Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Article 12
Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt
from criminal liability. the following
are exempt from criminal liability:
1. An imbecile or an insane person,
unless the latter has acted during a
lucid interval. When the imbecile or an
insane person has committed an act
which the law defines as a felony
(delito), the court shall order his
confinement in one of the hospitals or
asylums established for persons thus
afflicted, which he shall not be
permitted to leave without first
obtaining the permission of the same
court.
2. A person under nine years of age.
3. A person over nine years of age and
under fifteen, unless he has acted with
discernment, in which case, such minor
shall be proceeded against in
accordance with the provisions of Art.
80 of this Code. When such minor is
adjudged to be criminally irresponsible,
the court, in conformably with the
provisions of this and the preceding
paragraph, shall commit him to the care
and custody of his family who shall be
charged with his surveillance and
education otherwise, he shall be
committed to the care of some
institution or person mentioned in said
Art. 80.
4. Any person who, while performing a
lawful act with due care, causes an
injury by mere accident without fault or
intention of causing it.
5. Any person who act under the
compulsion of irresistible force.
6. Any person who acts under the
impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an
equal or greater injury.
7. Any person who fails to perform an
act required by law, when prevented by
some lawful insuperable cause.
Insanity
- Not so exempt if it
can be shown he
acted during lucid
interval
- acts with
intelligence during
lucid interval
- to make insanity an
exempting
circumstance, there
should be complete
deprivation of
intelligence while
committing the act.
He acts without the
least discernment,
there be total
deprivation of
freedom of the will
- mere abnormality of
mental faculties is
not enough,
especially if the
offender has not lost
consciousness, to
make an exempting
circumstance
Insanity at the
time of the trial
Sane at the time of
the commission of
the crime BUT
become insane at the
time of trial
Liable criminally
Trial will be
suspended until
mental capacity be
restored to afford
him fair trial
Evidence of Insanity
- Must refer to the time preceding the act
under prosecution or to the moment of its
execution
- Evidence point to insanity following to the
commission of the crime, the accused cant
be acquitted
Presumed to be sane when he
committed it
- Insanity only occasional or intermittent
Presumption of its continuance
doesnt arise
He who relies on such
insanity proved at another time must
prove its existence also at the time of
the commission of the offence
- Defendant had lucid intervals
Presumed that the offence was
committed in one of them
- Person who has been adjudged insane, or
who has been committed to a hospital or
asylum for the insane
Presumed to continue to be insane
Dementia praecox
- Covered by the term insanity
- Homicidal attack is common
Paedophilia
Determination of discernment
- take into account the ability of the child to
understand the moral and psychological
components of criminal responsibility and
the consequences of the wrongful act
Discernment Vs. Intent
Intent refers to desired act of person
Discernment relates to the moral
significance that person ascribes to the said
act
2 ways discernment is shown
1. Manner of committing the crime
Determination of age
1. True copy of certificate of live birth
2. Baptismal certificate and school records
3. In the absence of the documents under
paragraphs 1 and 2 of this section due to
loss, destruction, or unavailability. Testimony
of the child, testimony of a member the
family related to the child by affinity or
consanguinity. Section 40, Rule 130 of the
Rules on Evidence, the testimonies of the
persons, the physical appearance, of the
child, and other relevant evidence, shall
suffice
Burden of proof of age
Defendant strike another with a gun in selfdefence and then it fired accidently and
seriously injured assailant
SC Ruling: Lawful Act
Example 3:
Act of drawing a weapon in the course of a
quarrel, not being in self defence
SC Ruling: Unlawful. It is light threat
Person performing an act must do so with
due care, without fault or negligence
- Any person who, while in the performing a
lawful act with due care, causes an injury by
mere accident without fault or intention of
doing it is exempted from criminal liability.
Accident
- Something that happens outside the sway
of our will
- Lies beyond the bounds of humanly
foreseeable consequences.
- If the consequence are plainly foreseeable
Negligence
- Accident presupposes lack of intention to
commit the wrong done.
- Accident and negligence are intrinsically
contradictory; one cannot exist with the
other
Article 12(4) of the RPC refers to purely
accidental cases where there was no
absolutely no intention to commit the wrong
done
Par. 5. Any person who act under the
compulsion of irresistible force
Basis of paragraph 5
- based on complete absence of freedom, an
element of voluntariness
- presupposes that a person is compelled by
means of force or violence to commit a crime
Elements:
1. Compulsion is by means of physical force
Uncontrollable fear
Insuperable Cause
- A cause which prevents a person to do what
the law requires.
Example:
So you learned about a conspiracy against
the government, you're supposed to report it
to the authorities. If you do not do that, that
- An absolutory case
Entrapment
- A practice whereby a law enforcement
agent induces a person to commit a criminal
offense that the person would have
otherwise been unlikely to commit.
- It is a conduct that is generally discouraged
and thus, in many jurisdictions, is a possible
defence against criminal liability.
Instigation
- Instigator
practically induces
the would be
accused into the
commission of the
offence and himself
becomes the coprincipal
Entrapment
- ways and means
are resorted to for
the purpose of
trapping and
capturing the law
breaker in the
execution of his
criminal plan
- accused must be
acquitted
- Public officer or a
private detective
induces an
INNOCENT person to
commit a crime and
would arrest him
upon or after the
commission of the
crime by the latter
- No bar to the
prosecution and
conviction of the law
breaker
Absolutory causes
- Law enforcer
conceives the
commission of the
crime and suggests
to the accused who
adopts the idea and
carries it into
execution
- Its an absolutory
case
Instigation is absolutory
- The act by which one incites another to do
something, as to injure a third person, or to
commit some crime or misdemeanour, to
commence a suit or to prosecute a criminal.
- The means
originates from the
mind of the criminal.
The idea and the
resolve come from
him
- Entrapment is not a
defence
What are the complete defenses in criminal
cases?
1.
Where any of the essential elements
of the crime charged is not proved by the
prosecution and the elements proved do not
constitute any crime.
2.
When the act of the accused falls
under the justifying circumstances.
3.
When the act of the accused falls
under any of the exempting circumstances.
4.
Absolutory causes.
5.
Where the guilt of the accused is not
proved beyond reasonable doubt.
6.
Prescription of crimes
7.
Pardon by the offended party before
the institution of criminal action in crime
against chastity.