappropriate a part of his collection for the day.
Hence A is also liable for Malversation. Not B, but
A, the one who went to the restroom, because he
is the one accountable for the said public funds in
his drawer.

Malversation of public funds and property through dolo. So,


in the information, it was stated that he is the one who
misappropriate, appropriates or has taken the said public
funds, and so he was charged with Malversation through
dolo, through deliberate intent. That was the case filed
against him because they did not know that it was B who
took the money. So, the presumption is that, he is the one
who took the money, who appropriated it. During the trial of
the merits, during the presentation of the defense evidence,
when it was already As term to testify, it was divulged or
disclosed to the court that it was in fact another cashier, B
who misappropriated the said funds through the negligence
of A. And by reason of this evidence presented in court, the
said judge, convicted A of Malversation through culpa, in an
information of malversation through dolo. Is the judge
correct? can he convict A?
A: Yes, the judge is correct. The reason is that,
according to the Supreme Court, whether
Malversation is committed through deliberate
intent or culpa, DOLO and CULPA are merely
modalities of committing the crime. Nevertheless,
it is still malversation, and if you look at Article
217, whether malversation is committed through
deliberate intent or through negligence, they just
have one and the same penalties. Further, the
Supreme Court said, Malversation through
negligence or culpa is NECESSARILY INCLUDED
in Malversation through deliberate intent or dolo.
Hence, even if the information is Malversation
through dolo, one can be convicted of
Malversation through Culpa or Negligence.

Q: What if, there was this rape in a warehouse, in the


course of the said rape, dangerous drugs worth millions of
pesos were confiscated and they were placed in the PDEA
warehouse. The persons therein were charged with illegal
possession of dangerous drugs. In the course of the
hearing in this possession of dangerous drugs, the court
sent a subpoena to the PDEA custodian, to bring to the
Court the said dangerous drugs which were confiscated.
And so, on the designated day, the said PDEA agent
boarded all the dangerous drugs confiscated in a PDEA
van and off he went to the Court. However, before the
PDEA agent could reach the court, here comes two
motorcycles who went in and fired at him, and he fell on his
seat, lifeless. And then, a big vehicle arrived at the back of
the said PDEA van and took all the said dangerous drugs.
Now the said PDEA agent was brought into the hospital
and despite the fatal wound, because of the immediate
medical intervention, he survived. Is he
liable of any
crime?

That other person, B, who took the said property


is liable for qualified theft. because he was
entrusted with the same funds, and he took the
same funds.

Q: What if, in the same problem, after the COA auditor


found out that Php 2000 was missing, A was charged with

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 81

A: Yes, he is liable of Malversation of public


funds or property under Article 217 through
Negligence. There was inexcusable negligence
on his part said the Supreme Court, because all
by himself, carried the millions worth of dangerous
drugs in the PDEA van, considering the value of
the said dangerous drugs, he should have asked
for back up. Yes, he survived, but he was charged
with Malversation of public funds or property
through CULPA.

Q: What if, there is a public officer whose office is in pasay.


He is going to have a meeting in Caloocan. And so he went

CRIMINAL LAW 2
to Caloocan in one afternoon and attended the said
meeting. He had to go to pasay in order to make a report,
However, the traffic was heavy, so instead of using his car
on the way back, he rode the LRT. Upon reaching the
office, he realized that his bag was opened, and the
cellphone which was __5:17___ by the Government was
already gone. By reason thereof, he was charged with
Malversation under Article 217 because through his
negligence, the cellphone which was ____ to him by the
Government and for which he is accountable to the
Government was now missing. It was taken or stolen by
somebody. Is he liable? He was convicted by the
SandiganBayan but when it came to the Supreme Court,
the Supreme Court acquitted him.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a public officer has under his administration
public funds which is for a certain project. So let us say that
X is the city administrator. Under his administration, there
was Php500,000, the said Php 500,000 was for the
construction of a bridge between one barangay to another
barangay. Then suddenly there was a typhoon, a big
typhoon and many of the constituents were rendered
homeless. And so, they had to stay in the basketball court,
they need food, clothing, water and other basic needs. And
so, the city administrator made use of the Php 500,000
under his administration to buy these basic needs of his
constituents. Is the said public officer, the city administrator
liable of any crime?

A: According to the Supreme Court, there was no


negligence on the part of the said public officer.
He cannot be faulted for having taken the LRT
because of the said heavy traffic. It cannot be said
that there was negligence on his part in placing
the cellphone inside his bag, because, where else
would you place a cellphone but inside the bag for
safekeeping. It would have been different while on
board, he was using the said cellphone. Hence,
the Supreme Court said, there was no negligence
and therefore, although convicted by the
SandiganBayan, he was acquitted by the
Supreme Court.

A: Yes, he is liable for technical Malversation


under Article 220.

ARTICLE 218 FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER


TO RENDER ACCOUNTS
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer, whether in the service or
separated therefrom
2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
property
3. He is required by law or regulation to render accounts
to the Commission on Audit, or to a provincial Auditor
4. He fails to do so for a period of two months after such
accounts should be rendered

ARTICLE 219 FAILURE OF RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC


OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS BEFORE LEAVING
THE COUNTRY
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
property
3. He must have unlawfully left (or be on the point of
leaving) the Philippines without securing from the
Commission on Audit a certificate showing that his
accounts have been finally settled

ARTICLE 220 ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR


PROPERTY (Technical Malversation)
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender s a public officer
2. there is a public fund or property under his
administration
3. Such public fund or property has been appropriated by
law or ordinance
4. He applies the same to a public use other than that for
which such fund or property has been appropriated by
law or ordinance.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 82

BEST EXAMPLE:
GMA and other head of Philhealth before was
charged by Frank Chavez because of Technical
Malversation because of transfer of COA funds, which was
used for Philhealth purposes during the elections. And so,
because of that, according to Frank Chavez, they are liable
for Malversation. They were charged with Technical
Malversation. But their contention was there was a law that
allowed it. If there was a law that allowed it, then, there was
no violation. But, if there is no law, there is an illegal
transfer of funds, therefore, technical Malversation will
resolve.

ARTICLE 217

ARTICLE 220

T h e p u b l i c o f f i c e r The public officer did not


misappropriates the fund misappropriate the funds
for his personal use.
for his personal use, he
used it for another public
purpose other than that
which
has
been
appropriated by law or
ordinance that is why it is
T E C H N I C A L
MALVERSATION the
offense is on the
technicality of the use of
funds.
The public officer has in his
possession public funds or
property for safekeeping. It
is under his custody and
control and therefore it is
for his safekeeping and he
has the obligation to
account it later on to the
Government

The public officer has in his


possession public funds or
property is only under his
administration. Not for
safekeeping, but only for
the
purpose
of
administrating it that is, for
applying it for the purpose
which it has been
appropriated by law or
ordiance

ARTICLE 221 FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY OF


PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY

CRIMINAL LAW 2
ELEMENTS:
1. That the public officer has government funds in his
possession
2. That he is under obligation to make payments from
such funds
3. That he fails to make payment maliciously

Punishable acts:
1. Failing to make payment by a public officer who is
under obligation to make such payment from
Government funds in his possession
2. Refusing to make delivery by a public officer who has
been ordered by competent authority to deliver any
property in his custody or under his administration

ARTICLE 222 OFFICERS INCLUDED IN PRECEDING


PROVISIONS
Private Individual who may be liable under Art.
217-221:
1. Private Individual who in any capacity whatsoever,
have charge of national, provincial or municipal funds,
revenue or property
2. Administrator, depository of funds or property attached,
seized or deposited by public authority even if such
property belongs to a private individual
3. Those who acted in conspiracy in malversation
4. Accomplice and accessories to malversation

Can private property be the subject of Malversation?


YES, under the 2nd act in Article 222, that is when
the said funds or property has been attached,
seized or deposited by public authority, it now
becomes in custodialegis and it now assumes the
character of being public funds or property. If any
are misappropriated, then the crime committed is
Malversation and not theft.

INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF PRISONERS (Articles


223, 224, 225)
ARTICLE 223 CONNIVING WITH OR CONSENTING TO
EVASION
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He has in his custody or charge a prisoner, either
detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment
3. Such prisoner escaped from his custody
4. That he was in connivance with the prisoner in the
latters escape, or is with his consent

ARTICLE 224 EVASTION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He is charged with the conveyance or custody of a
prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final
judgment
3. Such prisoner escapes through his negligence

ARTICLE 225 ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER THE


CUSTODY OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC OFFICER
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a private individual
2. Conveyance (or charge) of custody of prisoner or
person under arrest is confided to him
3. Prisoner or person under arrest escapes

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 83

Offender consents to the escape of the prisoner or


person under arrest or that the escape takes place
through his negligence

4.

Whether it be under Art. 223, 224, 225, the offender


infidelity in the custody of prisoners is one who has been
entrusted with the custody and charge of the prisoner.
Whether the prisoner is a prisoner convicted by final
judgment or a detention prisoner. He must be charged, he
must be the custodian of the said prisoner because the
essence of the crime is the violation of the trust reposed on
him. Because prisoners are accountabilities of the
Government.

Can a private individual commit infidelity?


Yes, under Art. 225. If he is entrusted with the
custody of this prisoner and the prisoner escapes,
either in connivance with him or through his
negligence, then his liability is infidelity in the
custody of prisoners

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: A has been charged with illegal sale of dangerous
drugs. She is behind bars, it is a non-bailable offense, and
therefore, while the case is ongoing, she is behind bars.
So, it was the hearing date, she was accompanied by the
jail warden, the jail guard to the court, and after trial, there
was this husband and two children of the said woman who
was in jail. The husband and two children talked, and when
the said woman prisoner was about to be brought to jail,
the husband talked to the jail warden. He invited the jail
warden for a merienda, in a canteen inside the hall of
justice. And so, the jail warden saw nothing wrong and so,
he had merienda with the woman prisoner, the husband
and the two children. The handcuffs had to be removed for
the woman prisoner to eat. After eating, the woman
prisoner said that she needed to answer the call of nature,
and so, she went to the restroom, also inside or within the
hall of justice. The jail guard allowed her inside while the jail
guard was left outside, waiting. Hours passed, no woman
prisoner came out. It so happens that the said husband put
some disguise for the woman to use so that she could
escape without being noticed by the said jail guard, and
woman prisoner was able to escape without being noticed
by the said jail guard. Is the said jail guard liable for
infidelity in the custody of prisoner, or is it a mere laxity
which would not amount to infidelity in the custody of
prisoner?

A: People vs. Nava The Supreme Court said


that mere laxity would not amount to negligence
under Art. 224. Because
according to the
Supreme Court in that old case, the negligence
being required in order that a public officer may be
entitled, must be a deliberate non-performance of
his duty. Here, it is only a mere laxity on the part of
the said public officer for not having accompanying
the said woman in the rest room.

Rodriguez vs. SandiganBayan(new case) The


Supreme Court said otherwise. According to the
Supreme Court, the moment that a public officer, a
jail warden has accompanied a prisoner outside
jail, he must not have lost sight of the said prisoner.
The only obligation of the said jail warden after the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
trial was to bring her back to the court. The fact
that the said jail guard allowed himself to have a
merienda, and even allowed the woman prisoner to
go to the restroom alone, there was laxity on the
part of the said jail guard. The Supreme Court said,
LAXITY is a deliberate non-performance of his
official duty as the guard of the said prisoner,
thereby amounting to infidelity in the custody of
prisoner under Art. 224.

INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF DOCUMENTS


(ARTICLES 226, 227, 228)
ARTICLE 226 REMOVAL, CONEALMENT OR
DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENT
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He removes, destroys, or conceals documents or
papers
3. Said documents or papers should have been entrusted
to such public officer by reason of his office
4. Damage, whether serious or not, to a third party or to
the public interest should have been caused

Under Article 226, in order for infidelity in the custody


of documents to arise, it is necessary that there be damage
caused to a third person or to the public interest. If damage
is serious, the penalty is QUALIFIED, therefore, the
damage may or may not be serious provided that there is
damage, the crime will arise.
DAMAGE IS NECESSARY in order to give rise to
infidelity in the custody of documents.

ARTICLE 227 OFFICER BREAKING SEAL


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He is charged with the custody of papers or property
3. These papers or property are sealed by proper
authority
4. He breaks the seals or permits them to be broken

Under Article 227, officer breaking the seal, infidelity in


the custody of prisoners to arise, even without damage
caused to a third party or to public interest. Damage is NOT
an element.
MERE BREAKING of the seal of the document will
already consummate the crime.

ARTICLE 228 OPENING A CLOSED DOCUMENT


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. Any closed papers, documents, or objects are
entrusted to his custody
3. He opens or permits to be opened said closed papers,
documents or objects
4. He does not have proper authority

Infidelity in the custody of documents, the public officer


has been entrusted with papers, documents or objects,
which have been closed by proper authority and the said
public officer opened the said closed document or
permitted others to open the same. Again, Damage is NOT
an element.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 84

MERE ACT OF OPENING the said closed document


will give rise to the crime.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if A has been charged with illegal sale of
dangerous drugs. The case was on trial, during the trial of
the case, the fiscal presented the first police officer who
acted as the poseur buyer in the course of the testimony of
the police officer, the fiscal produced and showed to him for
identification the marked money. So the marked money
consists of 5, 100 peso bill. The fiscal presented it to the
police and the police identified it as indeed the marked
money because of the serial numbers and because of the
markings, and thereafter the marked money have been
marked as Exhibit A, B, C, D, E for the prosecution. After
the trial, they were placed inside an envelope and given to
the clerk of court, the custodian of the evidence which have
already been marked. So trial ended that day, it was now
lunch time. The clerk of court was on her table and so the
vendor arrived. The clerk of court wanted to buy lunch and
she said, how much. The vendor said it costs 50 peso. The
clerk of court pulled out her money; it was a 1000 peso bill.
The vendor said, anglakinamanniyan, walaakongpanukli
And so, by reason thereof, he gave it back to the clerk of
court. The clerk of court said that she had no smaller bills,
and he remembered the exhibits. And so, he took 100 peso
bill, marked as Exhibit E. And she paid it to the vendor and
the vendor gave him the change of 50 peso. After eating,
before 1:00, the said clerk of court immediately went
outside to change her big 1000 peso bill into smaller bills.
When he now has these smaller bills, he got one 100 peso
bill and marked it as Exhibit E and then he signed it and
placed it inside the envelope. Here comes the next hearing
date, on the next hearing date, another police officer was
presented, the fiscal produced the said documentary
exhibits, the marked money and asked it from the clerk of
court. So the fiscal showed it to the police officer, the police
officer identified Exhibits A, B, C, D. However, when it
comes to exhibit E, the police officer said, Your Honor, it
has a different serial number from the one in our sworn
statement and so because of that, an investigation
happened and the court learned that it was taken by said
clerk of court and used in buying food. What crime, if any is
committed by the said clerk of court? Is it malversation or is
it infidelity in the custody of documents?

A: The crime committed is infidelity in the


custody of documents under Art. 226 by the
public officer in destroying the said document.
This marked money becomes documentary
evidence, the moment they have been marked as
exhibits. Money here is not used as a medium of
exchange, but as documents because they have
been marked as documentary evidence. The
moment they have been taken, removed,
concealed or destroyed, the crime committed is
infidelity in the custody of documents because the
clerk of court is the custodian of the documentary
exhibits. If money is used, not as a medium of
exchange, but like this, as documentary exhibits
or any other use other than as a medium of
exchange, the one who malverse, or use it is the
custodian of the said documents, the crime is
infidelity in the custody of documents and NOT
malversation.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

When the clerk of court took the 100 peso bill, he


destroyed the exhibit, the documentary exhibit of
the said prosecution and the prosecution was
seriously damaged interface.

REVELATION OF SECRETS (Article 229-230)


ARTICLE 229 REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN
OFFICER
Punishable acts:
1. By revealing any secrets which affect public interest
learned by him in his official capacity
ELEMENTS:
3. Offender is a public officer
4. He knows of a secret by reason of his
official capacity
5. He reveals such secret without authority or
justifiable reasons
6. Damage, great or small, is cause to the
public interest

It is necessary that there be Damage caused, whether


serious or not.
2.

Wrongfully delivering papers or copies of papers of


which he may have charge and which should not be
published thereby causing damage, whether serious or
not, to a third party or to public interest.
ELEMENTS:
i.
Offender is a public officer
ii.
He has charge of papers
iii.
Those papers should not be published
iv.
He delivers those papers or copies thereof
to a third person
v.
The delivery is wrongful
vi.
Damage is caused to public interest

ARTICLE 230 PUBLIC OFFICER REVEALING


SECRETS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He knows of the secrets of private individual by reason
of his office
3. He reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable
reason

Damage is NOT an element in Article 230.

ARTICLE 231 OPEN DISOBEDIENCE


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a judicial or executive officer
2. There is judgment, decision, or order of a superior
authority
3. Such judgment, decision or order was made within the
scope of the jurisdiction of the superior authority and
issued with all the legal formalities
4. Offender without any legal justification openly refuses
to execute the said judgment, decision or order which
he is duty bound to obey
Open Disobedience is committed by any judicial or
executive officer who shall openly refuse without any legal
motive to execute a judgment or decision rendered by a
superior authority in the exercise of his duty and in the legal
infirmities of the law.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 85

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if in the case of Duterte, the sheriff wishes to
execute a writ of execution and cause the squatters to
leave the place because of the execution issued by the
court has to be implemented. Had not the sheriff performed
the said act, is he liable of any crime? Had the sheriff
refused to execute the writ of execution issued by the said
judge? Is he liable of any crime?

A: Yes, he is liable of Open Disobedience


under Article 231. He openly refused to execute
a writ of execution issued by a judge.

ARTICLE 232 DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF


SUPERIOR OFFICER, WHEN SAID ORDER WAS
SUSPENDED BY INFERIOR OFFICER
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. An order is issued by his superior for execution
3. He has for any reason suspended the execution of
such order
4. His superior disapproves the suspension of the
execution of the order
5. Offender disobeys his superior despite the disapproval
of the suspension

The offender refuses to disobey the suspension of the


said order which was disapproved by the said public officer.
ARTICLE 233 REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. Competent authority demands from the offender that
he lend his cooperation towards the administration of
justice or other public service
3. Offender fails to do so maliciously

Public officer who shall fail to lend his cooperation


towards the administration of justice or any other public
service despite demand by competent authority.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: A raped B. B was treated by a medico legal officer at the
PNP. This medico legal officer who has examined A, issued
a medical certificate, And so in the case filed by B against A
for this so-called rape, the fiscal moved that the subpoena
(adjustificandum) be sent to this public officer, the medico
legal office who examined the rape victim. However,
despite receipt of the said subpoena, the medico legal
officer failed to appear. He did not appear without any
justifiable reason at all. The said prosecutor move again for
the issuance of another subpoena, a second subpoena.
Again, despite the receipt, the medico legal officer failed to
appear in court and testified and failed to give the copy of
the medico legal certificate. What crime if any has the said
medico legal officer has committed?

A: He is liable for Refusal of Assistance under


Article 233. It is committed by a public offcer that despite
demands of the public authority shall fail to lend his
cooperation toward the administration of justice or any
other public service. Thereby, causing damage serious or
not, to public interest.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

NOTE: If the damage is serious, the penalty is QUALIFIED.


ARTICLE 234 REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE ELECTIVE
OFFICE
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is elected by popular election to a public
office
2. He refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of
the said office
3. There is no legal motive for such refusal to be sworn in
or to discharge the duties of said office

This is a crime which cannot be committed in


Philippine Jurisdiction. Refusal to discharge public duties is
committed by any person entitled to a public office by
means of popular election, refuses to assume to assume
the powers and duties of his office. He refuses to be sworn
in. This will not happen in our lifetime. This will never
happen in the Philippine Jurisdiction because here, even if
he did not win in the election, he wanted to hold office.

ARTICLE 235 MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He has under his charge a prisoner or detention
prisoner
3. He maltreats such prisoner either of the following
manners:
a. By overdoing himself in the correction or handling
of a prisoner or detention prisoner under his
charge either:
i. By the imposition of punishments not
authorized by the rules and regulations
ii.By inflicting such punishments (those
authorized) in a cruel or humiliating
manner
b. By maltreating such prisoner to extort a
confession or to obtain some information from
the prisoner

X. X snatched the handbag with the money. A police officer


passing by saw the incident and on boarded their mobile
patrol. They were able to arrest the man, took the bag and
returned it to the said victim. Thereafter, they placed X
inside the mobile patrol. While inside, they kicked, mold the
man. And so, the man suffered less serious physical
injuries. What crime is committed by the said police
officers?

A: The crime committed is less serious


physical injuries. It is not maltreatment of prisoners
because the said person, X, is not yet a prisoner. He is only
a person under arrest because he has just been arrested
for having committed a crime, but he is not yet a prisoner.
In order to be considered as a prisoner, he must be brought
to the PNP station, taken a picture, left view, side view,
front view, thumbmark and incarcerated. He is now an
accountability of the Government, he is now a prisoner. But
before that, he is not yet a prisoner. He is only a person
under arrest. That is why in the problem, the police officers
are liable only for less serious physical injuries and not of
maltreatment of prisoners.

Q: What if in the same problem, they chased the man.


They were able to catch the said man and brought him to
the PNP station. Booked him and incarcerated him, and all
the things needed to be done to a prisoner. Later, he was
brought out of jail for investigation to be brought in the
Investigation section. In the investigation, he was being
forced to admit to the commission of the crime. And so, by
reason thereof, the police officer boxed him and gave him a
huge black eye. The left eye suffered so much that he lost
sight, amounting to serious physical injuries. What are the
crimes committed by the police officer?
A: Two crimes Maltreatment of Prisoners and
Serious Physical Injuries.
Maltreatment of Prisoners because he is a
prisoner who was maltreated in order to extort a
confession and Serious physical injuries because
by reason of the injury inflicted, he lost an eye.

Q: Are you going to complex them? because a single act


constitute a grave and less grave felony, are you going to
complex them under Art. 48?

Who is the offender?


Any public officer or employee

A: No. You cannot complex them. Because under


Article 235, it is expressly provided that the liability for
maltreatment of prisoners shall be in addition to the
liability for any other physical injuries or damage
caused. Therefore two crimes will be charged against
the police officer.

Who is the offended party?


He must be a prisoner
-

In order to be considered a prisoner, it is necessary that the


said person has already been arrested, brought to the PNP
station and he has been incarcerated. If he is not a
prisoner, then, the crime can be physical injuries, whatever
injuries that may have been sustained by the prisoner, but
NOT maltreatment of prisoners

What if maltreatment does not only include physical


maltreatment. It shall also include moral, emotional,
psychological maltreatment because the law uses the
phrase physical injuries or damage caused.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if A has just withdrew his money from her ATM
account, she placed the money inside her bag and she was
already walking towards home when suddenly here comes

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 86

There is also a violation of R.A. 9745, Anti-Torture


Act, because under Section 14 of the Anti-Torture Act,
Torture shall not absorb and shall not be absorbed by
any other crime committed as a consequence.
Therefore, he can also be held liable under the socalled Anti-Torture Law.

ARTICLE 236 ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF A


PUBLIC OFFICE
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is entitled to hold a public office or
employment either by election or appointment

CRIMINAL LAW 2
2.
3.

Shall assume the performance of the duties and


powers of a public official or employee
Without being sworn into office or having given the
bond required by law

ARTICLE 237 PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF


DUTIES AND POWERS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is holding a public office
2. That the period allowed by law for him to exercise such
function and duties has already expired
3. That the offender continues to exercise such function
and duties

ARTICLE 238 ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR


POSITION
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is holding a public office
2. That he formally resigns from his office
3. But before the acceptance of his resignation, he
abandons his office

Abandonment of office is committed by a public officer


who has already formally resigns from his position, and
having formally resigned from his position, he abandons to
the detriment of public service. Despite the fact that his
resignation has not yet been accepted by a superior
authority. Under Labor Law, when you are an employee,
when you file a resignation, it does not mean you are
already resigned. There must be an ACCEPTANCE from
the superior officer before it can be said that he have
already resigned.
So here, the public officer has already formally
resigned, his resignation has not been accepted, yet he
abandons to the detriment of public service. What is the
penalty?
In the abandonment of office, the penalty is
QUALIFIED if the purpose of the said public officer
is to evade the prosecution punishment of the
crime involving violation of Title 1 Book 2 (Crimes
against National Security), or Chapter 1 Title 3 of
Book 2 (Rebellion, Coup detat, Sedition, etc.)

ARTICLE 239 USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE


POWERS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is an executive or judicial officer
2. That he:
a. Makes general rules and regulations beyond the
scope of his authority, or
b. Attempts to repeal a law, or
c. Suspend the execution of thereof
NOTE: It can only be committed by an executive or
judicial officer

ARTICLE 240 USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE


FUNCTIONS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a judge
2. That the offender:
a. Assumes the power exclusively vested to
executive authorities of the Government, or
b. Obstructs executive authorities from the lawful
performance of their functions
NOTE: It can only be committed by a Judge

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 87

A R T I C L E 2 4 1 U S U R PAT I O N O F J U D I C I A L
FUNCTIONS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is holding office under the Executive
Branch of the Government
2. That he:
a. Assumes the power exclusively vested in the
Judiciary, or
b. Obstructs the execution of any order or decision
given by a judge within his jurisdiction
NOTE: It can only be committed by a public officer of the
Executive Branch of the Government

Therefore, if the person who assumes judicial


power does not belong to the Executive Branch, but
belongs to the legislative branch, the crime is not
Usurpation of Judicial Function, but USURPATION OF
PUBLIC FUNCTION AND OFFICIAL AUTHORITY under
Article 177, because Article 239, 240 and 241 are specific
as to the offenders.
So, let us say, in the one who encroached upon
the powers of the Judge, does not belong to the executive
branch but he is legislator, it cannot be considered as
usurpation of judicial functions, rather it will beUsurpation
Of Public Function And Official Authority Under Article 177.

ARTICLE 242 DISOBEYING REQUEST OF


DISQUALIFICATION
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a public officer
2. That a proceeding is pending before such public officer
3. That there has been a question regarding the
jurisdiction brought before the proper authority
4. There is a question brought before the proper authority
regarding his jurisdiction, which is yet to be decided

ARTICLE 243 ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY


EXECUTIVE OFFICERS TO ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is an executive officer
2. That the offender addresses any order or suggestion to
any judicial authority
3. That the order or suggestion relates to any case or
business within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts
of justice

ARTICLE 244 UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He nominates or appoints a person to a public office
3. Such person lacks the legal qualification thereof
4. Offender knows that his nominee or employee lacks
the qualifications at the time he made the nomination
or appointment

ARTICLE 245 ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY


ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a public officer
2. That he solicits or makes any indecent or immoral
advances to a woman
3. That the offended party is a woman who is:
a. Interested in matters pending before the public
officer for his decision or where the public

CRIMINAL LAW 2

officer is required to submit a report or to


consult with a superior officer; or
b. Under the custody of the offender, who is a
warden or other public officer directly charged
with the care and custody of prisoners or
persons under arrest; or
c. The wife, daughter, sister or any relative falling
within the same degree of affinity of the person
under the custody and charge of the offender

How are abuses against chastity is committed?


There are three acts. (Refer to the elements)
1. Public officer solicits or makes any
indecent or immoral advances to a woman
who is interested in matters pending
before his for his decision or where the
public officer is required to submit a report
or to consult with a superior officer
2. Warden or other public officer directly
charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest, and he
solicits or makes any indecent or immoral
advances to a woman
3. Warden or other public officer directly
charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest, and the
said officer makes any indecent or immoral
advances to the wife, daughter, sister or
any relative falling within the same degree
of affinity of the male prisoner.

Who is the offender?


He must be a public officer because there must be
abuse of public office in making immoral or
indecent advances.
Essence of the crime is taking advantage of ones
position in soliciting or making immoral or indecent
advances.

Mere act of soliciting or making immoral and indecent


advances will already give rise to the crime. It is not
necessary that the woman will comply with the said
solicitation or immoral or indecent advances.

The solicitation must not be the gospel type of


solicitation. It must be bad, persistent, threatening such that
if the woman would not comply then it would adverse on
her part.

If a jail warden impregnated a female detainee, even if they


love one another, still liable because detainees are
liabilities of the state.

TITLE EIGHT
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS (ARTICLES 246 266-A)

ART 246 PARRICIDE


ELEMENTS:
1. That a person is killed
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused
3. That the deceased is the father, mother, or child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate
other ascendant, or legitimate other descendant, or
legitimate spouse of the accused

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 88

Parricide is committed when a person kills his father,


mother, child, whether legitimate or illegitimate,
legitimate other ascendant, legitimate other
descendant, or legitimate spouse. Therefore the
offended party or deceased or the victim is specified,
he must be the father, mother, child whether legitimate
or illegitimate, legitimate other ascendant, legitimate
other descendant, or legitimate spouse.
Parricide is a crime based on relationship.
What kind of relationship?

First, it must be a legitimate relationship

except in the case of parent and child.


Second, the said relationship must be in the
direct line
Third, the relationship must be by blood
(grandfather killed a grandson, a mother
killing a son, a son killing a father)

Q: So a father killed an illegitimate son. What crime is


committed?
A: It is parricide. Although the crime is based on
legitimate relationship, the exception is in case of
children, whether legitimate or illegitimate.

Q: A brother killed another brother. Is the crime committed


parricide?
A: No, the crime committed is murder or
homicide, as the case may be and not
parricide because the relationship between a
brother and another brother is in the collateral line
and not in the direct line.
Q: What if a stepfather killed his stepson?
A: The stepfather is not liable for parricide. It
can either be murder or homicide, as the case
may be, because their relationship is not based on
blood.
Again, the relationship must be
legitimate, in the direct line and by
blood.

In Parricide, the circumstance which will qualify is the


relationship, therefore relationship between the
offender and the offended party must be stated in the
information.
Q: Let us say that the husband killed the wife. In the
information filed by the fiscal, the fiscal failed to state that
the husband is the legal husband of the said victim.
However, during trial, by virtue of a certificate of marriage, it
was proven that the accused was the legal husband of the
said victim-wife. Can the husband be convicted of
parricide?
A: No, the husband cannot be convicted of
parricide. This is because the relationship was
not alleged in the information although proven
during trial. Since the relationship between the
husband and the wife is not alleged in the
information, although proven during trial, he
cannot be convicted of parricide. It can only be
murder or homicide, as the case may be.

Q: What if a husband wanted to kill his wife. So he has a


mistress, the husband wanted to dispose his wife.
However, he cannot do it on his own and so the husband
hired a high-profile killer, he paid the man 100,000 pesos to
kill the wife. And so the man conducted surveillance on the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
wife, checked the itinerary of the wife and so when the wife
was getting out of the grocery, here comes the killer. The
killer, on board a motorcycle, went directly to the wife, shot
her and off he went. The wife died. What crime/crimes is/
are committed?
A: The husband is liable for principal but said
killer is liable for murder. Conspiracy will not lie.
Although they conspired for the killing of the wife,
the husband, being the principal by inducement
and the killer, being the principal by direct
participation, conspiracy will not lie. This is
because the circumstance which qualifies
parricide, the relationship, is personal to the
husband and cannot be transferred to a stranger.
That is why there will two informations filed, one is
parricide as against the husband as a principal by
inducement and the other one is murder as
against the killer.

ART 247 DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED


UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ELEMENTS:
1. That a legally married person or a parent surprises
his spouse or his daughter, the latter under 18
years of age and living with him, in the act of
committing sexual intercourse with another
person.
2. That the said legally married spouse he or she
kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any or
both of them any serious physical injury in the
act or immediately thereafter
3. That he has not promoted or facilitated the
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he or
she has not consented to the infidelity of the
other spouse.

FIRST REQUISITE/ELEMENT:
Under the first element, it is required that the legally
married spouse surprises the other spouse while
in the actual act of sexual intercourse with another
person. So note the surprising must be in the
actual act of sexual intercourse and NOT
before, NOT after.
If you will read the book of Reyes, Justice Laurel,
naghinanakitsya. Sabinya, Why? Why should it
be in the actual act of sexual intercourse, you
already saw your spouse with another man, why
wait for the sexual intercourse? You know it will
happen, why wait for it for Article 247? This is
what Justice Laurel said. But the Supreme Court
said no, the surprising must be in the act of sexual
intercourse with another person. Not before, not
after, not during the preliminaries.

SECOND REQUISITE/ELEMENT:
The second element requires that the said legally
married spouse kills any or both of them or he
inflicts serious physical injuries upon any or both
of them. Again, while in the act of sexual
intercourse or immediately thereafter. There is no
question as to the actual act of sexual
intercourse but what about immediately
thereafter?
What does the phrase immediately thereafter mean?

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 89

The Supreme Court said, immediately


thereafter means there must not be lapse of
time between the surprising and the killing or
infliction of serious physical injuries.
Therefore the surprising and the killing or
infliction of serious physical injuries must be a
continuing process.

Q: What if the husband arrived home and the wife arrived


home from the market. She was about to go the kitchen
when suddenly, she heard voices in the masters bedroom
and so she opened the said masters bedroom and saw her
legal husband in actual sexual intercourse with another
person. Notice that the law says, other person which
means it could be a man or a woman. Upon seeing that,
the wife who still has a knife in the basket, immediately
went towards the husband and stabbed him. The woman
fled. The husband died. Of what crime would you prosecute
the said wife? The wife is liable for parricide under Article
246 for having killed her husband. If you are the counsel of
the said wife, what defense would you put up in order to
free your client from criminal liability?
A: Article 247 or Death under exceptional
circumstances. The Supreme Court said that
Article 247 is not a felony. Article 247 is a
privilege, in fact is it a defense. If Article 247 is
invoked, the accused is free from criminal liability.
It is an absolutory cause, an exempting
circumstance. The Supreme Court said that the
penalty stated therein, destierro, is not really a
penalty on the legally married spouse who killed
the other spouse. It is not a penalty but it is more
of a guard, a privilege for him so that he may be
free from any retaliation of any of the family of the
victim. So destierro here is not really a penalty.
Again, Article 247 is not a felony. It is a defense, a
privilege; it is an exempting circumstance or an
absolutory cause.

PEOPLE v. ABARCA
In this case, there was this student reviewing for the
bar. There were already rumors that his wife was having an
affair. So one time, he went home unannounced. Upon his
arrival, he saw his wife in sexual intercourse with another
man. The man jumped out the window. The husband
wanted to kill the man but he had no weapon at the time.
The man went away. It took the husband an hour before he
was able to find a weapon and upon finding a weapon, he
went directly to the whereabouts of the man, the lover of
the wife and killed the man. It took him one hour. The killing
took place an hour, not in the actual sexual intercourse, but
is it immediately thereafter? Despite the fact that one hour
had lapsed, would it be within the meaning of immediately
thereafter?

The Supreme Court, in this special case, said yes.


According to Supreme Court, when the law uses the
phrase immediately thereafter; that the killing or the
infliction of serious physical injuries must take place
immediately thereafter, the law did not say that the killing
must be done instantly. According to the Supreme Court, it
suffices that the proximate cause for the said killing is the
said pain and the look on the said husband upon chancing
his wife in the basest act of infidelity. This is an exceptional
case.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

Why an exceptional case?

6.

Because henceforth, after People v Abarca,


the Supreme Court has already interpreted
immediately thereafter, as there must be no
lapse of time between the surprising and the
killing. The surprising and the killing must be
continuous.
Legal luminaries say that this is an
exceptional case because the husband was
reviewing for the bar which is why he was
given this special _. Because in all other
cases after this, the Supreme Court is strict in
implementing immediately thereafter. The
Supreme Court is strict because this is not a
felony, it is a privilege therefore it must be
strictly interpreted and not liberally interpreted
in favor of the accused.
Look that if the injury inflicted by the legally
married spouse on the lover or the other
spouse, is less serious physical injuries or
slight physical injuries, he is totally free from
criminal liability. Liability will only come in if
the other spouse is killed or inflicted with
serious physical injuries.
With regards to the liability of the accused to
the injuries sustained by other people, liable
to physical injuries through negligence, as the
case maybe. There is no intent to kill the
other victims.
Note that the SC ruled that inflicting death
under exceptional circumstances is NOT
murder.

ART 248 MURDER


ELEMENTS:
1. That a person was killed
2. That the accused killed him
3. That the killing was attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances mentioned in Article 248
4. That the killing is not parricide or infanticide

Murder is committed by any person who shall kill


another person which will not amount to parricide or
infanticide and the killing is attended by the following
qualifying circumstances:
1. Treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or
of means or persons to insure or afford
mutiny.
2. In consideration of price, reward or promise
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of
an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or
with the use of any other means involving
great waste and ruin.
4. On occasion of any calamities enumerated
in the preceding paragraph, or of an
earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive
cyclone, epidemic, or any other public
calamities.
5. With evident premeditation.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 90

With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly


augmenting the suffering of the victim or
outraging or scoffing at his person or
corpse (RA 7659)

These are the qualifying circumstances for murder


(See Article 14-aggravating circumstances, Book
I) Know the elements in Article 14.
All of these are aggravating circumstance under
Article 14. Note, in order to qualify a killing to
murder, only one is necessary.

If in the information, A killed B and it was attended by


treachery, in consideration of a price, reward or
promise, by means of a motor vehicle, so there are
three qualifying circumstances. Only one will suffice to
qualify the murder to killing, all the other aggravating
circumstances will be considered not as qualifying
circumstances but as mere generic aggravating
circumstances.

ART 249 HOMICIDE


ELEMENTS:
1. That a person was killed
2. That the accused killed him without any justifying
circumstance
3. That the accused had the intention to kill, which is
presumed
4. That the killing was not attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances of murder, or by that of
parricide or infanticide.
When a person kills another person, and it is not

attended by any qualifying circumstance under Article


248, the killing is considered as Homicide under Article
249.

A R T 2 5 0 P E N A LT Y F O R F R U S T R AT E D O R
ATTEMPTED PARRICIDE, MURDER OR HOMICIDE
ART 251 DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTOUS AFFRAY
What is a tumultuous affray?

A tumultuous affray is a commotion, wherein

people fight in a tumultuous or confused manner


such that it cannot be ascertained or determined
who has killed the victim or who has inflicted
physical injuries on the victim.

ELEMENTS:
1. That there be several persons
2. That they did not compose groups organized for the
common purpose of assaulting and attacking each
other reciprocally
3. That these several persons quarreled and assaulted
one another in a confused and tumultuous manner
4. That someone was killed in the course of the affray
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
deceased
6. That the person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries or who used violence can be
identified.
Article 251, death in a tumultuous affray, is committed
when there are several persons who do not compose
groups which have been organized to assault and

CRIMINAL LAW 2
quarrel with one another reciprocally, assaulted and
attacked each other reciprocally and in the course of
the affray, someone is killed. And it cannot be
ascertained or identified or determined who killed the
victim, then the person who inflicted serious physical
injuries or those who used violence against the said
victim can be identified.

Someone is killed. Note that he can be any person; he


can be someone from the affray, he can be a mere
passerby, he can be just someone watching the affray,
so long as he is killed in the affray and it cannot be
ascertained who killed him, then the person who
inflicted serious physical injuries on him is liable if he
can be identified. If this person cannot be identified,
then the person who used any kind of violence against
him shall be criminally liable.

ART 252 PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN


TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY
ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a tumultuous affray
2. That a participant or some participants thereof suffer
serious physical injuries or physical injuries of a
less serious nature only.
3. That the person responsible thereof cannot be
identified
4. That all those who appear to have used violence
upon the person of the offended party are known.

Note that the victim here must be a participant. The


law is specific. The participants must be the one
injured with serious physical injuries or less serious
physical injuries. Not slight physical injuries.
Article 252, we have physical injuries inflicted in
tumultuous affray, is committed when in a tumultuous
affray, a participant has suffered serious physical
injuries or less serious physical injuries and it cannot
be ascertained who inflicted these injuries but the
person who used violence on the victim can be
identified or determined.
If the injury caused to the victim is only slight physical
injuries, then no one is liable because if a person
engaged in a tumultuous affray or participated therein,
the law presumes that it is __ therefore no one is liable
if the injuries sustained is only slight physical injury
and it cannot be determined who inflicted the said
slight physical injury on the victim.

Q: There was this tumultuous affray, several people were


attacking and fighting each other. Suddenly, here comes a
balot vendor. He saw the affray. He was just there,
watching, suddenly he fell on the ground. He died because
of a stab wound. Now, it cannot be ascertained who
stabbed him, so no one saw who stabbed him. Who will be
held criminally liable?
A: Any person who inflicted serious physical
injuries on him. No one has seen also who had
inflicted serious physical injuries against him. The
any person who inflicted any violence against
him shall be criminally liable.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 91

Q: There was this tumultuous affray, several people were


attacking and fighting each other. Suddenly, here comes a
balot vendor who saw the affray and he was just there,
watching. While he was watching the affray, one of the
participants of the affray, X, saw him and went directly to
the balot vendor and stabbed him twice. The balot vendor
died. What crime is committed? Is it under Article 251,
Death in tumultuous affray?
A: No. It is murder or homicide as the case
may be. This is because the perpetrator of the
crime is identified, ascertained or determined.
Death in a tumultuous affray under Article 251 can
only be charged if the actual perpetrator of the
crime who killed the victim cannot be ascertained
or identified.

ART 253 GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE


TWO ACTS PUNISHABLE:
I.By assisting another to commit suicide, whether the
suicide is consummated or not; or
II.By lending assistance to another to commit suicide to
the extent of doing the killing himself.

Giving assistance to suicide binigyan mong rope;


binigyan mo ng poison.
A friend wanted to commit suicide, he doesnt know the
way, the means and you agreed with him, you assisted
and gave the best poison in the world. So you assisted
the said friend in committing suicide. Note that if a
person assisted in committing suicide by giving him
poison, the initiative must come from him. The desire
to kill himself must come from the victim. He wanted to
commit suicide and you merely provide assistance in
the commission of suicide.
B wanted to commit suicide, here comes A, A gave
assistance to B but B survived. B did not die. Only A is
criminally liable because suicide or attempt to commit
suicide is not a felony within Philippine jurisdiction. It is
only the one who assisted to commit suicide is
criminally liable but not the person who attempted to
commit suicide.

Q: What if a terminally sick person with cancer, he was


lying in bed, almost lifeless and it was only a machine that
was giving life to his body. Now, the mother of the patient
and she took pity of her son because the son was
agonizing and was only breathing through the said
machine. The mother wanted to finish the suffering of the
son and at the time she visited the hospital, she turned off
the machine and the son died. He killed her son out of
mercy. So it is mercy-killing or euthanasia. Is the mother
liable for giving assistance to suicide?
A: No because the initiative to kill did not come
from the sai person who was ill. The crime
committed by the mother is parricide for killing
her son. If it were other person, it was murder.
Evidently, it was murder because there was
evident premeditation; there was thinking before
doing the act of mercy-killing.

ART 254 DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS/ ILLEGAL


DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender discharges a firearm against or at
another person

CRIMINAL LAW 2

2. That the offender has no intention to kill that person

Q: What if there was this park. The park was full of people
and then suddenly, here comes X, X went to the park, put
out his firearm, and he fired shots in the air. What crime is
committed?
A: X committed Alarms and Scandals under
Article 155. When he fired shots in the air, his
intention was to cause disturbance of public peace
and tranquility. The firearm was not aimed towards
any person.

Q: What if X went to a public place full of people. X saw his


enemy, Y, and so to threaten Y, X pulled out his firearm,
aimed the firearm at Y in order to threaten him. X
discharges the firearm, however, with no intention to kill Y.
His only intention is to threaten Y and Y was not killed.
What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is Article 254, Illegal
Discharge of Firearms. Illegal discharge of
firearms is committed by any person who aims
and discharges the firearm to any other person
absent the intent to kill the said person. The
purpose is merely to threaten the said person.

Q: What if in the same public place, X went there and


pulled out his firearm because he saw his enemy, Y. He
aimed the gun at Y with intent to kill, because he wanted to
kill his enemy. However, Y saw it and was able to avoid.
What crime is committed?
A: X committed attempted homicide or murder,
as the case may be. Although Y was not hit, the
fact that the said firearm was discharged with
intent to kill, it is already attempted homicide or
murder, as the case may be.

Q: What if in the said merry-making, there were so many


people. X went there. He saw his enemy Y and went
directly to Y, took out his gun and he poked the gun without
discharging. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is other light threats.
So here, threatening another with a gun, without
discharging, only poking. It is other light threats. It
is not grave threats, it is not light threats. It is only
other light threats, arrestomenor.

So kapag discharge, pinutok it could either be alarms


and scandals, illegal discharge of firearms or
attempted or frustrated murder or homicide, as the
case may be.
If no discharging, only poking, or threatening with a
firearm, it is only other light threats

ARTICLE 255 INFANTICIDE


Infanticide is the killing of a child less than three
(3) days old or less than seventy-two (72) hours. So in the
case of infanticide, it is the age of the victim that is
controlling. The victim, the child, the infant, must be less
than three (3) days old. He must be less than seventy-two
hours. If it is only three (3) days old or above it is any other
crime but not infanticide.
Who is the offender in Infanticide?

The offender can be the parents, the mother, the


father, the grandparents or it can be any other person so
long as the child is less than three (3) days old, it is

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 92

infanticide.
relationship.

It is the age that is controlling, not the

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there was this woman and this woman gave
birth to a child. After giving birth to the child while the child
was only a day old, she already wanted to kill the child in
order to conceal her dishonor. However, she could not kill
the child by herself and so she asked a favor from a friend.
And so the friend arrived and both the mother and the said
friend killed the child, a day old, by suffocating the said
child with a big pillow. The child less than three days old,
died. What crime/s is/are committed?
A: The mother is liable for infanticide. The
said stranger friend is also liable for
infanticide. There was conspiracy on them. This
time conspiracy on life, both of them are liable for
infanticide under only one information. Isang
information langsa court and that is infanticide.
Both the mother and the friend are conspirators of
infanticide.

Now let us say that the mother is convicted. If the


mother is convicted, the penalty imposed by the law as
provided in Article 255 is equivalent to parricide which is
reclusion perpetua to death. On the other hand, if the
stranger is convicted under Article 255, the penalty to be
imposed is equivalent to murder therefore, also reclusion
perpetua to death. But note the charge is that he is guilty
of infanticide.
The fact that the said mother killed the child, less
than three days old, in order to conceal dishonorwill
mitigate the criminal liability of the mother. NOTE:The
penalty will be lowered not by one, but by two degrees,
from reclusion perpetua to death, the penalty of the mother
will only now become prision mayor.

Q: What if let us say that the killer of the less than three
day old child is the maternal grandparents. The
grandparents conspired in the killing in order to conceal the
dishonor of their daughter.
What is the effect of the
concealment of the dishonor?
A: The concealment of the dishonor will also
mitigate the criminal liability of the maternal
grandparents that is one degree lower. So sa
mother, two degrees lower, from reclusion
perpetua to death magigingprision mayor.
Sa
maternal grandparents one degree lower lang,
from reclusion perpetua to death it will now
become reclusion temporal.
Whatever it is,
concealment of dishonor is akin to a privilege
mitigating circumstance because the lowering of
the penalty is not merely by periods but by
degrees. So it is akin to a privilege mitigating
circumstance.

Q: So what if in the same problem I gave, the woman gave


birth to the child and wanted to kill the child but this time
the infant is already three days old and the child was killed
by the said mother and the friend. What are the crimes
committed?
A:
The mother is liable for
parricidewhile the stranger/friend is liable for
murder. And this time no amount of concealment

CRIMINAL LAW 2
of dishonor will mitigate the criminal liability of the
mother.
So there lies a difference between
parricide and infanticide if the offender is the
parent or the mother of the child.
JUST REMEMBER: If the child is less than three days old
or less than 72 hours, IT IS INFANTICIDE. It is the age
that controls. If the child is three days old and above,
PARRICIDE OR MURDER, as the case may be. It is
obvious murder because a three day old child or infant is
totally defenseless.

ARTICLE 256, 257, 258 AND 259 ARE ALL ABOUT


ABORTION
ARTICLE 256 INTENTIONAL ABORTION
ARTICLE 257 UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
ARTICLE 258 ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE
WOMAN HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS
ARTICLE 259 - ABORTION PRACTICED BY A
PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF
ABORTIVES

Note that there are four (4) articles on abortion but there
are only two (2) type of abortion:
1. INTENTIONAL ABORTION
2. UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
Because the abortion practiced by the woman herself or
the mother and the abortion practiced by a physician or
midwife are all intentional abortion. So in effect, we only
have to kinds of abortion. We have intentional abortion and
unintentional abortion.
ABORTION is the willful killing of a fetus from the
mothers womb or the violent expulsion of a fetus from the
maternal womb which results in the death of the fetus.

to abort the fetus. So what the boyfriend did was he went to


the sidewalks of Quiapo and bought there aborting
beverages and he administered the same to the said
woman.
And the female student drank the aborting
beverage and the fetus died.
What crime/s is/are
committed?
A: In so far as the boyfriend is concerned, the
crime committed is intentional abortion under Article
256. In so far as the said female student is
concerned, the crime committed is also intentional
abortion but it is under Article 258 Abortion
practiced by the woman herself or by her parents.
So, both of them are liable for intentional abortion.

Q: But what if despite the fact that the female student had
already taken or drank the abortive beverage still the fetus
survived? Malakasangkapitngbatasa maternal womb. What
crime is committed if any by the boyfriend and the
girlfriend? Is there a crime such as frustrated intentional
abortion?
A: YES. There is a crime such as frustrated
intentional abortion. Here, the said woman has
already taken the said abortive beverage. He has
already performed all the acts necessary to
consume the crime of abortion however, abortion
did not result because of causes independent of
their will.
Malakasangkapitngbatasa maternal
womb and so the baby survived. And so, they are
both liable for frustrated intentional abortion.

IS THERE A CRIME SUCH AS FRUSTRATED


UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION?
NO. This time there is no crime such as
frustrated unintentional abortion.
Because in
unintentional abortion, the intention is against the
woman and abortion only happens unintentional.

INTENTION ABORTION is committed in three (3) ways:


1. By using violence upon the person of the pregnant
woman resulting to abortion.
2. Without violence, by acting without violence,
without the consent of the woman by
administering aborting drugs or beverages without
the consent of the pregnant woman.
3. By acting without violence, with the consent of the
pregnant woman that is by administering aborting
drugs or beverages to a pregnant woman this time
with her consent.

UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION can only be committed in


one (1) way and that is by exerting physical violence on a
pregnant woman. And in result thereof, an unintentional
abortion was suffered.
In unintentional abortion the force employed was
physically exerted on a pregnant woman. The intention of
the offender is not against the baby or the fetus but against
the mother. His intention is against the mother but in so
doing, since the mother is pregnant, the baby/fetus was
also aborted. So abortion was unintentionally caused.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there were two college students, a boyfriend
and girlfriend. The girlfriend became pregnant and the
boyfriend said, I am not yet ready. We are still so young so
I cannot marry you. And so by reason thereof the girlfriend
said, how about my situation? I am already pregnant. And
so by reason thereof, they both decided in order to conceal
the dishonor of the said female student, they both decided

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 93

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So lets say a man exerted physical violence against the
woman who happens to be his enemy. The said woman
was severely hurt however, the baby was not hurt. The
fetus inside the tummy did not die. What is the crime
committed by the said man?
A: Only serious physical Injuries against the
woman. No crimes against the fetus because there
was no intent in so far as the fetus is concerned.

Q: But what if in the said problem, the man inflicted


violence on the pregnant woman who happens to be his
enemy. Lets say he kicked and moved the said woman
severely and by reason thereof the pregnant woman was
1:44:17. What crime/s is/are committed?
A: The crime committed against the woman is
serious physical injuries. As against the fetus,
the crime committed is unintentional abortion.
Now, it resulted from one single act therefore it will
result to a complex crime of SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES WITH UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
under ARTICLE 48 OF BOOK 1. It is a complex
crime. It is a single act resulting to two less grave
felonies.

Q: What if a husband arrived home at 5 oclock in the


morning. He saw his wife looking at the children and is
making breakfast. Suddenly the cellphone of the wife rang,

CRIMINAL LAW 2
the pregnant wife answered the cellphone and she began
giggling. When she began giggling, the husband took the
cellphone from the said wife and listened to the cellphone.
He heard a voice of a man on the other line of the
cellphone. Since he heard the voice of the man and he just
arrived from work, he became jealous and with the use of a
knife he stabbed the wife. The wife died and the fetus died.
What crime/s is/are committed?
A: In so far as the wife is concerned, the crime
committed is parricide. In so far as the baby is
concerned, the crime committed is
unintentional abortion. Again, it resulted from
one single act of stabbing the wife therefore it will
give rise to a COMPLEX CRIME OF PARRICIDE
WITH UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION. There is a
crime against the wife which is parricide and
against the fetus which is unintentional abortion
resulting from a single act therefore, it is parricide
with unintentional abortion.

ARTICLE 259 - ABORTION PRACTICED BY A


PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF
ABORTIVES

UNDER ARTICLE 259, there is another act punished and


that is dispensing of abortives. Dispensing of abortives is
committed by a pharmacist who shall dispense an abortive
without a prescription from a physician. The mere act of
dispensing the said abortives without prescription from a
physician will hold the said pharmacist criminally liable.

ARTICLE 260 - DUEL


ARTICLE 261 CHALLENGING TO A DUEL
What is a duel?
A duel is a combat with deadly weapons
concerted between two or more persons who have decided
or agreed to fight.

ELEMENTS OF A DUEL:
1. It is necessary that the offenders that there was an
agreement to engage in combat or in a fight.
2. There must be two or more seconds for each
combatant.
3. The firearms or the arms to be used as well as the
other terms of the combat must be agreed upon
by the said seconds.

Under Article 260 - Duel, there are three acts punished in


a duel:
1. By killing ones adversary in a duel.
2. By inflicting physical injuries upon ones
adversary.
3. By making a combat by merely entering into a
duel.

So under Article 260, the persons who are liable are the
combatants and adversaries, those who engage in a duel
and yungkanilangalalay, yung seconds.

Under Article 261- Challenging to a duel, there are also


three acts punished:
1. By challenging another to a duel.
2. By inciting another to give or accept a challenge to
a duel.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 94

3.

By scoffing at or decrying another publicly for


having refused to accept a challenge to fight a
duel.

Under Article 261, the persons criminally liable are both the
challenger and the instigator.
NOTE that if it is not a duel or there is no agreement to
combat or to fight, lets say there was no agreement
between A and B to fight and yet they fought and B died,
the crime committed is HOMICIDE because Article 260 and
261 only applies if there is an agreement to fight, to a duel
or a combat.

CRIMES OF PHYSICAL INJURIES:


ARTICLE 262 MUTILATION
Mutilation is the clipping off or chopping off of a
particular part of a body which is not susceptible to grow
again.
Two kinds of mutilation:
1. By intentionally depriving another of a part of his
body which is an essential part for reproduction.
2. By intentionally committing other mutilation that is,
by depriving him of any other part of his body with
intent to deprive him of such part of his body.

Under the first kind, that is mutilating an organ


essential for reproduction, is otherwise known as
CASTRATION. You will know that the penalty is even
higher than homicide. Killing a person is only punishable
by reclusion perpetua while castrating a person is
punishable by reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua.
Because if you are castrated it is as if you are already
killed. Thats why it has a higher penalty.
Mutilation is a felony which cannot be committed

out of imprudence or negligence. Because the


law requires that there must be the deliberate
intent to mutilate, the deliberate intent to clip off, to
severe a particular part of the body of a person.
Absent that deliberate intent, any person who
loses a part of his body, it can only be serious
physical injuries but not mutilation. So in mutilation
it is always committed with deliberate intent or
dolo to mutilate. Absent that, it is serious physical
injury.
ILLUSTRATION
Q: Lets say A and B were engaged in a fight, they were
both fighting and A was losing and so he took out his bolo.
His intention was to cut the body of B in order to defeat him
however, B tried to prevent him and placed his hand and by
reason thereof, the right hand of B was severed from his
body. Is the crime committed mutilation?
A: NO. It is not mutilation because there was no
deliberate intent to clip off or to severe the right
hand of B. His intention was to attack or to stab B
and in so doing, it resulted to the loss of an arm
therefore, the CRIME COMMITTED IS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES. Physical injuries can either
be serious physical injuries, less serious physical
injuries or slight physical injuries.
PHYSICAL INJURIES is the act of wounding, beating or
assaulting another with no intent to kill. It also involves the
act of knowingly administering injurious beverages or
substances absent intent to kill. So always there is no
intent to kill in order to amount to physical injuries because

CRIMINAL LAW 2

even if the injury is only slight or no injury at all but if there


is intent to kill, it is already in the stage of homicide. So
there must be no intent to kill.
It also includes the act of knowing administering injurious
substances absent intent to kill.

BLINDNESS requires loss of vision of both eyes by reason


of the injury inflicted. Mere weakness in vision is not
contemplated.

Under the SECOND CATEGORY:

So always, there is no intent to kill in order to amount to


physical injuries.
Because even if the injury is only SLIGHT or no injury at all,
but there is intent7 to kill, it is already in the attempted
stage of Homicide. So there must be no intent to kill.

The offender loses the use of speech or the power to heal


or to smell, or looses an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a
leg.
So if it is only an eye which has been lost, it is
serious physical injury but under the Second
Category already. The penalty is lesser than that
of the First Category.

ARTICLE 263 SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES


Under Art. 263, the serious physical injuries punished
are:

Under the THIRD CIRCUMSTANCE/CATEGORY:

When the offender becomes DEFORMED.

When the injured person becomes insane,


imbecile, impotent, or blind in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted.
2. When the injured person:
a. Loses the use of speech or the
power to heal or to smell, or looses
an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a
leg; or
b. Loses the use of any such member,
or
c. Becomes incapacitated for the work
in which he was therefore habitually
engaged in the consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted
3. When the injured:
a. Becomes deformed
b. Loses any other member of his
body; or
c. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he
was habitually engaged for more
than 90 days, in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted
4. When the injured person becomes ill or
incapacitated for labor for more that 30 days (but
must not be more than 90 days), as a result of the
physical injuries inflicted.
Note: All of this, all of the enumeration mentioned in Art.
263 are already considered serious physical injury. If a
person becomes ill or incapacitated for more than 30 days,
it is already serious physical injuries. It is already divided
into categories for purposes of penalty. Because they differ
in penalty. But the moment the said person, by reason of
the said injury becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for
more than 30 days, it is already, serious physical injury.
1.

So the FIRST CATEGORYis, that the injured person


becomes INSANE.
INSANITY refers to a mental disease by reason thereof a
person can no longer appreciate the consequences of his
act.

IMBECILITY is when a person is already advanced in age,


yet he has only the mind of a 2-7 year old child.
IMPOTENCY includes the inability to copulate or sterility.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 95

So what is this so-called DEFORMITY which will result in


serious physical injury?
Q: A hacked B with the use of a bolo on his stomach. So
there was a big mark on his stomach despite the fact that it
was already healed, there was a big scar on the said
stomach. The doctor said that the said injury requires
medical treatment for 2 weeks. What crime is committed?
Is it serious physical injury or is it less serious physical
injury?

A: The crime committed is only LESS SERIOUS


PHYSICAL INJURY. There was no deformity.
Although there was a big scar on the stomach, it
would not amount to deformity. An injury in order
to amount to deformity which would bring about
serious physical injury must result to a physical
ugliness on a person. There are 3 requisites befor
deformity may be considered as a serious physical
injury:

1.
2.

3.

There must be physical ugliness produced on


a body of a person
The said deformity should be permanent and
definite abnormality and it would not heal
through the natural healing process
The said deformity must be located in a
conspicuous and visible place

EXAMPLE OF The said deformity should be permanent


and definite abnormality and it would not heal through the
natural healing process:

A boxed B. He lost his 2 front teeth permanently. What


crime was committed?

A: The crime committed was SERIOUS


PHYSICAL INJURY. Because it is a deformity
even if the doctor says that he can still replace it,
the fact still remains that it cannot be healed
through a natural healing process.

A boxed B, A lost another tooth.


A: The crime committed will LESS SERIOUS OR
SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES depending on the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
medical attendance. Because it cannot be seen. It
is not located in a visible or conspicuous place.

A poured muriatic acid on the face of another person whom


he hates and so because of that, the face of that person
becomes deformed, it became ugly. Later, she went on a
plastic surgeon. When he got out of the plastic surgery
clinic, she now looks like Vilma Santos. Is the accused
person liable for serious physical injuries?

A: Yes. Even if she became prettier than before, it


is still a fact that by reason of the said injury it
cannot be healed through the natural healing
process. It will require the attendance of medical
surgeon. Therefore, it is considered as a
deformity.

If the said physical ugliness is not located on a visible or


conspicuous place, it would be depending on the
deployment of medical attendance.

Q: When is serious physical injuries qualified?

A: Serious physical injuries is qualified:


1. If it is committed against any of the persons
enumerated in Parricide. That is when serious
physical injuries is committed against the
father, mother, child, whether legitimate or
illegitimate; legitimate other ascendant or
other descendant and legitimate spouse of
the accused.
2. If in the infliction of serious physical injuries, it
is attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances for murder. That is, if it is done
with treachery, evident premeditation, the
crime committed is qualified serious physical
injuries.

ARTICLE 264 ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS


SUBSTANCE OR BEVERAGES
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender inflicted serious physical injuries
upon another
2. It was done by knowingly administering to him any
injurious substances or beverages or by taking
advantage of his weakness of mind or cruelty
3. He had no intent to kill

ARTICLE 265 LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES


LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES is
committed if by reason of the injury inflicted, the offended
party requires medical attendance or he cannot perform
the work with which he is habitually engaged for a period of
10-30 days. So the requirement of medical attendance or
his incapacity to do his work for a period of 10-30 days, it
will bring about less serious physical injury.

Q: What circumstances will QUALIFY LESS SERIOUS


PHYSICAL INJURIES?
1.

When there is manifest intent to insult or offend


the injured person

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 96

2.
3.

4.

When there are circumstances adding ignominy to


the offense
When the victim is the offenders parents,
ascendants, guardians, curators, or teachers
When the victim is a person of rank or person in
authority, provided the crime is not direct assault

So the crime committed here, with the attendance of these


circumstances qualify less serious physical injuries.
ARTICLE 266 SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND
MALTREATMENT

3 KINDS OF SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES AND


MALTREATMENT:
1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the offended
party for labor from 1 to 9 days, or required
medical attendance during the same period
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the
offended party from engaging in his habitual work
or which did not require medical attendance
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing
any injury

Maltreatment of another by deed without causing any injury


is the act of INFLICTING PAIN ON ANOTHER PERSON
WITHOUT CAUSING ANY WOUND OR INJURY.

CASE: PEOPLE VS MAPALO (in Book I)


Let us say that A was walking. Here comes B. B
used a lead pipe, he went to A and hit the head of A with a
lead pipe. Thereafter, he ran away. The medical certificate
showed that the head of A did not sustain any injury. He
was charged with wttempted homicide. Supreme Court
said, the crime committed is ILL-TREATMENT OF
ANOTHER BY DEED, a form of slight physical injury under
Art. 266.

According to the Supreme Court, there was pain


inflicted on A, but there was no injury and there was no
intent to kill because the said offender immediately ran
away after hitting him a single time. So the crime committed
is MALTREATMENT OF ANOTHER PARTY.

ARTICLE 266-A RAPE


RAPE is now a crime against person; it is no
longer a crime against chastity. Because of the amendment
brought about by RA 8353 THE ANTI-RAPE LAW.

2 TYPES OF RAPE/HOW RAPE IS COMMITTED:


1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a
woman
2. Sexual Assault

There is RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE when a man


has carnal knowledge of a woman against her will.
ELEMENTS OF A RAPE BY A MAN WHO SHALL HAVE
CARNAL KNOWLEDGE OF A WOMAN :
1. Offender is a man

CRIMINAL LAW 2
2.
3.

Offender had carnal knowledge of the woman


against her will
Such act is accomplished under any of the
following circumstance:
a. Through force, threat, or intimidation
b. When the offended party is deprived of
reason or is otherwise unconscious
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave
abuse of authority
d. When the offended party is under 12 years of
age or is demented, even though the
circumstances mentioned above be present

FIRST - OFFENDER IS A MAN


So in rape by carnal knowledge, who is the offender? A
MAN.
Who is the offendeaprty? A WOMAN.
The law is SPECIFIC.

SECOND - OFFENDER HAD CARNAL KNOWLEDGE


OF THE WOMAN AGAINST HER WILL"
The offender has carnal knowledge of a woman against her
will and it is committed by using force, threat, or
intimidation. When the offended party is deprived of reason
or otherwise unconscious.

Q: What if the woman was sleeping when a man had a


carnal knowledge of the said woman. Is it rape by carnal
knowledge?

A: Yes. The Supreme Court said that the woman


who is sleeping is unconscious.

Q: What if the woman is half asleep when the carnal


knowledge was done by the said man? Is it still rape?
A: Yes, said by the Supreme Court. The woman
was unconscious.

THIRD:
A is 11 years old. He is cohabiting with a man who is 20
years old. They are luvingtgether as if they are husband
and wife. Of course, they had carnal knowledge. The man
is liable for STATUTORY RAPE. The number of times that
he had carnal knowledge of the said woman, that is the
number of the counts of rape. So if he had carnal
knowledge of the woman 5 times during the time that they
were together 5 counts of statutory rape. That is because
the child, the victim, is below 12 years of age. Insofar as
criminal law is concerned, she does not have a mind of her
own, she cannot give a valid consent.

Q: What if A and B are lovers and then suddenly B filed a


case against A because according to B, he was raped by
her boyfriend. In the course of the trial of the case, the
defense of the man was the so-called, sweetheart defense
theory. According to him, We are sweet lovers. Therefore
according to him, it is impossible for him to have raped her
because we are sweet lovers. Will said sweetheart defense
theory lie in his favor?

A: Yes. The crime committed is rape. It is


INCESTUOUS RAPE. In case of incestuous rape,
it is the overpowering and overbearing moral
influence or moral ascendency of an ascendant
over a descendant which takes place of force,

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 97

A: Supreme Court said, in case of sweetheart


defense theory, for it to lie, mere oral testimonty
will not suffice. There must be documentary
evidence, memorabilia, picture, love letters, etc.
which would show that indeed they are
sweethearts boyfriend & girlfriend or lovers. But
mind you, even the Supreme Court said this, there
was not a case wherein the sweetheart defense
theory has acquitted a man.

Therefore, under any all circumstances which involves the


sweetheart defense theory will not lie in favor of a man.
Because it does not mean that when you are the
sweetheart, you can no longer rape the other person.

In Book I, there is no such thing as FRUSTRATED RAPE.


Rape admits only 2 stages: ATTEMPTED RAPE and
CONSUMMATED RAPE.

The reason is that a mere touch of an erected penis on the


labia or lips of a womans genitalia will already
consummate rape.

It is not necessary that there be deep or complete


penetration. It is not necessary that the vagina did
lacerated. Mere touch of the lips or the labia of a womans
genitalia already consummates rape.

Q: What if, what the erectile penis has touched was the
outer portion of genitalia, that portion which became hairy
during puberty, you have to distinguish whether it is acts of
lasciviousness or attempted rape.

A:

CASE: PEOPLE VS JALOSJOS

Q: What if, so the law requires that the said act of carnal
knowledge must be with the use of force, threat, or
intimidation, a father raped his daughter. The daughter did
not put up a fight, the father did not use force, threat, or
intimidation in the said carnal knowledge of a daughter. Is
the crime committed rape?

threat, or intimidation. That is why in case of


inceuous rape, force, threat, or intimidation is not
indispensable; it is not necessary. Because it is
the overpowering and overbearing moral influence
or moral ascendency which a father has over his
daughter which takes place of force, threat or
intimidation.

If when an erectile penis has touched the outer


portion of a womans genitalia which becomes
hairy during puberty, if the intention of the said
offender is to lie, to have carnal knowledge
against the said woman, it is attempted rape. But
if in doing so, the said man has no intention to lie
or to have carnal knowledge, that is only ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS.

What about the other form of Rape RAPE BY SEXUAL


ASSAULT

CRIMINAL LAW 2

ELEMENTS:
1.

2.

Offe
nde
r
com
mits
a n
act
o f
sex
ual
ass
ault

c t
into
the
geni
t a l
o r
anal
orifi
c e
o f
anot
her
pers
on
3.

The
act
o f
sex
ual
ass
ault
i s
acc
omp
lish
e d
und
e r
any
o f
the
follo
win
g
circ
ums
tanc
es:

The
act
o f
sex
ual
ass
ault
i s
com
mitt
e d
b y
any
o f
the
follo
win
g
mea
ns
a.

b.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

B y
inse
rting
his
peni
s
into
anot
her
pers
ons
mou
t h
o r
anal
orifi
ce,
or
B y
inse
rting
any
instr
ume
n t
o r
obje

Page 98

a.

b.

B y
usin
g
forc
e or
inti
mid
atio
n
W h
e n
the
w o
man
i s
dep
rive
d of
reas
o n
o r
othe
rwis
e

CRIMINAL LAW 2
unc
ons
ciou
s, or
c.

d.

B y
mea
n s
o f
frau
dule
n t
mac
hina
tion
o r
grav
e
abu
sed
o f
auth
ority
W h
e n
the
w o
man
i s
und
e r
1 2
year
s of
age
o r
dem
ente
d

*So what if what has been inserted is the penis inside the
mouth or the anal orifice, before that would only amount to
acts of lasciviousness - before the passage of RA 8353.

*The law says that it must be an instrument or object which


was inserted in the genitalia or in the anal orifice of another
person.

Q: What if it was the finger which was inserted in the


genitalia of a person? Is it acts of lasciviousness or rape by
sexual assault?

A: Supreme Court said it is RAPE BY SEXUAL


ASSAULT. According to the Supreme Court, it
would be so weird if what has been inserted is an
instrument or object, it would be rape by sexual
assault, but if it was finger, it would be rape by
acts of lasciviousness. The finger is within the
mean of an instrument or object insofar as rape by
sexual assault is concerned.

Q: In case of RAPE, what are the circumstances which will


qualify the penalty?

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 99

A: In case of RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT, the


penalty is only PRISION MAYOR. It is a bailable
offense.
If it is a RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, note
that the penalty is RECLUSION PERPETUA. It is
a non-bailable offense

Q: In case of a RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, when is


a penalty qualified?
A: Reclusion Perpetua to Death:
1.

2.

3.

W h
e n
rap
e is
com
mitt
e d
with
the
use
of a
dea
dly
wea
pon
W h
e n
rap
e is
com
mitt
e d
b y
two
o r
mor
e
pers
ons
W h
e n
b y
reas
o n
o r
o n
occ
asio
n of
rap
e ,
the
victi
m
bec
ome
s
insa
ne

CRIMINAL LAW 2
4.

par
ent,
gua
rdia
n ,
relat
ive
b y
con
san
guin
i t y
o r
affin
i t y
with
i n
the
3 rd
civil
deg
ree,
o r
the
com
mon
law
spo
use
o f
the
victi
m

W h
e n
rap
e is
atte
mpt
e d
and
hom
icid
e is
com
mitt
ed

Q: What are the instances wherein the penalty to be


imposed is the capital punishment of death, so the extreme
penalty of death?

1.

2.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

W h
e n
b y
reas
o n
o r
o n
the
occ
asio
n of
rap
e ,
hom
icid
e is
com
mitt
ed
W h
e n
the
victi
m is
und
e r
1 8
year
s of
age
and
the
o ff e
nde
r is
a
par
ent,
asc
end
ant,
step
-

Page 100

3.

4.

W h
e n
the
victi
m is
und
e r
the
cust
ody
o f
the
poli
c e
o r
milit
ary
auth
oriti
e s
o r
any
pen
a l
insti
tutio
n
W h
e n
the

CRIMINAL LAW 2
rap
e is
com
mitt
e d
i n
full
vie
w of
the
spo
use,
the
par
ent,
any
o f
the
chil
dre
n of
the
relat
ive
b y
con
san
guin
i t y
with
i n
the
3 rd
civil
deg
ree
5.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

W h
e n
the
victi
m is
a
relig
ious
and
gau
ged
i n
legit
imat
e
relig
ious
calli
n g
o r
voc
atio
n
and
h e
kno
w n
t o

Page 101

b e
suc
h by
the
o ff e
nde
r
befo
r e
o r
duri
n g
the
com
mis
sion
o f
the
rap
e
6.

7.

W h
e n
the
victi
m of
the
rap
e is
belo
w 7
year
s of
age
W h
e n
the
said
o ff e
nde
r
kno
w s
that
h e
has
bee
n
a ff l i
cted
with
HIV
viru
s or
AID
S or
any
othe
r
sex
uall
y
tran
smi

CRIMINAL LAW 2
ssib
l e
dise
ase
and
the
viru
s of
the
dise
ase
i s
tran
smit
ted
t o
the
victi
m
8.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

W h
e n
the
said
o ff e
nde
r is
a
m e
mbe
r of
the
AFP
o r
parli
ame
ntar
y
unit
s ,
the
P N
P or
any
othe
r
m e
mbe
r of
the
law
enfo
rce
men
t
age
ncy
who
took
adv
anta
g e
o f
his
posi

Page 102

tion
i n
ord
e r
t o
facil
itate
the
com
mis
sion
o f
the
crim
e
9.

10.

B y
reas
o n
o r
o n
the
occ
asio
n of
rap
e ,
the
said
victi
m
suff
ere
d
per
man
ent
phy
sica
l
muti
latio
n or
disa
bilit
y
W h
e n
the
o ff e
nde
r
kne
w
that
the
o ff e
nde
d
part
y or
victi
m is
pre

CRIMINAL LAW 2
gna
nt at
the
time
o f
the
com
mis
sion
o f
rap
e
11.

W h
e n
the
o ff e
nde
r
kne
w of
the
men
t a l
disa
bility
,
emo
tion
a l
diso
rder
and/
o r
phy
sica
l
han
dica
p of
the
o ff e
nde
d
part
y at
the
time
o f
the
com
mis
sion
o f
the
crim
e

The presence of any of these circumstances will bring


about the imposition of the maximum penalty of death.
However, death is lifted because of RA 9346 which
prohibits the imposition of death penalty.

In case of rape, PARDON will not extinguish the criminal


liability of the offender. According to Art. 266, pardon will

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 103

not extinguish the criminal liability of the offender. It is only


through:
1.
The
o ff e
nde
d
w o
man
may
par
don
the
o ff e
nde
r
thro
ugh
a
sub
seq
uent
vali
d
mar
riag
e ,
the
e ff e
ct of
whi
c h
wou
l d
b e
the
exti
ncti
o n
o f
the
o ff e
nde
r s
liabi
lity
2.
The
lega
l
hus
ban
d
may
b e
par
don
e d
b y
forgi
ven
ess
o f
the
wife

CRIMINAL LAW 2

prov
ided
that
the
mar
riag
e is
not
void
a b
initi
o

EXCEPTION: In case of MARITAL RAPE. If the legal wife


has forgiven or pardoned the legal husband.
Q: When is there PRESUMPTION OF RESISTANCE?

A: If in the course of the commission of rape, the


said offended party has performed any acts in any
degree amounting to resistance of rape or when
the said offended party cannot give a valid
consent.

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN


ACT (VAWC) R.A. 9262

Violence against women and their children


- refers to any act or a series of acts committed by

any person against a woman who is his wife,


former wife, or against a woman with whom the
person has or had a sexual or dating relationship,
or with whom he has a common child, or against
her child whether legitimate or illegitimate, within or
without the family abode, which result in or is likely
to result in physical, sexual, psychological harm or
suffering, or economic abuse including threats of
such acts, battery, assault, coercion, harassment
or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.
Acts consisting violence against women and children:
A. "Physical Violence" refers to acts that include bodily or
physical harm;
B. "Sexual violence" refers to an act which is sexual in
nature, committed against a woman or her child. It
includes, but is not limited to:
a) rape, sexual harassment, acts of
lasciviousness, treating a woman or her child as a
sex object, making demeaning and sexually
suggestive remarks, physically attacking the
sexual parts of the victim's body, forcing her/him to
watch obscene publications and indecent shows
or forcing the woman or her child to do indecent
acts and/or make films thereof, forcing the wife
and mistress/lover to live in the conjugal home or
sleep together in the same room with the abuser;
b) acts causing or attempting to cause the victim
to engage in any sexual activity by force, threat of
force, physical or other harm or threat of physical
or other harm or coercion;
c) Prostituting the woman or child.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 104

C. "Psychological violence" refers to acts or omissions


causing or likely to cause mental or emotional suffering of
the victim such as but not limited to intimidation,
harassment, stalking, damage to property, public ridicule or
humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and mental infidelity. It
includes causing or allowing the victim to witness the
physical, sexual or psychological abuse of a member of the
family to which the victim belongs, or to witness
pornography in any form or to witness abusive injury to
pets or to unlawful or unwanted deprivation of the right to
custody and/or visitation of common children.
D. "Economic abuse" refers to acts that make or attempt to
make a woman financially dependent which includes, but is
not limited to the following:
1. withdrawal of financial support or preventing the
victim from engaging in any legitimate profession,
occupation, business or activity, except in cases
wherein the other spouse/partner objects on valid,
serious and moral grounds as defined in Article 73
of the Family Code;
2. deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial
resources and the right to the use and enjoyment
of the conjugal, community or property owned in
common;
3. destroying household property;
4. controlling the victims' own money or properties
or solely controlling the conjugal money or
properties.
Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children.- The
crime of violence against women and their children is
committed through any of the following acts:
(a) Causing physical harm to the woman or her
child;
(b) Threatening to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(c) Attempting to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(d) Placing the woman or her child in fear of
imminent physical harm;
(e) Attempting to compel or compelling the woman
or her child to engage in conduct which the
woman or her child has the right to desist from or
desist from conduct which the woman or her child
has the right to engage in, or attempting to restrict
or restricting the woman's or her child's freedom of
movement or conduct by force or threat of force,
physical or other harm or threat of physical or
other harm, or intimidation directed against the
woman or child. This shall include, but not limited
to, the following acts committed with the purpose
or effect of controlling or restricting the woman's or
her child's movement or conduct:
(1) Threatening to deprive or actually
depriving the woman or her child of
custody to her/his family;
(2) Depriving or threatening to deprive
the woman or her children of financial
support legally due her or her family, or
deliberately providing the woman's
children insufficient financial support;
(3) Depriving or threatening to deprive
the woman or her child of a legal right;

CRIMINAL LAW 2

(4) Preventing the woman in engaging in


any legitimate profession, occupation,
business or activity or controlling the
victim's own mon4ey or properties, or
solely controlling the conjugal or common
money, or properties;
(f) Inflicting or threatening to inflict physical harm
on oneself for the purpose of controlling her
actions or decisions;
(g) Causing or attempting to cause the woman or
her child to engage in any sexual activity which
does not constitute rape, by force or threat of
force, physical harm, or through intimidation
directed against the woman or her child or her/his
immediate family;
(h) Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless
conduct, personally or through another, that
alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the woman or her child.
This shall include, but not be limited to, the
following acts:
(1) Stalking or following the woman or
her child in public or private places;
(2) Peering in the window or lingering
outside the residence of the woman or
her child;
(3) Entering or remaining in the dwelling
or on the property of the woman or her
child against her/his will;
(4) Destroying the property and personal
belongings or inflicting harm to animals
or pets of the woman or her child; and
(5) Engaging in any form of harassment
or violence;
(i) Causing mental or emotional anguish, public
ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child,
including, but not limited to, repeated verbal and
emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or
custody of minor children of access to the
woman's child/children.

DATING RELATIONSHIP- refers to a situation wherein the


parties live as husband and wife without the benefit of
marriage or are romantically involved over time and on a
continuing basis during the course of the relationship. A
casual acquaintance or ordinary socialization between two
individuals in a business or social context is not a dating
relationship.

beats the wife. Will such defense mitigate the criminally


guilty husband? Can he use such defense?
A: Under Sec. 27 it cannot be used because
under Sec. 27; the fact that the husband is under
the influence of alcohol, any illicit drug, or any
other mind-alteringsubstance cannot be used as
defense in VAWC therefore; alcoholism and drug
addiction cannot be a defense in VAWC.

Battered Women Syndrome (Sec. 26)


Scientifically defined pattern of psychological
and behavioral symptoms found in the
battering relationship as a result of cumulative
abuse.

Under Sec. 26, it is provided that victim survivors


founded to be suffering from this battered women
syndrome shall be exempted from both criminal
and civil liability notwithstanding the absence of
any of the elements of self-defense.

The court however shall be held by a testimony of


a psychologist or psychiatrist if the woman is
indeed suffering from the so called battered
women syndrome.

ANTI-HAZING LAW R.A. 8049


Q: What is hazing?
A: Hazing is an initiation rite or practice which is
used as an admission into membership in any
fraternity or any other organization wherein the
said recruit/neophyte/applicant is placed under the
an embarrassing or humiliating situations such as
forcing him to do menial, silly, and foolish tasks or
services or subjecting him into psychological or
physical injury or crime.

Q: Is hazing totally prohibited in the Philippines?


A: No. Hazing is not totally prohibited in the
Philippines. Hazing is allowed provided that the
following requisites are present:
1.

Q: The neighbor was aware of the beatings that the


husband has been doing to his wife so the neighbor who
was a witness to all these beatings filed a case against the
husband. Will the case prosper?
A: Yes because under sec. 25, Violation Against
Women and Children (VAWC) is a public offense.
Q: When does the crime prescribe?
A: If it involves physical abuse; it shall prescribe
after 20 years. If it involves psychological, sexual,
and economical abuse; it shall prescribe in 10
years.

Q: Lets say the wife filed a case against the husband for
violation of RA 9262; during the presentation of evidence
by the defense, the husband testified that he was always
drunk. He was alcoholic. Thats why he lost temper and

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 105

2.

There must be a prior written notice


sent to the head of the school authorities or
the head of the organization 7 days before
the said initiation rites and this prior written
notice shall contain the following:
a.
It shall indicate the date of the said
initiation rites which shall not be more
than 3 days.
b.
It shall indicate/state the names of
the neophytes or applicants who will
undergo the said hazing or initiation
rites.
c.
It shall contain an undertaking
which states that there shall be no
physical violence employed in any form
on these neophyte recruits or
applicants.

Upon the receipt of such prior


written notice; the head of the school or
organization shall assign atleast 2
representatives from their school or

CRIMINAL LAW 2

organization who must be present during the


time of the said initiation rite or hazing and
these 2 representatives shall see to it that no
amount of physical violence shall be
employed on any person or any neophyte or
recruit or applicant during the said hazing or
initiation rite.

Q: What if in the course of the said hazing or initiation rite


someone died or suffered physical injuries; who shall be
held criminally liable?
A: If in the course of hazing or initiation rite,
someone died or some suffered any physical
injuries; all of the officers and members of the said
fraternity or organization who are present and who
participated in the said initiation rite shall be
liable as principal.

Q: What if the said initiation rite was conducted or held in a


house of an Aling Nene? Is Aling Nene criminally liable?
A: Aling Nene is liable as an accomplice if
she has knowledge of the conduct of the said
initiation rites and she did not do any act in order
to prevent its occurrence.

If the said initiation rite took place in the


house of a member or an officer of the said
fraternity or sorority; the parents of the said
members or officers shall be held liable not as
an accomplice but as a principal if they have
such knowledge of the said conduct of the
initiation rites and they did not perform any
act inorder to prevent its occurrence.
Q: When is there a prima facie evidence of participation?
A: Any person who is present in the said hazing
or initiation rite shall constitute a prima facie
evidence that there is a participation and shall be
held liable as principal.

homicide, it shall not be reckless


imprudence.

ANTI- CHILD ABUSE ACT R.A. 7610


In so far as RA 7610 is concerned; Children are those:

Q: What if two children, A and B were fighting over a gun


toy. The mother of A saw B beating A so As mother held B
and gave him a tender slap. However, because B is still a
child, his face became reddish. Based in the medical
certificate, it showed that the said act of slapping was the
cause of the injury sustained by B that made his face
reddish. What crime was committed by the mother of A? Is
the mother liable for Child abuse or is the mother liable for
slight physical injuries?
A: The mother of A is liable for slight physical
injuries only and not for violation of RA 7610.

Q: What do you mean by Child Abuse?


A: Child abuse refers to the maltreatment,
whether habitual or not, of the child which includes
any of the following:

Q: What if in the said hazing an officer beat an applicant


and he hit the neck thereby causing the death of the said
neophyte/recruit/applicant and so when prosecuted he
said: I have no intention to commit so grave a wrong as
that committed. Can such defense be used so as to
mitigate his criminal liability?
A: No such defense is prohibited defense. Under
RA 8049; the defense that such person has no
intention to commit so grave a wrong as that
committed cannot be used by an accused under
RA 8049.

Whenever a person hits an applicant/


neophyte, he is already performing a felonious
act therefore he shall be held criminally liable
for all the consequences of his actions. (Art 4
book 1)
In the case of Lenny Villa Hazing; Sereno et.
al. considered Art. 4 wherein they ruled
Reckless Imprudence resulting to homicide.
o (I disagree) In Reckless imprudence, the
said person must be performing an act
which is not felonious but by reason of
negligence or imprudence, a felony
resulted. Therefore, in the case of
Lenny Villa, the ruling shall be

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 106

Below 18 years of age


Above 18 years of age who does not have the
capacity to fully protect themselves against any
abuse, cruelty or maltreatment because of their
physical or mental disability.

Physical or psychological abuse, neglect,


cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional
maltreatment;
Any act by deeds or words which debases,
degrades or demean the intrinsic worth and
dignity of a child as a human being.
Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs
for survival, such as food and shelter; or
Failure to immediately give medical treatment
to an injured child resulting in serious
impairment of his growth and development or
in his permanent incapacity or death.

Not all acts committed against a child will result to


child abuse. It is necessary that in the said act,
there was this intention to debase, degrade or
demean the intrinsic worth of a child as a human
being.

Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse


What is child prostitution?
Children, whether male or female, who for money, profit, or
any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence
of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be
children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse.

Aggravating Circumstances:
(a) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
induce child prostitution which include, but are not
limited to, the following:
(1) Acting as a procurer of a child
prostitute;
(2) Inducing a person to be a client of a
child prostitute by means of written or

CRIMINAL LAW 2
oral advertisements or other similar
means;
(3) Taking advantage of influence or
relationship to procure a child as
prostitute;
(4) Threatening or using violence towards
a child to engage him as a prostitute; or
(5) Giving monetary consideration goods
or other pecuniary benefit to a child with
intent to engage such child in
prostitution.
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual
intercourse of lascivious conduct with a child
exploited in prostitution or subject to other sexual
abuse; Provided, That when the victims is under
twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be
prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for
rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended,
the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious
conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the
penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is
under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period; and

(c) Those who derive profit or advantage


therefrom, whether as manager or owner of the
establishment where the prostitution takes place,
or of the sauna, disco, bar, resort, place of
entertainment or establishment serving as a cover
or which engages in prostitution in addition to the
activity for which the license has been issued to
said establishment.

When is there attempt to commit child prostitution?


1. when any person who, not being a relative of a
child, is found alone with the said child inside the
room or cubicle of a house, an inn, hotel, motel,
pension house, apartelle or other similar
establishments, vessel, vehicle or any other
hidden or secluded area under circumstances
which would lead a reasonable person to

believe that the child is about to be


exploited in prostitution and other sexual
abuse.
2. when any person is receiving services from
a child in a sauna parlor or bath, massage
clinic, health club and other similar
establishments.
What is Child Trafficking
Any person who shall engage in trading and dealing with
children including, but not limited to, the act of buying and
selling of a child for money, or for any other consideration,
or barter
Aggravating Circumstance: if the victim is under 12 years
of age
Attempt to Commit Child Trafficking. There is an
attempt to commit child trafficking under Section 7 of this
Act:
(a) When a child travels alone to a foreign country
without valid reason therefor and without
clearance issued by the Department of Social

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 107

Welfare and Development or written permit or


justification from the child's parents or legal
guardian;
(b) when the pregnant mother executes an
affidavit of consent for adoption for consideration;
(c) When a person, agency, establishment or
child-caring institution recruits women or couples
to bear children for the purpose of child trafficking;
or
(d) When a doctor, hospital or clinic official or
employee, nurse, midwife, local civil registrar or
any other person simulates birth for the purpose of
child trafficking; or
(e) When a person engages in the act of finding
children among low-income families, hospitals,
clinics, nurseries, day-care centers, or other childduring institutions who can be offered for the
purpose of child trafficking.
TITLE NINE
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONSAL LIBERTY AND
SECURITY (ARTICLES 267 292)

ART 267 KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL


DETENTION
It is committed when: a private individual kidnaps or

detains another or in any other manner to deprive him


of his liberty when such detention is illegal and it is
committed in any of the following circumstances:
1. If the kidnapping or detention should have
lasted for more than 3 days.
2. If it is committed simulating a public authority.
3. If threats to kill had been made upon the
person kidnapped or any serious physical
injuries are inflicted upon same.
4. If the person kidnapped or detained is a
minor, female, or a public officer.

Any of the circumstances present, then we have


serious illegal detention.

Q: Who is the offender in Art 267?


A: He must be a private individual because
if he is a public officer who has been vested
by law to make arrest and he detains a
person; it will be arbitrary detention under Art
124.
Q: Can a public officer commit kidnapping and serious
illegal detention?
A: Yes if the said public officer has not been
vested by law with the authority to effect
arrest and to detain a person then the said
public officer is acting in his private capacity.
Although a public officer; since he is acting in
his private capacity, the crime committed is
kidnapping and serious illegal detention under
Art 267 and not arbitrary detention under Art
124.

The second element requires that the offender kidnaps


or detains another or in any other manner depriving
him of his liberty.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

Q: When is there detention?


A: There is detention if the offender restrains
a person or the liberty of another person. He
must be detained, incarcerated. There must
be showing that there is a restraint on his
person or liberty; otherwise, if there is no
restraint on the person or liberty on the part of
the offended party, it could be any other crime
but not kidnapping and serious illegal
detention.
The law requires that the kidnapping and detention
must be illegal therefore there must be no reasonable
ground.

Circumstances which will make the crime serious:


1.The kidnapping or detention should have lasted for
more than 3 days;
2.If it is committed by simulating public authority.
1. By pretending to be police officers,
pretending to be NBI agents
3.If any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the
person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him
are made.
4.If the person kidnapped or detained is a minor
(unless the offender is his parents); a female, or a
public officer.

The presence of any of these circumstances will meet


the crime of Serious Illegal Detention and the absence
of any of the circumstance will make the crime Slight
Illegal Detention under Art 268.

Note that the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death.


Circumstances which will qualify the penalty:
1.If the purpose of the kidnapping is to extort ransom
from the victim or from any other person.
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention

for Ransom.

Q: What is ransom?
A: A ransom is the
other consideration
for the redemption
person who has
incarcerated.

money, price, or any


given or demanded
of the liberty of the
been detained or

PEOPLE VS. MAMANTAK


-While the mother and the daughter where in a food
chain in tondo; the mother lost the said child.
-she had been looking for the said child for a year.
-A year and six months thereafter, the said mother
received a call from a woman who sounded to be
a masculine man from Lanaodel Norte according
to the said woman.
-The woman said that she has the child with her and
the woman was demanding P 30,000 in exchange
for the child.
-The said woman, Mamantak and company asked the
mother to go to a certain restaurant.
-The mother went to the said restaurant however the
mother already informed the authorities.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 108

-Upon the exchange of the child and the demand;


Mamantak and co. were arrested by the said
authorities.
-The crime charged was: Kidnapping and Serious
Illegal Detention for Ransom.
-RTC ruled that it is only kidnapping and serious illegal
detention for ransom but not for ransom because
according to the trial court; the amount given is
measly a sum to be considered as ransom
because according to the RTC; it is only in
payment for the board and logging of the child
during the time that she was in the captivity of the
said woman.
-SC ruled that the crime committed is kidnapping and
serious illegal detention for ransom. Even if it is
only 5 centavos; if it was given in exchange for the
liberty of a person who has been detained, by
whose liberty has been restricted; it is already
considered as ransom.
-There is no such thing as small amount in so far
as ransom is concerned.
Q: Lets say A is indebted to B; B was asking payment
from A, A however said that he has no money until B
got fed up so what B did is he kidnapped and detained
the minor child of A. He then called A telling the same:
I will only release your minor child the moment you
give your indebtedness in the amount of a million
pesos. Is the crime committed kidnapping and serious
illegal detention for ransom?
A: Yes it is already kidnapping and
serious illegal detention for ransom even
if the amount being asked by the
kidnapper is the indebtedness of the
father of the said child. Any amount
demanded in exchange for the liberty of
the person detained; that is already
considered as ransom.
2.When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of
the kidnapping or detention.

Kidnapping and Serious Illegal


Detention with Homicide.
This is a special complex crime.

Therefore, since it is a special


complex crime; regardless of
the number of victims killed; it is
still kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with homicide.

PEOPLE VS. LARANAGA


-There were two kidnap victims and these two sisters
were both killed and raped yet the SC held that
the crime committed was kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with homicide and rape.
-Despite the fact that there were 2 victims who were
killed and raped because regardless of the
numbers of the victims killed, since it is a special
complex crime; in the eyes of the law there is only
one crime committed so it is only: Kidnapping and
Serious illegal detention with homicide.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

Note however that it is required that the victim himself


is the one who has been killed. If it is another person; it
will result to a separate and distinct crime because the
law is particular that the person detained/ kidnapped
must be the one who is killed or died as a
consequence thereof.

Q: What if A kidnapped the child of B who is his


enemy. The said child is 10 years old and he was
placed in a hideout. The child tried to escape but A saw
him so A fired a shot towards the child which resulted
to the death of the child. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is kidnapping
with serious illegal detention with
homicide.
Q: What if in the same problem; the father learned
about the said kidnapping so the father informed the
NBI agents. The NBI agents were able to track down
the place where the said child was being hidden so the
NBI agents together with the said father went to the
hideout. There was an exchange of gun fires between
A (the kidnapper) and the NBI agents. While there was
an exchange of gun fires, the father saw his child so
the father rushed towards the son, carry the son and
they were able to leave the said hideout. While they
were leaving, A the kidnapper saw them and A the
kidnapper shot the father. What crime/s is/are
committed?
A: In so far as the minor is concerned;
the crime committed is Kidnapping and
serious illegal detention even if it did
not last for a period of more than 3 days,
the fact that the offended party is a minor,
it is already kidnapping and serious
illegal detention.

In so far as the father who has been


killed; since he is not the victim of serious
illegal detention, it will constitute a
separate and distinct crime of: homicide.

Therefore, there are 2 crimes committed


by the said kidnapper. Kidnapping and
serious illegal detention in so far as the
child is concerned and homicide in so far
as the father who has been killed is
concerned.
3.When the victim is raped.

Kidnapping and Serious Illegal


Detention with Rape.

It is necessary that the victim is the one who


has been raped.
Again; since this is a special complex crime;
regardless of the times that the victim has
been raped. The crime committed is only
kidnapping and serious illegal detention with
rape. There is no kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with multiple rape.

4.When the victim is subjected to torture or any


dehumanizing acts.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 109

The presence of any of these circumstances will bring


about the imposition of maximum penalty of death.
Q: A, a 6 yr old child is playing at a playground at
about 5 oclock in the afternoon while the mother is
hanging clothes. A man (X) gave the child a candy and
the child was so happy. Later, the man again
approached the child and gave the child money and
then the said man invited the child to go with him.
Since the child was so happy because the man was so
good to her; the child went with the said man. At 6
oclock; the mother came looking for the child but the
child was no longer in the playground. Meanwhile, the
man brought the child to his place. That evening, the
mother kept on looking for the child however they
could not locate the child. In the house of the man, the
child was molested and raped twice. The following
morning, when the mother opened the door of the
house, she saw her child at the door with torn clothes
and blood. So the man was charged with serious
illegal detention with rape. Is the charge correct?
A: The charge is wrong because the
obvious intention of the man is to rape
the child and not to detain the child
therefore the SC said: the crime
committed would be 2 counts of
statutory rape not only a single
indivisible offense of kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with rape but 2
counts of statutory rape because the said
child is under 12 years of age and she
was raped and molested twice.
Therefore, unless and until there was an
intent to detain on the part of the
offender; it could be any other crime but
not kidnapping and serious illegal
detention.
Q: A saw his enemy walking. He abducted his enemy
and placed him inside the van. The following morning,
the said enemy was found in a vacant lot with 10
gunshot wounds. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is Murder.
Obviously, there was no intent to detain
the offended party. The intent was to kill
him. Therefore the crime committed is
murder and not kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with homicide or murder
as the case may be.
Inorder for kidnapping and serious illegal detention to
amount to with rape, murder, with homicide with
physical injuries; it is necessary that there is an intent
to detain and in the course of the said detention, the
victim dies, raped, subjected to torture or other
dehumanizing acts.
Again, as mentioned earlier; the absence of any of the
circumstances which will make illegal detention serious
will make the crime Slight Illegal Detention under Art
268.

ART 268 SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION


Slight illegal detention is committed by: any

person who shall kidnap or detains another or in

CRIMINAL LAW 2

any other manner deprive him of his liberty when


the said detention is illegal absent of any of the
circumstances under Art 267; it will only be slight
illegal detention.
Q: What if A was so envious of his neighbor. To teach
the neighbor a lesson, he kidnapped and detained the
said neighbor and placed the said neighbor in a
secluded place in a vacant area one morning.
However, later on, A felt sorry for his neighbor and he
released his neighbor that night. What is the effect in
the criminal liability of the offender A?
A: Under Art 268 (Slight Illegal
Detention); if the offended party has been
released. Such release will be
considered as a privileged mitigating
circumstance because from the penalty
of reclusion temporal, the penalty would
be lowered by one degree that is prision
mayor.
Note however that this voluntary release of the victim
may only be considered as a privileged mitigating
circumstance the ff requisites must concur:
1. It is necessary the release has been
made within 3 days from the
commencement of the said
kidnapping.
2. It must have been made without the
offender having attained or
accomplished his purpose.
3. It must have been made before the
institution of the criminal
proceedings against the said
offender.

Q: What if the person kidnapped by A is a public


officer? He is mad with the said public officer and
so he kidnapped the same and detained him in
the morning. In the evening, he immediately
released the public officer because he told himself
that perhaps the NBI would look after him so he
immediately released the public officer. Will such
release mitigate his criminal liability?
A: No. the fact that the person kidnapped
is a public officer; the crime would
immediately be kidnapping and serious
illegal detention under 267. And if the
crime is committed under Art 267, no
amount of voluntary release will mitigate
the criminal liability of the offender.

If all of these 3 are present then such


voluntary release of the offender will
mitigate the criminal liability of the said
offender.

ART 269 UNLAWFUL ARREST


Unlawful arrest is committed by: any person who

shall arrest or detain another without authority by

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 110

Q: A was walking when suddenly he was arrested by


B, a police officer. The police officer said that a case
has to be filed against him. The arrest was made
without warrant of arrest. A was not caught committing
a crime inflagrante delicto and not also an escapee but
he was incarcerated. Thereafter a case has been filed
against him however since there was no complainant,
the fiscal dismissed the case for lack of probable
cause. What crime is committed by the police officer?
A: The crime committed is unlawful
arrest.

Q: What about the fact that he has been detained


arbitrarily?
A: It is already absorbed because the
intention of the said police officer is to file
a case against him that is; to deliver him
to the proper authorities. Therefore the
arbitrary detention is merely incidental in
the said act of unlawful arrest.

ART 270 KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A


MINOR
Kidnapping and failure to return a minor is

committed by: any person who had been


entrusted with the custody of a minor who shall
deliberately fail to restore the said minor to his
parents or guardians.

Q: Who is the offender?


A: The offender is the person entrusted
with the custody of a minor.

So if the victim is a minor, a female, or a public


officer; automatically, it will be kidnapping and
serious illegal detention and no amount of
voluntary release will mitigate the offenders
criminal liability.

law or without reasonable ground therefore and


his main purpose is to deliver him to the proper
authorities.
The purpose is: to deliver him to the proper
authorities.

Q: When will the crime arise?


A: The crime will arise if the offender
shall deliberately fail to restore the said
minor to his parents or guardians.
Q: What if A and B has a child and they entrusted the
child to X as they will be going for a vacation for a
week. They told X to deliver the child to them after 7
days. A week after, the husband and wife arrived home
but X failed to deliver the said child. The reason of X
was he was so busy with his work that he forgot that it
was already the 7th day from the time that he has been
entrusted with the child. Can he be held liable under
Art 270?
A: No because he did not deliberately fail
to restore the said minor to his parents or
guardians. The law requires deliberate
failure. Here, he only failed because of
negligence or just because he was so
busy.

ART 271 INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS


HOME
It is committed by: any person who induces a

minor to leave the home of his parents, guardians,

CRIMINAL LAW 2

or person entrusted with the custody of the said


minor.
The crime will arise even if the child hasnt left the
house of the parents or guardians. Mere
inducement with intent to cause damage will
suffice.

Q: A and B husband and wifes marriage has been


declared a nullity by the court and the custody of their
5 yr old child has been given definitely to the mother.
However the father has been given visiting rights. One
Sunday, the father visited the 5 yr old son and the son
was brought out by the father. Usually, whenever the
father takes his son out; he will return the child by night
time. However this time, the father did not bring back
the child to the house of the mother and so the mother
demanded the return of her son but the father still
failed to return their child therefore the mother filed a
case of Kidnapping and failure to return a minor under
Art 270 against the father. Will the case prosper?

A: Yes the case will prosper. Under Art


271 it is provided that Art 270 and 271
can also be committed not only by
strangers but also by the father or the
mother. The only difference is that under
Art 270; if the offender is any other
person the penalty is reclusion perpetua.
But if the offender is the father or the
mother, note that the penalty is so low;
only arresto mayor or a fine of not more
than P300 or both fine and penalty
depending upon the discretion of the
court therefore, even the father or the
mother can be held liable under Articles
270 and 271. The only difference is their
respective penalties.

ART 274 SERVICES RENDERED UNDER


COMPULSION IN PAYMENT OF DEBT
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender compels a debtor to work for
him, either as household servant or farm
laborer.
2. It is against the debtors will.
3. The purpose is to require or enforce the
payment of a debt.

2.

It is committed by: Any person who shall detain a


child in his service against the will of the child

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 111

3.

Failing to render help or assistance


to another whom the offender has
accidentally wounded or injured.
Failing to deliver a child under 7
years of age whom the offender has
found abandoned, to the authorities
or to his family, or failing to take him
to a safe place.

Q: A saw B at Luneta Park. He was wounded and


bitten by a dog and he was crying for help.
However, A, instead of helping B left. Is A liable
under Art 275?
A: No because the place is not an
uninhabited place. Luneta Park is a
public place. People come and go there.
Therefore, A is not liable under Art 275
despite the fact that B is wounded and
dying.

It is committed by: Any person who shall buy,


sells, kidnaps or detains a person for the purpose
of enslaving the said person.
If the purpose is to engage in immoral traffic; then
the penalty will be qualified.

ART 273 EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender retains a minor in his
service.
2. It is against the will of the minor.
3. It is under the pretext of reimbursing
himself of a debt incurred by an
ascendant, guardian or person
entrusted with the custody of such
minor.

It is committed by: a creditor to shall compel a


debtor to work for him as a household servant or a
farm laborer against the will of the said debtor
inorder to require or enforce the payment of a
debt.

ART 275 ABANDONMENT OF PERSONS IN DANGER


AND ABANDONMENT OF ONES OWN VICTIM
ACTS PUNISHED:
1. Failing to render assistance to any
person whom the offender found in
an uninhabited place wounded or in
danger of dying when he can render
such assistance without detriment to
himself, unless such omission shall
constitute a more serious offense.

ART 272 SLAVERY


ELEMENTS:
1. The offender purchases, sells,
kidnaps or detains a human being.
2. The purpose of the offender is to
enslave such human being.

under the pretext of reimbursing a debt incurred


by the parents, ascendants, guardian or any
person entrusted with the custody of the child.

Uninhabited place
One wherein theres a remote possibility for the
victim to receive some help.

Q: What if in the same problem, A found B in a


forest? So A went hunting in a forest when he
suddenly saw B in the middle of the forest. There
was this big trunk of tree on the neck of B and he
cannot move. He was begging for the help of A. A
however left. Later, B was rescued. Can he file a
case in violation of Art 275 against A?
A: Yes because B was found by A in an
uninhabited place and he was wounded

CRIMINAL LAW 2

and in danger of dying because theres a


big trunk of tree on his neck and theres
no detriment on the part of A to render
assistance but he failed to render
assistance therefore A may be held liable
for violation of Art 275.
Q: But what if when A found B and he was bitten
by a snake and the snake was still there. B was
asking for help however A did not give help
because theres a snake. Hes afraid that he might
get bitten by the snake too. Can A be held liable
under Art 275?
A: No because helping B will be
detrimental on his part.

ART 276 ABANDONING A MINOR


ELEMENTS:
1. Offender has the custody of the
child.
2. Child is under 7 years of age.
3. He abandons such child.
4. He has no intent to kill the child
when the latter is abandoned.

Q: What if A was driving his vehicle when


suddenly his car tripped on a stone so the stone
flew and hit an eye of a bystander. The left eye
bled. Is A liable?
A: No because it is purely accidental; it is
an exempting circumstance. He was
performing an act with due care and
accident happened without fault or
negligence on his part

Q: A woman; an OFW worker who left her newly


born child inside a garbage bin of an aircraft/
airplane and later she has been arrested. What
crime is committed by the said mother?
A: The crime committed is Abandoning
a Minor under Art. 276. The mother is in
custody of the child and she deliberately
or and consciously abandoned her child
without the intent to kill. Obviously there
was no intent to kill because she could
have killed the said child instead she
placed her child inside a garbage can in
the restroom of an aircraft so there was
no intent to kill therefore the crime
committed is Abandoning a Minor under
Art. 276.

Q: What if when the left eye of the bystander bled;


A saw him and he knows that the bystander is his
victim. However, instead of bringing the bystander
to the hospital; he increased his speed and left. Is
A criminally liable this time?
A: Yes.

For the first act he is not liable because it


is purely accidental but when he failed to
render help or assistance to his own
victim. This time, he is criminally liable
under Art 275.

Abandoning a minor is committed by any person


who has been entrusted with the custody of a
child under 7 years of age and he abandons the
said child permanently, deliberately, and
consciously with no intent to kill the said child.
The penalty will be qualified if DEATH resulted
from the said abandonment or WHEN THE
SAFETY OF THE CHILD HAS BEEN PLACED IN
DANGER.

ART 277 ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY A PERSON


ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY; INDIFFERENCE OF
PARENTS
ACTS PUNISHED:
1. Abandonment of a child by a person
entrusted with his custody.
1. It is committed by: any person
who, having entrusted with the
living and education of a minor
shall deliver a minor to a public
institution or other persons
without the consent of the person
who entrusted such minor to the
care of the offender or, in his
absence, without the consent of
the proper authorities.
2.

Indifference of parents
1. It is committed by: any parent
who neglects any of his children
by not giving them the education
which their station in life requires
and financial capability permits.

ART 278 EXPLOITATION OF A CHILD


ACTS PUNISHED:
1. Causing any boy or girl under 16 to
engage in any dangerous feat of

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 112

CRIMINAL LAW 2
2.

3.

4.

5.

balancing, physical strength or contortion,


the offender being any person.
Employing children under 16 years of age
who are not the children or descendants
of the offender in exhibitions of acrobat,
gymnast, rope walker, diver, or wild animal
tamer, the offender being an acrobat, etc.,
or circus manager or person engaged in
any of said callings.
Employing any descendants under 12
years of age in dangerous exhibitions
enumerated on the next preceding
paragraph, the offender being engaged in
any of the said callings.
Delivering a child under 16 years of age
gratuitously to any person if any of the
callings enumerated in paragraph 2, or to
any habitual vagrant or beggar, the
offender being an ascendant, guardian,
teacher, or a person entrusted in any
capacity with the care if such child.
Including any child under 16 years of age
to abandon the home of its ascendants,
guardians, curators or teachers to follow
any person entrusted in any of the callings
mentioned in paragraph 2 or to
accompany any habitual vagrant or
beggar, the offender being any person.

3.

4.

ART 281 OTHER FORMS OF TRESSPASS TO


DWELLING
(TRESSPASS TO PROPERTY)
ELEMENTS
1. Offender enters the closed premises
or the fenced estate of another.
2. Entrance is made while wither of
them is uninhabited.
3. Prohibition to enter is manifest.
4. Trespasser has not secured the
permission of the owner or the
caretaker thereof.

These acts are considered as exploitation of minors


because these acts endanger the life and safety, the
growth and development of the minors. (usually these
involves circus)

Mere act of delivering the child gratuitously under 16


years of age; the crime is already committed.
The fact that it is with consideration; the penalty will be
qualified.

ART 280 QUALIFIED TRESSPASS TO DWELLING


It is committed by: a private individual who shall
enter the dwelling of another against the will of
the latter.

ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a private individual
It is committed by a private individual

because if it is a public officer; then the


crime is under Art 128 which is: Violation
of Domicile.
2. He enters the dwelling of another
3. Such entrance is against the will of the latter.
1. As discussed under Art. 128; when
the law says against the will, there
must be a prohibition or opposition
from entering whether express or
implied.
2.

Mere entry without consent will not bring about


QUALIFIED TRESSPASS TO DWELLING.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 113

Trespass to property is committed by: any person


who enters a closed premises or fenced estate
which at that time is uninhabited and the
prohibition to enter is manifest and the offender
enters the said uninhabited place without
securing the permission of the owner or the care
taker thereof.

Note: If the delivery of the said child is on the basis of a


consideration, compensation or money, the penalty will be
QUALIFIED.

If the door is opened therefore it means that anyone


could enter even without the consent of the owner and
the moment he enters he is not liable for qualified
trespass to dwelling because there is no prohibition or
opposition from entering.
It is necessary that there is an opposition or prohibition
from entering. It can be expressed prohibition (e.g. A
note which states: Do Not Enter or the door was
closed and a person knocked so the owner got up and
opened the door but upon seeing the person he
immediately closed the door) or implied prohibition
(e.g. Door is closed even if it is not locked).

TRESSPASS TO
DWELLING

TRESSPASS TO
PROPERTY

Place entered into is


a dwelling and
uninhabited.

Place entered into is a


closed premises or a
fenced estate which is
uninhabited.

Prohibition to enter
can either be
expressed or implied.

Prohibition to enter
must be manifest.

Entry was made


against the will of the
owner or the
possessor of the said
dwelling.

Entry was made


without securing the
permission from the
owner or the care taker
of the said property.

Q: Lets say there are these town houses. In one


of the town houses, town house A; theres no
person living at the moment and there was this
sign: FOR RENT/ FOR LEASE. X entered the said
town house. What crime is committed by X? Is it
qualified trespass to dwelling or is it trespass to
property?
A: It is trespass to property because it
is a closed premises which is uninhabited
at the time of the entering and he entered

CRIMINAL LAW 2

without first securing the permission of


the owner/care taker.
Q: What if there is this house which is occupied by
husband A and B. Husband A and B went for a
vacation for a month. So for a month, there is no
person in the said place. X learned that there is no
person in the said place. He entered the said
place. What crime is committed? Is it qualified
trespass to dwelling or trespass to property?
A: The crime committed is Qualified
Trespass to Dwelling. The said place is
a residential place and there is someone
who is occupying it even if at the moment
it is not people because the said
husband A and B are on vacations, it is
still considered as an inhabited place.
Therefore, the moment anyone enters,
the crime committed is trespass to
dwelling and not trespass to property.

THREE KINDS OF THREATS:


1. Grave threats
2. Light threats
3. Other light threats

ARTICLE 282 GRAVE THREATS


PUNISHABLE ACTS:
1. Threatening another with the infliction upon his
person, honor or property or that of his family of
any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding
money or imposing any other condition even
though not unlawful, and the offender attained his
purpose.
2. By making such threat with the infliction upon his
person, honor or property or that of his family of
any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding
money or imposing any other condition even
though not unlawful and without the offender
attaining his purpose. (Elements for this act are
the same with the first except that the purpose is
not attained.)
3. By threatening another with the infliction upon his
person, honor or infliction upon his person, honor
or property or that of his family of any wrong
amounting to a crime, the threat not being subject
to any demand of money or imposition of any
condition.

ARTICLE 283 LIGHT THREATS


Light threats is committed if a person threatens another
with the commission of any wrong which does not amount
to a crime. But it always subject to a demanded money or
the imposition of any other condition even though not
unlawful.

Art. 284 BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR


In all cases falling within the two next preceding
articles, the person making the threats may also be
required to give bail not to molest the person threatened, or
if he shall fail to give such bail, he shall be sentenced to
destierro.

ARTICLE 285 OTHER LIGHT THREATS

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 114

There are 3 instances or punishable acts under light


threats:
1. Threatening another with a weapon or by drawing
such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful
self-defense. Here, the weapon must not be
discharged.
2. Orally threatening another, in the heat of anger,
with some harm constituting a crime, without
persisting in the idea involved in his threat.
3. Any threat made in a jest or in the heat of anger
constitutes light threat only.
4. Orally threatening to do another any harm not
constituting a felony.

So whether it be grave threats, light threats or other light


threats, the essence of threats is INTIMIDATION. It is a
promise of a future wrong, a promise of a future harm. Not
now, but in the future.

So, since it is a promise of a future wrong, threats may be


committed either personally or orally or it can also be
committed in writing or through an internet chat. If threats
are committed through writing or through an internet chat,
the penalty is qualified.

Q: What is the difference between grave threats, light


threats or other light threats?
A: In GRAVE THREATS, the threat will always
amount or constitute a crime. It may or may not be
subject to a demand money or condition. The
offender may or may not attain his purpose. But, in
grave threats, the threats will always amount or
will always constitute to a crime. On the other
hand, in case of LIGHT THREATS, the threat will
not constitute to a crime but it is always and
always subject to a demand of money or the
imposition of any other condition.

So in LIGHT THREATS, the threat threatened to


be committed will not amount to a crime, will not
constitute to a crime, however it is always subject
to a demand of money or the imposition of any
other condition, even though not unlawful.

Lastly, in case of OTHER LIGHT THREATS, other


light threats can be done by threatening another
with a weapon or by drawing such weapon in a
quarrel, unless it be in lawful self-defense or it can
be done by orally threatening another with a harm
amounting to a crime in the heat of anger. So it is
necessary that the offender is in the heat of anger
or he threatens another with a harm amounting to
a crime. But he did not pursue with the idea
involved in his threat. And the last one is by orally
threatening another which does not constitute a
crime.

Q: So what if A went to the store and then from the said


store he learned that had been spreading negative rumors
against him. And so A was so mad, he was so angry that he
went to the house of B and he called on B: B get out of the
house! I will kill you! I will kill you! Get out of the house B!
But B did not get out of the house. Instead, it was the son
of B who came out of the house and said: What do you

CRIMINAL LAW 2
want with my father? A angrily said that, You let your
father come out or I will kill him because he has been
spreading negative rumors about me. The son went inside
the house and did not come back. The father also did not
come out of the house. And so later, A just left the house.
What crime is committed by A? Is it grave threats, light
threats or is it other light threats?
A: The crime committed is under Article 285
OTHER LIGHT THREATS. Orally, in the heat of
anger, he threatened another with a harm
constituting a crime, but he did not pursue with the
idea in his threat. It is only other light threats.

Q: What if, let us say, A saw that B has a new car. It was a
luxury car. He knew that it was smuggled and so he told B:
B, if you will not give me P500,000, I will call the Bureau of
Customs, I will tell ComissionerBiazon right now that your
car is smuggled. What crime if any is committed by A
against B?
A: It is LIGHT THREATS. He threatened to
commit a wrong which does not constitute a crime.
It is not a crime to inform the Bureau of Customs
that the car was smuggled and it is subject to a
demand of money and the imposition of any other
condition even though not unlawful.

Q: What if A, who is the creditor of B, was inside the house


of B. He was asking B to pay his indebtedness. B said:
Get out of my house. If I still see you in the afternoon
when I get back inside my house and if you are still here, I
will kill you. What crime is committed?
A: In this instance where B told A : Get out of my
house. If I still see you in the afternoon when I get
back inside my house and if you are still here, I
will kill you. The crime committed is GRAVE
THREATS. There is a promise of a future wrong to
be committed in the afternoon if A is still there in
the house.

Q: What if in the same problem, A was asking B to pay his


indebtedness. B said: Get out of my house! Otherwise, I
will kill you. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is GRAVE COERCION.
The threat is present, direct, personal, immediate
and imminent. Not in the future, but now direct,
personal and immediate.

So, to amount to preventive coercion, the offender by


means of violence prevents someone form doing
something which is not prohibited by law.

Q: Therefore, what if, the offender prevents someone form


doing something which is prohibited by law? So let us say
A, wanted to enter the house of B, against the will of B. X
saw A wanting to enter the house of B against the will of B.
X prevented A. A in his act of wanting to enter the house of
B, is an act prohibited by law, so X prevented A from doing
so. However, A still pursued with the act of entering and so
what X did in order to prevent him is that X boxed A
resulting in his injury of slight physical injuries. What crime
is committed by X?
A: It is not grave coercion. Because X is
preventing A by means of violence and
intimidation, not from doing something which is
prohibited by law but from doing something which
is prohibited by law. Therefore, it is not grave
coercion.
So what crime is committed?
The crime committed is SLIGHT PHYSICAL
INJURIES.

Q: What if in case of grave coercion, it is necessary that the


offender compels another to do something against his will,
regardless of whether
it be right or wrong, regardless
of whether it is allowed or prohibited by law. The fact is a
person cannot put the law in his hands and prevent
someone from doing something so long as it is against his
will.
A: So in case of grave coercion, if the essence of
threats is intimidation or a promise of a future
wrong, a promise of a future injury, the injury or
threat is present, direct, personal, immediate and
imminent. It is NOW. That is why, grave coercion
cannot be committed in writing or through an
internet chatting because it is always personal.
Hence, it is about to take place imminent and
immediate.

Q: So how would you distinguish threat vs. coercion?

Note that in case of threats made while committing


physical injuries, threats are absorbed.
ARTICLE 286 GRAVE COERCIONS
2 way of committing grave coercion:
1. Preventive Coercion
2. Compulsive Coercion

PREVENTIVE COERCION if a person prevents another,


by means of violence, threat or intimidation, from doing
something not prohibited by law.

COMPULSIVE COERCION if a person compels another,


by means of violence, threat or intimidation, to do
something against his will, whether it be right or wrong,
whether it be prohibited or not by law.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 115

THREAT

COERCION

The wrong threatened to


be committed is in the
future

The wrong threatened to be


committed is direct,
personal, immediate and
imminent

May be committed in
writing or through an
internet chatting

Cannot be committed in
writing or through internet
chatting because it is
always personal and
immediate

The essence of threat is


intimidation

It is violence or intimidation
amounting serious enough
to amount to violence

ARTICLE 287 LIGHT COERCION


It is committed by a creditor who shall seize anything
belonging to his debtor by means of violence or intimidation
in order to apply the same to the indebtedness.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
There is one form of light coercion under Article 287, that
is UNJUST VEXATION. It is a form of light coercion.
UNJUST VEXATION refers to any human conduct, which
although not capable of producing any material harm or
injury, annoys, vexes or irritates an innocent person.

Example in Book I: a person walking and hit with a lead


pipe on the head.
CASE OF BALEROS, JR.:
There was a UST medical student. There was a
cloth soaked with chemical pressed on her face.
So there was this man, she was awakened with a
man on top of her placing a cloth soaked with
chemical pressed on her face. The charge was
attempted rape. Supreme Court said it was just
UNJUST
V E X AT I O N

nangiinislangdawyunglalakingyun. So, Supreme Court


said it is a human conduct which annoys or vexes
the said female medical student.

Art. 288 OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS;


(COMPULSORY PURCHASE OF MERCHANDISE AND
PAYMENT OF WAGES BY MEANS OF TOKENS)
Other light coercion is committed by forcing or compelling
directly or indirectly or knowingly permitting the forcing or
compelling any employee or laborer to buy merchandise or
commodities from the said employer. And lastly, by paying
the wages due to the laborer or employees by any tokens
or object other than the legal tender currency of the
Philippines unless to be requested by the said employee or
laborer.

So it is more on LABOR other light coercion.


Q: What if a person, A threatened to kill B. and so B filed a
case of grave threats against A. The case was filed before
the court. Upon the filing of the court, what bail, if any,
should the court impose on A in order to insure that A will
not make good the said threat?
A: Under Article 284, we have BOND FOR
GOOD BEHAVIOR. Bond for good behavior is a
bail which is required by the court to be posted by
any accused only in the crimes of grave threats
and other light threats. In the crimes of grave
threats or other light threats, the court would allow
or would require an accused to file or to post a
bond for good behavior in order to ensure that he
will not make good the said threat. If the said
accused failed to pay or post the said bond for
good behavior, then the penalty hat would be
imposed is destierro in order to ensure that he
will not make good the said threat.

REVELATION OF SECRETS:
ARTICLE 290 DISCOVERING SECRETS THROUGH
SEIZURE OF CORRESPONDENCE
We have seizure of correspondence in order to discover
the secrets of another.
This is committed by any person who shall seize any
correspondence of another in order to discover the secret
of any person.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

NOTE: In case of seizure of correspondence in order to


discover the secrets of another, DAMAGE is not element.
Likewise, REVELATION is not an element.

The mere act of seizing the correspondence of another


with the intention to discover the secrets, the crime is
already consummated. It is not necessary that the secret
be revealed, it is not necessary that there be damage on
the part of the offended party.

ARTICLE 291 REVEALING SECRETS WITH THE


ABUSE OF OFFICE
This is committed by a manager or by an employee or by a
servant who reveals the secrets of his principal or master
learned by him in such capacity.
It is the REVELATION OF SECRETS which will
consummate the crime, not merely discovery but
revelation of the said secrets. Again, damage is not an
element. It is not necessary that the offended party be
prejudiced or damaged.

ARTICLE 292 REVELATION OF INDUSTRIAL


SECRETS
This is committed by any person in charge, employee or
workman of a manufacturing or industrial establishment
who shall learn and discover the secrets of the industry and
shall reveal the same to the prejudice of the owner thereof.
In case of revelation of industrial secrets, mere revelation
of those secrets will not suffice. There must be
DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE CAUSED TO THE
OFFENDED PARTY.
The law requires to the prejudice of the owner thereof.

RA 92400 - ANTI-WARTAPPING LAW


The following acts are punishable:
1. It shall be unlawful for any person, without
securing the consent of all the parties to any
private communication or spoken word, to tap
any wire or cable, or by using any other
device or arrangement to secretly overhear,
intercept or record such private
communication or spoken word by using a
device commonly known as a Dictaphone or
dictagraph, walkie talkie, tape recorder, or
other similar devices.
2. Knowingly possessing any tape record, wire
record, disc record, or any other such record,
or copies thereof, of these private
communication or spoken word.
3. Replaying these any tape record, wire record,
disc record to another person.
4. Communicating the contents of the said tape
record, wire record or disc record, in writing or
verbally to another person.
5. Furnishing transcriptions of these tape record,
wire record or disc record whether totally or
partially to any other person.

What is foremost prohibited is the act of tapping, recording


or intercepting any private communication or spoken word
without the consent of all the parties. Without being
authorized by all the parties to the said private
communication or spoken word.


Page 116

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Q: So what if A told B to come inside his room and when B
entered the room, A started scolding B. In scolding B, A
said scandalous remarks against B. Unknown to A, B was
tape recording the private conversation between them. Can
B later use the said tape recording in order to file a case of
defamation or slander against A?
A: NO. Because the said act of tape recording
without being authorized by all the parties to a
private communication or spoken word is
inadmissible in any judicial, quasi-judicial,
legislative or administrative proceedings or
investigation.

The ONLY EXCEPTION is when a police officer or peace


officer is authorized by written order of the court to listen to,
intercept or record any communication in crimes involving
treason, espionage, inciting to war or giving motives for
reprisals, piracy, mutiny, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal
to commit rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition
and kidnapping. Only in these instances and provided that
the said peace officer is authorized by a written order
coming from the court may he be allowed to intercept,
listen to or record the private communication or spoken
word.

TITLE TEN
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Art. 293 Who are guilty of robbery?
Robbery is committed by any person, who with
intent to gain shall take any personal property belonging to
another by means of violence against, or intimidation of any
person, or using force upon anything.

Elements of Robbery:
1. That the offender unlawfully takes a personal
property
2. That the said personal property belongs to
another person
3. There must be intent to gain in the taking of the
said property
4. That the said taking is either by means of violence
against, or intimidation of any person, or using
force upon anything
5.
Unlawful taking is the deprivation of the offended party of
his personal property with an element of permanency. So, it
is necessary that in taking the personal property from
another person, there is an element of permanency.

The law requires that the property must be personal


property, not real property because real property is under
Article 312 Occupation of real property.
The personal property must belong to another person
because if it do not belong to another person it cannot be
said that there is intent to gain on the part of the offender.
The law requires that there must be intent to gain.
Intent to gain is an internal state of mind. So how can you
prove intent to gain? The law presumes there is intent to
gain the moment there is taking of the personal property of
another person. Intent to gain is presumed by law.

Two ways of committing robbery:


1. Robbery with violence against or intimidation (Art.
294)

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 117

Robbery with the use of force upon things (Art.


299)
The value of the property taken in robbery with violence
against or intimidation against people is immaterial
because the penalty is dependent on the violence used by
the offender against the offended party.
However, in
Robbery with the use of force upon things (Art.299), the
value of the property taken is material because the penalty
is dependent on the value of the property taken.
2.

Art.294 - Robbery with violence against or intimidation


of persons
The following acts constitute robbery with violence against
or intimidation of persons:
1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, the
crime of homicide is committed.
2. When robbery is accompanied by rape or
intentional mutilation or arson.
3. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery,
any of the physical injuries resulting in insanity,
imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted.
4. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of
the physical injuries resulting in the loss of the use
of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or the
loss of an eye, a hand, foot, an arm, or a leg or
the loss of the use of any such member or
incapacity to go to work in which the injured
person is thereto habitually engaged is inflicted.
5. If violence or intimidation employed in the
commission of the robbery is carried to a degree
clearly unnecessary for the commission of the
crime
6. When in the course of its execution, the offender
shall have inflicted upon any person not
responsible for the commission of the robbery any
of the physical injuries in consequence of which
the person injured becomes deformed or loses
any other member of his body or loses the use
thereof or becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he is habitually
engaged for more than 90 days or the person
injured becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for
more than 30 days
7. If violence employed by the offender does not
cause any of the serious physical injuries defined
in Article 263, or if the offender employs
intimidation only.

In other words, we have robbery with homicide, robbery


with rape, robbery with intentional mutilation, robbery with
arson, robbery with serious physical injuries, robbery with
unnecessary violence and lastly, simple robbery.

Robbery with Homicide


Robbery with homicide is a special complex crime or a
composite crime or a single indivisible offense. In reality
two or more crimes have been committed, the robbery and
the homicide yet, in the eyes of the law only one crime, a
single indivisible offense of robbery with homicide.
Q: When should the killing or the homicide take place?

A: In case of robbery with homicide, for as long as


the original intent of the offender, for as long original
criminal design is to commit robbery or to rob, the killing

CRIMINAL LAW 2
may take place before, during or after the said robbery
provided, that the original intent/ original criminal design is
to commit robbery or to rob.
Since it is a special complex crime, regardless of
the number of the persons killed there is only a single
indivisible offense of robbery with homicide. Even if the
killing is an unintentional killing or accidental killing still, it is
a single indivisible offense of robbery with homicide. Even if
the victim of the said robbery is different from the victim of
the killing, it is still robbery with homicide. There lies the
difference between Article 294 and Article 267.
In
kidnapping and serious illegal detention with homicide, the
victim of the kidnapping and serious illegal detention must
be the victim in the said killing to amount to kidnapping and
serious illegal detention. But in case of robbery with
homicide, regardless of who the offended party may be,
whether the offended party in robbery is different from the
offended party in the killing it is still robbery with homicide.

Q: So let us say, A entered the house of B in order to


commit robbery. He took the valuables therein and after
taking the jewelries suddenly the box of jewelries fell so X
was awaken. When A saw that X was awaken, A shot X. X
died. What crime is committed?
A: Robbery with homicide. Because by reason or
on occasion of robbery, homicide was committed.

Q: What if in the same problem, when X was awaken, the


robber, A, shot X. The wife was also awaken and so the
wife started shouting so A also shot the wife. The wife also
died. What crime/s is committed?
A: Two persons are killed still, the crime
committed is still a single indivisible offense of
robbery with homicide. All the killings are merged
into a composite intergraded whole that is a single
indivisible offense of robbery with homicide.

Q: What if let us say, in the same problem, so A went to the


house of X and took the jewelries. He was on his way out
when he bumped the door and so the owner of the house
was awaken. So A went down and saw the back of the
robber. And so he chased the robber. In the garden, A tried
to shoot the owner of the house and so A jumped on him
and they struggled for the possession of the gun. In the
course of struggle for the possession of the gun, the gun
fired hitting a ballot vendor passing by. The ballot vendor
died. What crime/s is committed?
A: The crime committed is still the single
indivisible offense of robber with homicide. Since
it is a special complex crime, even if the victim of
the robbery is different from the victim of the
homicide, it is still robbery with homicide. Even if it
is only accidental killing it is still robbery with
homicide so long as the killing is by reason or on
occasion of the said robbery.

Q: So what if, A, B, and C entered the house of X in order


to commit robbery. They have already taken the valuables
when the owner of the house was awaken. It was only A
who saw the owner of the house was awaken and so A
shot X and killed him. Are they all liable for robbery with
homicide or only A who shot X?
A: All of them are criminally liable for the crime of
robbery with homicide. Under Article 8, that in case of an
express or direct conspiracy, the conspirators are liable

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 118

only for the crime agreed upon. The crime agreed is to


commit robbery but how come all of them are liable for
homicide? Because it falls under the exception that when
the resulting felony is a special complex crime because you
cannot separate or divide a special complex crime.
Therefore, even if it was only A who killed the victim, even if
their agreement is only to commit robbery, because
homicide or the killing was committed by reason or on
occasion of the said robbery, all of them are criminally liable
for the crime of robbery with homicide.
The only exception to the exception is when B
and C performed acts in order to prevent A from committing
the homicide.

CASE OF PEOPLE vs CABBAB


Let us say, A and B versus X, Y and Z. A and B
committed robbery and upon leaving the said place, X and
Y saw A and B and shot them and made gun fires. Z, a
police officer dove into the canal in order to prevent himself
from being killed. A and B went directly to X and Y and
killed them both. And thereafter, A and B took the winnings.
Based on the circumstances or facts the fiscal filed the
following cases before the RTC, robbery, double murder,
and attempted murder, robbery because of the taking of the
winnings, double murder for the death of X and Y and
attempted murder as to the police officer who dove into the
canal. What is the ruling of the RTC? It said wrong ka
fiscal! The crime is robbery with double homicide and
attempted murder. Then it went to appeal on the Court of
Appeals, sabiniya wrong fiscal! Wrong ka din RTC! The
crime committed is robbery with homicide and attempted
murder. Then it went up to the Supreme Court. Sc said,
malika fiscal! Mali ka RTC! Mali kadn CA! Mali kayo lahat!
The only crime committed is the single indivisible crime of
robbery with homicide. Because all the acts are considered
absorbed in the crime of robbery with homicide despite the
fact that two persons were killed, despite the fact that one
person was greatly injured, all these circumstances are
merged into a composite integrated whole that is single
indivisible offense of robbery with homicide.

Robbery with rape


Just like robbery with homicide, is also a special
complex crime or a single indivisible offense. So, for as
long as the intention of the offender is to commit robbery,
rape may be committed before, during or after the
commission of robbery. Since it is a special complex crime,
regardless of the number of times the victim was raped, the
crime committed is only robbery with rape. There is no such
crime as robbery with multiple rapes. There is only robbery
with rape.

Q: So a woman was walking on her way home and


because it was pay day here comes X. X dragged the
woman in a dark place and took the bag and took the
money inside it. And then he found the woman attractive so
he raped the woman not once but twice. What crime/s is
committed?
A: X committed the crime of robbery with rape
regardless of the times the woman was raped.

CASE OF PEOPLE vs SUYU


Two persons, boyfriend and girlfriend, they were
having snack and saw the shadow of 3 men. And these 3
men were pushing the truck trying to open the door. They

CRIMINAL LAW 2
took their valuables and the boyfriend hurriedly left the
girlfriend allegedly to ask help to the police. And so the
girlfriend was alone with the three men and they dragged
her into a nipa hut and there she was raped by the
mastermind, Suyu. Not only she was raped by Suyu but
also Cainglet while, the other two was outside serving as
lookouts. So the said woman, Clarissa, was raped by two
persons and she was raped three times. Suyu and Cainglet
raped her by carnal knowledge. Not only that, Cainglet also
inserted two fingers to her genitals therefore, he also
committed rape by sexual assault.
What crimes are
committed by the 4 persons? What crime/s they should be
criminally liable of?

Supreme Court said, they are all liable for the


single indivisible offense of Robbery with Rape.
Regardless of the fact that two persons raped the victim,
regardless of the fact that the victim was raped 3 times,
regardless of the fact that there is two nature of rape
committed against the victim (rape by carnal knowledge
and rape by sexual assault), still the crime committed is the
single indivisible offense of robbery with rape.

from his pocket and stab A in his face and placed the ice
pick in As face. A suffered serious physical injuries and
deformity in his face. It caused physical ugliness to A
therefore there is deformity. What crime/s is committed?

A: This time the crime committed by B is not the


single indivisible crime of robbery with serious
physical injuries but two crimes, Robbery and
Serious physical injuries under paragraph 3 of
Article 263 because of the deformity.
Why?
Because under paragraph 4 of Article 294, when
the serious physical injury that resulted is a
deformity or the loss of any of the member of his
body, the law requires that the said physical injury
or deformity must be inflicted because of the
execution of a robbery and to a person not
responsible to the commission of the crime of
robbery. Here, the deformity was inflicted after the
robbery, not before. Not only that. The deformity
was inflicted on A, the person responsible for the
commission of the robbery.

There are four conspirators but not all of them


raped the victim. Yet they are all liable for robbery with rape
because the two lookouts did not perform acts in order to
prevent the consummation of the said rape. So since it is a
special complex crime and a single indivisible offense all
the other rapes are merged into a composite integrated
whole that is robbery with rape.
The same theory applies in case of robbery with intentional
mutilation and robbery with arson.

If the serious physical injuries inflicted resulted to a


deformity or to a loss of any of the member of his body or
loss of the use of any such member or incapacity to go to
work in which the injured person is thereto habitually
engaged for more than 90 days, under paragraph 3 of
Article 263, it is required that in order to amount to a single
indivisible offense the said deformity or serious physical
injury must be inflicted in the course of the execution of the
robbery and to a person not responsible to the commission
of the robbery. Otherwise, it will bring about a separate and
distinct crime.

Robbery with intentional mutilation, arson and serious


physical injuries
For as long as the intent or the criminal design of
the offender is to commit robbery, the intentional mutilation,
arson or serious physical injuries may be committed before,
during or after the commission of the said robbery.

Title Nine
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND
SECURITY

Q: So let say A and B saw X walking. It was pay day and so


A and B announced a holdup. They were both armed with
guns and so what X did since they were both armed with
guns, he gave the bag. By reason thereof, A and B already
left the place. While A and B was waiting for a ride in a
waiting shed, A and B divided the things they took from X.
So A told B, this is your share. B said, why is my share
smaller than your share?! And so B got and he shot A. A
died. What is the crime committed?
A: The crime committed is robbery with homicide
because even if it was also an offender who was
killed, the killing took place by reason of the said
robbery.

Q: So what if in the same problem, so A and B were


already dividing the things they took and B said, wait why is
my share so small? B got mad shot A but A did not die. A
suffered serious physical injuries.
What crime is
committed?
A: The crime committed is robbery with serious
physical injuries.

Q: What if in the same problem, A were dividing the things


and B said, why is my share so small compared to your
share? B got mad and what he did was took an ice pick

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 119

Chapter One
CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY
Section One Illegal Detention
Art. 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention.

It is committed when any private individual who


kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner
deprive him of his liberty. When such detention is
illegal or committed in any of the following
circumstances:
a. If the kidnapping or detention shall have
lasted more than three days;
b. If it shall have been committed simulating
public authority;
c. If any serious physical injuries shall have
been inflicted upon the person kidnapped
or detained; or if threats to kill him shall
have been made;
d. If the person kidnapped or detained shall
be a minor, female or a public officer.
The crime committed is serious illegal

CRIMINAL LAW 2
detention.
1st Element

Who is the offender?


He must be a private individual because if he
is a public officer vested with the power to
effect arrest and detain a person, he will be
liable for arbitrary detention under Article 124.

-The circumstances are the following:


a. If the purpose of the kidnapping or
detention was to extort ransom from the
victim or any other person. Therefore, we

Can a public officer also commit kidnapping and


serious illegal detention?
Yes. If said public officer has not been vested
by law with the authority to effect arrest and
detain a person, then said person is acting in
his private capacity. Since he is acting in his
private capacity then he is liable for
kidnapping and serious illegal detention and
not under Article 124 which is arbitrary
detention.
2nd Element

When is there detention?


There is detention if the offender detains the
person or liberty of another person. He must
be detained or incarcerated, there must be
showing that there was restraint in his person
or liberty. Otherwise, if there is no restraint in
his person or liberty, it could be any other
crime but not kidnapping and serious illegal
detention.
The law requires that detention must be
illegal. Therefore, there should be no
reasonable ground thereof.

qualify the penalty that will make the institution of


the maximum penalty of death?

Circumstances that will make the crime serious


illegal detention:
a. The kidnapping or detention shall have
lasted more than three days;
b. It shall have been committed simulating
public authority;
- By pretending to be a public officer,
pretending to be NBI agent.
c.Any serious physical injuries shall have
been inflicted upon the person kidnapped
or detained; or if threats to kill him shall
have been made;
d.The person kidnapped or detained shall be
a minor, female or public officer.

The presence of any of these circumstances will


make the crime serious illegal detention and the
absence of any of these circumstances will make
the crime slight illegal detention under Article 268.

Note that the penalty is reclusion perpetua to


death. What then are the circumstances that will

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 120

b.

c.

d.

have kidnapping and serious illegal


detention with ransom.
If the person kidnapped or detained died
or is killed as a consequence of
kidnapping and serious illegal detention,
we have kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with homicide.
If the person kidnapped or detained is
raped, we have kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with rape.
If person kidnapped or detained is
subjected to torture or other
dehumanizing acts.

Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with


Ransom
- Ransom
- Any money, price or consideration given or
demanded as a redemption for the liberty of
the person detained. Any money, price or
consideration which is given in exchange for
the liberty of the person detained or
incarcerated is considered ransom.
-People vs. Mamantak
While the mother and her daughter were in a
food chain in Tondo, the mother lost her
daughter. She searched for her daughter over
a year. A year and 6 months thereafter, she
received a phone call from a Muslim woman
claiming that she has her daughter and she
was demanding P30,000 in exchange of her
child. The woman instructed the mother to go
to a restaurant, where the exchange will take
place. However, the mother already reported
the call to the police. When they were in the
restaurant and while the exchange was taking
place, the police apprehended Mamantak.
The crime charged was kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with ransom. The
RTC convicted the accused, however for
kidnapping and serious illegal detention but
not for ransom. According to the RTC, the
amount given, 30 thousand pesos, is such a
small amount to be considered ransom.
According to the RTC it is merely a payment
for the board and lodging of the child during

CRIMINAL LAW 2
the child was held by Mamantak.
-SC: The crime committed is kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with ransom. Kahit 5
pesos pa yan if it was given or demanded as
a redemption for the liberty of the person
detained it is already considered as ransom.
There is no such thing as small amount in so
far as ransom is concerned.

But what if in the same problem, the father told the


NBI agents about the kidnapping. The agents
were ale to track down than place where the child
was being kept. They went over the hide out and
exchange of gunfire took place. The father saw
that his child and took him away. While they were
escaping the kidnapper saw them and shot the
father. What crime or crimes was or were
committed?
-In so far as the minor is concerned, the crime
committed is kidnapping and serious illegal
detention. Even if it has not lasted for a period
of more than three day, the fact that the victim
is a minor, the crime committed is kidnapping
and serious illegal detention.
-In so far as the father is concerned, since he is
not the victim of the crime of kidnapping, a
separate crime of homicide should be filed.
-Therefore, there are 2 crimes committed by said
kidnapper: kidnapping and serious illegal
detention, in so far as the minor is concerned
and homicide in so far as the father is
concerned.

NOTE: The same is true for kidnapping and


serious illegal detention with rape. It is necessary
that the victim is the one raped and since it is
again a special complex crime regardless of the
number of times that the victim was raped the
crime committed is only kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with rape. There is no such crime
as kidnapping and serious illegal detention with
multiple rapes. Only kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with rape and so with kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with physical injuries
which is also a special complex crime.

Example

A was indebted to B. B was asking for the


payment, however A failed to pay. B got fed up
therefore he kidnapped the minor child of A. B
called A telling him that he would only release his
child if he pays his indebtedness of half a million.
Is the crime of kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with ransom committed?
-Yes, it is already kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with ransom even if the amount
being asked by the kidnapper is the
indebtedness of the father of the kidnapped
child. So any amount given or demanded for
the release of the person detained, that is
already considered ransom.

Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with


Homicide
-It is a special complex crime. Therefore, since it is
a special complex crime, regardless of the
number of the victims, it is still kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with murder or
homicide.

-People vs. Laranaga


- There were 2 kidnapped victims. They were
sisters kidnapped and raped, thereafter killed.
SC held that even though there were 2
victims the crime committed is kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with homicide.

- NOTE: It is the victim himself or herself who


died. If it is another person, it is another
separate and distinct crime because the law
is particular that the victim himself is the one
that is killed or dies as consequence thereof.

Example:

A kidnapped the child of B who is his enemy. Child


is 10 years old. While being held, the child tried to
escape. A caught the child trying to escape. He
shot the child. What was the crime committed?
-The crime committed was kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with homicide

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 121

Example:

A, is a 6 year old child, while playing in the


playground was approached by X and gave her
candy. Meanwhile, the mother was busy hanging
their clothes. After a while, X came back and this
time gave the child money. The child was so
happy and easily persuaded to go with X. The
mother searched for her daughter but she was
nowhere to be found. X brought the child in his
house and molested her twice. The following day,
the mother found her child in their house with torn
and blooded clothes. The crime charged was
kidnapping and serious illegal detention with rape.
Is the crime charged proper?
-No, the charge is wrong because the obvious
intention is to rape the child and not to detain
her. SC held that the man is guilty of 2 counts

CRIMINAL LAW 2

of statutory rape because the child is below


12 years of age and she was molested twice.
Therefore, unless and until there was an
intention to detain the child on the part of the
offender, it could be any other crime but not
kidnapping and serious illegal detention.

A saw his enemy walking. He abducted his enemy


and placed him in a vacant lot. The following
morning, his enemy was found in a vacant lot
dead with 10 gun shot wounds. The crime
committed is murder. Obviously there was no
intent to detain the said offended party. The intent
was to kill him. Therefore, the proper charge is
murder and not kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with murder or homicide as the case
maybe. In order to amount to kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with homicide or murder
or physical injuries, it is necessary that there must
be intent to detain and in the course of such
detention the victim is killed or raped or subjected
to torture or other dehumanizing acts.

If any of the circumstances is absent it will only be


slight illegal detention under article 268.

Art. 268. Slight illegal detention.


Elements:
1. Offender is a private individual
2. He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprive him of his liberty
3. The act of kidnapping or detention is illegal
4. Committed absent any of the circumstances under
Art. 267
Example

A, was envious of his neighbor. He kidnapped said


neighbor in the morning and placed him in a
secluded place. A realized that he might be
imprisoned, so he decided to release his neighbor
in the evening. What is the effect if such release to
the criminal liability of A?
-Under Article 268, slight illegal detention, it is
provided that if the victim is released, such
release shall be considered as a privilege
mitigating circumstance because from the
penalty of reclusion temporal, the penalty will
be lowered by one degree which is prision
mayor. However, in order that this voluntary
release maybe considered a privilege
mitigating circumstance these are the
requisites:
a. The release must be within three days
from the commencement of the
detention;

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 122

b. It must be made without having


attained the purpose intended;
c. It must be made before the institution
of criminal proceedings against him.
-If all these are present, then such voluntary
release of the offender will mitigate the
criminal liability of said offender.

A kidnapped a public officer in the morning. In the


evening he released the said public officer. Will
such release mitigate the criminal liability of A?
-No. Because the fact that the person kidnapped
is a public officer the crime committed is
already kidnapping and serious illegal
detention under Article 267. If the crime
committed is Article 267, no amount of
voluntary release will mitigate the criminal
liability of the offender.

NOTE: If the victim is a minor, female, public


officer automatically the crime committed is a
kidnapping and serious illegal detention under
Article 267 and no amount of voluntary release will
mitigate the criminal liability of the offender.

Art. 269. Unlawful arrest.


Elements:
1. Offender arrests or detains another person
2. The purpose of the offender is to deliver him to the
proper authorities
3. The arrest or detention is not authorized by law or
there is no reasonable ground therefor.
Example:

A was walking when he was arrested by B a police


officer. The arrest was without warrant but the
same was not executed under any of the
circumstances for a valid warrantless arrest.
Because there were no complainants and
evidence presented, the fiscal dismissed the case.
What is the proper crime to be charged?
-The public officer is guilty of unlawful arrest. The
fact that he has been detained is already
absorbed because the intention of the said
public officer is to file a case against him, that
is, to deliver him to the proper authorities.
Therefore the arbitrary detention is absorbed
in unlawful arrest.

Section Two Kidnapping of minors

Art. 270. Kidnapping and failure to return a minor


Elements:
1. Offender is any person entrusted with the custody

CRIMINAL LAW 2
2.

of a minor
He deliberately fails to restore the minor to his
parents or guardians or any person charged with
the custody of the minor

Example

A and B has a child who was entrusted to X


because they were going on vacation for a week.
They instructed X to return the child after 7 days.
When they came back home X failed to return the
child. X was so busy and she forgot to return the
child. Can X be charged with kidnapping under
Article 270?
-No because he did not deliberately fail to restore
the child to his parents or guardian. The law
requires deliberately. Here he failed to return
the child because of his negligence. He was
so busy.

Art. 271. Inducing a minor to abandon his home


Elements:
1. That a minor is living in the home of his parents or
guardian or the person entrusted with his custody
2. The offender induces said minor to abandon such
home

It is committed by any person who shall induce a


minor to abandon the home of his parent or
guardians or the persons entrusted with his
custody.

The crime will arise even if the child has not left
the house of his parents or guardian. Mere
inducement with intent to cause damage will
suffice.

Example

A and B, husband and wife, whose marriage has


been declared a nullity by the court. The custody
of their child who is 5 years of age is given to the
mother as provided by law. The father was
granted visitation rights. One Sunday the father
visited the 5 years old son and he brought him
out. Usually, he would return the child by
nighttime. However, the father did not bring back
the child to his mothers house. The mother
demanded the return of the child but the father still
failed to return the child. Therefore the mother
filed a case of kidnapping under article 270
against the father. Will the case prosper?
- Yes the case will prosper. Under article 271 it is
provided that the father or the mother of the minor
may commit any of the crimes covered by the two
preceding articles. The only difference is that in
case kidnapping and failure to return a minor
under Art. 270, the penalty of reclusion perpetua

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 123

shall be imposed upon any other person but if it


shall be the father or the mother of the minor, the
penalty shall be arresto mayor
or a fine or both under the discretion of the court.
Therefore, even the mother or the father can be
criminally liable under articles 270 and 271. The
only difference is in the penalty

Section Three Slavery and Servitude

Art. 272. Slavery


Elements:
1. Offender is any person who shall purchase, sell,
kidnap or detain a human being
2. The purpose is to enslave the human being

If the purpose is to engage in some immoral


traffic, the penalty shall be qualified.

Art. 273. Exploitation of child labor


Elements:
1. Offender is any person who retains a minor in his
service
2. It is against the will of the minor
3. It is under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a
debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or
person entrusted with the custody of a minor

Art. 274. Services rendered under compulsion in


payment of debt
Elements:
1. Offender is a creditor who compels a debtor to
work for him, either as household or farm laborer
2. It is against the debtors will
3. The purpose is to require or enforce the payment
of a debt

Chapter Two
CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY

Section One Abandonment of helpless persons and


Exploitation of minors

Art. 275. Abandonment of person in danger and


abandonment of one's own victim

3 acts punished:

1.Any one who shall fail to render assistance to


any person whom he shall find in an
uninhabited place wounded or in danger of
dying, when he can render such assistance
without detriment to himself, unless such
omission shall constitute a more serious
offense;

CRIMINAL LAW 2

Elements:
1. The place is not inhabited
2. The accused found there is a person
wounded or in danger of dying
3. The accused can render assistance
w/out detriment to himself
4. T h e a c c u s e d f a i l s t o r e n d e r
assistance

2.Anyone who shall fail to help or render


assistance to another whom he has
accidentally wounded or injured;

3.Anyone who, having found an abandoned child


under seven years of age, shall fail to deliver
said child to the authorities or to his family, or
shall fail to take him to a safe place.

Example

A saw B at Luneta Park. He was wounded, he was


bitten by a dog. He was crying for help, instead of
helping B, A took off. Is he liable under Article
275?
-No because Luneta park is not an uninhabited
place. Uninhabited place is one where there
is remote possibility for the victim to receive
some help. Luneta Park is a public place.
Therefore, A cannot be held liable under
Article 275.

2nd Act
Example

A was driving his car when suddenly it tripped


over a stone. The stone flew, hitting the left eye of
a bystander. Is A liable?
-No because it was purely accidental. It is an
exempting circumstance. he was performing a
lawful act with due care. An incident
happened without fault or accident on his
part.

But what if A found B. B was bitten by a snake and


it was still there. B was asking for help but A did
not help him because he was afraid that the snake
too might bite him. Can A be held liable under
Article 275?
-No, because helping B would be detrimental on
his part.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 124

However, when the left eye of the bystander bled,


he saw it, instead of bringing the person to the
hospital, he sped up. Is A criminally liable?
-Yes, A is criminally liable. When he failed to
render assistance to his victim, he is
criminally liable under Article 275.

Art. 276. Abandoning a minor


Elements:
1. Offender is any person who has custody of a child
2. The child is under 7 years of age
3. That he permanently, deliberately and consciously
abandons such child
4. That he has no intent to kill the child when the
latter is abandoned

1st Act
Example

A was hunting in the forest. He found B in the


middle of the forest. There was a big trunk of a
tree in his neck; thus, B cannot move. He was
begging for help. A however just left. B thereafter
was rescued. Can A be held liable under Article
275?
-Yes because A found B in an uninhabited place,
the forest. He was wounded, he was in
danger of dying because there was a big
trunk in his neck. There was no detriment on
the part of A if he renders assistance but he
failed to render the same. Therefore he is
liable under Article 275.

Penalty will be qualified if


a.death of the minor shall result by reason of such
abandonment or
b.the safety of the child has been placed in
danger.

Art. 277. Abandonment of minor by person entrusted


with his custody; indifference of parents

2 acts punished:

1.Abandonment of a child by a person entrusted


with the custody
Elements:
1. The offender is any person who has
charge of the rearing or education of
a minor
2. The he deliver said minor to a public
institution or other persons
3. That it is without the consent of the
one who entrusted such child to his
care or in the absence of the latter,
without the consent of the proper
authorities

2.Indifference of Parents
Elements:
1. The offender is a parent

CRIMINAL LAW 2
2. The he neglects his children by not
giving them the education
3. That his station in life requires such
education and financial conditions
permits it

beggar.

Art. 278. Exploitation of minors.

The following are the acts punished:

1. Any person who shall cause any boy


girl under sixteen years of age
perform any dangerous feat
balancing, physical strength,
contortion;

or
to
of
or

Art. 279. Additional penalties for other offenses.


The imposition of the penalties prescribed in the
preceding articles, shall not prevent the imposition upon
the same person of the penalty provided for any other
felonies defined and punished by this Code.

2. Any person who, being an acrobat,


gymnast, rope-walker, diver, wild-animal
tamer or circus manager or engaged in a
similar calling, shall employ in exhibitions
of these kinds children under sixteen
years of age who are not his children or
descendants;

In either case, the guardian or curator


convicted shall also be removed from
office as guardian or curator; and in the
case of the parents of the child, they
may be deprived, temporarily or
perpetually, in the discretion of the court,
of their parental authority;

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 125

4. Any ascendant, guardian, teacher or


person entrusted in any capacity with the
care of a child under sixteen years of
age, who shall deliver such child
gratuitously to any person following any
of the callings enumerated in paragraph
2 hereof, or to any habitual vagrant or
beggar.

Section Two Trespass to dwelling

Art. 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling


Elements:
1. Offender is a private person
2. He enters the dwelling of another
3. That such entrance is against the latters will

3. Any person engaged in any of the


callings enumerated in the next
paragraph preceding who shall employ
any descendant of his under twelve
years of age in such dangerous
exhibitions;

5. Any person who shall induce any child


under sixteen years of age to abandon
the home of its ascendants, guardians,
curators, or teachers to follow any
person engaged in any of the callings
mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof, or to
accompany any habitual vagrant or

These acts are considered exploitation of minors


because these acts endanger the life and safety,
the growth and development of said minors. This
usually involves circus.

Trespass to Dwelling or Qualified Trespass to


Dwelling is committed by any private person who
shall enter the dwelling of another against the
latter's will

It is committed by a private person because if it is


public officer the crime committed is under Art.
128 which is Violation of Domicile. Under Art. 128,
when the law says against the will, it means that
there is some prohibition, there is opposition of
entering whether express or implied. Mere entry
without the consent of the owner will not bring
about qualified trespass to dwelling. If the door is
open it means that anybody can enter even
without the consent of the owner. The moment he
enters he cannot be held liable with qualified
trespass because there is no prohibition or
opposition to enter. It is necessary that there must
be prohibition or opposition from entering.
It can be express an express prohibition
such as, when there is a note stating
DO NOT ENTER or when the door is
closed after a person knocks when the
owner sees the person knocking.
It is implied if the door is closed even if it
is not locked.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Art. 281. Other forms of trespass. The penalty of
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or
both, shall be imposed upon any person who shall
enter the closed premises or the fenced estate of
another, while either or them are uninhabited, if the
prohibition to enter be manifest and the trespasser has
not secured the permission of the owner or the
caretaker thereof.

Trespass to Property
Elements:
1.Offender is any person who shall enter the
closed premises or the fenced estate of
another person
2.The entrance is made while either of them is
uninhabited
3.That the prohibition to enter be manifest
4.That the trespasser has not secured the
permission of the owner or the caretaker
thereof

place and someone is occupying it even if at the


moment it is uninhabited because the owners
went on vacation. It is considered an inhabited
place therefore the moment someone enters, it
is considered trespass to dwelling and not
trespass to property.

Section Three Threats and coercion

3 kinds of threats:
1. Grave threats
2. Light threats
3. Other light threats

Art. 282. Grave threats


Acts punished:

1.

Trespass to Dwelling vs. Trespass to Property

Trespass to Dwelling

2.

Trespass to Property

Place is a dwelling and P l a c e i s a c l o s e d


inhabited
premise or the fenced
estate of another which
is unihabited

Prohibition to enter can Prohibition to enter


either be express or must be manifest
implied
Entry was made against E n t r y w a s m a d e
the will of the owner/ without seeking the
possessor of property
permission of the
owner/caretaker thereof

Example
Townhouse A was currently uninhabited. There was a
notice posted that it was for rent. X entered the said
townhouse. What crime was committed by A?
-Trespass to Property because at that time the
premises was closed and uninhabited and he
enters without securing the permission of the
owner or the caretaker.

A and B, husband and wife, went on vacation for a


month. Their house was therefore uninhabited. X learned
that there was no one inside the house. he entered the
house. what crime was committed? Is it Trespass to
Property or Qualified Trespass to Dwelling?
-Qualified Trespass to Dwelling. It is a residential

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 126

3.

Threaten another with the infliction upon the


person, honor or property of the latter or of his
family of any wrong amounting to a crime coupled
with a demand of money or imposition of any
other condition, even though not unlawful, and
said offender attained his purpose

Threaten another with the infliction upon the


person, honor or property of the latter or of his
family of any wrong amounting to a crime coupled
with the demand of money of money or imposition
any other condition, even though not unlawful, and
said offender did not attain his purpose
Threaten another with the infliction upon the
person, honor or property of the latter or of his
family of any wrong amounting to a crime without
the demand of money or imposition of any other
condition

Art. 283. Light threats


Light threats:
- Any threat to commit a wrong not constituting a
crime, but it is always subject to a demand of
money or imposition of any other condition, even
though not unlawful

Art. 284. Bond for good behavior


Example:
A threatened to kill B. B filed a case of grave threats
against A. Upon filing of the case, what bail if any should
the court impose upon A?
ANS: BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR - is a bail
required by the court to be posted by any accused
only in the crimes of grave threats and other light
threats. This is to ensure that the offender will not
make good the threat imposed by him. Failure to

CRIMINAL LAW 2
post the bond, the offender shall be sentenced to
destierro.

Art. 285. Other light threats


Acts punished:

1.

2.

3.

Threatening another with a weapon or draw such


weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful selfdefense

Example:
A learned that B was spreading negative rumors against
him. A was so mad so he went to the house of B and
shouted, B get out of your house. I will kill you! I will kill
you! But B did not go out of the house. Instead, it was
the son of B who went out. A told the son to let his father
go out because A would kill him. Upon hearing this, the
son went inside the house and did not go back. B as well
did not go out. Later, A left Bs house.

Orally threatening, in the heat of anger, another


with some harm not constituting a crime, and who
by subsequent acts show that he did not persist in
the idea involved in his threat
Orally threatening to do another any harm not
constituting a felony

Whether it be grave, light or other light threats, the

A saw that B has a new Lexus. A knew that the car was
smuggled. A told B. If you will not give me 500,000php, I
will tell the Bureau of Customs that your car is
smuggled.

essence of the threats is intimidation - the promise of a


future wrong or harm.

Threats can be committed personally, orally, in writing or


through an intermediary. If committed in writing or
through an intermediary, the penalty is qualified.

DISTINCTION: GRAVE, LIGHT, OTHER LIGHT THREATS


GRAVE
THREATS

LIGHT
THREATS

OTHER LIGHT
THREATS

The threat is
always
&
a l w a y s
amounting to
and constituting
a crime. It may
or may not be
subject to
demand of
money
or
imposition of
o t h e r
conditions. The
offender may or
may not attain
his purpose.

The threat does


not amount to a
crime. It is
always and
always subject
to a demand of
money or the
imposition of
any
other
condition, even
though not
unlawful.

Committed by
threatening another
with a weapon or
draw such weapon
in a quarrel, unless
it be in lawful selfdefense; or orally
threatening, in the
h e a t o f a n g e r,
another with some
harm
not
constituting a crime,
and who by
subsequent acts
show that he did not
persist in the idea
involved in his
threat; or orally
threatening to do
any harm not
constituting a
felony.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 127

CRIME: A committed other light threats. A, in the


heat of anger, orally threatened B with a wrong
constituting a crime but he did not pursue the
idea.

CRIME: Light threats. A threatened to commit a


wrong not constituting a crime. It is not a crime to
tell Customs that the car was smuggled. The
threat is subject to a demand of money or the
imposition of any other condition, even though not
unlawful.

A, creditor of B, was inside the house of the latter


seeking for payment of debt. B said, get out of my
house. If I still see you later afternoon in my house when
I come back, I will kill you!

CRIME: B committed Grave threats because there


is a promise of a future wrong of killing to be
committed in the afternoon.

A, creditor of B, was inside the house of the latter


seeking for payment of debt. B said, get out of my house
right now or else I will kill you!

CRIME: B committed Grave coercion. The threat


is present, direct, personal, immediate and
imminent. It is not in the future.

Art. 286. Grave coercions


2 ways to commit grave coercion:
1. PREVENTIVE COERCION
if a person prevents another by means of
violence or intimidation from doing
something not prohibited by law.
Example:
A wanted to enter the house of B against the latters will.
X saw A, so he prevented A. Nevertheless, A continued

CRIMINAL LAW 2

to enter. Because of this, X boxed A resulting to slight


physical injuries.
CRIME: Slight physical injuries because X
prevents a person from doing something
prohibited by law. In grave coercion, the offender
prevents someone to do something not prohibited
by law.
2.

COMPULSORY COERCION
if a person compels another by means of
violence and intimidation from doing
something against his will, whether it be
right or wrong, prohibited or not.
-

Unlike in threats where the essence of


the threats is the promise to do a future
wrong or injury; in coercion, the threat is
present, direct, personal and imminent.
Hence, grave coercion cannot be
committed through an intermediary or in
writing because the threat is always
personal, present and imminent. The
threatened act is about to be committed.

DISTINCTION: THREAT AND COERCION


THREAT

COERCION

the wrong threatened to be the wrong threatened to be


committed is in the future
committed is direct,
personal, present and
imminent
threats may be committed t h r e a t s c a n n o t b e
in writing or through an committed in writing or
intermediary
through an intermediary
because they should
always be personal and
direct
threat means intimidation

it is violence; or intimidation
sufficient enough to amount
to violence


Art. 288. Other similar coercions
OTHER LIGHT COERCION - more on labor
Acts punished:

1.

Committed by forcing or compelling directly,


indirectly, knowingly permitting or forcing an
employee or laborer to buy merchandise or
commodities from the employer

2.

By paying the wages due to the employees or


laborers by objects other than the legal tender of
the Philippines, unless it is requested by the
employee or laborer

Chapter Three
DISCOVERY AND REVELATION OF SECRETS

Art. 290. Discovering secrets through seizure of


correspondence
SEIZURE OF CORRESPONDENCE to discover the
secrets of another
- committed by any person who shall seize any
correspondence of another to discover the secrets
of the latter. DAMAGE is not a requirement. The
mere act of seizing the correspondence to
discover the latters secrets will consummate the
crime. It is also NOT necessary that the secret be
REVEALED.

Art. 291. Revealing secrets with abuse of office


REVEALING SECRETS BY ABUSING OFFICE
- committed by a manager, employee or servant
who reveals the secrets of his master learned by
him in such capacity. It is the revelation of secrets
which will consummate the crime, not mere
discovery. DAMAGE is also not an element.

Art. 287. Light coercions


LIGHT COERCION - committed by a creditor who shall
seize anything belonging to his debtor by means of
violence or intimidation for the purpose of applying the
same to the indebtedness

Art. 292. Revelation of industrial secrets


REVELATION OF INUSTRIAL SECRETS
- committed by any person in charge or an
employee in an industrial of manufacturing
establishment who shall learn and discover the
secrets of the industry and shall reveal the same
to the prejudice of the owner thereof. DAMAGE
must be caused to the offended party. Mere
revelation of secrets will not suffice.

related to light coercion is UNJUST


VEXATION which refers to any human
conduct, although not capable of producing
any harm or material injury, annoys or vexes
an innocent person.

In relation to
RA 4200 (ANTI-WIRE TAPPING LAW)
ACTS:
1. It shall be unlawful for any person, not obtaining
the consent of all the parties to any private

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 128

CRIMINAL LAW 2
communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or
cable, or by using any other device or
arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept, or
record such communication or spoken word by
using a device like dictaphone or dictagraph or
dictaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or
other similar means

by means of violence or intimidation of any person, or using


force upon anything

Elements:
1.

Exapmle:
A told B to go inside his room. When inside the room, A
started scolding B saying slanderous remarks against
him. Unknown to A, B was recording the private
communication between them. Can B use the record in
filing a case for slander against A?
ANS: No, because the act of tape recording
without being authorized by all the parties in a
private communication is inadmissible in evidence
in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative or
administrative proceeding or investigation.

2.

3.

4.

The only exception is when a police officer is


authorized by a written order of the court to
listen to, intercept or record any communication in
crimes involving treason, espionage, provoking
war and disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny in
the high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal
to commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition,
conspiracy to commit sedition, inciting to sedition
and kidnapping.

2.

Knowingly possessing any tape record, wire


record, disc record, or any other such record, or
copies thereof, of any private communication or
spoken word

3.

By replaying the wire record, tape record, disc


record for any other person or persons; or
communicating the contents thereof, either
verbally or in writing, to another person

4.

Furnishing transcriptions of the wire record, disc


record or tape record, whether totally or partially,
to any other person
Title Ten
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY

Chapter One
ROBBERY IN GENERAL
Art. 293. Who are guilty of robbery
ROBBERY- committed by any person who, with intent to
gain, shall take any personal property belonging to another,

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 129

Offender unlawfully takes the personal


property of another
UNLAWFUL TAKING - deprivation of the
offended party of his personal property.
The personal property belongs to another
person
- If the property does not belong to
another person, it cannot be said that
there is intent to gain on the part of the
offender
Intent to gain in taking the property
- Intent to gain is an internal state of
mind. The law presumes that there is
intent to gain the moment that there is
taking of personal property of another
Taking is with violence and intimidation or
force upon things

Section One Robbery with violence against or


intimidation of persons

Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation


of persons
2 Types of Robbery:
1. WITH VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION
In this kind of robbery, the value of the
property taken is immaterial because the
penalty is dependent on the violence
employed by the offender.
2. WITH FORCE UPON THINGS
The value of the property taken is material
because the penalty is dependent upon the
value of the property.

ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AND


INTIMIDATION
ACTS:
1. When by reason or on the occasion of
robbery, homicide is committed
2. When robbery is accompanied by rape,
intentional mutilation, or arson
3. When by reason or on the occasion of
robbery, any of the serious physical injuries
resulting to insanity, imbecility, impotency or
blindness was committed
4. When by reason or on the occasion or
robbery, any of the of the serious physical
injuries resulting to the loss of the use of
speech or the power to hear or to smell, or

CRIMINAL LAW 2
shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm,
or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such
member, or shall have become incapacitated
for the work in which he was therefor
habitually engaged
5. When the commission of the robbery is
carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for
the commission of the crime
6. In the execution of the robbery, and in
consequence of the physical injuries inflicted,
the person injured shall have become
deformed, or shall have lost any other part of
his body, or shall have lost the use thereof, or
shall have been ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he as
habitually engaged for a period of more than
ninety days
7. If the violence employed in the commission or
robbery does not constitute the physical
injuries covered by sub-divisions 3 and 4 of
said Article 263 or that only intimidation is
employed.
Based on the foregoing, there exists crimes such as
robbery with homicide, robbery with rape, robbery with
serious physical injuries and robbery with unnecessary
violence and simple robbery.

ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE


is a special complex crime because in reality
there are two crimes committed but in the
eyes of the law, there is only one crime. For
as long as the original intent or original
criminal design of the offender is to rob, the
killing may take place before, during or after
the robbery

regardless of the number of persons killed,


there is only one crime committed. Also, even
if the killing is unintentional or accidental,
there is still one crime committed.

even if the victim of the killing is different from


the victim of the robbery, still it is robbery with
homicide. This constitutes the difference
between kidnapping with serious illegal
detention because in this crime, the victim of
the kidnapping must also be the victim of the
killing

Example:
A went to the house of B and took the valuables
therein. During the taking, one jewelry box suddenly
fell on the floor. This awakened the owner of the
house, X. When A saw this, he immediately shot X

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 130

In same problem, wife of X was also awakened and


she started to shout. Because of this, A also shot the
wife
CRIME: Robbery with homicide even if two
persons were killed since the crime is a special
complex crime. All the offenses are merged into a
single indivisible crime of robbery with homicide.
A was about to go out bringing with him the valuables
he robbed. However, he bumped the door. This
awakened the owner, X, who tried to chase A. They
reached the garden part of the house. While therein, A
positioned himself to shoot X, so X jumped on A to
struggle possession of the gun. In the course of the
struggle, the gun fired and hit a balot vendor who
passed by the house of X.
CRIME: Robbery with homicide. Since it is a
special complex crime, even if the victim of
robbery is different from the victim of homicide or
even if the killing is accidental, there is only a
single indivisible crime committed. So long as the
killing is by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery.

CRIME: Robbery with homicide because by


reason or on the occasion of robbery, homicide
was committed.

A, B and C entered the house of X to commit robbery.


After taking the valuables and as they were about to
leave, X was awakened. Among the three, it was only
A who shot and killed X.
CRIME: All are criminally liable even if it is only A
who shot X. While there is a rule that in an
express or direct conspiracy the conspirators are
liable only for the crime agreed upon by them, the
situation however falls under the exception.
EXCEPTION: That is, when the conspiracy results
to a special complex crime. The crimes cannot be
separated from each other. Thus, even if its only A
who shot X or even if the agreement is only to
commit robbery, since homicide was committed by
reason or on the occasion of robbery, all are
criminally liable for the crime of robbery with
homicide.
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: is when B
and C performed acts to prevent A from killing X.

People vs Cabbab
In a game played by A, B, X, Y and Z, it was A who won the
game. After the game, while A, B and Z were about to
leave, X and Y were furiously looking at them. Suddenly, X
and Y fired several shots against A, B and Z. Z, who was a
police officer, dove into the canal in order to prevent himself

CRIMINAL LAW 2
from being killed. Z was injured. Unfortunately, A and B
were killed and thereafter, the winnings of A were taken by
X and Y.
Fiscal filed the cases of - 1. Robbery because of the taking
of the winnings, 2. Double murder because of the death of
A and B, and 3. Attempted murder insofar as Z is
concerned.
RTC ruled that the charges were wrong because the crime
committed is robbery with double homicide and attempted
murder
Upon appeal, CA ruled that the ruling of RTC is incorrect
because the crime committed is robbery with homicide and
attempted murder
SC: The Fiscal, RTC and CA were all wrong. The
crime committed is only the single indivisible
offense of robbery with homicide. All the acts are
considered absorbed by robbery with homicide
despite the fact that 2 persons were killed and 1
person was injured. All these circumstances are
merged into an integrated whole; that is, the single
indivisible offense of robbery with homicide

ROBBERY WITH RAPE


is also a special complex crime. So long as
the intention of the offender is to commit
robbery, the rape can be committed before,
during and after the robbery. Regardless of
the number of rapes, there is only a single
indivisible crime. There is no such crime as
robbery with multiple rapes.
Example:
A woman was walking on her way home. It was payday
and her salary was inside her bag. X, the robber, took the
bag of the woman and got the money therein. X found
the woman attractive so he raped her twice.
CRIME: Robbery with rape, regardless of the
number of times the woman was raped.

Even if not all of the offenders raped the victim,


still all of them are criminally liable for the crime of
robbery with rape because the two lookouts did
not perform acts to prevent the rape.

R O B B E RY W I T H I N T E N T I O N A L M U T I L AT I O N ,
ROBBERY WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES AND
ROBBERY WITH ARSON
For as long as the original intent is to commit
robbery, the intentional mutilation, serious
physical injury or arson may be committed
before, during or after the robbery.
Example:
It was payday. A and B saw X with a bag. A and B
signaled X to give them his bag. X gave the bag and left.
A and B went to a nearby waiting shed bringing with
them the bag of X. In the waiting shed, A and B divided
the money of X. In the course of the partition, A gave B
only a small share of the money. B got mad. B shot A.
CRIME: Robbery with Homicide, even if it was an
offender killed. This is because the killing took
place by reason of the robbery, while A and B
were dividing the loot.

In the same problem, while A and B were dividing the


loot, B got a small share. Because of this, B without
intent to kill shot A who suffered serious physical injuries.
CRIME: Robbery with serious physical injuries

People vs Suyu
A couple was having snack inside the car. While eating,
they saw shadows of four men trying to push the car. One
of them was Suyu. The couple was forced to open the door
and get out of the car. The men took the valuables of the
couple. While the men were taking the valuables, the
boyfriend ran and left the girlfriend. After taking the
valuables, the men dragged the abandoned girlfriend to a
nearby nipa hut. Inside the nipa hut, the girlfriend was
raped by Suyu, the mastermind. After Suyu, the girlfriend
was again raped by the other companion. The girlfriend
was raped three times. Rape with carnal knowledge and
rape with sexual assault were committed against her. The

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

other two men remained outside the nipa hut to serve as


lookouts.
CRIME: Robbery with rape. Regardless of the fact
that two persons raped the victim, regardless of
the fact that the victim was raped three times, and
regardless of the fact that two natures of rape
(carnal knowledge and sexual assault) were
committed against the victim, there is only one
indivisible crime.

Page 131

In the same problem, while A and B were dividing the


loot, B got a small share. Because of this, B took his ice
pick from his pocket and used it to put an X mark on the
face of A. This serious physical injury resulted to
deformity.
CRIME: Robbery and Serious Physical injury.
Under Art. 294 par 4, when the serious physical
injury that resulted is a deformity, or the loss of
any other member of his body, the law requires
that the said serious physical injury or deformity is
inflicted in the course of the execution of the
robbery upon a person not responsible for the
robbery. Otherwise, it will bring about a separate
and distinct crime.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

Here, the deformity was inflicted after the robbery


and upon a person responsible for the
commission of the robbery. Thus, there are two
crimes committed: Robbery and Serious Physical
Injury.

What if A went to the house of B, instead of X which was


his original plan. A, while taking the valuables, made
some noise and awakened the owner of the house, and
so A shot the owner of the house. The owner of the
house died. Thereafter A hurriedly went downstairs.
Downstairs he saw the wife, found the wife attractive,
and he raped the wife. After raping the wife, he also saw
the maid and found the maid attractive, so he raped the
maid. The moment he got out of the door of the house,
the gardener saw him and tried to prevent A from leaving
the house. And so A shot the gardener, and in shooting
the gardener, A shot the arms several times, resulting in
the severance of the arm, so intentional mutilation. Not
only that, when he was going out of the gate, here comes
the driver, preventing A from leaving the house. So what
A did was that he boxed the driver several times which
resulted to serious physical injuries. What are the crimes
committed?
So we have one death, two rapes, intentional
mutilation and serious physical injuries.

A only committed the single indivisible offense of


robbery with homicide. All the rape, intentional
mutilation and serious physical injuries are
merged into the composite integrated offense and
that is, the single indivisible offense of robbery
with homicide.

Art. 295. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in


an uninhabited place and by a band, or with the use
of firearm on a street, road or alley.

Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by


the members thereof.

Art. 297. Attempted and frustrated robbery


committed under certain circumstances.

Art. 298. Execution of deeds by means of violence or


intimidation.

The first is homicide, rape, intentional


mutilation, arson, serious physical injuries,
unnecessary violence and simple robbery. All
the others are merged, and that is robbery
with homicide. The other offenses will not be
considered as aggravating circumstances
because there is nothing in Art. 14 that will
consider the other offenses as aggravating
circumstances.
That is why you have to

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 132

Section Two Robbery by the use of force upon things

ROBBERY WITH USE OF FORCE UPON


THINGS

Art. 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public


building or edifice devoted to worship
Another form of robbery is robbery with the use of
force upon things in Art 299.

You have to observe the sequence because


the highest is robbery with homicide.

If rape took place after A committed robbery, A after


taking the valuables of the house, raped the wife and
while he was raping the wife, the husband saw A, so A
killed the husband, and then later the driver put up a fight
and resulted to serious physical injuries. What are the
crimes committed?
The crime committed is robbery with homicide.

observe the sequence. So if there was only


rape, intentional mutilation, serious physical
injuries, it will be robbery with rape. It will only
be a single indivisible offense. It will be a
special complex crime.

In case of violence against persons, the value of the


property is not important because the penalty is the
basis of the violence.

In Art. 299, the basis of the penalty is the value of the


property taken.

3 ways of committing robbery with use of force upon


things:
1. When a person enters the dwelling, house, public
building or edifice devoted to worship where
personal property is taken through:
a. An opening not intended for entrance or
egress
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or
breaking any door or window.
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar
tools

CRIMINAL LAW 2
d.

By using any fictitious name or


pretending the exercise of public
authority

appropriated the jewelry? What are the crimes


committed? Is Brother A only liable civilly?
A is guilty of robbery with use of force upon things.
He is an insider, and he used force to break open
the cabinet of B. He did not commit theft. Since
the crime committed is robbery, brother A is
criminally liable and civilly liable. Because under
Article 332, it is only on cases of theft, swindling,
estafa, and malicious mischief, wherein theres no
criminal liability but only civil liability in case of
relatives living together.

NOTE:
Under the first act, the essence of the crime is in

the unlawful entry; it is the act of trespassing and


also the taking of the property of another.

It is necessary that the entire body must have


enter, otherwise, even if there is breaking, it would
only amount to theft and that breaking would
amount only to aggravating circumstance. The
Supreme Court ruled that when the law used the
word enter, it means that the entire body must
have entered said place to take the property of
another.

Example
A, in order to rob the house made an opening in the roof,
sufficient for him to enter. So he used a rope in going
down and thereafter he took the valuables and then left.
What crime is committed?
Robbery by use of force upon things. A made an
opening and he was able to enter fully.

In the same problem, what if A was in need of money, he


saw the expensive watch of B on top of the table and
sold the watch. What crime was committed?
A committed the crime of theft since there is no
breaking or forcibly opening the receptacle. Under
Art 332, he is only liable for civil liability. They are
free from criminal liability.

Art. 332. Persons exempt from


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

What if he made an entry, let down a rope with a hook


and used it in taking the valuable.
The crime committed only is theft with aggravating
circumstance of the breaking of the roof. His body
did not enter the premises.

2.

When the offender manages to enter said


inhabited place, dwelling, public place or place
dedicated to religious worship without any
unlawful entry, or is an insider, and once inside, he
used force in opening in order to:
a. Break doors, wardrobes, chests, or
any other kind of locked or sealed
furniture or receptacle

NOTE:
The second act is when the offender was able to

enter without unlawful entry or was an insider and


once inside, breaks the doors, wardrobes, chest,
receptacles, and thereafter took the personal
properties inside the house.

Example
A and B are brothers, living in the same house and in the
same room but have different cabinets where each of the
cabinets have locks. One time brother A was in need of
money and wanted to borrow money from brother B, but
brother B was out of the house. So what brother A did
was that he forcibly opened the cabinet of brother B and
took the expensive jewelries of brother B and

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 133

Since it refers to simple crimes, if the crime committed is


estafa through falsification of public document, there will
be criminal liability. This exemption from criminal liability
will only lie in the cases mentioned in Art. 332.
3.

When the offender manages to enter said


inhabited place, dwelling, public place, or place
dedicated to religious worship without any
unlawful entry, once inside he took the sealed
receptacle outside to be opened or forced open.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

The offender was able to enter and once inside,


he did not use force to open the close cabinet or
receptacle. Instead, he took the cabinet and
receptacle outside to open it.

Circumstances that will qualify robbery with use of


force upon things:
Art. 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a
band.
Under Article 300, if robbery is committed with

in an uninhabited place and by a band the


law used the conjunction AND, both must
concur in order to amount a qualifying
circumstance, to increase the penalty. So it
should be in an uninhabited place and by a
band, therefore both must be present.

Art. 295. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in


an uninhabited place and by a band, or with the use of
firearm on a street, road or alley.
In case of robbery with serious physical injuries,
unnecessary violence or simple violence, how will the
crime be qualified?
The answer is under Art. 295, where if the said
robbery is:
1. Committed in an uninhabited place OR
by a band
2. By attacking any moving train, street car,
motor vehicle or airship
3. B y e n t e r i n g t h e p a s s e n g e r s
compartments in a train; or
4. Taking the passengers by surprise in
their respective conveyances
5. On a street, road, highway, or alley and
the Intimidation is made use of a firearm

NOTE:
That in case of robbery with violence or

intimidation on persons, the qualifying


circumstances are present, only one of these is
sufficient to qualify the penalty. The law here uses
the conjunction OR not AND.

Example:
A went to the house of B. A told B this is a hold up and
bring out the valuables. Instead of bringing the valuables
to A, B panicked and shouted. A therefore shot B. B died.
A also panicked and left the place without bringing his
loot. What is/are the crime/s committed?
The crime committed by A is attempted robbery
with homicide. This is also a special complex
crime. Here robbery was attempted because he
was unable to take any of the property. The fact
that A was able to announce hold-up and bring the

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 134

valuables to him means that the original design is


to commit robbery. It was attempted because he
was unable to take the property, and in the course
of thereof, he killed the owner.

In order to amount to special complex crime, it is


necessary that both the robbery and homicide
must be consummated.

What if in the course of robbery, the said owner was shot


but was able to survive. What crime is committed?
The crime committed is robbery with physical
injuries depending on the injuries sustained by the
victim. In order to amount to robbery with
homicide, it is necessary that both crimes must be
present and there is no such thing as robbery
with frustrated homicide or attempted
homicide, for it is the law which provides for the
crime which must be complexed, and the law does
not provide that frustrated homicide or attempted
homicide must be complexed with robbery.

In the instant case, since the killing took place at


the spur of the moment, then it is robbery with
homicide.

Chapter Two
BRIGANDAGE

What if robbery was committed by 4 armed men?

Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by


the members thereof.
A was walking, suddenly there are 4 men with knives and
took As bag which is full of money. A put up a fight. And
so these armed men killed A. What crime is committed?
Is the crime committed robbery in band with homicide?
There is no such crime as robbery by a band with
homicide. The said use of band is only an
aggravating circumstance. The proper designation
of the crime is robbery with homicide. The fact that
it is committed by 4 armed men is only an
aggravating circumstance. Under Art. 296, if a
band committed robbery, it is only an aggravating
circumstance.

Art. 306. Brigandage.


Under Article 306, it is committed by at least 4 armed men
for the purposes of 1. committing robbery in the highway;
2. kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or
ransom

CRIMINAL LAW 2

3. for any other purpose to be attained by means of


force and violence.
Art. 296

Art. 306

Both require at least 4 armed persons


It is required that the 4
armed men must actually
take part in the
commission of the robbery

The crime is already


consummated by the mere
fact that 4 armed men
formed a band of robbers.
It is not required that they
actually commit the
enumerated purposes.

PD 532 (THE ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW OF 1974)

In PD 532, brigandage is defined as the seizure of any


person for ransom, extortion, or other unlawful purposes, or
the taking away of property of another by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons of force upon
things or other unlawful means, committed by any person
on any Philippine highway.

Art 306 vs. PD 532, or the Anti-Highway Robbery Law


of 1974
Art. 306

PD 532

Requires that there must No requisite as to the # of


be at least 4 armed men
perpetrators of the crime
Even a single person can
commit the crime of
brigandage
The mere formation of the There must be an actual
band of robbers for any of commission of the crime or
the purposes mentioned no crime will arise
will bring about the crime
There is a predetermined There is no preconceived
or preconceived victim
victim. It is committed
indiscriminately on any
person passing on the
highway as long as it is
committed in a Philippine
highway.

Theft is likewise committed by:


1. Any person who, having found lost property,
shall fail to deliver the same to the local
authorities or to its owner;
2. Any person who, after having maliciously
damaged the property of another,
shall
remove or make use of the fruits or object of
the damage caused by him; and
3. Any person who shall enter an inclosed estate
or a field where trespass is forbidden or which
belongs to another and without the consent of
its owner, shall hunt or fish upon the same or
shall gather cereals, or other forest or farm
products.

The definition is almost the same as robbery. The


difference lies in the case of robbery where there is
violence or intimidation of persons and use of force upon
things, while in theft, there is no violence, intimidation
against persons or force upon things.

Example:
1. A person who found a lost personal property of
another but did not give it to the police, there is
theft.
2. A damaged the property of B, he make use of that
damage.
3. There is a vacant lot guarded by X. A person
entered the vacant lot and took the fruits.

Valenzuela v. People
There is no frustrated theft. In this case, the offender took
boxes of tide from SM North Edsa and placed it in the taxi.
Before they were able to left the premises of SM, they were
a p p r e h e n d e d . T h e o ff e n d e r s w e r e c h a r g e d o f
consummated theft. They did not deny that they committed
theft but their defense is that they committed frustrated
theft.
The SC En Banc in 2007 ruled that there is no crime as
frustrated theft. In case of theft, unlawful taking is deemed
complete the moment the offender gain possession of the
property of another, theft is consummated.

Art. 309. Penalties


When is theft qualified?

Chapter Three
THEFT

Art. 308. Who are liable for theft. Theft is committed


by any person who, with intent to gain but without

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

violence against or intimidation of persons nor force


upon things, shall take personal property of another
without the latter's consent.

Page 135

Art. 310. Qualified Theft


Theft is qualified in the following instances:
1. If theft is committed by a domestic servant
2. If committed with grave abuse of confidence

CRIMINAL LAW 2
3.
4.
5.
6.

If the property stolen is a (a) motor vehicle, (b)


mail matter, or (c) large cattle
If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken
from the premises of the plantation
If the property stolen is taken from a fishpond or
fishery
If property taken on the occasion of fire,
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any
other calamity, vehicular accident or civil
disturbance.

the car. X drove away with the car. What is the crime
committed?
The crime committed is carnapping. Even if there
is no violence or intimidation against person or
force upon things, so long as said taking is without
the consent of the owner, it will amount to
carnapping.

Under Sec. 14, the penalty if there no violence or


intimidation against persons or use of force on
things, the penalty is 14 years and 8 months to 17
years and 4 months.

Example:
A is a domestic servant. When his master was out of the
house, A went to the masters bedroom and took the
jewelries. In the information cited that he was a domestic
servant but the information did not state that A took the
jewelries with grave abuse of confidence. Is A liable for
qualified theft?
Yes, according to the Supreme Court, the law
uses the conjunction OR. The fact that the
accused is a domestic servant, it will suffice. The
law does not require that abuse of confidence to
be established. It will suffice that the accused is a
domestic servant.

A was a security guard. The owner of the house left his


key to the security guard. However, the security guard
used the key to open the house of the owner and took
the valuables. What crime is committed?
The Security Guard is liable for qualified theft
because of grave abuse of confidence.

If again, in the same problem, A tried to stop X and X


shot A. A died. What is the crime committed?
The fact that the owner is killed or raped as a
consequence, the penalty is reclusion perpetua to
death. It will bring about a higher penalty, but
not as a special complex crime because it is a
Special Penal Law. Though it is akin to a special
complex crime, the killing is absorbed. The crime
is carnapping. It is also not a bailable offense.

RA 6539 (ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT)

Carnapping- is the taking with intent to gain, of motor


vehicle belonging to another without the consent of the
latter, or by means of violence against or intimidation of
persons, or by use of force upon things.

Elements:
1. Actual taking of motor vehicle
2. The vehicle belongs to another
3. There is intent to gain in the taking of the vehicle
of another
4. Said taking is taking without the consent of the
owner or by means of violence or intimidation or
by means of force upon things.

Example:
A was driving his car and suddenly felt the need to
answer the call of nature so he parked his vehicle.
Suddenly, there was X and saw A was out of the car, and
the door of the car was open and the key was left inside

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 136

In the given situation, what if A saw X and there was a


fight that ensued between them. X shot A, and X was
able to take the vehicle. A however survived due to
immediate medical treatment. What is/are the crimes
committed by X?
The crime committed by X is only carnapping. The
fact that X shot A, where there is frustrated
homicide, it falls under violence or intimidation
which was used by the offender in committing the
crime. Since there is violence, the penalty is 17
years and 4 months to 30 years.

PD 533 (ANTI-CATTLE RUSTLING LAW)

Cattle Rustling - defined as the taking away by any


means, method or scheme, without the consent of the
owner/raiser, of any large cattle whether or not for profit or
for gain, or whether committed with or without violence
against or intimidation of persons or force upon things. It
includes the killing of a large cattle or taking it as a meat or
hide without the consent of the owner/raiser.

Large Cattle- shall include cow, carabao, horse, mule, ass,


or other domesticated member of the bovine family. Goats
are not large cattle. (sabi nung isang justice sa SC na prof
naming dati, si Lawyer daw pag kinidnap cattle rustling daw
tawag dun. Ang evil nya!)

Example:

CRIMINAL LAW 2
As carabao was tied on the mango tree. X saw the
carabao alone. So what X did was he untied the carabao
and took the carabao away. A saw X with his carabao so
A tried to catch up with X. As A was able to catch up with
X, a fight ensued. X took his bolo and hacked A to death.
What is the crime committed by X?
The crime committed by X is only cattle rustling.
The fact that the owner was killed is within the
meaning of violence or intimidation against
persons. It will not bring about a separate and
distinct crime of murder. The Anti-Cattle Rustling
Law, although a special law, is not malum
prohibitum but a malum in se. Under Sec. 10 of
the law, it is expressly provided that this law
amends Art. 309 and 310 of the RPC. Since it is
an amendment, the SC it is a malum in se and not
a malum prohibitum.

Art. 311. Theft of the property of the National Library


and National Museum.
The value of the property is immaterial because

the law prescribed the penalty of arresto mayor or


fine or both.

Chapter Four
USURPATION

Art. 312. Occupation of real property or usurpation of


real rights in property.

2 acts punished under Art 312:


1. Occupation of real property which is committed by
any person who by means of violence against or
intimidation shall occupy the real property of
another
2. Usurpation of real rights in property committed by
any person who by means of violence against or
intimidation shall usurp any real rights in property
of another person

Example:
There was a vacant lot. Here comes A and B and his
family. The said land or property was being guarded by
X. A and B went inside the vacant lot and tried to build a
nipa house because they do not have any house. And so
the guard told them that A and B has no right to build a
nipa house because the lot is owned by Y. However, A
and B told the guard that they do not have any house. In
the course of the argument, A and B killed the guard.
What is/are the crimes committed?

The crime committed is only occupation of real


property. The killing is only a means to occupy the
real property. It falls under violence against or

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 137

intimidation of persons in occupying the real


property.

In the same problem A and B put up their house in the


vacant property. The owner learned this and went to A
and Bs house. However, A and B killed the owner.
In this case, two crimes are committed. The killing
took place after occupying the place. This time,
the crimes committed are occupation and
homicide or murder as the case maybe.

Art. 313. Altering boundaries or landmarks. Any


person who shall alter the boundary marks or
monuments of towns, provinces, or estates, or any other
marks intended to designate the boundaries of the same,
shall be punished by arresto menor or a fine not
exceeding 100 pesos, or both.

Chapter Five
CULPABLE INSOLVENCY

Art. 314. Fraudulent insolvency. Any person who


shall abscond with his property to the prejudice of his
creditors, shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor, if he
be a merchant and the penalty of prision correccional in
its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium
period, if he be not a merchant.

Chapter Six
SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Art. 315. Swindling (estafa). Any person who shall
defraud another by any of the means mentioned here in
below shall be punished by:

1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its


maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum
period, if the amount of the fraud is over 12,000
pesos but does not exceed 22,000 pesos, and if
such amount exceeds the latter sum, the penalty
provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its
maximum period, adding one year for each
additional 10,000 pesos; but the total penalty which
may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years. In
such cases, and in connection with the accessory
penalties which may be imposed under the
provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be termed
prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may
be.

2nd. The penalty of prision correccional in its


minimum and medium periods, if the amount of the
fraud is over 6,000 pesos but does not exceed
12,000 pesos;

3rd. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum


period to prision correccional in its minimum period if
such amount is over 200 pesos but does not exceed
6,000 pesos; and

4th. By arresto mayor in its maximum period, if such


amount does not exceed 200 pesos, provided that in
the four cases mentioned, the fraud be committed by
any of the following means:
1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of
confidence, namely:
(a) By altering the substance, quantity, or
quality or anything of value which the
offender shall deliver by virtue of an
obligation to do so, even though such
obligation be based on an immoral or
illegal consideration.
(b) By misappropriating or converting, to the
prejudice of another, money, goods, or
any other personal property received by
the offender in trust or on commission,
or for administration, or under any other
obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of or to return the same, even
though such obligation be totally or
partially guaranteed by a bond; or by
denying having received such money,
goods, or other property.
(c) By taking undue advantage of the
signature of the offended party in blank,

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 138

3 ways of committing estafa or swindling:


1. Estafa with unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence
Art 315 (1)
2.

3.

By means of false pretense or by fraudulent acts


executed prior to or simultaneous to the
commission of the offense Art 315 (2)
Through fraudulent means Art 315 (3)

Whatever be the crime of estafa, there are always 2


general elements:
1. That the accused defrauded another by means of
abuse of confidence, or by means of deceit; and
2. That damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary
estimation is caused to the offended party or third
persons.

ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS or ABUSE OF


CONFIDENCE (1st form)
Committed through:
a. By altering the substance, quantity, or quality or
anything of value which the offender shall
deliver by virtue of an obligation to do so, even
though such obligation be based on an immoral
or illegal consideration.

NOTE: The law says that even if it based on an


immoral or illegal consideration.

Example:
A is bound to deliver boxes of marijuana to B. At the
bottom of the box were inferior qualities of marijuana
while on top are high grade marijuana. Is A liable of
estafa?
A is liable for estafa. B can file a case of estafa
against A. (for purposes of example only because
B may be held liable for dangerous drugs act)

b. By misappropriating or converting, to the


prejudice of another, money, goods, or any other
personal property received by the offender in
trust or on commission, or for administration, or
under any other obligation involving the duty to
make delivery of or to return the same, even
though such obligation be totally or partially
guaranteed by a bond; or by denying having
received such money, goods, or other property.

The moment that the offended party entrusted the


money or goods or any other personal property to
the offender, it is necessary that there must be a
transfer of juridical possession. Juridical

CRIMINAL LAW 2

possession is a legal right over the property;


possession in the concept of the owner. During
the time that the possessor has legal possession
of the property, even the owner cannot file estafa
to the possessor because it is the rightful
possessor at that moment.

If what has been transferred is material or physical


possession, and the offender misappropriates the
same, he is only liable for qualified theft.

Example:
A rented a bicycle from B for Php500 for 2 hours. A was
in possession of the said bicycle. 2 hours had lapsed, A
was not able to return the bicycle to B. B demanded that
A return the bicycle, but A did not. What is the crime
committed by A?
The crime committed by A is estafa because it
there is a lease agreement. What has been
transferred to A is juridical possession of the
property by virtue of the lease agreement.

A gave B a watch. A told B This is my watch, use it as a


collateral for my debt. B however, instead of using it as
collateral for the loan of A, sold the watch and
appropriated the proceeds of the watch. What is the
crime committed?
The crime committed by B is qualified theft and
not estafa. There is no transfer of juridical
possession. A remains to be the owner of the
watch, and said watch is only used as a collateral.

A went to the bank and then A told the teller, Here is


100k, kindly deposit this to my account. Here is my
passbook and here is the money. Deposit it because I am
in a hurry and I will drop by later in the afternoon.
However, A was not able to drop by in the afternoon. So
A went the following day. When A asked for the
passbook, he realized that the 100k was not deposited
by the teller to his account. The teller misappropriated
the 100k. What is the crime committed?
The crime committed is Qualified Theft. The SC
ruled that when the depositor leaves to the bank
his money for deposit, what has been transferred
is only the material or physical possession. The
juridical possession of the money remains with the
owner of the money. Hence, when it is
misappropriated by the teller of the bank, it is only
qualified theft and not estafa.

c. By taking undue advantage of the signature of the


offended party in blank, and by writing any
document above such signature in blank, to the
prejudice of the offended party or of any third
person.

Example:
The owner of the company has blank documents with his
signature and gave it to his secretary. The said
documents will be used in case of emergency. One time
the secretary wrote a document above the blank
signature stating that the said owner will be assuming the
indebtedness of the secretary.
The crime committed by the secretary is estafa
because there is abuse of confidence. The owner
entrusted the blank document to the secretary.

What if the secretary placed the blank document it on the


table. Here comes a visitor, and upon seeing the blank
document, he took one and then he went to his house
and wrote a document stating that the said owner shall
assume his liability.
The crime committed is not estafa but falsification
of a private document because he made it appear
that the owner participated in procuring the
document when in fact, the owner did not.

ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSE or BY


FRAUDULENT ACTS PRIOR TO OR SIMULTANEOUS
TO THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE (2ND form)

A works in the field and makes cash advance to his


company. One time he went to a certain place and there
is a cash advance. When A returned, A failed to liquidate

the expenses in the cash advance despite demands.


What is the crime committed by A?
According to the SC, a cash advance is in the
nature of a loan. When an employee makes a
cash advance to the company, it is in effect
obtaining a loan from the company. Therefore
ownership is transferred to the employee because
there is no obligation to return the very same
money. Hence there can be no estafa. Since
ownership was transferred and that the employee
cannot pay, we have the relationship of creditor
and debtor, not that entrustor- entrustee. There
will be no criminal case but only civil liability.
Hence, we have a civil case of collection for sum
of money.

a.By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to


possess power, influence, qualifications,
property, credit, agency, business or imaginary
transactions, or by means of other similar
deceits.

Example:

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 139

CRIMINAL LAW 2
A, Band C are newly graduates. They just passed the
nursing board exam. X learned that A, B, and C passed
the board so he went to the house of A, B and C and told
them that X has a placement agency that will help them
find work abroad. AB and C believed X, and X demanded
that they give X 100k for processing fees. A, B, and C
never saw X again. Later X was arrested. What are the
crimes committed by X?
X may be liable of estafa by falsely pretending to
possess power or agency, where in fact, he is not
licensed by the POEA of Department of Labor.

Can he also be held liable for illegal recruitment?


He can also be liable for illegal recruitment under
the labor code.

Under PD 2018, which amended Article 38 and 39


of the Labor Code, where if illegal recruitment is
committed by a syndicate (3 or more persons) or
in large scale (where the victims are 3 or more
persons individually or as a group), the crime
committed is economic sabotage.

By reason thereof, the offender is liable for 2


crimes, and that is estafa and illegal recruitment.

Can the offender be prosecuted at the same time?


Yes, because estafa requires illegal deceit or false
pretense, while in illegal recruitment does not
require deceit or false pretense. The mere fact of
recruiting where he does not have any license
makes him liable for illegal recruitment.

d.

Example:
A is building a house, so he went to B, who is the owner
of the hardware store. A told B that he doesnt have any
money at the moment but he will be issuing a check
guaranteeing that it will be funded on the 15th, which is
the maturity date. B believed As representation that the
check will be funded so B placed the construction
materials to A. On the 15th day of the month, the check
bounced. B sent a notice of dishonor to A, but despite
such notice of dishonor, months had passed and yet A
still failed to pay. What crimes may be filed against A?
B may file a case of estafa because the said
check was issued in concomitance with the said
fraud. Where it not for the said check, B would not
give the construction materials to A.

Aside from that, can A also be held liable for violation of


BP22?
A may also be held liable for violation of BP 22. It
will apply in any cases the moment the check
bounce. The essence of BP22 is the issuance of
the worthless check.

By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in


payment of an obligation when the offender
therein were not sufficient to cover the amount
of the check. The failure of the drawer of the
check to deposit the amount necessary to cover
his check within three (3) days from receipt of
notice from the bank and/or the payee or holder
that said check has been dishonored for lack of
insufficiency of funds shall be prima facie
evidence of deceit constituting false pretense or
fraudulent act. (As amended by R.A. 4885,
approved June 17, 1967.)

BP 22 (BOUNCING CHECKS LAW)


2 acts punished in BP 22:
1. Making or drawing and issuing a check knowing at
the time of issue that he does not have sufficient
funds.
The offender knows that he does not have

sufficient funds in his account at the time of the


issuance of the check.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 140

2. Failing to keep sufficient funds to cover the full


amount of the check.
The funder knows that he has sufficient amount at

the time of the issuance of the check but failed to


keep sufficient funds to cover the amount after the
issuance of the check. The crime will arise for his
failure to keep sufficient funds or maintain his
credit to cover the full amount for a period of 90
days from the date appearing on the check.

However, said offense will not automatically


amount to estafa. In order to amount estafa, it is
necessary that the issuance of the check is the
reason of the defraudation. That is, where it not for
the said check, where it not for the promise of the
said check, the offended party would not have
parted with his property or money.
In order to amount estafa by postdating a check,
the issuance of the check must not be in payment
of a pre-existing obligation. It is necessary that the
obligation is in concomitance with the issuance of
the check.
In case of BP 22, even if in payment of preexisting obligation, the moment the check
bounced, BP 22 will apply.
In case of estafa, the offender must make good of
the check within a period of 3 days. In BP 22, the
offender must make good of the check within 5
banking days.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
intent of AC 10-2000 does not erase imprisonment
as an alternative penalty. What 10-2000
establishes is a rule of preference, and that is, if
the offender acted in good faith, and there is clear
mistake of fact without any taint of negligence, fine
should be the appropriate penalty. Nevertheless,
still whether to impose penalty of imprisonment of
fine is within the sound discretion of the court.

When is there prima facie evidence of knowledge of


insufficiency of funds in BP 22?
Section 2 of BP 22, there arises the prima facie knowledge
of insufficiency of funds when the offender makes or draws
and issues a check which bounced when deposited within
the period of 90 days from the moment of its issue.

Elements of prima facie knowledge:


1. The check must be deposited within 90 days from
date appearing on the check;
2. There must be notice of dishonor received by the
drawer of the check;
3. The drawer of the check failed to make good of
the check within 5 banking days from receipt of
the notice of dishonor.

If the drawer was able to make good of the


check within 5 banking days, the prima facie
presumption of knowledge of insufficiency of
funds will not arise.

Example:
If the holder deposited the check on the 100th day. Can
the drawer of the check be still held liable for violation of
BP 22?
Yes, the drawer is liable for violation of BP 22.
What is erased only is the prima facie knowledge
of insufficiency of funds. But so long as the check
is not a stale check (check beyond 6 months or
120 days). If said check is dishonored, violation of
BP 22 can still arise, because the prima facie
knowledge of insufficiency of funds can be proven
by other evidence.

Penalty for violation of BP22:


Imprisonment of not less than 30 days but not
more than 1 year or a fine of not less than but not
more than double the amount of the check which
fine shall in no case exceed PHP200,000, or both
such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the
court.

NOTE:
In consonance with this penalty, the SC in the

cases of Rosalie v. CA and VACA v. CA, SC


issued AC 10-2000. In this Supreme Court AC,
because of its decision in the said cases, in lieu of
penalty, in lieu of imprisonment, the proper penalty
to be imposed would be fine, if the offender acted
in good faith or clear mistake of fact without any
taint of negligence.

The SC again issued AC 13-2001 to clarify the


first circular. AC 13-2001 states that the tenor and

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 141

In case the penalty imposed is only fine, there is


no hindrance in the court to impose subsidiary
imprisonment in case of failure to pay fine.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Art. 316. Other forms of swindling. The
penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and
medium period and a fine of not less than the
value of the damage caused and not more than
three times such value, shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who, pretending to be owner
of any real property, shall convey, sell,
encumber or mortgage the same.
2. Any person, who, knowing that real
property is encumbered, shall dispose of
the same, although such encumbrance
be not recorded.
3. The owner of any personal property who
shall wrongfully take it from its lawful
possessor, to the prejudice of the latter or
any third person.
4. Any person who, to the prejudice of
another, shall execute any fictitious
contract.
5. Any person who shall accept any
compensation given him under the belief
that it was in payment of services
rendered or labor performed by him,
when in fact he did not actually perform
such services or labor.
6. Any person who, while being a surety in
a bond given in a criminal or civil action,
without express authority from the court
or before the cancellation of his bond or
before being relieved from the obligation
contracted by him, shall sell, mortgage,
or, in any other manner, encumber the
real property or properties with which he
guaranteed the fulfillment of such
obligation.

Art. 317. Swindling a minor. Any person


who taking advantage of the inexperience or
emotions or feelings of a minor, to his detriment,
shall induce him to assume any obligation or to
give any release or execute a transfer of any
property right in consideration of some loan of
money, credit or other personal property,whether
the loan clearly appears in the document or is
shown in any other form, shall suffer the penalty
of arresto mayor and a fine of a sum ranging
from 10 to 50 per cent of the value of the
obligation contracted by the minor.

Art. 318. Other deceits. The penalty of


arresto mayor and a fine of not less than the
amount of the damage caused and not more
than twice such amount shall be imposed upon
any person who shall defraud or damage
another by any other deceit not mentioned in the

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 142

Chapter Eight
ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING
DESTRUCTIONS

Chapter Eight
A R S O N A N D O T H E R C R I M E S I N V O LV I N G
DESTRUCTIONS
Art. 320. Destructive arson. The penalty of reclusion
temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua
shall be imposed upon any person who shall burn:
1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military powder
or fireworks factory, ordinance, storehouse, archives
or general museum of the Government.
2. Any passenger train or motor vehicle in motion or
vessel out of port.
3. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of
inflammable or explosive materials.

Art. 321. Other forms of arson. When the arson


consists in the burning of other property and under the
circumstances given hereunder, the offender shall be
punishable:
1. By reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua:
(a) if the offender shall set fire to any building,
farmhouse, warehouse, hut, shelter, or vessel in port,
knowing it to be occupied at the time by one or more
persons;
(b) If the building burned is a public building and value
of the damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
(c) If the building burned is a public building and the
purpose is to destroy evidence kept therein to be used
in instituting prosecution for the punishment of
violators of the law, irrespective of the amount of the
damage;
(d) If the building burned is a public building and the
purpose is to destroy evidence kept therein to be used
in legislative, judicial or administrative proceedings,
irrespective of the amount of the damage; Provided,
however, That if the evidence destroyed is to be used
against the defendant for the prosecution of any crime
punishable under existing laws, the penalty shall be
reclusion perpetua;
(e) If the arson shall have been committed with the
intention of collecting under an insurance policy
against loss or damage by fire.

2. By reclusion temporal:
(a) If an inhabited house or any other building in which
people are accustomed to meet is set on fire, and the
culprit did not know that such house or building was
occupied at the time, or if he shall set fire to a moving
freight train or motor vehicle, and the value of the
damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
(b) If the value of the damage caused in paragraph (b)
of the preceding subdivision does not exceed 6,000
pesos;
(c) If a farm, sugar mill, cane mill, mill central, bamboo
groves or any similar plantation is set on fire and the
damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos; and
(d) If grain fields, pasture lands, or forests, or plantings
are set on fire, and the damage caused exceeds 6,000
pesos.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

3. By prision mayor:
(a) If the value of the damage caused in the case
mentioned in paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) in the next
preceding subdivision does not exceed 6,000 pesos;
(b) If a building not used as a dwelling or place of
assembly, located in a populated place, is set on fire,
and the damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;

4. By prision correccional in its maximum period to


prision mayor in its medium period:
(a) If a building used as dwelling located in an
uninhabited place is set on fire and the damage caused
exceeds 1,000 pesos;
(b) If the value or the damage caused in the case
mentioned in paragraphs (c) and (d) of subdivision 2 of
this article does not exceed 200 pesos.

5. By prision correccional in its medium period to


prision mayor in its minimum period, when the damage
caused is over 200 pesos but does not exceed 1,000
pesos, and the property referred to in paragraph (a) of
the preceding subdivision is set on fire; but when the
value of such property does not exceed 200 pesos, the
penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed in
this subdivision shall be imposed.

6. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium


and maximum periods, if the damage caused in the
case mentioned in paragraph (b) of subdivision 3 of
this article does not exceed 6,000 pesos but is over 200
pesos.
7. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum
and medium periods, if the damage caused in the case
mentioned paragraph (b) subdivision 3 of this article
does not exceed 200 pesos.

8. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine ranging from


fifty to one hundred per centum if the damage caused
shall be imposed, when the property burned consists
of grain fields, pasture lands, forests, or plantations
when the value of such property does not exceed 200
pesos. (As amended by R.A. 5467, approved May 12,
1969).

Art. 322. Cases of arson not included in the preceding


articles. Cases of arson not included in the next
preceding articles shall be punished:

1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum


periods, when the damage caused does not exceed 50
pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period, when the damage
caused is over 50 pesos but does not exceed 200
pesos;
3. By prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods, if the damage caused is over 200 pesos but
does not exceed 1,000 pesos; and
4. By prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods, if it is over 1,000 pesos.

Art. 323. Arson of property of small value. The arson


of any uninhabited hut, storehouse, barn, shed, or any
other property the value of which does not exceed 25

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 143

pesos, committed at a time or under circumstances


which clearly exclude all danger of the fire spreading,
shall not be punished by the penalties respectively
prescribed in
this chapter, but in accordance with the damage
caused and under the provisions of the following
chapter.

Art. 324. Crimes involving destruction. Any person


who shall cause destruction by means of explosion,
discharge of electric current, inundation, sinking or
stranding of a vessel, intentional damaging of the
engine of said vessel, taking up the rails from a railway
track, maliciously changing railway signals for the
safety of moving trains, destroying telegraph wires and
telegraph posts, or those of any other system, and, in
general, by using any other agency or means of
destruction as effective as those above enumerated,
shall be punished by reclusion temporal if the
commission has endangered the safety of any person,
otherwise, the penalty of prision mayor shall be
imposed.

Art. 325. Burning one's own property as means to


commit arson. Any person guilty of arson or causing
great destruction of the property belonging to another
shall suffer the penalties prescribed in this chapter,
even though he shall have set fire to or destroyed his
own property for the purposes of committing the crime.

Art. 326. Setting fire to property exclusively owned by


the offender. If the property burned shall be the
exclusive property of the offender, he shall be
punished by arresto mayor in its maximum period to
prision correccional in its minimum period, if the arson
shall have been committed for the purpose of
defrauding or causing damage to another, or prejudice
shall actually have been caused, or if the thing burned
shall have
been a building in an inhabited place.

Art. 326-A. In cases where death resulted as a


consequence of arson. If death resulted as a
consequence of arson committed on any of the
properties and under any of the circumstances
mentioned in the preceding articles, the court shall
impose the death penalty.

Art. 326-B. Prima facie evidence of arson. Any of the


following circumstances shall constitute prima facie
evidence of arson:
1. If after the fire, are found materials or substances
soaked in gasoline, kerosene, petroleum, or other
inflammables, or any mechanical, electrical chemical
or traces or any of the foregoing.
2. That substantial amount of inflammable substance
or materials were stored within the building not
necessary in the course of the defendant's business;
and
3. That the fire started simultaneously in more than one
part of the building or locale under circumstances that
cannot normally be due to accidental or unintentional
causes: Provided, however, That at least one of the
following is present in any of the three abovementioned circumstances:

CRIMINAL LAW 2
(a) That the total insurance carried on the building and/
or goods is more than 80 per cent of the value of such
building and/or goods at the time of the fire;
(b) That the defendant after the fire has presented a
fraudulent claim for loss.

The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed


on one who plants the articles above-mentioned, in
order to secure a conviction, or as a means of extortion
or coercion. (As amended by R.A. 5467, approved May
12, 1969).

3.

ARSON- is the malicious destruction of property set by fire.


It can be either destructive or simple arson. Destructive or
simple arson is not dependent on the value of the property
but rather on the

4.

SAMPLE PROBLEM:
1. A is a maid and it was Christmas time. A wanted to
go to the province so she asked the master of the
house if she can go to the province. The master of
the house said no. The maid got mad, so while
the master of the house and his family are
sleeping, A burned the house and left. The house
of the master was not the only one burned, but
also the neighbors houses. The master and his
children were killed.
What is/are the crimes
committed by A? Is A liable for destructive arson or
simple arson only?

Destructive Arson is found under Art 320 of the RPC while


Simple Arson and other arson is repealed by PD 1613
repealing Article 320 to 326 B of the RPC. Even though
there are five deaths, the deaths will be absorbed in the
crime of arson and will only qualify the penalty to death.
The maid is only liable for simple arson, because what has
been burned is an inhabited dwelling. For as long as the
thing burned is an inhabited house or dwelling, the crime
committed is simple arson. If in the course of burning the
dwelling, homicide results, the crime committed is still
arson.

If the intention is to kill the offended party, and the means


employed is through burning the house, the crime
committed is MURDER. If however, the intention of the
offender is to destroy the property of the offended party by
fire, and the offender did not know that someone is inside
and death results, the crime is still simple arson. It will only
qualify the penalty to RP to death.

2.

A killed B while sleeping. The crime committed is


murder. In order to conceal the crime, A burned
the house. This time, the crime committed is 2.
Murder for killing B and Arson, order to hide the
crime committed. The arson committed is
destructive arson, as it is defined by the law.

How is destructive arson committed?


1. One or more buildings or edifices, consequent to
one single act of burning, or as a result of
simultaneous burnings or committed on several or
different occasions;
2. Any building of public or private ownership,
devoted to public in general, or where people

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 144

5.

usually gather or congregate for a definite purpose


such as but not limited to official government
function or business, private transaction,
commerce, trade workshop, meetings,
conferences, or merely incidental to or for a
definite purpose such as but not limited to motels,
transient dwellings, public conveyances or stops,
or terminals, regardless of whether the offender
had knowledge that there are persons in said
building or edifice at the time set on fire and
regardless also of whether the building is actually
inhabited or not.
Any train, locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or
airplane, devoted to transportation or conveyance,
or for public use, entertainment and leisure;
Any building, factory, warehouse installation and
any other appurtenances thereto, which are
devoted to the service of public utilities;
Any building the burning of which is for the
purpose of concealing or destroying the evidence
of another violation of law, or for the purpose of
concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or
to collect from insurance.

There is also destructive arson in the following


instances:
1. When the arson is committed by 2 or more
persons, regardless of whether their purpose is
merely to burn or destroy the building or the
burning merely constitutes an overt act in the
commission of another violation of the law;
2. When any person shall burn:
a. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or
military power or fireworks factory,
ordinance, storehouse, archives or
general museum of the Government; or
b. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or
factory of inflammable or explosive
materials.

When is there simple arson otherwise known as other


cases of arson in PD 1613?
Burning of:
1. Any building used as offices of the government or
any of its agencies;
2. Any inhabited house or dwelling;
3. Any industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well or
mine shaft, platform or tunnel;
4. Any plantation, farm, pasture land, growing crop,
grain field, orchard, bamboo grove or forest;
5. Any rice mill, sugarmill, cane mill, or mill central;
6. Any railway or bus station, airport, wharf, or
warehouse.

Penalty for destructive arson: Reclusion Perpetua to


Death

If as a result of the commission of any acts of


destructive arson, death results, the penalty
should be death.

In case of simple arson, reclusion temporal to


reclusion perpetua

Under Sec 5 of PD 1613, if by reason or on the


occasion of simple arson, death results, the
penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. Therefore,
whatever may be the crime may be, if by reason of

CRIMINAL LAW 2

said arson, death results, it will aggravate the


crime of arson and the homicide will be absorbed
in the arson.

MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
Art. 327. Who are liable for malicious mischief. Any
person who shall deliberately cause the property of
another any damage not falling within the terms of the
next preceding chapter shall be guilty of malicious
mischief.

Art. 328. Special cases of malicious mischief. Any


person who shall cause damage to obstruct the
performance of public functions, or using any
poisonous or corrosive substance; or spreading any
infection or contagion among cattle; or who cause
damage to the property of the National Museum or
National Library, or to any archive or registry,
waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing used
in common by the public, shall be punished:
1. By prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods, if the value of the damage caused exceeds
1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor, if such value does not exceed the
abovementioned amount but it is over 200 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor, in such value does not exceed 200
pesos.

Art. 329. Other mischiefs. The mischiefs not


included in the next preceding article shall be
punished:
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum
periods, if the value of the damage caused exceeds
1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and medium
periods, if such value is over 200 pesos but does not
exceed 1,000 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor or fine of not less than the value of
the damage caused and not more than 200 pesos, if the
amount involved does not exceed 200 pesos or cannot
be estimated.

Malicious Mischief- is the willful damaging of anothers


property for the sake of causing damage due to hate,
revenge or other evil motive.

If the intention of the offender is to cause damage in the


property of another, by any means outside arson, is
malicious mischief.

It is a crime which can only be committed by means of


intent. There must be deliberate intent to cause damage to
the property of another, because if there is no intent to
cause damage in the property, the liability will be damages
only; civil liability and not criminal liability.

Sample problem:
A and B were fighting, and in the course of their fight, A fell
on the floor and the floor was damaged. The liability will
only be a civil action for damages.

Special cases of Malicious Mischief:


1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance of
public functions;

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 145

2.
3.
4.

Using poisonous or corrosive substances


Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle
Causing damage to the property of the National
Library or to any archive or registry, waterworks,
road, promenade, or any other thing used in
common by public

Art. 330. Damage and obstruction to means of


communication. The penalty of prision correccional
in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed
upon any person who shall damage any railway,
telegraph or telephone lines.
If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars,
collision or other accident, the penalty of prision mayor
shall be imposed, without prejudice to the criminal
liability of the offender for the other consequences of
his criminal act.
For the purpose of the provisions of the article, the
electric wires, traction cables, signal system and other
things pertaining to railways, shall be deemed to
constitute an integral part of a railway system.

Art. 331. Destroying or damaging statues, public


monuments or paintings. Any person who shall
destroy or damage statues or any other useful or
ornamental public monument shall suffer the penalty of
arresto mayor in its medium period to prision
correccional in its minimum period.
Any person who shall destroy or damage any useful or
ornamental painting of a public nature shall suffer the
penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200
pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment, in the
discretion of the court.

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

1st Act
Q:In the Case of Carungcong vs People, the son in law a
Japanese National , by means of deceit made his mother in
law sign a SPA, said SPA was used to sell the property of
Tagaytay. The mother died without receiving the proceeds
of the sale. The daughter of the mother wanted to file a
case against the son-in law. Note that the wife of the
Japanese national is already deceased. Does article apply
in this case where the crime committed is estafa even if the
wife of the Japanese National is already dead?

CRIMINAL LAW 2
A: The relationship by affinity is still existing. The purpose
is to ensure harmony within the family. Article 332 will still
apply. The Son in law may be prosecuted. The crime is
estafa through falsification of public document. The crime
committed is the complex crime of estafa through
falsification of public document. Article 332 will not apply
though there is a relationship because the crime is already
complexed.
Article 332, paramours, mistresses, are within the meaning
of wives. Step fathers- ascendants, step childrendescendants.

Title Eleven
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
Chapter One
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
Art. 333. Who are guilty of adultery. Adultery is
committed by any married woman who shall have
sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and by
the man who has carnal knowledge of her knowing her
to be married, even if the marriage be subsequently
declared void.
Adultery shall be punished by prision correccional in
its medium and maximum periods.
If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense
while being abandoned withoutjustification by the
offended spouse, the penalty next lower in degree than
thatprovided in the next preceding paragraph shall be
imposed.

Offender: legally married woman


Offended party: husband
To whom shall the case be filed: Wife and Lover
Who shall file: only by the offended husband.
Adultery is a private crime. It can only be prosecuted by the
offended spouse. Without the complaint filed by the
offended spouse, no crime.

If the lover does not know that the woman is


married, still the husband should file the case on
both of them. it is a matter of defense only on the
lover. So, there are cases where only one is
convicted and the other one is acquitted. The wife
is convicted and the lover is acquitted

If adultery is abandoned by her husband without


justification, mitigated

Adultery is a crime of consequence, so there is no


attempted or frustrated stage. It is always in the
consummated stage.

Adultery may be proven by circumstantial


evidence.
o For example, the husband was working
in Saudi for 10 years, and upon reaching
home, he sees his wife pregnant, there is
adultery except if the wife is raped.

Art. 334. Concubinage. Any husband who shall keep


a mistress in the conjugal dwelling, or shall have
sexual intercourse, under scandalous circumstances,
with a woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with
her in any other place, shall be punished by prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.The
concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.

Elements of concubinage:

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 146

1.
2.

3.

The man must be married


That he committed any of the following acts:
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal
dwelling;
b. H a v i n g s e x u a l i n t e r c o u r s e u n d e r
scandalous circumstances;
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place
The woman must know that the man must be
married

1st Act: the conjugal dwelling is the house of the husband


2nd Act: the best witnesses are the neighbors of the
husband. It must be in such a manner that the neighbors
are shocked.

Just like adultery, concubinage is a private crime. It cannot


be prosecuted if the offended spouse will not file a
complaint against the offender spouse. The wife must also
prosecute both the husband and the concubine. It is a
matter of defense on the concubine that she does not know
the husband is married.

The penalty for the concubine is destierro.


RAPE IS ALREADY REPEALED
Art. 336. Acts of lasciviousness. Any person who
shall commit any act of lasciviousness upon other
persons of either sex, under any of the circumstances
mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished
by prision correccional.

Acts of lasciviousness- acts committed with unchaste


design and done under circumstances of rape.
As it is done under circumstances of rape, so the
offender may be any person, for example a man
touching the private parts of another man.

Elements:
1. T h a t t h e o f f e n d e r c o m m i t s a n y a c t o f
lasciviousness or lewdness;
2. That the act of lasciviousness is committed
against a person of either sex;
3. That it is done under any of the following
circumstances:
a. Using force or intimidation
b. When the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious
c. By means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority
d. When the offended party is under 12
years of age or demented

Chapter Three
SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION OF MINORS
AND WHITE SLAVE TRADE
Art. 337. Qualified seduction. The seduction of a
virgin over twelve years and under eighteen years of
age, committed by any person in public authority,
priest, home-servant, domestic, guardian, teacher, or
any person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted
with the education or custody of the woman seduced,

CRIMINAL LAW 2
shall be punished by prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed
upon any person who shall seduce his sister or
descendant, whether or not she be a virgin or over
eighteen years of age.
Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is
committed when the offender has carnal knowledge of
any of the persons and under the circumstances
described herein.

In one case, the woman committed sexual congress with a


married man because the man promised that he will marry
the woman. The SC said that there is no seduction. The
fact that the woman knows that the man is married, the
man cannot marry her. There is no deceit.

Two kinds of qualified seduction:


1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 years of age and
under 18 years of age by persons who abuse their
authority or confidence reposed in them
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother or descendant
by her ascendant, regardless of her age and
reputation.

In the 1st kind is the seduction of a virgin


1. Committed by a public officer, a domestic servant,
a priest, teacher, guardian or any person who has
custody over the person
2. In this case, the elements are:
a. The offended party must be a virgin
b. She must be over 12 and under 18
c. The offender is a priest, domestic
servant, teacher, guardian
d. The offender had sexual intercourse with
her
e. There is abuse of authority, confidence or
relationship on the part of the offender

Virginity does not refer to physical virginity. It would suffice


that the woman is not married, she is single and living a
chaste life. The law presumes that she is a virgin.
The offender is any person, public authority, priest,
guardian

Note: sexual intercourse is an element of any kind of


seduction.
In the 2nd case:
Virginity does not matter, even if the said sister or
descendant is a married woman. Likewise, age does not
matter. There can still be a seduction of a sister or
descendant. There must be an element of sexual
intercourse and committed in abuse of authority.

Art. 338. Simple seduction. The seduction of a


woman who is single or a widow of good reputation,
over twelve but under eighteen years of age,
committed by means of deceit, shall be punished by
arresto mayor.

In case of simple seduction, the offended party must be a


WOMAN who is single or widow.
Deceit- the offended party gave herself to the man because
of the latters promise.

Sample Problem:
In order to have sexual congress with the woman, the man
promised to marry the man. Crime committed is seduction.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 147

Art. 339. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the


offended party. The penalty of arresto mayor shall
be imposed to punish any other acts of lasciviousness
committed by the same persons and the same
circumstances as those provided in Articles 337 and
338.
This is under circumstances of seduction.
Offender: Man
Offended Party: woman

Under this circumstance, the acts of lasciviousness are


committed through:
a. Abuse of authority
b. Abuse of confidence
c. Abuse of relationship
d. Means of deceit

Art. 340. Corruption of minors. Any person who shall


promote or facilitate the prostitution or corruption of
persons underage to satisfy the lust of another, shall
be punished by prision mayor, and if the culprit is a
pubic officer or employee, including those in
government-owned or controlled corporations, he shall
also suffer the penalty of temporary absolute
disqualification. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg.
92).

Art. 341. White slave trade. The penalty of prision


mayor in its medium and maximum period shall be
imposed upon any person who, in any manner, or
under any pretext, shall engage in the business or shall
profit by prostitution or shall enlist the services of any
other for the purpose of prostitution (As amended by
Batas Pambansa Blg. 186.)

Chapter Four
ABDUCTION
Art. 342. Forcible abduction. The abduction of any
woman against her will and with lewd designs shall be
punished by reclusion temporal.
The same penalty shall be imposed in every case, if the
female abducted be under twelve years of age.
Art. 343. Consented abduction. The abduction of a
virgin over twelve years and under eighteen years of
age, carried out with her consent and with lewd
designs, shall be punished by the penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.

Forcible abduction- taking away of a woman against her


will with lewd design.
Woman can be any person. Age, virginity, civil status is not
material. For as long as the taking away is done with lewd
design and against her will.

note that sexual intercourse is not an element. If


by reason of the forcible abduction, the man had
sexual intercourse with the woman, it may result in
a complex crime of rape with forcible abduction.

CRIMINAL LAW 2

SAMPLE PROBLEM:
1. X is a turned down suitor of A. X forcibly took A,
who was sitting in the door step of her house. X
professed his love to A. However, A did not accept
him so X raped him 7 times within 7 days. How
many crimes are committed? What are the crimes
committed?
The crimes committed by X are 7 crimes: 1 crime forcible
abduction with rape and 6 crimes of rape. Separate and
distinct from each other.

Note that only 1 forcible abduction is necessary


and only 1 rape is necessary to bring about
complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. The
other rapes are separate and distinct from the
crime of rape

In the same case, the woman was inside the


house of the man. The man attempted to rape the
woman but the woman was able to run away.
There is no crime of forcible abduction with attempted rape.
The attempt to rape the woman is the manifestation of the
lewd design which is an element of forcible abduction.

2.

CONSENTED ABDUCTION:
Elements:
1. The woman must be a virgin
2. She must be over 12 years but under 18
3. The taking away must be with her consent, after
solicitation or cajolery from the offender
4. The taking away must be with lewd designs.

This time, the offended party consented to the taking away.


But take note of the age (12-18). This is what makes the
crime of abduction.

Sample Problem
The girl was 15 and the boyfriend was 25. The said
boyfriend was able to take away the girl with her consent.
The parents of the girl filed a case. Per Maam, she was
able to handle a similar case where the girl was 16 and the
man was above 18. The parents of the girl do not like the
man so the lovers eloped and lived in the house of the
man. The mother filed a case of consented abduction.
During the P.I., the said girl loved the man and even if the
mother will take her away from the man, she will always
return to the man. Also, the woman has keys of the house
of the man. Per maam the man was not at fault because it
was always the woman who would go to the mans house.
So she dismissed the case.

In qualified seduction and consented abduction, acts of


lasciviousness in circumstances of seduction: INSTANCES
WHERE VIRGINITY IS AN ELEMENT

Note: In consented abduction, sexual intercourse is not an


element, so if after the woman ran away with the man, yet
she does not want to have sexual intercourse but the man
forced her and was able to succeed in having sexual
intercourse, the crime committed is consented abduction
with rape.

Chapter Five
PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE PRECEDING

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 148

CHAPTERS OF TITLE ELEVEN


Art. 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery,
concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts of
lasciviousness. The crimes of adultery and
concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended spouse.
The offended party cannot institute criminal
prosecution without including both the guilty parties, if
they are both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have
consented or pardoned the offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of
lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents, or guardian, nor, in any case, if the
offender has been expressly pardoned by the above
named persons, as the case may be.
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of
lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of the offender
with the offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him.
The provisions of this paragraph shall also be
applicable to the co-principals, accomplices and
accessories after the fact of the above-mentioned
crimes.

Art. 345. Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes


against chastity. Person guiltyof rape, seduction or
abduction, shall also be sentenced:
1. To indemnify the offended woman.
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law should
prevent him from so doing.
3. In every case to support the offspring.
The adulterer and the concubine in the case provided
for in Articles 333 and 334 may also be sentenced, in
the same proceeding or in a separate civil proceeding,
to indemnify for damages caused to the offended
spouse.

Art. 346. Liability of ascendants, guardians, teachers,


or other persons entrusted with the custody of the
offended party. The ascendants, guardians,
curators, teachers and any person who, by abuse of
authority or confidential relationships, shall cooperate
as accomplices in the perpetration of the crimes
embraced in chapters,
second, third and fourth, of this title, shall be punished
as principals.

Teachers or other persons in any other capacity


entrusted with the education and guidance of youth,
shall also suffer the penalty of temporary special
disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual
special disqualification.
Any person falling within the terms of this article, and
any other person guilty of corruption of minors for the
benefit of another, shall be punished by special
disqualification from filling the office of guardian.

Title Twelve
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS
Chapter one
SIMULATION OF BIRTHS AND USURPATION OF CIVIL
STATUS
Art. 347. Simulation of births, substitution of one child
for another and concealment or abandonment of a

CRIMINAL LAW 2
legitimate child. The simulation of births and the
substitution of one child for another shall be punished
by prision mayor and a fine of notexceeding 1,000
pesos.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any person
who shall conceal or abandonany legitimate child with
intent to cause such child to lose its civil status.
Any physician or surgeon or public officer who, in
violation of the duties of hisprofession or office, shall
cooperate in the execution of any of the crimes
mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs, shall
suffer the penalties therein prescribed and also the
penalty of temporary special disqualification.

Three acts punished under Art. 347:


1. Simulation of birth
2. Substitution of a child
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child
with intent to cause such child to lose its civil
status

Simulation of birth- takes place when the woman pretends


to be pregnant when in fact she is not and on the day of the
delivery, takes the child of another as her own.

Sample problem:
1. A was a pregnant. She told the midwife that she
does not want the baby. The midwife said that she
knew a couple who wanted a child. This couple
took the baby and registered the child as their
own. What are the crimes committed and who are
liable?

Chapter Two
ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
Art. 349. Bigamy. The penalty of prision mayor shall
be imposed upon any person who shall contract a
second or subsequent marriage before the former
marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the
absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead
by means of a judgment rendered in the proper
proceedings.

Sample problem:
A and B are married. B, the husband fell in love with
another woman, and married the woman thereafter. It is
now a bigamous married. A bigamous marriage is an
otherwise valid marriage, except for the fact that there is a
subsisting marriage.

Bigamous marriage through reckless imprudence- in the


book, there is such crime because a woman contracted a
marriage because she believed the statements of the
relatives of her former spouse that the latter is already
dead. However, such ruling was erroneous. There must be
a declaration of presumptive death.

2.

In substitution of a child, the classic example is


MARA and CLARA.

3.

In the 3rd act, it is necessary that the child is


legitimate, not illegitimate. The offender conceals
or abandons the legitimate child and the intention
of the offender is to lose the childs civil status.

Illegal marriage- marriage contracted without the requisites


of the law.
If a person contracted marriage if knowledge of the
infirmities, liable under 350

All of them are all liable for simulation of birth. The said
couple pretended that the child is their own child. In that
case, said child lost its original status.

Sample problem:
1. The offender abandons the child in the forest. The
child is one month old. Later however the child
was rescued. The crime committed was attempted
parricide, because it can be seen that there was
intent to kill.
2.

Art. 350. Marriage contracted against provisions of


laws. The penalty of prisioncorreccional in its
medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon
any person who, without being included in the
provisions of the next proceeding article, shall have
not been complied with or that the marriage is in
disregard of a legal impediment.
If either of the contracting parties shall obtain the
consent of the other by means of violence, intimidation
or fraud, he shall be punished by the maximum period
of the penalty provided in the next preceding
paragraph.

heirs; otherwise, the penalty of prision correccional in


its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed.

A couple gave birth to its 13th child. They are very


poor. So the couple placed the baby in the gate of
a well-known family. What crimes are committed?
-Crime committed abandonment of the legitimate
child with the intent to lose its civil status. There is
no other intent of the parents but to lose its status
as a poor child.

Art. 348. Usurpation of civil status. The penalty of


prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who
shall usurp the civil status of another, should he do so
for the purpose of defrauding the offended part or his

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 149

The solemnizing officer is liable also criminally.


Art. 351. Premature marriages. Any widow who shall
marry within three hundred and one day from the date
of the death of her husband, or before having delivered
if she shall have been pregnant at the time of his death,
shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not
exceeding 500 pesos.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any woman
whose marriage shall have been annulled or dissolved,
if she shall marry before her delivery or before the
expiration of the period of three hundred and one day
after the legal separation.

Person liable:
1. A woman who married within 301 days from the
death of her husband, or before delivery of her
baby
2. A woman whose marriage having been annulled
or dissolved, married before delivery or before

CRIMINAL LAW 2

expiration of the period of 301 days after the date


of legal separation.

The requirement that the marriage must be done within 301


days must only apply if the woman is not pregnant. If the
woman is pregnant, it is only at the time of the delivery of
the baby. After the baby is delivered, she can already
marry.
Why is it that the law requires that the baby must be first
delivered, or it must be 301 days? This is to ensure that
there is no doubt as to the paternity of the child, otherwise
there would be confusion.

Art. 352. Performance of illegal marriage ceremony.


Priests or ministers of any religious denomination or
sect, or civil authorities who shall perform or authorize
any illegal marriage ceremony shall be punished in
accordance with the provisions of the Marriage Law.

Title Thirteen
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
Chapter One
LIBEL
Section One. Definitions, forms, and punishment of
this crime.

Art. 353. Definition of libel. A libel is public and


malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect,
real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition,
status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor,
discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person,
or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.

Art. 354. Requirement for publicity. Every


defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious,
even if it be true, if no good intention and justifiable
motive for making it is shown, except in the following
cases:
1. A private communication made by any person to
another in the performance of any legal, moral or social
duty; and
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without
any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative or
other official proceedings which are not of confidential
nature, or of any statement, report or speech delivered
in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by
public officers in the exercise of their functions.
Art. 355. Libel means by writings or similar means. A
libel committed by means of writing, printing,
lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting,
theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or
any similar means, shall be punished by prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods or a
fine ranging from 200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in
addition to the civil action which may be brought by
the offended party.
Art. 356. Threatening to publish and offer to present
such publication for a compensation. The penalty of
arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 2,000 pesos, or
both, shall be imposed upon any person who threatens
another to publish a libel concerning him or the
parents, spouse, child, or other members of the family
of the latter or upon anyone who shall offer to prevent
the publication of such libel for a compensation or
money consideration.

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 150

Art. 357. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in


the course of official proceedings. The penalty of
arresto mayor or a fine of from 20 to 2,000 pesos, or
both, shall be imposed upon any reporter, editor or
manager or a newspaper, daily or magazine, who shall
publish facts connected with the private life of another
and offensive to the honor, virtue and reputation of
said person, even though said publication be made in
connection with or under the pretext that it is
necessary in the narration of any judicial or
administrative proceedings wherein such facts have
been mentioned.
Art. 358. Slander. Oral defamation shall be punished
by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period if it is of a serious
and insulting nature; otherwise the penalty shall be
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.
Art. 359. Slander by deed. The penalty of arresto
mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in
its minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000
pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall
perform any act not included and punished in this title,
which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon
another
person. If said act is not of a serious nature, the
penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding
200 pesos.

Forms of libel:
1. Written defamation
2. Oral defamation
3. Slander by deed
4. Defamatory acts

Elements of libel:
1. There must be an imputation or allegation of a
crime, or a vice of defect, real or imaginary, or any
act or omission, condition, status or circumstance
which tend to dishonor or discredit a natural or
juridical person.
2. That there must be a publication of these
imputation;
3. The identity of the person defamed must be
established or identified;
4. The existence of malice.

Publication- satisfied the moment that a 3rd person has


heard or read the libelous statement, even if the person
pertained has not read it. So the basis is that a 3rd person
has heard or read the libelous statement.

Identity of the person- must be identified, not necessary


that the person must be named. It suffices that the person
is described and identifiable by a third person.

Malice- malice is presumed as a rule for every statements


made. However in defamatory statements, if the offender
cannot state any good intention for stating defamatory
statements, the law presumes malice.
Prosecution need not prove malice because the law
presumes malice. This is MALICE IN LAW.

Instances:

CRIMINAL LAW 2
Malice in fact- refers to privilege in communication, refers to
private communication, reports, or any acts performed by a
public officer. In this case the law does not presumes
malice. Malice must be proven by the prosecution
otherwise there would be acquittal

Libel can be committed through the following:


1. Writing
2. Printing
3. Lithography
4. Engraving
5. Radio
6. Phonograph
7. Painting
8. Theatrical exhibition
9. Cinematographic exhibition
10. Or any similar means

If libel is committed, the liability is prision


correctional.
TV is within the phrase any similar means.
If amplifier or microphone was used for everyone
to hear, the crime committed is slander or oral
defamation, but not libel.

Venue: RPC provides that even if the crime is prision


correccional, it must be filed before the RTC where the
article was printed or first published, or RTC where any of
the offended party is residing. Note that this is a
substantive law. It is not found in the Rules of Court
If the offended party is a public officer and is working in
Manila, it must be filed before RTC of Manila or where the
article was first published. If the public officer is not working
in Manila, it shall be filed in the RTC where he is working at
the time of the commission of the offense or where the
libelous article was printed or was first published.
If private individual is the offended party, RTC of the place
where the private individual resides at the time of the actual
commission of the offense or where the libelous material
was published

ORAL DEFAMATION/SLANDER
1. Grave oral defamation- when serious and insulting
and nature.

Factors to consider: not only the grammar and meaning,


but also the:
a. Personal relations of the accused and the
offended party
b. Facts and Circumstances surrounding the case
c. Social standing and position of the offended party.

PUTANG INA MO is not a slanderous remark; it is


merely an expression of the Filipino People.
(Pader vs People)
2. Simple slander

SLANDER BY DEED
Slander by deed- refers to acts not words, with the intent to
defame the person. It can also be (a)serious, grave slander
by deed, or (b) simple slander by deed.

A priest was slapped by a person, serious slander


by deed

Section Two. General provisions

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 151

Art. 360. Persons responsible. Any person who shall


publish, exhibit, or cause the publication or exhibition
of any defamation in writing or by similar means, shall
be responsible for the same.
The author or editor of a book or pamphlet, or the
editor or business manager of a daily newspaper,
magazine or serial publication, shall be responsible for
the defamations contained therein to the same extent
as if he were the author thereof.
The criminal and civil action for damages in cases of
written defamations as provided for in this chapter,
shall be filed simultaneously or separately with the
court of first instance of the province or city where the
libelous article is printed and first published or where
any of the offended parties actually resides at the time
of the commission of
the offense: Provided, however, That where one of the
offended parties is a public officer whose office is in
the City of Manila at the time of the commission of the
offense, the action shall be filed in the Court of First
Instance of the City of Manila, or of the city or province
where the libelous article is printed and first published,
and in case such public officer does not hold office in
the City of Manila, the action shall be filed in the Court
of First Instance of the province or city where he held
office at the time of the commission of the offense or
where the libelous article is printed and first published
and in case one of the offended parties is a private
individual, the action shall be filed in the Court of First
Instance of the province or city where he actually
resides at the time of the commission of the offense or
where the libelous matter is printed and first published:
Provided, further, That the civil action shall be filed in
the same court where the criminal action is filed and
vice versa: Provided, furthermore,
That the court where the criminal action or civil action
for damages is first filed, shall acquire jurisdiction to
the exclusion of other courts: And, provided, finally,
That this amendment shall not apply to cases of written
defamations, the civil and/or criminal actions which
have been filed in court at the time of the effectivity of
this law.
Preliminary investigation of criminal action for written
defamations as provided for in the chapter shall be
conducted by the provincial or city fiscal of the
province or city, or by the municipal court of the city or
capital of the province where such action may be
instituted in accordance with the provisions of this
article.
No criminal action for defamation which consists in the
imputation of a crime which cannot be prosecuted de
oficio shall be brought except at the instance of and
upon complaint expressly filed by the offended party.
(As amended by R.A. 1289, approved June 15, 1955,
R.A. 4363, approved June 19, 1965).

Art. 361. Proof of the truth. In every criminal


prosecution for libel, the truth may be given in
evidence to the court and if it appears that the matter
charged as libelous is true, and, moreover, that it was
published with good motives and for justifiable ends,
the defendants shall be acquitted.
Proof of the truth of an imputation of an act or
omission not constituting a crime shall not be
admitted, unless the imputation shall have been made

CRIMINAL LAW 2
against Government employees with respect to facts
related to the discharge of their official duties.
In such cases if the defendant proves the truth of the
imputation made by him, he shall be acquitted.

Art. 362. Libelous remarks. Libelous remarks or


comments connected with the matter privileged under
the provisions of Article 354, if made with malice, shall
not exempt the author thereof nor the editor or
managing editor of a newspaper from criminal liability.

Chapter Two
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS
Art. 363. Incriminating innocent person. Any person
who, by any act not constituting perjury, shall directly
incriminate or impute to an innocent person the
commission of a crime, shall be punished by arresto
menor.

Act of directly incriminating or imputes to an innocent


person the commission of the crime. It is necessary that it
must not be made on an affidavit, because if it is through
an affidavit, it will be perjury. It will only arise if it will not
amount to (a) perjury or (b) sec 29 of RA 9165

Sample problem

As ballpen was lost. B took it and placed it in the


bag of C so that C will be liable for theft. B
committed incriminating innocent person.

In the case of dangerous drugs, the law that will


govern is sec 29 of RA 9165, or planting of
evidence. Person found guilty of
planting
evidence, regardless of quantity or purity of the
dangerous drugs shall suffer the penalty of death.

Art. 364. Intriguing against honor. The penalty of


arresto menor or fine not exceeding 200 pesos shall be
imposed for any intrigue which has for its principal
purpose to blemish the honor or reputation of a
person.

Title Fourteen
QUASI-OFFENSES
Sole Chapter
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. Any person
who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act
which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave
felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its medium
period; if it would have constituted a less grave felony,
the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and
medium periods shall be imposed; if it would have
constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto menor
in its maximum period shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence,
shall commit an act which would otherwise constitute a
grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor
in its medium and maximum periods; if it would have
constituted a less serious felony, the penalty of arresto
mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed.
When the execution of the act covered by this article
shall have only resulted in damage to the property of

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 152

another, the offender shall be punished by a fine


ranging from an amount equal to the value of said
damages to three times such value, but which shall in
no case be less than twenty-five pesos.
A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and censure
shall be imposed upon any person who, by simple
imprudence or negligence, shall cause some wrong
which, if done maliciously, would have constituted a
light felony.
In the imposition of these penalties, the court shall
exercise their sound discretion, without regard to the
rules prescribed in Article sixty-four.
The provisions contained in this article shall not be
applicable:
1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal to
or lower than those provided in the first two
paragraphs of this article, in which case the court shall
impose the penalty next lower in degree than that
which should be imposed in the period which they may
deem proper to apply.
2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with
violation of the Automobile Law, to death of a person
shall be caused, in which case the defendant shall be
punished by prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods.
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but
without malice, doing or falling to do an act from which
material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack
of precaution on the part of the person performing of
failing to perform such act, taking into consideration
his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence,
physical
condition and other circumstances regarding persons,
time and place.
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution
displayed in those cases in which the damage
impending to be caused is not immediate nor the
danger clearly manifest.
The penalty next higher in degree to those provided for
in this article shall be imposed upon the offender who
fails to lend on the spot to the injured parties such help
as may be in this hand to give. (As amended by R.A.
1790, approved June 21, 1957).

Take note of the case of Ivler vs Modesto.


Reckless imprudence or negligence is the crime itself.
Hence, once committed or acquitted of a specific act of
reckless imprudence, the accused may not be prosecuted
again for that same act. For the essence of the quasi
offense of criminal negligence under Art 365 of the RPC
lies in the execution of an imprudent or negligent act that if
intentionally done, would be punishable as a felony. The
law penalizes thus the negligent or careless act, not the
result thereof. The gravity of the consequence is only taken
into account to determine the penalty; it does not qualify
the substance of the offense. And, as the careless act is
single, whether the injurious result should affect one person
or several persons, the offense (criminal negligence)
remains one and the same, and cannot be split into
different crimes and prosecutions.
1st case: reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical
injuries
2nd case: reckless imprudence resulting to homicide and
damage to property

CRIMINAL LAW 2

One quasi-offense cannot give rise to another


quasi-offense.
Note simple negligence is not a means to commit
a crime. They are crimes by themselves.

R.A 9995 Anti-Voyeurism Law


Acts Punished:
a. Taking photo or video coverage of a person or a
group of persons performing sexual act or any
similar activity or to capture an image of a private
area of a person such as the naked or
undergarment clad genitals, public area, buttocks,
or female breasts without the consent of the
persons involved and under circumstances in
which the person/s has/have a reasonable
expectation of privacy
b. To copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied or
reproduced such photo or video or recording of
sexual act or any similar activity with or without
consideration
c. To sell or distribute or to cause to be sold or
distributed , such photo or video or recording of
sexual act, whether the original copy or
reproduction thereof;
d. To publish or broadcast, or to cause to be
published or broadcast whether in print or
broadcast media, or show or exhibit the photo or
video coverage or recordings of such sexual act or
any similar activity through VCD/DVDV, internet,
cellular phones and other similar means or device.

Sample problem:
A and B are having sex. B proposed to video their sexual
act to which A consented. There is no crime. However, if B
later on reproduced the video, B is still liable.
Penalty: imprisonment of not less than 3 years but not
more than 7 years AND fine of not less than 100k but not
more than 500k, or both at the discretion of the court.

RA 7877 Anti-Sexual Harassment Act


Definition of Work, Education, or Training Related Sexual
Harrassment
- Committed by an employer, employee, manager,
supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor,
professor, coach, trainor, or any other person who, having
authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in a
work or training or education environment, demands,
requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the
other, regardless of whether the demand, request or
requirement for submission is accepted by the object of
said Act.
(a) In a work-related or employment environment, sexual
harassment is committed when:
(1) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the
hiring or in the employment, re-employment or
continued employment of said individual, or in
granting said individual favorable compensation,
terms of conditions, promotions, or privileges; or
the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in
limiting, segregating or classifying the employee
which in any way would discriminate, deprive
ordiminish employment opportunities or otherwise
adversely affect said employee;

Dinty | Manalo | Navarez | Shyu | Tubio

Page 153

(2) The above acts would impair the employee's


rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or
(3) The above acts would result in an intimidating,
hostile, or offensive environment for the employee.

(b) In an education or training environment, sexual


harassment is committed:
(1) Against one who is under the care, custody or
supervision of the offender;
(2) Against one whose education, training,
apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the
offender;
(3) When the sexual favor is made a condition to
the giving of a passing grade, or the granting of
honors and scholarships, or the payment of a
stipend, allowance or other benefits, privileges, or
consideration; or
(4) When the sexual advances result in an
intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for
the student, trainee or apprentice.
Any person who directs or induces another to commit any
act of sexual harassment as herein defined, or who
cooperates in the commission thereof by another without
which it would not have been committed, shall also be held
liable under this Act.