You are on page 1of 71

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON
WITH UPDATED

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

CRIMINAL LAW II

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 114 - TREASON • Who may commit treason? FILIPINO CITIZEN • Where may he commit treason? ANYWHERE • Are those who commit treason abroad criminally liable? YES • Why is it that a Filipino citizen may commit treason even if abroad? - Definition of treason; concept of allegiance • What allegiance is owed by a non-resident alien? • Why are penal laws territorial? • What is the territoriality principle? • Does this violate the principle of territoriality? NO. See Par. 5, Art. 2 of the RPC (crimes committed against national security and the law of the nations; treason is a crime against a national security, therefore it falls within the exceptions) • Where may an alien commit treason? Only in the Philippines; he owes temporary allegiance to the govt. of the Phil. in return for protection he receives • What if he was once a Japanese and then he becomes a naturalized citizen, may he still be liable for treason? YES. There is no distinction made in Art. 114  Supposing during time of war, a Chinese businessman, who has been residing in the Philippines for ten years, decides to visit China. While there, he commits treasonous acts against the Philippines. Is he liable for treason? Supposing during time of war, a Chinese tourist visits the Philippines for three days. On his third day of stay, he commits treasonous acts against the Philippines. Is he liable for treason? • How is treason committed? (1) By levying war against the government • Should there be an actual military encounter with the govt. forces? Not necessarily • Can this be committed by just one person? NO; use of the word MEN in element #1 • Is it necessary that this assembly of men be armed? NO. There is no qualification in the law  Supposing the Phil. Govt. was at war with Japan. We were all unarmed and we were discussing ways and means of effectively delivering the govt. into the hands of foreign power. Liable for treason? YES. Complied with elements of levying war PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos
UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

1

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON
WITH UPDATED

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

CRIMINAL LAW II

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(2) By adhering to the enemies and giving them aid • During the Japanese occupation, certain Filipinos were moving around, convincing the people that the principles of the govt. of Japan are better than that followed by the Phil. Treasonous? NO. there is only adherence in this case (adhering to the enemies and giving aid or comfort must concur)  Suppose that during the Japanese occupation, you were a merchant engaged in the selling of weapons and you were having transactions with the Japanese. Treasonous? YES. Adherence to the enemy may be implied by the nature of the act committed.  Suppose you were engaged in a transportation business; Japanese hired your buses to transport their troops to another province. Liable? YES. It will directly strengthen the enemy’s troops  Suppose you were a rice merchant supplying Japanese with rice. Liable? NO. Does not strengthen enemy; no adherence on your part  Supposing, during time of war, a young Filipina falls in love with a Japanese soldier. Is she liable for treason? What if she supplies names of guerrilla leaders to him?  Supposing a professor, during time of war, lectures about the advantages of having a government similar to the Japanese. Is he liable for treason?  Supposing a class, discuss and volunteer to do different means to help the Japanese (i.e. distribution of weapons, etc.) Are the members liable for treason? • Conviction of Treason (1) Confession of Guilt – plea of guilty Prosecution need not present evidence but may present it only to show the presence of AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE/S (2) Testimony of Two Witnessses with the same overt act • WHY? Because it carries with it penalty of death and it is committed in abnormal circumstance • Testimony of two witnesses to two different acts is not enough for conviction; testimony of two witnesses must be credible and believed by the court • Is it enough that there be two witnesses? –Depends: if testimony points to the same acts, it is enough that there are only two witnesses

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos
UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

2

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON
WITH UPDATED

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

CRIMINAL LAW II

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Is proof beyond reasonable doubt (PBRD) sufficient to convict the accused? NO. There is further requirement of two witnesses who should testify on the same overt act (treason is the only felony in the entire RPC where PBRD is not sufficient) • Extrajudicial confession is not sufficient to convict a person of treason; confession must be made in open court • Prosecution of Treason  Witness #1: saw personally the accused in the company of a Japanese major who went to the house of a guerrilla officer; saw the accused point at the guerrilla, and the latter was tied and dragged. Witness #2: was walking in the farm locate across the brgy. hall; saw the jeep where the guerrilla officer was; saw him being dragged by the Japanese, after which they shot him. Is the 2-witness rule complied with? NO.  Suppose the prosecution presented three witnesses but the court gave credence only to one witness. Acquit or convict? Acquit for non-compliance with the 2-witness rule. • If the common crimes were committed and was in any way connected with the objectives of treason – liability is separate • Accused was charged with treason and 10 acts of kidnapping with ransom: purpose of ransom was to finance their (treasonous) activities. Liability? Treason. ARTICLE 115 - CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TREASON ARTICLE 116 - MISPRISION OF TREASON • How soon should the disclosure be made? Within a reasonable period which will depend on the judgement of the judge • By any person? NO. refer to element #1 • Does this violate the principle of generality? Yes, it violates BUT this is an express exception by provision of the law  Supposing, accused is prosecuted for MT; alleged in the info that being a Filipino citizen, he owes permanent allegiance and having knowledge of persons who performed acts w/ the view of overthrowing the govt., he should have disclosed the same. Liable? NO. Knowledge was already about treason (in the first manner) and not mere conspiracy  Supposing, accused is resident of a city; has knowledge of conspiracy; refused to disclose the matter to the mayor/fiscal because they are among the most corrupt; disclose the matter directly to the AFP Chief of Staff. Liable for MT? NO. Even if the matter was not disclosed to PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos
UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

3

the matter has ceased to be confidential because of its previous publication  Supposing.  Supposing a witness sees a group of men. Govt. to be used for its war against Malaysia. May you be held liable for espionage under the RPC? No. etc.ESPIONAGE • Where may espionage in the first manner be committed (RPC)?  Suppose that the US donated armaments. you climbed a tree to photograph confidential information.  May espionage be committed in the National Library? In the Benedictine Abbey?  Supposing you paid the janitor to obtain confidential information for you. He does not disclose what he sees to anyone. Are you liable for espionage under the RPC? How about the janitor? • May espionage in the second manner be committed by a private person (RPC)? No. ARTICLE 118 . Is he liable for espionage? Yes. Liable? NO because what he intends to obtain is not anymore confidential. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 4 . MAXIMO P. arms were stored in a warehouse in Nueva Ecija. are they liable? Does the act have a tendency to provoke war against US? • Does the raising of troops constitute inciting to war? ARTICLE 119 . Liable? YES. a newspaper man who was accosted told the military officers that he wanted to take the photos of the modern warfare that he read in Remate (tabloid). newspaper reporter without authority went inside the warehouse to take photos of the arms. The law does not distinguish foreign representative. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------the person/s specified in the law.VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY ARTICLE 120 . Liable? ARTICLE 117 . Elements of first manner of committing the crime were present  Supposing. all unarmed. But you may be liable for violation of CA 616.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. there was no intent on the part of the accused not to disclose the info. was still 50 meters away from the warehouse when he was accosted. discussing means to commit treasonous acts against the government.  Supposing a high ranking military officer discloses confidential matters to a beauty contestant from another nation. to the Phil.INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVE FOR REPRISALS  Supposing protesters burn the US flag in front of the US embassy.CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.

Is he liable for piracy? • What if persons from another boat commit the act of piracy. Crime committed? –Common robbery –floating casino is not within the definition of a vessel RA 6235 ANTI-HIJACKING LAW • Acts Punishable: (a) Aircraft of Phil. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing Malaysia is at war with the Philippines. D. MAXIMO P. Which law will apply.PIRACY IN GENERAL AND MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS OR IN PHILIPPINE WATERS • In what way is piracy under the RPC different from piracy under P. is she liable for violation of Article 120? Without prohibition by the government? With prohibition by the government? What if the letter contains the drawing of a heart only? ARTICLE 121 . (2) seize or usurp control thereof PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. 532?  Ship from Manila to Cebu.D. Crime committed? Piracy under RPC  What if it was also a passenger of the ship who took your belongings? Piracy under PD 532  Floating casino in Manila Bay. demanded that you give your belongings after which. pointed a knife at you. registry: (1) change in the course OR destination. a person suddenly boarded the ship.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.FLIGHT TO ENEMY’S COUNTRY • May this be committed by mere attempt to flee? YES ARTICLE 122 . If a Filipina writes a love letter to a Malaysian sweetheart. while you were there. RPC or P. 532? Piracy under the RPC if committed by a stranger. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 5 . Piracy under PD 532 if committed by passenger or member of the crew • Which piracy falls under the law of the nations? • What constitutes high seas? Philippine waters?  May piracy be committed in the Pasig River? Waters under the Mendiola Bridge? Lake in Burnham Park? Floating restaurant?  Supposing you boarded a motor boat and a passenger ordered other passengers to give him their belongings. while waiting for the departure of the ship. a person pointed a revolver at you and demanded that you give your winnings. he got off.

MAXIMO P. on board. Violation? Yes –refers to a change in the course  Accused bribed the pilot to veer the plane in exchange for money. liable? NO – no longer in flight (c) other acts: • Shipping. external doors were already opened. carrying in any passenger aircraft operating as a public utility w/in the Philippine any explosive. after it has landed. Violation? YES  Suppose the doors have already been opened but the passengers have not come out. Violation? NO . AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PAL from Manila to Davao: accused compelled the pilot to veer the plane a little to right for a couple of minutes. accused seized control of the plane. accused seized control of the plane. Violation? NO.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. but the pilot was still waiting for instructions from control tower. passengers were already on board. at a latitude of about 15. Liable? YES  Same facts but the plane was owned by one of the students. flammable.legally speaking. notwithstanding that it is actually flying (b) aircraft of foreign registry: (1) landing. instead of jumping.3)  A group of students chartered a PAL passenger plane for their exclusive use from Manila to Zamboanga. (2) seize or usurp control thereof • Is it necessary that acts be done while the aircraft is in flight? NO. if plane if of Phi.there is no compulsion (what is punished is the element of compulsion) • Definition of “in flight”: from the moment external doors are closed following embarkation to the moment they are opened for disembarkation • May a plane be considered in flight when the external doors have been closed but it is still on the ground because of engine problems? YES. Violation? No . last person. Liable? NO – plane is not w/in the contemplation of “public utility” PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. Liable? YES  Under the same facts. • Doors are already closed. loading. the plane is no longer in flight. or poisonous substance or material (Sec. the door of the plane opened and the skydivers jumped out. they carried with them bottles of cyanide and several sacks of dynamite. plane about to stage a skydiving exhibition in Luneta.000 ft. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 6 .. Plane has seized to be in flight  A group of skydivers on board a Phil. corrosive. the law is silent  Japan airlines. Registry. seized control of the plane. accused barged into the pilot’s cockpit and seized control of the plane.

or may order an arrest or detain • A private individual may be also be liable for arbitrary detention if he acts either as an accessory. a task force was organized. (3) violent insanity • Instances when warrantless arrests are lawful: (1) has committed. He was being chased by the people. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 7 . may recommend an arrest or detain. he only has hearsay knowledge  Supposing a woman was a victim of rape. Deaf? Yes. together with her parents. The members of the household were able to give description of the robbers to the police. is actually committing or is attempting to commit an offense in his presence • May a crime be committed in the presence of a public officer who is blind? Yes. the officer saw one of the persons who fitted the description given so he arrested him. He was holding a knife and he was already stained with blood. she proceeded to the NBI to report the crime. no arbitrary detention can be committed • Public officer liable for arbitrary detention may be one who: has duty to make an arrest or detain. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 123 . he arrested the accused. Seeing what was happening. Since there were media present. there was a commotion after which the accused fled. MAXIMO P. Both? (2) personal knowledge of the facts that the person to be arrested actually committed the offense • May a person be arrested based on suspicion? Is suspicion equivalent to actual knowledge?  Suppose the accused stabbed X. There is no probable cause to believe that the person committed the crime. Liable? NO –there is personal knowledge of the facts that a crime has been committed and the person being arrested was the one who committed it  Suppose a crime of robbery was committed. The TF PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. accomplice. All the lights were on when it happened. principal by inducement.QUALIFIED PIRACY ARTICLE 124 . (2)compulsory confined.ARBITRARY DETENTION • May this be committed by ANY public officer? NO – only by those vested with authority • May this be committed by an officer who arrested and detained a person by virtue of a warrant of arrest issued by the court? NO The moment there is a WOA. Three days later. or principal by indispensable cooperation • Legal grounds for detention (1) committed the crime. A police officer came. Valid? No.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.

• To whom should the delivery be made? Courts of Justice • Is delivery to fiscal sufficient? No. There is no warrant of arrest. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------learned rapist was in Bacolod.DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES • Distinguish from arbitrary detention • When does detention in delay become illegal? Upon expiration of the periods specified • Reason behind the law: to prevent any abuse that may be committed against the accused so that he can avail of any legal rights available to him.EXPULSION • May a Filipino be expelled from the Philippines? NO PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. They only have hearsay knowledge (3) arrest of a prisoner who escaped ARTICLE 125 . Detention became illegal. 6 months or more ARTICLE 127 . Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 8 . They search and found him. There was a police officer. 15 days – 6 months. Within what hours should you be delivered? 36 hours  Supposing you were only delivered on the 7th day.DELAYING RELEASe • Is there a period prescribed? Yes. ARTICLE 126 . 125 • What does PO do if he cannot deliver him so he may not be liable? He should release him. He doesn’t form part of judicial authority • May this be committed if there is warrant of arrest? NO. • Assuming detention is already illegal does this affect the validity of your arrest? Yes. May NBI task force arrest and detain him? NO. Even if you fail to deliver him as required there is already a case in court.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Same as that prescribed in Art 124: 3 – 15 days. MAXIMO P. • Does illegal detention affect your crime? No.  X killed his neighbor in the course of their town fiesta. What crime is committed by the police officer? Violation of Art. Police officer made the arrest because he saw the killing.

May these be admissible in evidence? NO-not included in SW PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. the agents raided the lab. They seized such firearms. • May an alien be deported by the Bureau of Immigration without violating Art 127? Yes because the Bureau of Immigration has the authority to do so. signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer. Is he liable? Yes. Is the SW issued by the court valid? NO-warrant was issued for two offenses  Warrant was issued for violation of DDA. commanding him to search for personal property described therein and bring it before the court • Requisites: (1) probable cause. they saw the warehouse door was open.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. after which they were convinced that there is a shabu lab in a certain compound.VIOLATION OF DOMICILE • Judicial order = search warrant • Search Warrant: an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Phils. court by final judgment. Laws. in order to stop prostitution he arrested and sent all prostitutes to Basilan. MAXIMO P. when agents entered the compound. granting authority ARTICLE 128 . The agents applied for the issuance of SW for violation of DDA and for illegal possession of firearms. There is authority of law. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Who can be expelled? ALIENS only • Who can order expulsion? Bureau of Immigration and Deportation to be approved by the Office of the President • Convict has already served the minimum term of his sentenceand ready to be released for parole. condition in his parole fixes his residence even against his will. through which they can see high powered firearms. • May court order convict to change the residence by virtue of Probation Law? Yes. (2) for one offense (3) to be determined personally by the judge (4) particular description of place. persons and things • Effect of SW that was not legally obtained: things seized would be inadmissible in evidence  Suppose NBI agents conducted a surveillance operations for 2 weeks. Armed with the SW. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 9 . Is condition valid? YES  Supposing the Mayor of City of Manila. How about by virtue of ISLAW? Dangerous Drugs Act? Yes to both.

LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Prosecutor only presented those material and relevant to the offense. raided the condo unit after the inquiry. which the police major opened and he entered the house. MAXIMO P. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 10 . Valid? NO – place not particularly described  Suppose the court issued a SW against the accused for violation of the internal revenue law. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Suppose court issued a SW for the seizure of equipment used in the production of shabu. Liable? NO. Violation? NO  There was a sign that said “Do not enter at all times” but the door is slightly opened. sign says “Beware of dogs!” Police entered. Valid? NO – things seized were not particularly described therein  NBI agents applied for SW against the house said to be a shabu lab. he entered your house. agents implemented the warrant. location of shabu lab is in a compound: white house. • How is violation of domicile committed? (1) by entering… -dwelling: a place that satisfies the requisites of domestic life Is it enough that there is no consent? NO-entry must be against the will of the owner  Police major who is your neighbour saw the door of your house slightly opened. It was almost 5pm when thy arrived at the office of the judge. judge was in a hurry so he instructed the clerk to receive the evidence the agents may present in support of their application. Agents implemented the warrant. police entered. Liable? YES . It is personal. Order was brought to the judge who signed it. Violation? YES-there is express prohibition  Suppose the door was locked. Valid? NO – probable cause was not determined personally by the judge • May judge delegate such duty? NO. draft the order and bring it tot the judge. Valid? NO – place was not particularly described  Suppose the SW was issued for illegal possession of firearms. Liable? YES – express prohibition  Door was open. got all the documents. ordering the seizure of ALL documents contained inside the 2 cabinets in the office of the accused. agents saw that there were several units in said floor so they inquired.  Sign says enter at your own risk. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.locked door is implied prohibition  Sign says “no trespassing”. Police entered. Liable? NO. ordering the officers to seize high-powered firearms in the condo unit of the accused located in the 5th floor. blue gate. Everything was done by the clerk.

it need not be implemented. MAXIMO P. you catch him inside your house and order him to leave. he did conduct any search.surreptitious entry: secretly entering the house  Police entered the house through the closed back door which he opened. which is not true. He is not liable because he did not commit any of the three acts under Article 128.SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED. Is he liable for procuring SW w/o just cause? YES. However. Once inside. (3) by refusing to leave… . (2) abuse in the service PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. under the first manner – closed door constitutes prohibition • What consummates the crime? Refusal to leave the premises  Supposing a police officer. While he was intently staring at the picture. with the intention of searching the premises of your house. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(2) by searching… is it necessary that the entry be done against the will of the owner? NO – it is sufficient that the entry is without the consent of the owner. he will implement the warrant. you answered him. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 11 . Liable? YES. AND ABUSE IN THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED • Is perjury necessary in maliciously obtaining a search warrant? • What if an illegal firearm was actually found based on a maliciously obtained search warrant for illegal possession of firearm? • Manner of Commission (1) maliciously obtaining  Suppose you have a persistent suitor whom you don’t like so you rejected him. Officer left. his attention was caught by the picture of a beautiful woman posted on your wall. owner saw him and asked him to leave. What crime/s may he be liable for? Perjury and procurement of SW w/o just cause  Suppose he came to you and told you that unless you answer him. The crime is consummated by the mere act of obtaining the SW. There is no implied prohibition because the door was slightly opened. ARTICLE 129 . Is he liable for violation of domicile? No.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. He turned out to be an NBI officer and he ensued an application for SW against your father for keeping firearms in you house. before he began his search. The warrant was issued. he did not refuse to leave the house after having been required to do so. entered through the slightly opened front door without your consent. In order to save your father. which he immediately does.

Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 12 . INTERRUPTION.PROHIBITION. the holding of a peaceful meeting. either alone or together with others. Are the members of the raiding team liable for violation of Article 130?  Supposing the raid was witnessed by the twon children residing in the house who were both 8 years old. The children are not valid witnesses. the agents would only be liable for maliciously obtaining SW. Are the members of the raiding team liable for violation of Article 130?  Supposing the raid was conducted in the presence of two members of the raiding team who were also residents of the same locality.INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP • Committed only by public officers or employees PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. may the members of the raiding team be liable? Yes. (2) By hindering any person from joining any lawful association or from attending any of its meetings  Suppose an officer prevented you.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. NPA is not a lawful org (3) By prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing. MAXIMO P. the SW must be lawfully obtained? The warrant enjoys the presumption of validity since it was issued by the court. any petition to the authorities for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances • What right is safeguarded? Right of the people to redress grievances ARTICLE 132 . AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Does the law require that for abuse to be committed. ARTICLE 130 .SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES  Supposing a raiding team conducted the search of a dwelling in the presence of two maids only. w/o legal ground. through force or threat from joining the NPA. If the warrant turns out to be unlawfully issued. or by dissolving the same • What constitutional right is safeguarded? Right to peaceful assembly • During a rally and while certain people were speaking. somebody threw an explosive in the middle of the crowd. ARTICLE 131 . Liable? No – what is contemplated is the joining of a lawful org. AND DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETING • How committed? (1) by prohibiting or by interrupting. May the police lawfully disperse the assembly? YES it has ceased to be peaceful.

What crime is committed? If the common crime was committed in furtherance of the objectives of rebellion.REBELLION OR INSURRECTION • Can it be committed by only one person? NO.  Suppose the kidnappers distributed the ransom among themselves. ARTICLE 133 . They ambushed the military. It is absorbed in rebellion.  Supposing they raped the daughter of the Barangay Captain? Liable also for rape as it is not connected with any political purpose. May he be liable for violation of Article 133? Yes. What crimes are committed? Rebellion only.  Supposing the NPA commander ambushed the governor for being corrupt. May they be prosecuted for murder? No. What crime is committed? Rebellion  Suppose an NPA asked you to encash some of their checks and to deliver them. Upon payment. He claimed that the Virgin Mary was only made of wood. ARTICLE 134 . Crime committed? Rebellion only. It is a crime of the masses • Manner of conviction: proof beyond reasonable doubt (2-witness rule is not necessary) • Is it necessary that they engage the government forces in actual combat? NO. the Chinese was released and the ransom was given to the officers of the NPA for its finances. the common crime is absorbed in the crime of rebellion  Supposing an NPA commander had an encounter in Mindoro. • Is it necessary that it be done in a church? No.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Is it necessary that the act be committed inside a place of religious worship? NO.  Supposing accused placed the statute of the Virgin Mary in the altar and chopped it in pieces.  Supposing common crimes are committed. Liable? NO mere adherence to the enemy by giving them aid or comfort is not punishable under rebellion  Members of the NPA kidnapped a Chinese merchant and demanded a ransom.OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS • Whose point of view should be considered to determine the act as notoriously offensive? The worshippers. What is important is that what is interrupted is a ceremony. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 13 . Crime? Kidnapping PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.

that the offender does not take PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 134 . because it was committed outside Philippine territory. Crime committed? Rebellion. ARTICLE 135 PENALTY FOR REBELLION. strategy. they were arrested and prosecuted for committing conspiracy to commit coup de etat. are they liable? NO. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 14 . INSURRECTION. target of the attack: Rebellion – government Coup de etat – authorities of the Philippines. installation.A COUP D’ETAT • Offender: military. police. OR COUP D’ ETAT ARTICLE 136 CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT COUP D’ ETAT. upon arrival. OR REBELLION • Conspiracy to commit Coup de etat  Supposing. as to purpose: Rebellion – Section 134 Coup de etat – Section 134-A 4. military camp. intimidation. military officers met outside the Philippines and they agreed and decided to seize the power from the present administration. or public officer or employee • Difference between rebellion and coup: 1. it cannot be prosecuted here because it was not among the exceptions provided for in Article of the RPC (Conspiracy to commit coup de etat is a crime against public order) ARTICLE 137 DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEES ARTICLE 138 INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION  Supposing. because one element is missing. or stealth 3. a member of the NPA was going around recruiting members by inciting them. as to manner of commission: Rebellion – rising publicly and taking arms against the government Coup de etat – swift attack accompanied by violenece. public utilities or other facilities • May coup d’ etat be committed by one person? YES. INSURRECTION. MAXIMO P. as to persons criminally liable: Rebellion – public persons and private persons Coup de etat – public persons.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. communication networks. military or police officers 2. threat.

(2) uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the public peace .CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION ARTICLE 142 . MAXIMO P. offender in this case was already a member of the NPA  Supposing. several members in the barangay. if they were not convinced. etc.dangerous tendency rule PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. inspectors. what crime was committed? Rebellion. because the persons induced would be principals by direct participation.PENALTY FOR SEDITION ARTICLE 141 . under the 1st purpose  Using the same facts. etc. during the elctions. etc. under the 2nd purpose ARTICLE 140 . are they liable? NO. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------arms against. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 15 . armed themselves and proceeded to the precincts and prevented the elections officers. or is not in open hostility with the government. writings. but the officers were prevented from performing their duties during a referendum. thorugh speeches. proclamations. from performing their duties. referendum is different from an election  Supposing.. what crime was committed? Sedition. what crime was committed? Inciting to rebellion ARTICLE 139 .INCITING TO SEDITION • How committed? (1) inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition by means of speeches.SEDITION – HOW COMMITTED • When is public uprising deemed to be tumultuous? Article 163 – if it is caused by more than three (3) persons who are armed or are provided with means of violence  Supposing. what crime was committed? Inciting to rebellion  Suppose the audience before whom he spoke were finally induced and persuaded by him to join the movement and overthrow the government. person who induced would be a principal by inducement  Using the same facts. are they liable for sedition? YES. an ordinary barangay leader who was fed up with the Arroyo administration. persuaded and convinced people to join him in the fight against the government.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.clear and present danger rule . emblems. ten (10) persons who are armed purpose is to prevent the holding of a referendum through force.

was the arrest lawful? NO. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 16 .ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES • First form of illegal assembly PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. Separate power of Congress. • May the crime of inciting to sedition be committed by mere silence? YES. a military officer abducted a member of the Congress who was always taking an antagonistic position against them. MAXIMO P. 1st part. or circulating scurrilous libels against the government or any of the duly constituted authorities thereof which tend to disturb the public peace  Supposing X incited others to commit sedition and they commit sedition.preventing a member from attending a meeting  Supposing. there is an investigation in Basilan to find out how some members of the Abu Sayyaf were able to escape.ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF THE ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR BODIES ARTICLE 144 . starting July 1. by knowingly concealing such evil practices (one of the ways of committing inciting to sedition) ARTICLE 143 . ARTICLE 145 . Congress was in session for 3 months. publishing.DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS • May an accused put double jeopardy as a defense? No. refer to the definition of “session” ARTICLE 146 . the Congressman was arrested on August 28 while he was at home. was the arrest lawful? YES  Supposing. what crime was committed? May the military officer be held for kidnapping? Did the single act of the military officer give rise to two (2) felonies (kidnapping and violation of parliamentary immunity)? Crimes are COMPLEXED under Article 48. What crime may X be liable for? Sedition for principal by inducement because Sedition was committed. penalty for the crime he committed was 5 years. of the RPC (when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies) (2) By arresting or searching  Supposing.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(3) writing. a congressman committed the crime of homicide (penalty is reclusion temporal) and he was arrested while he was on his way to the session hall of Congress.VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY (1) By using force or intimidation .

it is not an offense punishable under the RPC • Second form of illegal assembly • Is it necessary that they be armed? NO • Is it necessary that the members of the audience be incited? YES ARTICLE 147 . the governor went to the office of the mayor where he inflicted where he inflicted fist blows upon the mayor. the other party waited for the lawyer outside where they PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. the purpose of which is to devise ways and means to cheat without being discovered. are they liable? YES. by employing force.. contrary to public morals  Supposing. there was a meeting attended by several persons. is your friend liable under Article 131? NO. there were 10 persons. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing. had a meeting..force or intimidation + objectives of rebellion or sedition + public uprising – (minus) public uprising = DIRECT ASSAULT in the first form (2) By attacking. to be illegal. what crime was committed by the governor?  Using the same facts. a governor who recommended his niece to be a member of the staff of the mayor but the positions were already filled hence she was not accommodated. the governor assaulted the mayor. must be attended by armed persons  Supposing. Cheats Unlimited. a meeting. liable? NO.ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS  Supposing. what is prohibited in Article 131 is preventing someone from attending a meeting of a lawful organization ARTICLE 148 . association is unlawful. is this illegal assembly? NO.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY..public uprising + tumultuous + political purpose = SEDITION . the purpose of which was to commit illegal logging. a group formed an association.DIRECT ASSAULTS • How committed? (1) By employing force. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 17 . intimidation. in a criminal case. not one of those who attended the meeting was armed. all armed. what crime was committed? By reason of past performance of duties  Supposing. . MAXIMO P. by force. supposing.  Supposing. the lawyer cross-examined the witness of the other side and practically destroyed his testimony. a friend prevented you from attending the meeting of cheats. they met at a wedding and there.. the purpose of which is to devise ways and means of kidnapping.

and he was attacked by reason of the performance of his official duties as a lawyer  Supposing a professor was in the middle of discussing lessons in class when his neighbor.INDIRECT ASSAULTS • Can only be committed in the occasion of direct assault • Does acquittal in DA also mean an acquittal in IA? It depends on the ground of acquittal. The Reason for attack immaterial if done in the actual performance if duty  What if the killing was done while the professor was walking on his way home? No – there is no direct assault. ARTICLE 149 . MAXIMO P. May the offender be liable for direct assault? Yes – the attack was done connected with performance of official duty  May a person in authority be liable fro direct assault committed against subordinate? YES. if acquitted for reasons which are personal only to the accused. May the governor be liable for direct assault? YES. who had a long time personal grudge against him. If acquitted because the act does not constitute direct assault it also means the person shall be acquitted for indirect assault. lawyers are considered persons in authority. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 18 .RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS OF SUCH PERSON PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. which hit him on the head and killed him. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------inflicted harm on him.  What if the neighbor was actually a former student and he killed the professor while on his way home because the latter failed him in class. ITS COMMITTEES. BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS. A traffic enforcer stopped him and gave him a ticket. This includes being acquitted because of insanity or minority. SUBCOMMITTEES OR DIVISIONS ARTICLE 151 . not acquitted in IA. The governor got mad and shot the traffic enforcer.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Position is immaterial. ITS COMMITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES. May the offender be liable for direct assault? YES. Qualified assault – It is an aggravating circumstance when an offender s a public officer/employee  Supposing a provincial governor violated the traffic rules and regulations.DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY. If acquitted because there is no guilt beyond reasonable doubt. it shall not mean acquittal in IA. Absence of knowledge may constitute a defense of good faith ARTICLE 150 . through a stone at the professor. what crime was committed? Direct Assault. This would mean that there is a crime of DA however guilt of accused was not sufficiently proven • It is necessary that the offender has knowledge that the person assaulted is a person in authority or his agent? Yes.

he made him a hero. the crime is discharge of firearm or grave threat.UNLAWFUL MEANS OF PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES • How Committed 1st Manner: Essence is publication of false news which causes damage to the interest of the state  Supposing X published that half of Mindanao under control of MILF. lawyers if in actual performance of professional duty or attacked because of such reason • Agent of person in authority . justifying.not vested with jurisdiction . provided there is no intent to kill.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. May X be liable? Yes. Prejudicial to the interest of the state 2nd Manner:  Supposing X made a film about the life of Abu Sabaya.Examples: mayor. frustrated homicide/murder if the wound is mortal ARTICLE 156 .duty is the protection of persons and property . Chaplain). extolling an act punished by law 3rd Manner:  Supposing X prematurely published a PIATCO Contract investigated by Blue Ribbon Committee? May X be liable? Yes – he has no official authority to publish the contract ARTICLE 155 . But it is false. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 19 . administrators (dean. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 152 .Examples: policeman. If pointed at another. If there is intent to kill.directly vested with jurisdiction . Praising. Will X be liable? Yes. MAXIMO P. members of the military ARTICLE 153 .DELIVERY PRISONERS FROM JAIL PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.ALARMS AND SCANDALS • Will the firing of a gun be punishable? Yes.TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER ARTICLE 154 . rector. congressman. teachers.PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND AGENTS OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY – WHO SHALL BE DEEMED AS SUCH • Persons in Authority . barangay tanod. judge. the crime is either attempted homicide/murder if the wound is not mortal. members of the board of directors. In the film.maintenance of public order . provided the gun is not pointed at any one in particular.

if he returned a deduction of 1/5 of the entire sentence shall take place • Accused must be a convict not a detention prisoner ARTICLE 159 . and while pending. The accused went to Manila.OTHER CASES OF EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE (VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON)  Supposing. after 6 years. is he liable? YES  Supposing. and an officer assisted in the escape of such youthful offender. then he assisted in the escape of a prisoner at around 3pm.EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE  Supposing. OR OTHER CALAMITIES • Failure to return 48 hours within the proclamation = addition of 1/5 of the unexpired term to the sentence. he assisted in the escape at around 10pm. 2 years after. and the prisoner is not anymore under his custody ARTICLE 157 . the accused was convicted of homicide and was sentenced to a penalty of 10 years. May he be liable? Yes. CONFLAGRATIONS. what crime was committed? Delivering Prisoners from Jail. What crime may he be prosecuted for? No crime. using the previous case. the judgment of conviction is not yet final  Supposed a youthful offender who is committed in a reformatory institution escapes. what crime was committed? Infidelity  Supposing. he was granted a conditional pardon.  Supposing the accused is prohibited to enter manila. he is not yet convicted by final judgment  Youthful offender who is incorrigible in a reformatory institution. What is the remedy is available to him to be able to visit his sick mother during the service of his sentence? Executive clemency ARTICLE 158 . AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing. a jail officer whose duty is from 7am-7pm. if another person assists in the escape of such detention prisoner. there is a prisoner against whom a judgment of conviction has been rendered. he escaped. because he is already off-duty. he was found guilty of frustrated homicide. MAXIMO P. EARTHQUAKES. He escaped in Bilibid.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. His mother gets sick in manila. what crime was committed? Infidelity  Supposing. a youthful offender was committed inside a reformatory institution. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 20 .EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS. Will he be liable? Yes. the one who escaped is a detention prisoner. The court pronounced judgment. is he liable under this article? NO. he appealed such judgment to the CA. May the President order his re-arrest even without waiting for conviction of the second crime? May he still be prosecuted separately for violation of conditional pardon? PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.

is he a quasi-recidivist? NO. is he liable? YES. sentenced to 10 years. Can the accused be held liable under this Article? NO.MUTILATION OF COINS • Is mere possession of counterfeited coins with knowledge make one liable? No. ARTICLE 163 .FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES OR OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO BEARER. while serving his sentence. the second offense committed by him was a violation of a special law. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing. which is kept by the customs and cannot be released because of failure to complete the payment of customs duties. MAXIMO P. to be liable. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 21 . the first offense need not be a felony ARTICLE 161 . is the condition valid? YES.SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED COIN. WITHOUT CONNIVANCE ARTICLE 166 . the convict is free to accept or reject the offered conditions of the contract in the pardon ARTICLE 160 – QUASI-RECIDIVISM  Supposing the accused was convicted of attempted rape. the conditional pardon is in the nature of a private contract between the President and the convict. AND UTTERING SUCH FALSE OR FORGED NOTES AND DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. while serving the same.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.MAKING AND IMPORTING AND UTTERING FALSE COINS ARTICLE 164 . FORGING THE SIGNATURE OR STAMP OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE ARTICLE 162 .USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP  Supposing. the second crime must be a felony  Supposing. the accused has a pending shipment. his friend forged the President’s signature and gave the endorsement to the accused. accused was convicted. there must be actual uttering and intent ARTICLE 165 . was granted a conditional pardon thereafter and it was expressly provided that the convict should observe the terms and conditions of the conditional pardon for 7 years. he already served for 8 years. IMPORTING. there was no knowledge on his part that the signature of the President on the endorsement was forged • Is this an act of accessory? Yes but if accused is punished as principal of Article 162 he is not an accessory of Article 161. he attempted to take the life of his co-prisoner. accused was already serving sentence for violation of a special law.COUNTERFEITING THE GREAT SEAL OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. he committed and was found guilty of illegal possession of shabu. asked his friend from Malacanang to get an endorsement from the President. shipment was then released.

It is presumed there is intention to utter. MAXIMO P. IMPORTING. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• What may be the subject of forgery? Does this include treasury or circular notes issued by a foreign bank be subject? How about those issued by the Philippines? ARTICLE 167 COUNTERFEITING. • An ecclesiastical minister is liable only when the falsification affects civil status of persons and not ones religion • Under fourth manner commission. the officer changed the date of arrest to January 3. Is he liable under the fifth manner of commission? YES. ARTICLE 169 . Date is essential. Only the last number is different from the winning combination so he changed it and presented it as the winning ticket. 2002 – date of turnover. etc. the entry falsified must be a fact not an opinion  Supposing a prisoner was arrested on January 2. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. May X be held liable? • How would you classify the lottery ticket. EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER • Differentiate Article 170 from Article 171: Determine the nature of the document falsified. To avoid being reprimanded. if it is legislative regardless of offender it is under Art 170. 2001 but the arresting officer failed to deliver within 36 hours to proper authorities. If it is not legislative and falsified by a public officer who takes advantage of his position/office it falls under Art 171. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 22 . he did not know that it is fake.FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS ARTICLE 171 . may he be liable for possession? • What is the presumption? Accused is the author of the forgery when he is found in possession of false treasury notes. is it payable to bearer or order? It is payable to bearer ARTICLE 170 . AND UTTERING INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER ARTICLE 168 ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND THE USE OF FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT  Supposing X used false bank note to pay for his the groceries.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER.HOW FORGERY IS COMMITTED  Supposing X was in the possession of a sweepstakes ticket. thus making him liable under Article 125.

Date was not essential. X only had two years of work experience so he asked a former superior to issue a certificate stating that he has had 10 years of work experience. May she be liable under the sixth manner of commission? Yes. Is the LCR liable? Yes.  Supposing the Local Civil Registrar issued a birth certificate to show you were born earlier so X can run for mayor. what crime may he be liable for? Use of falsified documents for other transaction ARTICLE 173 . X was never ill.FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND THE USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS • May there be a crime of estafa through falsification of public.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Determine which crime was first committed by the accused. The father issued the certificate stating that X was recovering from fever and had to rest for three days when in fact.FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS. The officer placed the date as January 5.  Supposing X presented it to his professor. Who may be liable under Article 174? The father. ARTICLE 172 .  Supposing X wanted to apply for a position in a company. a doctor. 2001. 2001 as date of arrest. 2001 and the prisoner was delivered on January 3.  Supposing X used a falsified document in an administrative proceeding? What crime may he be liable for? Use of falsified documents for other transaction  What if he was applying for a loan in a bank. Is he liable under the fifth manner of commission? NO. official or commercial documents? Yes.USING FALSE CERTIFICATES PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What if the date of arrest was on January 2. May he be liable for the commission of a crime? Yes he is liable under Article 175 using false certificates. to a medical certificate to excuse him from classes. who is liable? The mother. CABLE.  Supposing the Secretary of PRC is in charge with keeping the grades of board examinees. MAXIMO P. TELEGRAPH.FALSE MEDICAL CERTIFICATES. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 23 . AND USE OF SAID FALSIFIED MESSAGE ARTICLE 174 . There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of a private document since both have the same element – damage. May his superior be liable? Yes for issuing a false certificate of service ARTICLE 175 . CERTIFICATE OF MERIT OR SERVICE. AND THE LIKE  Supposing A asked his father. which requires at least seven years of work experience. and he used a false document. She changed the grade of one examinee from 71 to 77. The first crime committed is his first liability.  What if it was X’s mother who issued mother the certificate.

a student. May he be liable? Yes. The raiding team confiscated an equipment used in the making of falsified Philippine money. He went to a room with many girls wearing different uniforms including those of a nun. He introduce yourself as a PNP officer. May the girls be liable? Yes.USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND CONCEALING TRUE NAME  Supposing X told Y he is single so that he can court the latter. May E be liable for possession? No. Whether it is believed by the court or not is immaterial as it has the tendency to degrade the administration of justice and mislead justice. ARTICLE 180 .FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT  Supposing C falsely testified in a criminal case against his neighbor.  Supposing A went to a Chinese Store. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 176 . PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. there must be intent to use. ARTICLE 177 . May he be liable? YES.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Liability? Is one’s status an essential part of his identity? ARTICLE 179 . May he still be liable for Article 180? Yes.MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION OF INSTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR FALSIFICATION  Supposing a raid in the house of E. What crime is committed? Usurpation of Authority. What crime may he be liable for? Usurpation of official function ARTICLE 178 . During his suspension. Testimony was not given credence. What is A’s criminal liability? Usurpation of official function  Supposing an MMDA traffic enforcer was suspended for 6 months. He is no longer authorized to wear the uniform. Y later discovered that X is married. a nurse.  Supposing P went to a whore house. He introduced himself as an agent from BIR when in fact he was not. MAXIMO P. What the law punishes is the mere act of giving false testimony in a case. is it necessary to actually perform the duty? NO  Supposing the accused was in a party and he wanted to impress a girl. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 24 . and a fire fighter.ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS OR INSIGNIA  Supposing a PNP officer who was dismissed from service wore his uniform and went to a public function.  What if the owner acceded and A was able to inspect the book of accounts. He claimed that he wanted to inspect the store’s book of accounts. he continued to wear his uniform and directed traffic in a major intersection.USURPATION OF AUTHORITY • In usurpation of authority.

or which legitimately affects the credit of any witness who testifies  Supposing G and B applied for a marriage license. Is he liable? Yes.FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES ARTICLE 183 . He falsely testified in court in his favor. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. age is not a material matter since in either case B is still capacitated to contract marriage. X testified falsely in his favor. Is he liable for perjury? No. MAXIMO P. May he be prosecuted for false testimony in favorable to the defendant? Yes . What crime may he be liable for? Perjury • May perjury be committed thru negligence. In order that this be approved. this right do not carry with it the right to testify falsely. Truth is license was confiscated for a traffic violation. There must be a wilful and deliberate assertion of falsehood • Is good faith a defense? Yes.while he has the right to testify in his behalf. In the course of the judicial settlement. ARTICLE 182 . What crime is he liable for? Perjury • What is a material matter? It is the main fact which is the subject of the inquiry or any circumstance which tends to prove that fact. Assuming the application was sworn before an authorized officer. It is a special proceeding. What crime is he liable for? Perjury  Supposing an employee files an illegal dismissal proceeding.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Is a guardianship proceeding a civil case? No. He executed a false affidavit. The heirs cannot agree extrajudicially. one of the heirs testified falsely.FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION  Suppose a person died. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 181 . Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 25 . Is B liable for perjury? Yes. B stated in his application that he was single when truth was married but legally separated from his ex-wife. He executed an affidavit of loss which stated that his license got lost when wallet was snatched. His status is material matter  What if B indicated that he is 30 years old when in truth he is 45 years old.FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT  Supposing M was a defendant in a criminal case. imprudence? No. The judicial settlement is neither a criminal nor civil case  Supposing a guardianship proceeding is pending in court. Assertion must be deliberate or intentional  Supposing X needed to present driver’s license for his application. or any fact or circumstance which tends to corroborate or strengthen the testimony relative to the subject of inquiry.

She suspects he is married and has a wife in the province. -victim is minor/mentally incapacitated. Is perjury committed? Yes. Dispensation. broker  Max Penalty: -minors/mentally incapacitated persons used as couriers or messengers. He said he was never convicted truth is he was previously convicted of theft. Administration. organizer. In the course of investigation she falsely testified under oath that she is single when in fact she was already married. No  Supposing a woman was involved in case of immorality. W. financier. ARTICLE 184 . It is not necessary that the executed affidavit is required by law. protector/coddler. X applied to take the bar before the SC. Trading. Not material matter. H gives it to W although she never asked him to submit such. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What if B indicated that he is 21 years old when in truth he is only 17 years old. Importation (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: manager.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. It is enough that it is authorized by law. Is he liable for perjury? Yes. MAXIMO P. May H be liable for perjury? Yes. protector/coddler 2. • Will a false statement of an opinion under oath make accused liable for perjury.OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------RA 9165 DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002 • Difference between Dangerous Drugs (DD) and Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals (CP/EC) • Punishable Acts: 1. material matter. Distribution and Transportation (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: manager. H executes an affidavit under oath stating he is single but the truth is was already married for five years. Is she liable for perjury? No. Delivery. organizer. Status does not have a legal effect in immorality charge  Supposing H was courting his officemate. age is a material matter because he doe not possess legal capacity to contract marriage  Supposing after finishing law. financier. Sale. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 26 .

school or church premises . Dive or Resort (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: (same as 1) Max Penalty: -DD is sold/administered to minor -proximate cause of death is DD  Escheat (legal proceeding for forfeiture of private property in favour of the State) 4. ingesting. Maintenance of Den. Possession of Equipment.committed w/ help of minors . or introduction to the human body of substance  presumption: possession shall be prima facie evidence that possessor has introduced into his body the DD and shall be presumed to have violated Section 15 10. public officer. Instrument. AMURAO) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------proximate cause of death is DD/CP/EC. Instrument. Possession during Parties. -committed w/in 100m from school 3.lab is protected by booby traps . Possession of Dangerous Drugs (DD) 9. Illegal Chemical Diversion (CP/EC) 7. Manufacture/Delivery of Equipment. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 27 . Meetings or in the proximate company of at least 2 Persons (DD) 11. etc. etc. (DD)  intended for consuming.committed w/in 100m residential. (DD) PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.lab is concealed w/ legitimate business operations 6. Instrument. Social Gatherings. during Parties. etc. Apparatus or other Paraphernalia (DD and CP/EC)  Max Penalty: minor/mentally incapacitated is used to deliver 8. Employment in and Visiting Den. Social Gatherings. business. Possession of Equipment. MAXIMO P. chemical engineer or practitioner . Illegal Manufacture (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: (same as 1)  Presumption: presence of CP/EC or Lab Equipment is prima facie proof of manufacture  Max Penalty: . Dive or Resort (DD and CP/EC) 5.employment of alien.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.

LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. dispositions. Use of Dangerous Drugs (Section 15)  1st apprehension: 6 months rehabilitation  2nd apprehension: 6 years and 1 day to 12 years  Not applicable if offender is also found to have in his possession such quantity of any drug. in such a case. Consenting or Knowingly Tolerating any Violation of DDA  applies to public officers 22. plants. equipment. Misapplication or Failure to Account (DD and CP/EC)  seized. proceeds and property  become property of the State 18. Misappropriation. Unnecessary Prescription (DD) 16. or surrendered DD. Violating Rules or Regulations Issued by DDB 24. Cultivation and Culture of Plants classified as Dangerous Drugs or Sources thereof  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: same 14. Consenting or Tolerating Use of Vehicle or Equipment  as an instrument for commission of violation of DDA 23. of DD/CP/EC 15. Benefiting from Proceeds (DD) 19. Failure to Maintain or Keep Records of Transactions (DD and CP/EC)  Records of sales. provision of Section 11 shall apply  Disqualified from Probation Law 13. Receiving Financial or Material Contributions from Persons found Guilty of Trafficking Dangerous Drugs (DD) 20. Violation of Confidentiality Rule  voluntary submission program 26. Failure or Refusal to Appear as Witness for any Violation of DDA PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 28 . Unlawful Prescription (DD) 17. MAXIMO P. Issuance of False or Fraudulent Dangerous Drugs Test Result 25. etc. Planting Evidence 21. confiscated. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12.

6 (Maintenance of Den). 8 (Manufacture). MAXIMO P. 12 (Possession of Paraphernalia). 16 (Cultivation or Culture). 14 (Possession of Paraphernalia during parties). 11 (Possession of DD). Delay or Bungling in the Prosecution of Drug Related Cases Fundamental Concepts  No Plea-bargaining Rule . or any act if committed by a syndicate 3) He willingly testifies against persons who violated above provisions 4) Information/testimony must comply with the ff conditions: a) it is necessary for conviction b) it is not yet in the possession of the State c) it can be substantially corroborated on its material points d) informant has not yet been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude except when no other evidence is available PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.).LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------27.qualifying aggravating circumstance (changes the nature of the crime)  Public Officials found guilty of violation of DDA -Maximum Penalty is always imposed -no amount of ordinary mitigating circumstance will offset (lower) penalty Immunity from Criminal Prosecution and Punishment  does not refer to all provisions of the DDA • Requirements: 1) Person violated Sections 7 (employment in den). Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 29 . 13 (Possession of DD during Party). 5 (Sale.for drug pushers and drug traffickers  Influence of Dangerous Drugs during commission of another crime . 10 (Manufacture of Equipment). 15 (use of DD). and 19 (unlawful prescription) 2) He voluntarily gives information about any of the following violations: Section 4 (Importation). etc.for any person charged with the violation of DDA under any provision  Non applicability of the Probation Law .

spouse or any relative w/in 4th civil degree of consanguinity or affinity b) DDB files petition in court c) Court issues examination of drug dependent d) If positive. he surrenders within one week from date of escape. parents. if convicted. malicious. and after-care and follow-up treatment (at least 18 months). MAXIMO P. RPC. to his family. (2) he has never been charged or convicted for any offense under the DDA.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. or made only to harass or prejudice the accused 2) failure or refusal to testify w/o just cause 3) violation of condition of immunity • Effects of Termination of Immunity -immunity shall cease and informant shall be prosecuted for the crime committed and cited for contempt Submission of Drug Dependent to Confinement/Treatment or Rehabilitation  refers only to use of DD under Section 15  Drug dependent may either submit voluntarily or compulsorily • Voluntary Submission a) application with the DDB by drug dependent. court issues order for rehabilitation in a center: not less than 6 months but not more than 1 year e) Final discharge of drug dependent from the center  discharge shall exempt him from criminal prosecution or liability under Section 15  Provided: 1) he complied with regulations of the center. * Drug dependent who is not rehabilitated after 2nd confinement and upon recommendation of the Board shall be charged under Section 15. he shall be given full credit for his stay in confinement * Judicial and medical records of drug dependents under VSP shall be confidential and shall not be used against him for any purpose except to determine how many times he has voluntarily submitted himself for the program PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. or any special law. and 4) he poses no danger to himself. or to the community. Board. 3) he has no record of escape or if he has escaped. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e) informant shall strictly comply with condition imposed by the State f) Informant does not appear to be the most guilty g) No direct evidence available to state except testimony of informant • Termination of Immunity 1) If information/testimony is false. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 30 .

if court finds him a drug dependent. and is not a recidivist. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Compulsory Submission 1) drug dependent who refuses to submit himself to VSP a) petition is filed by DDB in RTC b) RTC conducts a hearing c) Order by the court for examination of drug dependent by at least 2 physicians . if found guilty.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. it shall issue an order for commitment e) If rehabilitated as certified. or other special laws b) has not been previously committed to a center or care of a DOH accredited physician c) Board favorably recommends suspension of sentence  Republic Act 9344 supersedes the provisions of the DDA PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. court shall order his commitment 2) in the course of hearing a case. his commitment in Center shall be credited in full g) If he is prosecuted under Section 15. records of drug dependents who are not rehabilitated or who escaped and did not surrender shall be forwarded to the court who shall determine their use • Suspension of Sentence  for first-time minor offenders above 15 years of age but not over 18 years Conditions: a) has not been previously convicted of violation of DDA. penalty is deemed served in center upon his release and upon certification by the Board and the center * Period of prescription of offense charged shall be suspended while he is confined in rehab * Judicial and medical records of drug dependents under CSP or those charged for violation of Section 15 shall be confidential and shall not be used against him for any purpose. MAXIMO P. DDB shall order his release . court will consider all other evidence .if either physician finds him dependent on drugs. RPC.if physicians conclude that he is not a drug dependent. he shall be returned to the court for discharge from the center f) Continuation of his prosecution. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 31 . one of the parties is found to be a drug dependent a) person is charged w/ offense punishable by imprisonment of less than 6 years and 1 day and is found by court to be a drug dependent b) Board files petition in RTC for confinement in Center c) Hearing is conducted by the court d) If RTC finds him a drug dependent.

and any elected public official 7) Sworn certification of burning is issued by the Board 8) Submission to the court of certificate 9) After promulgation of judgment. and elected public official who shall sign a copy of the inventory 2) Items submitted w/in 24 hours to PDEA Forensic Laboratory for qualitative and quantitative examination 3) Certification of results w/in 24 hours -if time is not sufficient. DOJ. 1) Physical inventory and photograph -in presence of counsel of accused. partial certification may be issued. civil society. full certification w/in next 24 hours 4) Filing of criminal case in court 5) Ocular inspection by court w/in 72 hours from filing 6) Within next 24 hours. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• 15 years and below: exempted from criminal liability. burning or destroying of items -in presence of accused or his counsel. the representative sample with leave of court (approval) shall be turned over to the PDEA w/c shall destroy the same w/in 24 hours from receipt. DOJ. while not criminally liable. court is informed of termination of the case -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. representative from the media. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 32 . minor shall be subjected to intervention programs • above 15 and under 18: find out if minor acted w/ or w/o discernment • reformed minor can deny that he was charged with a crime or convicted thereof (justified misrepresentation.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. MAXIMO P. not liable for perjury or falsification) * The DOJ shall keep a confidential record of proceedings on suspension of sentence and shall not be used for any purpose other than to determine whether or not person accused is a first-time minor offender • Disposition of Confiscated. representative from the media. or Surrendered DD. Seized. etc.

and there is gambling going on. the act was committed in the privacy of one’s room.IMMORAL DOCTRINES. are you liable? It depends. because the 4th element is missing (that the act complained of be committed in a public place or within the public knowledge or view) ARTICLE 201 . NOT liable. you are liable. you will be entitled to a ticket for a raffle.  Supposing. OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS AND INDECENT SHOWS • Who are liable? • TEST OF OBSCENITY – whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscene is to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influence and into whose hands such a publication may fall. MAXIMO P. if you can prove that you have NO knowledge of such gambling taking place.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. otherwise.GRAVE SCANDAL • How committed?  Supposing. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 33 . mere act of playing them. in a certain mall. is it lottery? • Do you get the full value of the money? YES • Is the prize merely incidental? YES ARTICLE 200 . is it grave scandal? NO. prize of which is MB. punishable? NO • Conductor – person who manages or carries on the gambling game or scheme • Maintainer – person who sets up and furnishes the means with which to carry on the gambling game or scheme  Supposing. is it necessary that there be bets involving money or other object? • Sports. you are the owner of a boat. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PD 1602 – ANTI-GAMBLING LAW • May the inspector be criminally liable? NO • In any of the games specified. and whether or not such publication or act shocks the ordinary and common sense of men as an indecency PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. for every purchase worth P100.

who has the physical ability to work and who neglects to apply himself/herself to some lawful calling . or trampling or wandering about the country or the streets without visible means of support  Supposing. is she a prostitute? NO. a woman engages in sexual intercourse at least two times a week. means of support is through his mother who is a laundrywoman. not being included in the provisions of other articles of this Code. • MERE nudity in pictures or paintings is NOT obscenity ARTICLE 202 . AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• TEST OF OBSCENITY OF NUDE PICTURES – whether the motive of the picture.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. for money or profit. is she a prostitute? NO  Supposing. is X still a vagrant? YES (3) Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill-fame. as indicated by it is pure or impure. and those who habitually associate with prostitutes (4) Any person who. a woman engages in sexual intercourse once a year. there is no element of habituality PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. and asks for money. MAXIMO P. the definition of prostitutes – women who. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 34 . X is an able-bodied man.“batugan” (2) Any person found loitering about public or semi-public buildings or places. and does not ask her customers for money. instead he is liable as a principal by indispensible cooperation  Supposing. is he a vagrant? YES  Supposing. habitually indulge to sexual intercourse OR lascivious conduct • A man cannot be a prostitute from the legal point of view. and can provide for the support of her son. almost always seen in public places. shall be found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to another without any lawful or justifiable purpose (5) Prostitutes  May a woman who has been in the prostitution business for the last 20 years still remain a virgin? YES. ruffians or pimps.VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES • Who are vagrants? (1) Any person having no apparent means of subsistence. or whether it is naturally calculated to excite impure imaginations. the mother is employed.

it was done with a man for 6 months. during those acts. agent. raiders opened a cubicle and found a woman having sexual intercourse with a man.the act was still done for profit  Supposing a squad conducted a raid in a house in Binondo known to be a prostitution house. Is she liable? No – element of habituality was not established. The squad apprehended the woman. to maintain the cleanliness of the city hall of Manila. ARTICLE 206 UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER ARTICLE 207 MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. by direct provision of the law. May the woman be considered a prostitute? Yes. what if there was proof that the woman has been engaged in sexual intercourse with different men for money or profit. Will the man be criminally liable? Yes – as principal by indispensable cooperation. or shall perform in said government or any of its branches. considered public officers? NO.  Supposing for every sexual act. popular election. The contract provided that the corp.  Supposing the City Government of Manila entered into a contract with XYX Corp. MAXIMO P. the man did not pay although he kept on promising to give her money. may she be considered as a prostitute? Yes . Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 35 . or subordinate official. it was done with only one man but regularly. • Is it necessary that money is actually received? No. or appointment by competent authority. Are these people deployed by XYX Corp. • Are they appointed by the city government itself? NO – which means they do not fall under any of the 3 ways by which a person can be considered a public officer ARTICLE 204 KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST JUDGMENT ARTICLE 205 JUDGMENT RENDERED THROUGH NEGLIGENCE • Will any degree of negligence make the judge liable? No – the negligence must be inexcusable. is she a prostitute? YES  Supposing. the woman was given jewellery.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Will she be liable? Yes.  Under the same facts. • Is their work a public function? Yes. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing. ARTICLE 203 WHO ARE PUBLIC OFFICERS • Any person who. public duties as an employee. of any rank or class. shall take part in the performance of public functions in the government of the Philippines. would deploy its men to clean the premises of the building.

the bribe-giver promised the officer a gift. Liable? YES. he did not give the give anymore. he agreed that the changed transcript must be ready within a week. (2) maliciously tolerating the commission of offenses  Supposing a smuggler. talked to a police officer and told him not to assign any men in the area where the shipment would be unloaded and where it would pass while being transported. in consideration of any offer.000. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 36 . AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 208 PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES. there was an extensive cross-exam done by the opposing counsel. in connection with the performance of official duties. he was arrested by NBI agents. the transcript was already available but before it could be given to the lawyer. MAXIMO P. the lawyer for the prosecution asked the stenographer to change certain portions of the transcript. knowing that an illegal shipment will be unloaded. or by performing.BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN ATTORNEY OR SOLICITOR ARTICLE 210 . and to do the act (between the bribe-giver and the officer) • Is it necessary that the officer actually receives the gift? NO • Is it necessary that the act constituting the crime to be committed be actually done by the officer? NO  Supposing. the testimony of the witness for the prosecution came to a point that it was damaging the theory of his own case and unless corrected. NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE • Manner of Commission: (1) maliciously refraining from instituting prosecution against violators of the law • Who may commit? Public officer who has the duty to prosecute offender • May this be committed negligently? No.DIRECT BRIBERY • Manner of Commission (1) By agreeing to perform. gift or present an act constituting a crime. and he would give him P50. liable for direct bribery? YES  Suppose in one case. to which the police agreed. but after he got what he wanted. May the police officer be liable? Yes. ARTICLE 209 . promise. etc. the prosecution would lose the case.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. • What consummates the crime? MERE AGREEMENT to give a gift. because mere agreement is enough to constitute the crime of direct bribery PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.

Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 37 .  Supposing A was applying for a driver’s license and he was supposed to take a written exam. The stenographer is liable for direct bribery and falsification. gave one of the employees of LTO P500 pesos to allow him to get ahead of the line. May the judge be liable? IT DEPENDS – if during trial. which does not constitute a crime. The LTO employee accepted the amount but just the same. The latter immediately told A to proceed to the practical exam. He placed money in the drawer of the examiner so the latter agreed to take the exam for A. It turns out that X does not have the money. who was frustrated by the long line in getting his driver’s license. He told the LTO employee that he would just return to pay him but he never did. in connection with the performance of his official duty. The employee agreed. Is the LTO employee liable? No. MAXIMO P.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. he did not allow X to get ahead of the others. Is the examiner liable? YES. • What consummates the crime? Acceptance – mere agreement to accept the bribe does not constitute a crime  Supposing X. the decision was rendered in favor of X but he was not able to produce the promised dancers. Still liable? Yes. May the LTO employee still be liable for direct bribery? YES – the bribe was already accepted  What if X merely promised to give the LTO employee P500. • What consummates the crime? Mere Agreement. X was able to get ahead in the line and his license was released.  What if the lawyer never came back? Is the stenographer still liable? YES  What if the lawyer came back and gave a check which was later dishonored for lack of funds. or by refraining from doing something which it its his official duty to do. the judge may be liable for unjust judgment under Article 204. in consideration of a gift or promise. there is insufficient evidence from X but the decision was still rendered in his favor. May the stenographer be criminally liable? What crime/s? Yes. Liable? YES. (2) By accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of an act. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What if the stenographer actually changed the transcript and handed it to the lawyer but the latter had no enough cash and just said he’d be coming back.  Supposing X approached a judge and told him that if he could render a decision favorable to him (X). he will give him two nights with a sexy dancer of his choice. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. He did not want to wait so he dropped P1000 in the examiner’s drawer. (3) By agreeing to refrain.  What if A passed the written exams but he had to wait for the results before taking the practical exam.

The chairman accepted. Is the chief of police liable for direct bribery? YES – under the first manner of commission.A QUALIFIED BRIBERY ARTICLE 212 .  Supposing he testified but the testimony was false. Is he liable? YES. he refused to continue testifying. witness may be prosecuted  What if he testified but the court disregarded his testimony and acquitted the officer. ARTICLE 213 . is the witness still immune? No – the testimony must be necessary for conviction. He told the chief that he will give him a large amount of money if he will refrain from deploying his men at the pier.INDIRECT BRIBERY  Supposing X is the owner of a taxi company and he gave a car to the newly appointed LTFRB chairman.FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC TREASURY AND SIMILAR OFFENSES PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. • When a public officer is prosecuted for either direct bribery or indirect bribery. The chief agreed and did not deploy his men. may he likewise be prosecuted for violation of RA 3019? YES. Legal effect? Immunity will not attach. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a smuggler talked to the chief of police at the time the ship will be unloading his illegal goods. ARTICLE 211 . refraining from deploying his men is already a crime in itself (Article 208 dereliction of duty) • Who else may be liable for direct bribery? (a) private persons who conspire with the officers (b) accessories and accomplices (c) principal by indispensable cooperation * No principal by inducement – they fall under Article 212 corruption of public officials ARTICLE 211 . May the witness be included in the information and be prosecuted? YES. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 38 . MAXIMO P.GRANTING IMMUNITY TO GIVER OF BRIBE • Conditions for grant of immunity to a witness: (1) his testimony must refer to consummated violations (2) his testimony must be necessary for the conviction of the accused (3) his testimony must not yet be in the possession of the state (4) his testimony may be corroborated on its material points (5) witness has not been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude  Supposing a witness testified against a public officer and availed of this immunity. After doing so.CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS PD 749 .LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. What is the legal effect? Immunity will no longer attach.

PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS  Supposing an RTC judge. fees. instead of the medicine specified. for any sum of money collected by him officially. DPWH paid the contractor the corresponding amount for the materials but in connivance with the officer. the contractor delivered only 10 trucks of gravel. and 5000 bags of cement. as provided by law. directly or indirectly. things or objects of a nature different from that provided by law. Liable? YES. the making of contracts. by way of payment or otherwise.OTHER FRAUDS ARTICLE 215 . in dealing with any person with regard to furnishing supplies. in the collection of taxes. fees. Liable? YES – demanded a larger sum than that authorized by law  What if he asked for the payment of only P200 thousand. and other imposts  Supposing an official asked a Chinese merchant to pay for P700 thousand delinquency taxes when in fact only P500 thousand is to be paid. Still liable? YES – demanded payment different from that authorized by law (3) by failing voluntarily to issue a receipt. 200 trucks of sand.  Supposing a contract was executed between DPWH and a private contractor.  What if the RTC judge purchased stocks in Cebu.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. the manufacturer distributed only medicine of inferior quality. Liable for violation of RA 3019? YES. Liable? No. in the collection of taxes. the payment of sums different from or larger than those authorized by law in the collection of taxes. and other imposts ARTICLE 214 . DPWH purchased 100 trucks of gravel. whose jurisdiction is the national capital judicial region. Fees. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 39 . 10 trucks of sand. licenses. directly or indirectly.PROHIBITED INTEREST PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. (2) by demanding. or the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds  Supposing the DOH appropriated P100M for medicine to be distributed. in connivance with the officer. MAXIMO P. purchased stocks in Ortigas. and 1000 bags of cement. Liable? YES. and other imposts (4) by collecting or receiving. ARTICLE 216 . licenses. Liable? YES. licenses. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Manner of Commission: (1) by entering into an agreement with any interested party or speculator or making use of any other scheme to defraud the government.

 Supposing a van was ordered confiscated for having been used in the commission of a certain crime. ARTICLE 217 .  Supposing the car was used in the transporting of shabu. the car was forfeited. An application by a company where his wife is a majority stockholder was approved. the guardian sold a property to a company where he is a majority stockholder. the Director of the Manila Zoo is the accountable officer. He was ordered to return the rifle but he refused and instead sold it. for which he was dismissed. What crime may he be liable for? Violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act  Supposing heroin was confiscated. In this case. The latter sold the animals in the zoo.  The property custodian of DPWH for the construction of roads let the equipment and materials idle. Liable? YES – there is indirect benefit  What if there was a pre-nuptial agreement between them. Is the caretaker liable for malversation? No – he only has qualified charge over the animals. still liable? Not anymore. What crime may the property custodian be liable for? Malversation through negligence/abandonment PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 40 .  Supposing a SWAT member was given a modern assault rifle to be used in the performance of his job. However.MALVERSATION • Who may commit? Public officers • Any public officer? No. With the approval of the court. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a minor was hospitalized and his guardian had to sell some of the properties. he is still considered an accountable officer. Liable? YES. The PDEA chair sold the car. the custodian sold the car.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. What crime may he be liable for? Malversation – even though he has been dismissed. He committed irregularities.  Supposing the regional director of the DENR had to approve logging concessions. PDEA agents sold the prohibited drug to other. Crime? Violation of Dangerous Drugs Act. MAXIMO P. • Is it enough that he has the physical charge of the fund or property to be held liable? No – he must be an accountable public officer  Supposing the Director of Manila Zoo has a zoo caretaker who works for him. Is he liable for malversation? YES – the car has become public property already. Upon conviction of the accused. As a consequence of which. the residents got hold of the same.

10 days had lapsed but he still failed to account for the shortage.FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY  Supposing the AFP issued a check to a supplier but the disbursing officer refused to deliver the check. Is the officer liable? YES. Still liable? YES. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing there was a demand made to an accountable public officer to pay within 10 days. OR DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS • The removal should be for an illicit purpose PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. MAXIMO P.EVASION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE ARTICLE 225 . thereafter.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.REMOVAL.FAILURE OF A RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS BEFORE LEAVING THE COUNTRY ARTICLE 220 .FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS • Is demand necessary? No – as long as there is a law requiring the officer to render accounts ARTICLE 219 . Liable? YES – the presumption applies  What if there has been a criminal case filed against the officer. CONCEALMENT.ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER THE CUSTODY OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC OFFICER ARTICLE 226 . he returned the amount he misappropriated. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 41 . but the return mitigates the liability (criminal liability attaches the moment all the elements are present and cannot be extinguished by the return of the malversed money. The officer consented.OFFICERS INCLUDED IN THE PRECEDING PROVISIONS ARTICLE 223 .CONNIVING WITH OR CONSENTING TO EVASION  Supposing there is a prisoner who requested if he could go home sine his house is just near the jail.ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY  What constitutes the crime of technical malversation? The fact that the officer applies the public funds or property to a public use other than that for which such fund or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance ARTICLE 221 . ARTICLE 224 . which is not one of the grounds for extinguishment of criminal liability provided for under Article 89) ARTICLE 218 . Liable? YES – under the first manner (failing to make payment by a public officer who is under obligation to make such payment from the government funds in his possession) ARTICLE 222 .

ARTICLE 227 .PUBLIC OFFICER REVEALING SECRETS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS  Supposing an employee of the BIR disclosed your income to another employee. • In concealment and destruction.REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE ELECTIVE OFFICE ARTICLE 235 . a personnel set it on fire. One day. Is he liable? YES – a person’s income is his secret ARTICLE 231 .DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF SUPERIOR OFFICER. What crime may he be liable for? Infidelity of documents.OFFICER BREAKING SEAL ARTICLE 228 . MAXIMO P.MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS • Who are the prisoners contemplated? Prisoners (by final judgment) and detention prisoners • May it be committed by any public officer? NO – only those who have direct charge of the prisoners or detention prisoners PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.OPEN DISOBEDIENCE ARTICLE 232 . One day. lack of illicit purpose or illegal motive is not a valid defense  Supposing there are several blank application forms in the DPWH office. the mere act of it is punishable. Is he liable? No.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. may the officer to whom the assistance was expected be liable for refusal? NO – Demand must be made. Is he liable for infidelity? No – forms are not documents  Supposing during trial. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing the building where the RTC is.REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE  Suppose there was no demand. is leaking. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 42 . It was kept as evidence.OPENING OF CLOSED DOCUMENTS ARTICLE 229 . The stenographer removes the papers/documents to save them. the clerk ran out of cash so he got P20 thousand from the exhibit. WHEN SAID ORDER WAS SUSPENDED BY INFERIOR OFFICER ARTICLE 233 . The money bills partake the nature of a document which was used to prove the fact of the entrapment and bribery (not to be used for disbursing). there can be no refusal ARTICLE 234 .REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN OFFICER ARTICLE 230 . prosecution presented P100 thousand which were used in an entrapment operation. it is necessary because without demand.

The Deputy Sec.UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS ARTICLE 245 .LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF A PUBLIC OFFICE ARTICLE 237 .DISOBEYING REQUEST FOR DISQUALIFICATION ARTICLE 243 . ARTICLE 244 .USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS ARTICLE 241 . to the judge on what to do. What crime/s may the police officer be liable for? Maltreatment of prisoners and frustrated homicide. There was no order. liable? NO.ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. prepares a letter addressed to the judge.PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES AND POWERS ARTICLE 238 . MAXIMO P. one of the policemen inflicted injuries and the detention prisoner suffered mortal wounds. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Manner of Commission: (1) by overdoing himself in the correction and handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner under his charge either (a) by imposition of punishments no authorized by the regulations.ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY EXECUTIVE OFFICERS TO ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY • What is the purpose of this provision? To prevent executive officers from influencing judicial authorities  Supposing the Deputy Executive Secretary has a connection with a strong political leader who has a pending case before a judge.USURPATION OF JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS ARTICLE 242 .USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS ARTICLE 240 .ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR POSITION ARTICLE 239 . which states that any legal assistance given to the political leader will be appreciated. The offenses are to be treated as separate crimes by virtue of the provision which states “in addition to any other liability for physical injuries or damage caused…” (2) by maltreating such prisoner t extort a confession or to obtain some information from the prisoner ARTICLE 236 . or (b) by inflicting such punishments in a cruel humiliating manner  Supposing a detention prisoner was being suspected of having been involved in kidnapping. Is the Deputy Sec. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 43 . no suggestion. which might have caused his death were it not for the timely medical assistance.

MAXIMO P. Is warden liable? YES. W killed H. There is a presumption of validity of marriage. May she be liable? Under the RPC. The invitation is neither indecent nor immoral. Liable? NO – the proposal is neither indecent nor immoral (even if the judge is married) • The term “wife” in the third manner is misplaced. were married in Hong Kong without a valid marriage license.  Supposing a judge said that he will render a decision in favor of a woman with a pending case before her provided that she would be his sweetheart. W was a minor whose consent was obtained through force.  W filed a case for the declaration of nullity of her marriage to H. both single. The invitation is merely for them to talk. legitimate spouse  Supposing an illegitimate grandson killed his grandfather. Crime committed? Parricide. Is he liable? No. What crime did W commit? Parricide. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Against who may it committed? Women only. Sexual intercourse outside of marriage is immoral. Crime committed? Murder or homicide. at the time of their marriage. ARTICLE 246 . Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 44 . A woman in custody cannot have a “wife.”  Supposing a judge invites a woman interested with a pending case before him.  Supposing. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. which resulted in the latter’s pregnancy. Judgment was rendered but H appealed the case. After three years. both Filipinos. mother or child. loving is neither immoral nor indecent. she may not be liable but she may be held liable for violation of the Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act. When they went home to the Philippines. What crime may W be liable for? Parricide. W killed H. legitimate other ascendant or other descendant. talk to him in a motel. Is he liable? No.PARRICIDE • Who may be the offended party? Legitimate or illegitimate father. The third manner is in reference to the second manner of commission.  H and W. he invites her to be his “lover.  Supposing H and W were married.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.” The public officer is already married. Presumption of validity of marriage applies until it is terminated by final judicial declaration. as the case may be • Spouses include those with defective or flawed marriages.  Supposing a female public officer made advances to a male prisoner. under the same facts.  Supposing a warden and a woman detainee. fall in love and have a relationship. While appeal was pending. W killed H.

H left home. W was hit but according to the doctor. waited for an hour and returned. May H be held liable for the injuries sustained by or even the death of the houseboy? YES. • What does “immediately thereafter mean”? The discovery. When he got his gun. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing the judgment has already become final when W killed H. He did not see them in the act of sexual intercourse. the injuries W sustained were only less serious ones. MAXIMO P. H then saw W and P in the act of intercourse. there should be no interruption  Supposing H already has a suspicion of W’s infidelity so he told her that he was going to the province for a week when in fact. H ran after him and kills him. Convinced that the man has had sexual intercourse his wife. Is H entitled to benefits? YES. ARTICLE 248 .LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. both were doing lascivious acts preparatory to the intercourse. May H avail of the benefits under Article 234? No.DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES  Supposing H surprised W in the act of intercourse with another man. Article 247 is still a felony because it provides a penalty. H went to the kitchen to look for a knife but he couldn’t find any. Crime? Homicide or murder. the escape. jump out of the window of H’s room. ARTICLE 247 . the pursuit. H is liable for the direct. As such. wearing only underwear. The death of P is still the proximate result of the outrage of H.  When H came home one night. as the case may be. H shot P and the bullet also hit the houseboy who was peeping through a slightly opened window. Liable? No. and the killing should all form part of a single act. and logical consequences of his act pursuant to Article 4 of the RPC. • When should the killing or the infliction of injuries take place? In the act or immediately thereafter.  H saw W and her paramour both naked. H shot them. he saw a man.  H surprised W in the act with P. he remembered that he has a revolver in the neighbor’s house so he went there. H shot P dead. H shot them both. P was already playing billiards at a nearby place.MURDER • In the absence of qualified aggravating circumstance (QAC). he was not.  H saw W naked with P. how would you classify the killing of a person? Homicide. who caught him having sexual intercourse with his wife. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 45 . Can he avail of the benefits of Article 243? NO – killing should be committed after having one’s spouse in the act of sexual intercourse with another. H fired his gun at the two of them. natural. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. Can he avail of the benefits of Article 243? No.

LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. ARTICLE 252 . depending on the nature of the injuries inflicted. • If a person was killed and the accused was under the influence of liquor.DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY  Supposing the person who gave the fatal blow was identified. is he liable for discharge of firearms? No. the situation is no longer contemplated under Article 251.must be alleged in the information GAC – need not be alleged as long as it is proven during the trial • If a QAC is not alleged but the prosecution introduced a witness or presented evidence proving the existence of such QAC to which the defense counsel did not object. how would you classify the killing of a person? Homicide. what crime is committed? Homicide or murder. only increases the penalty by period (3) QAC .PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY  Supposing the person who inflicted the physical injuries can be identified. MAXIMO P. what crime may he be liable for? Physical injuries. he is only liable for alarms and scandals. ARTICLE 253 . it still does not change the nature of the crime but only increases the penalty.DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS  Supposing the accused aimed his gun at the house of his neighbor. and such QAC was actually proven. • Qualified Aggravating Circumstance v. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing only a generic aggravating circumstance (GAC) is present. what crime may he be liable for? Murder – influence of drugs in the commission of a crime is considered a QAC under Section 25 of the Dangerous Drugs Act. • What if the accused was under the influence of a prohibited drug. ARTICLE 249 . Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 46 . what crime may he be liable for? Homicide. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. Intoxication is an alternative circumstance.PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED PARRICIDE.HOMICIDE ARTICLE 250 .GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE ARTICLE 254 . as the case may be. Generic Aggravating Circumstance (1) QAC – cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance GAC – may be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance (2) QAC – changes the nature of the crime GAC – does not change the nature of the crime. MURDER OR HOMICIDE ARTICLE 251 .

may he still be liable for duel? YES. ARTICLE 259 . The impact threw the woman several meters away. Crime committed? Illegal discharge.INFANTICIDE  Supposing a stranger killed a two-day old child with the use of poison. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing C aimed his gun at A. it was no longer aimed t A. Crime? Infanticide.ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE WOMAN HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS • Any mitigating circumstance? YES. may the combatants still be liable? YES. under the third manner . The violence exerted against the pregnant woman must be intentional. no one was injured or harmed. there is an intention to deprive the offended party of the use of any part his body PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. as a result of which.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. MAXIMO P. ARTICLE 261 . hit a pregnant woman.MUTILATION • As distinguished from physical injuries.  Supposing a mother killed her two-day old child. ARTICLE 258 .RESPONSIBILITY OF PARTICIPANTS IN A DUEL  Supposing in the course of the duel. if the purpose was to conceal dishonor. in mutilation.ABORTION PRACTICED BY A PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF ABORTIVES ARTICLE 260 .  What if one of the combatants was seriously injured but survived.CHALLENGING TO A DUEL ARTICLE 262 . ARTICLE 255 . Crime? Infanticide ARTICLE 256 . but at the time it was discharged . Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 47 .INTENTIONAL ABORTION ARTICLE 257 .of commission of duel: by making a combat although no physical injuries have been inflicted.UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION • May there be a crime of unintentional abortion through reckless imprudence? No. she suffered an abortion. physical injuries. only the pregnant woman is entitled to avail of such mitigating circumstance.  Supposing a jeepney driver who was driving recklessly. The violence exerted was not intended. Crime? At most.

May the man be liable under this law? No. In SPI. Does it have the same effect as a justifying circumstance? • Who are the women protected by the law?  Supposing the offender and the woman were only phone pals and had never met each other in person. homicide or murder.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. there is merely an intent to deprive the offended party of the use of any part of his body. psychological. and economic abuse. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Differentiate mutilation from attempted/frustrated parricide. May the offender be liable under the law? YES. infanticide. in frustrated PMHI.ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS SUBSTANCES OR BEVERAGES ARTICLE 265 . There is sexual relationship between them. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 48 .”  Supposing that the victim was a prostitute who had sexual intercourse with the offender for the first time. the crime will remain SPL. homicide or murder. there is an intent to kill ARTICLE 263 . RA Anti-Hazing Law • What is hazing? How is it committed? • Who are the persons liable and what are their liabilities? PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. • Define stalking. if there is no intention to kill. in PMHI.SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES • Manner of commission: (1) by wounding (2) by beating (3) by assaulting (4) by administering injurious substance (Art. while the injury inflicted may be mortal or sufficient to cause the death of a person. • Define Battered Woman Syndrome.ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT • Define sexual.SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND MALTREATMENT RA 9262 . infanticide.LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES ARTICLE 266 . They victim and offender did not have a “dating relationship. MAXIMO P. physical. In the mutilation. 264) • Differentiate SPI from frustrated parricide. there is an intent to kill ARTICLE 264 .

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON
WITH UPDATED

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

CRIMINAL LAW II

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Which physical, mental, and psychological tests or training of the AFP, PNP, PMA, and CAT are not considered as hazing? Those approved by the NAPOLCOM and Secretary of National Defense. • What physical injuries are contemplated under this statute? Those enumerated under the RPC (serious, less serious and slight physical injuries). Abortion is not included. ARTICLE 266-A TO 266-D RAPE • How is rape classified? As a public crime. (rape can be prosecuted de officio, w/c means authorities can initiate the filing of the complaint) • Manner of commission: (1) sexual act (carnal knowledge of a woman by a man) • Is it sufficient that a man has carnal knowledge of a woman? NO – it must be accompanied or attended by any of the circumstances enumerated • May a woman be criminally liable for rape under the first manner? - As principal by inducement? YES. - As principal by indispensable cooperation? YES. - As principal by direct participation? YES. ONLY if there is conspiracy - As an accomplice or accessory? YES. • Attendant circumstances: (a) through force, threat or intimidation • Is it necessary for the crime to be consummated that there be full penetration? No – partial is sufficient • In the event that force was used, what degree of resistance must be put up by the offended party? Same as if she was defending her life  Supposing the woman did not offer any resistance; she was simply reluctant. Is the man liable? No. (b) when the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious  Supposing the offended party was asleep. When she woke up, she saw a man on top of her and she just let him be. Is the man still liable? It depends. If there was already penetration before she woke up, the man would be liable since the woman’s resistance is unnecessary considering the crime had already been consummated; if there was no penetration yet and the woman did not resist, there is no rape. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos
UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

49

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON
WITH UPDATED

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

CRIMINAL LAW II

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a tablet, which has the effect of arousing a woman sexually, was secretly dropped by a man into his date’s drink. After the effect kicks in, he invites her to his place and has sexual intercourse with her. Is he liable? No. There were no attendant circumstances present. The woman was simply made to loosen her inhibitions (c) by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority • Is it necessary that there be force, threat, or intimidation? No. • May the offender still be liable even if there is consent of the woman? YES. • Fraudulent machinations include promise to marriage in order to secure a woman’s consent to sexual intercourse  Supposing through a promise of marriage, A agreed to have sexual intercourse with her boyfriend; but when she became pregnant, he disappeared. Crime committed? Rape.  Supposing a man had sexual intercourse with the daughter of his common-law wife. The girl is 19 years old. Is he liable? YES. There is grave abuse of authority. Also applies to professor having sexual intercourse with student, guardian with ward, adopting father with his adopted daughter. (d) when the offended party is under 12 years old or is demented • If victim is a minor, the charge of rape is always accompanied by violation of R. A. 7610  Supposing a girl worked as a prostitute who agreed to have sexual intercourse with the accused in exchange for a certain amount of money. She was 11 years, 11months, and 29 days old at the time of the commission of the offense. May the accused be held liable for rape? YES – regardless of the consent of the offended party, sexual intercourse with a child under 12 years old is always rape. (2) sexual assault • How committed? By inserting one’s penis into another’s mouth or anal orifice or by inserting any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person; both must be attended by any of the circumstances enumerated in the first manner • May the offended party be male? YES.  Supposing in a rape case, there is one principal by direct participation and 2 principals by indispensable cooperation. The principal by direct participation marries the victim. Who benefits from the pardon provided by the law? The principal by direct participation. Does the pardon extend to his co-accused? R. A. 8353 is silent. There is no official interpretation by the Supreme Court. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos
UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

50

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON
WITH UPDATED

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

CRIMINAL LAW II

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 267 - KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION • Is it necessary that there be physical deprivation of liberty for a person to be considered detained? No.  Supposing a person was detained in a building; he was free to roam around but offenders did not allow him to go out of the building’s premises. Detention? YES.  Supposing he was allowed to go out but he chose to stay inside the building for security purposes. Detention? No. • Attendant circumstances: (a) if the detention lasts for more than three days  Supposing the offended party is detained for only one day but is a minor. Kidnapping? YES – this would fall under the 4th circumstance  Supposing the offended party is 45 years old and is a barangay tanod. He was detained for two days. Kidnapping? YES – this would fall under the 4th circumstance (b) when the detention is committed by simulating public authority (c)when serious physical injuries are inflicted or threats to kill offended party are made  Supposing the infliction of physical injuries was only incidental, may offenders still be liable? YES – the law does not make distinction as to whether the injuries were inflicted intentionally or accidentally. (d) when the victim is a minor, a female, or a public officer • Kidnapping for ransom - What does ransom mean? Ransom is money, price or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons; a payment that releases one from captivity  Supposing A was courting B, female friend, but she neglected his proposals. A kidnapped B’s sister; the condition for her release was for B to agree to become A’s girlfriend. B agreed and A released her sister. What crime did A commit? Kidnapping for ransom  Is the crime of grave threats absorbed in kidnapping? YES.  Supposing A owes X P50,000; A cannot pay so X kidnapped his mother and would only release her if A pays his debt. What crime may X be liable for? Kidnapping for ransom. Notwithstanding the fact that the amount asked of is legally due to X? YES.

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos
UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

51

Ransom was demanded but not forthcoming so X was killed. On the same night. Still liable? YES. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A borrowed a car from X but refused to return it so X kidnapped A’s brother. There is only mere suspicion. kidnapping was only incidental.INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS HOME PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Liable? ARTICLE 271 . if they are separated and one of them fails to return the child to the other’s custody  Supposing H and W were legally separated. A was killed. Crime committed? Murder – there was no indication of A’s intention to detain X.  Supposing X was kidnapped and was brought to Laguna. One weekend. Crime committed? Special complex crime of kidnapping with homicide ARTICLE 269 . Liable? YES but for the crime of arbitrary detention since the offender is a public officer.  Supposing in a judicial proceeding. Arrest is not a valid warrantless arrest.the arrest falls under valid warrantless arrests  Supposing a police officer has been suspecting that his houseboy has been stealing the jewellery of his wife so he took the houseboy into custody and brought him to the municipal hall for proper action. Is a liable? No . he brought B to the proper authorities. Liable? YES. ARTICLE 270 . the mother was deprived of the custody of her children which was granted to the DSWD. and after five days. this time for unlawful arrest. A kept him for 2-3 hours after which. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 52 . The mother took her children and did not allow DSWD to take them. the car was returned and the brother was released. Is H liable? YES. What crime did X commit? Kidnapping for ransom the car was considered ransom.  Supposing A kidnapped X and brought him to Cavite.KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR • May the parents be criminally liable for this crime? YES. custody of the child from Monday-Friday is with W while it was with H during the weekends. H brought the child to the province. they still had not returned.  Supposing X suspected that his maid has been taking the jewellery of his mother so X took his maid to the police.  What if there was already an order for the suspension of the police officer at the time he arrested his houseboy. MAXIMO P.UNLAWFUL ARREST  Supposing A saw B in the act of committing theft so he arrested B.

SLAVERY ARTICLE 273 . Liable? No.ABANDONMENT OF PERSONS IN DANGER AND ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S OWN VICTIM • Manner of commission: (1) by failing to render assistance to any person whom the offender finds in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying  Supposing the person X found did not have a wound but just fainted and lost consciousness.ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY PERSON ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY. He took them with him to Manila.  Supposing the accused persuaded the minors to go with him to Manila with the promise of giving them lucrative jobs. when the accused was about to leave for Manila. ARTICLE 276 .ABANDONING A MINOR • The purpose of abandonment is to avoid the obligation of taking care of such minor ARTICLE 277 . whom the offender has found abandoned to the authorities or to his family. Liable? No. X did not give him any assistance. but the minor must be found in an unsafe place. That evening.EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR ARTICLE 274 . MAXIMO P.SERVICES RENDERED UNDER COMPULSION IN PAYMENT OF DEBT ARTICLE 275 . is X liable if he did not render assistance? YES. (2) by failing to help or render assistance to another whom the offender has accidentally wounded or injured  Supposing X intentionally injured somebody in an isolated place and left him there. he saw three minors who wanted to go with him.  What if he was unconscious because of starvation. ARTICLE 272 . Liable? YES. Is X liable? No. or by failing to take him to a safe place • Is it necessary that the minor be wounded? No.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. INDIFFERENCE OF PARENTS PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. The minors went with the accused. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing the accused assembled some minors in the province and told them about Manila. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 53 . (3) by failing to deliver a child. under 7 years of age. The minors were mesmerized by his stories of the life in the city.

accused entered through the said door. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 54 . I will take your book and sell it. the owner of the dwelling.“If you don’t lend me your book. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• In indifference of parents.EXPLOITATION OF MINORS ARTICLE 279 . The owner saw him and told him to leave but he did not. the threat is absorbed in such crime. • If the threat was used as a means to commit another crime. may the parents also be liable for violation of RA 7610(Anti-Child Abuse Law)? YES. I not pay my debt.  Supposing the back door was open. or third person (2) purpose is to render some service to humanity or justice (3) place is a café.” What crime may X be liable for? Light threats ARTICLE 284 . MAXIMO P. tavern. and other public house. I will be forced to cheat. while the same is open ARTICLE 281 .ADDITIONAL PENALTIES FOR OTHER OFFENSES ARTICLE 280 . ARTICLE 278 . inn.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.“If you don’t allow me to cheat. ARTICLE 283 .” What crime may X be liable for? Light threats .LIGHT THREATS  Supposing X made the following threat to Y: .“If you don’t lend me your book. Is offender still liable? YES. What crime may he be liable for? Violation of domicile.” What crime may X be liable for? Grave threats . Liable? No. • Possible defenses in trespass to dwelling: (1) purpose was to prevent harm on the accused.QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING  Supposing the offender was a public officer. Entry was not against the will of the owner.BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS ARTICLE 282 .GRAVE THREATS  Supposing the threat was made and it was relayed to the person after three hours.

It is not necessary that offender has had sufficient time to dispose of the object or property.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Is offender still liable? YES. What crime is he liable for? Carnapping.OTHER LIGHT THREATS ARTICLE 286 . PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. etc. Under Article 274. The subject taken is large cattle. The crime is consummated by the mere act of taking. MAXIMO P. Same is true with violation of Anti-cattle rustling law. Are the robbers liable? YES.  Supposing an offender has taken possession of the object but offended party fought back and was able to retrieve his stolen property. they were in turn. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 55 . AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 285 . prevented X from joining the NPA. May the police officer be liable? No – the police officer is justified.  Several armed men surrounded the farm in a certain area. the farmers did not go out of their house to harvest palay. Crime committed? Robbery – there was intent to gain (assuming there was violence in the seizure) • Distinguish from services rendered under compulsion of debt under Article 274. Because of their fear.  Supposing A stole a car with jewellery and money inside. ARTICLE 287 . crime committed is always carnapping. whether it was taken with or without force.GRAVE COERCIONS  Supposing a police officer.LIGHT COERCIONS  Supposing the purpose of the seizure by offender was to sell the properties seized and not to apply to the debt. As the robbers were fleeing. What crime may the armed men be liable for? Grave threats. Liable? No. ARTICLE 288 & ARTICLE 289 • Articles 288 and 289 are now covered by the provisions of the Labor Code. suppose X is indebted to A but he cannot pay. What is essential is the subject matter of the crime. A asked X to work as a janitor in his office as payment for his debt.  When the thing taken is a motor vehicle. • ROBBERY  Supposing a person was divested of his cell phone. violence. Liable? No – he must have been made to work as a household servant or far laborer.  Supposing A boarded a taxi and the taxi brought you somewhere despite your efforts to stop the driver. Its return does not preclude the existence of robbery. through violence. divested of the cell phone they took from you.

000 in exchange for their silence. • Homicide is given a generic meaning. What crime are the robbers liable for? Robbery with homicide.  Supposing a robber stepped on a two-day old child instantly killing the latter.  Supposing during a robbery a shoot-out ensues between the robbers and the son of the owner of the house. • ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS:  Supposing A. they saw one of its residents and killed him in order there will be no opposition during the robbery. if charges were merely concocted.  If during the robbery. On their way to the house. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide and physical injuries. Are you liable for robbery? No. During the shoot-out. The sanitation officers intimidated the Chinese owner with threats of legal cases and asked for P50. So long as a person is killed by reason or on occasion of the robbery. If threat of prosecution was used to make a person part from his money and person actually committed a crime and was intimidated to part with his money – there is bribery. the crime committed is robbery.  Supposing there is a restaurant which was inspected by sanitary officers and thereafter a violation of cleanliness ordinance was discovered. However. there is intimidation. a policemen responded and was killed during the shoot-out.  Supposing that while fleeing. B. • Distinguish robbery from direct bribery: In both.  Supposing a maid was hogtied and killed by robbers. They then proceeded to the house and robbed it. one robber was killed while two policemen were injured. Crime? Robbery with homicide even if there is treachery. Crime committed? Robbery with homicide.  Supposing robbers escaped and policemen were able to catch up with them in another province. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing you threaten another person to retrieve your personal property. and infanticide. MAXIMO P. and C wanted to rob the wealthiest family in the barangay. murder.  Supposing a robber accidentally pulled the trigger of his gun and killed another robber who was his son. not infanticide. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. Crime? Robbery with homicide. Crime? Robbery with homicide. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 56 . robbers saw a person who witnessed the crime and killed him. not parricide. it contemplates parricide. There is no intent to gain. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide. One of the robbers is killed.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.

• The concept of dependencies –  Supposing there is a house. adjacent to it is a grocery and there is a door connecting the two. or edifice devoted to worship a) unlawful entry (effected through opening not made for entrance)  Supposing offender entered through the window of a house and stole valuables. C took a woman out of the house and raped her. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Chinese owner gives them the said amount.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. the crime committed by the sanitary officers is robbery. public building. Crime committed? Robbery with arson. C – robbery with rape. • ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS:  Supposing a man slashes the bag of a passer-by and takes her cell phone and wallet.)  Supposing A. the vehicle was set on fire. Liable? YES. What crime are the sanitation officers liable for? Direct Bribery. The bank manager was shot dead by one of the robbers. The use of force upon things must be used as a means to gain entry to a building or house.  Under the same facts. What crime is committed? Theft. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 57 . MAXIMO P. being present in the scene of the crime. A and B were not present when C raped the woman so they were not in the position to prevent C from committing the rape. The offender destroys the door of the grocery and enters thru the connecting door and robbed the house. • Manner of commission: 1) in an inhabited house. Is the crime committed a special complex crime of robbery with arson? No. Unless.  Supposing five robbers agreed to commit crime of robbery of Bank X only. Liability? A and B – robbery only. if there is actually no violation of cleanliness ordinance and threats of prosecution are based on concocted facts. Crime committed? Robbery.  Supposing after a robbery was committed in a public bus. Who is/are liable for the killing of the bank manager? All members of the band shall be equally liable as principals.  Supposing a part of the house was set on fire by the accused in order to divert the attention of the household members while his co-accused robbed the house. the robbery was already consummated when the bus was set on fire. B. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. they attempted to prevent the killing or assault of another person by their co-robber (except if there is an agreement to kill all those who get in their way. and C conspired to rob the house of X. Robbery with force upon things.

Is he liable for robbery? No. • False key: includes a genuine key stolen from owner  Supposing A used a false key to open the door of their neighbor’s house. There is material possession of the car c) through the use of picklocks or false keys • Picklock: used solely for the commission of the crime. Crime committed? Theft.  Supposing accused broke the window of a car and took valuables within his arm’s reach. Crime committed? Theft. MAXIMO P. offender breaks the window in order to escape. If offenders took valuables inside. There is unlawful entry b) breaking door (external). after breaking the window. Accused entered through the slide opening and took 50 cavans of rice. when he opened the door.  Supposing offender took the stolen car to a nearby street. What crime may A be liable for? Carnapping d) by simulating or pretending to be a public authority  Supposing a Meralco lineman asked permission to conduct electrical inspection inside your house. roof. Upon entry. window. he saw a motorcycle in the sala and took it. Force upon things was not used as a means to enter the house. Crime committed? Theft.  Supposing the offender.  Supposing there is a warehouse. Crime committed? Robbery. the crime is robbery. “reaches” for valuables inside the house. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing owners use the window for entering the house. Offender entered through the window and stole valuables. Accused broke the gate and took the vehicle inside the carport. wall. Crime committed? Carnapping. If offender entered through the door the crime committed is robbery. removed its stereo and fled leaving the car behind. mere possession is punishable. floor  Supposing accused entered through the door of a house. he was merely purporting himself to be Meralce lineman. he takes your property. e) use of fictitious name PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 58 . Crime committed? Theft. After taking valuables. It turns out. The window was not broken to effect entrance  Supposing a carport is enclosed with a gate. A Meralco lineman is not a person in authority.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Crime committed? Carnapping.

the son of the owner catches him with the box while he was on his way out. There is no use of fictitious name. The crime is consummated by the mere act of taking. wardrobe. wardrobe. Crime committed? Consummated robbery. However. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 59 . Crime commited? Robbery. receptacle to be broken or forced open outside the place of robbery  Supposing the offender took a sealed jewellery box from an inhabited house and brought it outside and broke it open. If the receptacle was sealed or closed. what crime did he commit? Theft. window. The offender broke the door and took the couple’s jewellery. chest.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. chest. If what he broke outside the inhabited house was a closed jewellery box. Crime committed? Theft. Once inside. sealed or closed furniture or receptacle  Supposing the offender breaks open a locked receptacle from an uninhabited house.  Supposing the said jewellery box is not locked or sealed but merely closed. He then destroyed the lock and took the valuables.  Supposing the door of the master’s bedroom was not closed. wall. Crime committed? Robbery. g) by removing or taking away such locked or sealed furniture. floor c) through the use of picklocks or false keys d) by breaking door (internal).  Supposing offender took a sealed jewellery box from an inhabited house with the intention to break it outside. roof. The box need not be broken. Offender entered and took a locked jewellery box. f) by breaking door (internal). What crime did he commit? Robbery. the crime committed is robbery with force upon things. locked or sealed furniture or receptacle  Supposing a husband and wife locked the door of the master’s bedroom when they left for work. chest. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing X pretended to be a long lost relative to gain your permission to sleep in your house for the night. 2) in an uninhabited house or public building a) unlawful entry (effected through opening not made for entrance) b) breaking door (external). destroyed the box and took the jewellery. he takes your valuable items. Crime committed? Theft. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. MAXIMO P. thinking it was locked. Crime committed? Theft. The offender.

• Purchasing unlicensed car parts may make the buyer liable for violation of the Anti-Fencing Law. or on any highway. Crime committed? Simple robbery only. the crime is simple robbery only. while it was travelling along EDSA. receptacle to be broken or forced open outside the place of robbery ARTICLE 310 .QUALIFIED THEFT • When theft is committed by a domestic servant.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. He breaks the window of the car and takes the jewellery box home where he planned to force it open. PD 532 . If it is committed through a solitary act. e) by removing or taking away such sealed or closed furniture.  Supposing offenders rode a bus and. or taking of fish from a fishpond or fishery. keeps. chest. Act is solitary. Estafa . 532. D. or act is committed with grave abuse of confidence. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 60 . or disposes of stolen items (subject of robbery and theft) and knows that such items were stolen.ESTAFA = Juridical Possession + Material Possession + Misappropriation . PD 1612 .THEFT = Material Possession + Misappropriation . conceals. MAXIMO P. road. The seller is required to acquire license before selling such second-hand items. or bridge indiscriminately – it is highway robbery under P. Crime committed? Theft. acquires. • Offender benefiting from the proceeds of crime committed punishable under P.ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW • If a crime of robbery is committed on the streets. or taking of coconut from a coconut farm or plantation. 532 is punished as a co-principal.ANTI-FENCING LAW • Can be prosecuted concurrently with theft or robbery under the RPC • Fence: any person who buys. possesses.SWINDLING • Theft v. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a passer-by saw a locked jewellery box inside a parked car. sells.D.NO CRIME (only civil liability) = Ownership + Juridical Possession + Material Possession + Misappropriation PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. divested the other passengers of their valuables. ARTICLE 315 .

owner has better right than possessor.  Is there JP? YES. (MP + Mis) There is no JP since there is no agreement nor contract between them to give student better right over the book. also called physical possession • Juridical Possession (JP): is present when possession arises from lawful transactions either by a contract of agreement. In estafa. (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing a professor asks his student to bring the book to his office in Makati. Student takes the book to Recto instead and sells it to a bookstore. property is taken.  Supposing after an hour. the professor asks for the book. May he do so? YES. MAXIMO P. The student suggests that if he loses the book he will give the professor the latest edition of the book to take its place. The professor agrees.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 61 . physical possession of the property. or by virtue of a provision of the law • Ownership of property: There is ownership when there is no more obligation to return exactly the same property given or lent to the accused. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Material Possession (MP): there is only actual. May the student refuse to return it? YES. the professor asks for the book but student tells him that he could no longer return it because he sold it to another student. written or verbal. What crime is committed? Estafa. The professor lends the book until March 17. Student has better right over it. with abuse of confidence.  Supposing the professor lends his book to his student and asks about what will happen if the latter cannot return the book.  Supposing the following day. expressed or implied. There is lawful transfer of possession based on the contract. Only MP was given to the student. ownership is transferred to him  Supposing a professor owns a criminal law book.  Is there MP? YES. The professor still has better right over the book and may ask for its return at any time. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. property is voluntarily lent or given to the offender. What crime is committed? THEFT. • In ordinary cases of theft. based on the verbal agreement (there is a contract)  Does the student have a better right over the book than the professor? YES. the professor changes his mind asks the student for the return of the book. A Student approaches him and borrows the book knowing it contains personal notations by the professor.  Is student bound to return the exact same book? No.  Supposing on March 17.

What crime? Estafa. What crime may A be liable for? Estafa. If F misappropriates the car. (MP + Mis)  G borrows a P1. S agrees. G never returns the P500.  Supposing S has been keeping a 1. A will give his neighbor a new bike instead. There is ownership already. Subject of theft is a motor vehicle (MP + Mis) PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. (MP + JP + Mis)  If A was merely asked by his neighbor to bring the bike to a shop for repair. He is civilly liable only. A is unable to return the bike because he sold it to another person. But A is civilly liable. JP? YES.  Supposing A borrows his neighbor’s bike for five days. S give the student 1. G borrows the bill. Both agreed that if the car was not returned.  Supposing P gives his car keys to his driver and instructs him to fill up his car with gas. what crime may A be liable for if he misappropriates the bike? No crime. (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing G borrows P500 from S. G will give S twice the amount plus interest instead. G fails to return the bill and spends it for himself. S issues a receipt which states the serial number of the bill. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MP? YES. Ownership was already given since F was not obliged to return the same car to Y.  Supposing the student sold the book. but A sells it instead. F will give a better and newer model instead. What crime did he commit? No crime.000 bill from S. what crime is he liable for? Estafa. (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing Y lends his car to F with the agreement to return it on the day after the wedding.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. take one of the bills and return the other to him. What crime may the driver be liable for? Carnapping. On the sixth day. If F does not return the car and sells it to another person. Y lends it to be returned on Monday. MAXIMO P. what crime may he be liable for? No crime. Driver never returns and sells the car to his friend.  Supposing F approaches Y to borrow the latter’s car and to use it as a bridal vehicle for his cousin’s wedding. what crime is he liable for? No crime. What crime may he be liable for? Theft. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 62 .000 peso bill in his wallet for 25 years. Ownership? YES – student is no longer obliged to return the borrowed item. Just to be sure that G returns the exact bill. what crime may A be liable for? Theft (MP + Mis)  If A was told to return the bike on the sixth day from the day it was borrowed but both he and the neighbor agreed that if it cannot be returned. subject to the condition that if in case it cannot be returned. If G misappropriates the amount borrowed.000 pesos instructing the student to have it denominated to two P500 bills.

who could not pay. Not convinced. M and X had the same name. Was there misappropriation? YES.  Supposing a company was bound to deliver a package to X but the package was delivered to M instead. he made an agreement with the supplier of to provide for 50 sacks of rice at half the price.  Supposing a school asks for deposit in case of breakages. a public officer in charge of purchasing supplies.  Supposing the accused.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. X is liable for estafa because there would be conversion in that case. Was the sale on credit within the scope of the authority of X? YES. MAXIMO P. At the end of the school year. it would be considered sold. It turns out.  Supposing bank teller takes the money deposited by a client. X sold the items on credit. X no longer returned the product because he had sold it to another. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 63 . If there is. May the school be liable for estafa? No. The school is not bound to return the exact money bills paid by the student. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. If M misappropriates the contents of the package. Determine if there is a violation of the terms and conditions by the agent against the principal.there was no express prohibition for X to give the items to a sub-agent. if the product is not returned. The crime of theft is committed with abuse of confidence. Ownership is transferred to the school.  Supposing a sales representative of an appliance company approached X as a prospective customer. after which. explained the benefits of the appliance he was selling. the student asks for the deposit arguing that no breakages occurred. he gave X a trial period of one week. he was merely instructed by Y to sell it within 30 days. the depository is liable for estafa. if there is an express prohibition. to return the same.  What if instead of selling it. conversion exists because the agent acted beyond authority given to him. • If a particular property is given to another through a contract of deposit and depository misappropriates it and cannot return the same. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What kind of possession does a bank teller have over the money deposited by the bank’s clients? Material possession only. X gave the jewellery to a sub-agent who sold it to Z. Crime committed? Frauds against the public treasury under Article 213. acting in violation of a condition agreed or imposed upon. But could X be liable for estafa? No. Is X liable for estafa? No . M takes possession of the property in trust for the true owner (based on the provision of the law). What crime may the teller be liable for? Qualified Theft.  Supposing when the pieces of jewellery were given to X. May he be liable for estafa? No. was given the money to purchase high quality rice. is he liable for estafa? YES. • Conversion: disposing of property and acting as if one is the owner of a property. The school refuses to return the amount deposited. and if not sold.

There is conversion. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 64 .  Supposing A pawned his cell phone but the pawnshop did not return the item even after A’s redemption of the same. is he liable for estafa? YES. joint owner. B. was tasked to pay taxes for the business. a partner to a business. The property was given to him in trust. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. C does not sell the jewellery and keeps it for himself. The ownership of the goods remains with the bank who fully paid such goods. They agree that if B succeeds. The grounds for the extinguishment of criminal liability are enumerated in Article 89 of the RPC.  Under the same facts but A tells B that he is prohibited from giving it to a sub-agent.  Supposing D. the officemate loses her job and could no longer pay the instalments agreed upon. A gives it to B for the latter to sell it at a price less than 100K. • Estafa cannot be committed by a partner in a partnership. If importer fails to pay the bank and to return the goods. The agent in turn gives it to a sub-agent also for the jewellery to be sold. The importer is bound to pay the bank the proceeds of the sale of the goods or to return the same to the bank. There is no conversion. he shall receive 10% commission. D used the money to play in the casino and lost all of it. May the pawnshop be liable for estafa? YES. Therefore. by a co-owner or by a joint owner of a property. It is not within the power of private individuals to extinguish criminal liability.  Supposing the administrator of the estate of deceased L. The importer is guilty of estafa by misappropriation. Owner gave the jewellery to the agent for the latter to sell it. B goes to C and asks him to sell the property on the same condition with a commission of 5%. Is B liable for estafa? YES. the agent. May D be liable for estafa? YES.  Supposing an importer receives goods in trust. or co-owner misappropriates property which is already separated or given to a third person or entirely to the other partner. There is conversion committed by B  A tells B to sell the jewellery based on cash basis but B sells the jewellery on instalment basis to his officemate. The money was misappropriated.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. May B be liable for estafa? YES. The cell phone was given to them in trust. • Novation of the contract or obligation: Is novation a ground to extinguish criminal liability? No. novation is a change or amendment of terms or conditions agreed upon by the parties who are private individuals. Novation is not one of the grounds stated therein. May B be liable for estafa? No. B acted in violation of prior agreement. Moreover. B acted beyond the authority given to him. if partner. It was given for a specific purpose. After few days. Istead of paying the taxes. B gives it to a sub-agent who misappropriates the jewellery. acted within authority given to him by the owner. May L be liable for estafa? YES.000. the misappropriator may be held liable for estafa. MAXIMO P. However. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing A owns a jewellery worth P100. misappropriated certain properties of L.

J lost the entire amount. The criminal liability of J has already attached since his obligation to pay arose on December 31. On the same day. The check was issued simultaneously with the contracting of the debt. May the company charge J with estafa? No. J asked for forgiveness and suggested that he will repay the amount through salary deduction every month.000 on December 1. is J liable for estafa? No. employs collection agents around the country who are obliged to collect amounts within their jurisdiction for the company.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. it turned out that the account did not have sufficient funds. upon the approval of the president.  Supposing on December 23. ABC Corp has a policy that collections are to be remitted within 30 days from collection. J. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing ABC Corp. J played in the casino with his girlfriend and her family. There was no crime since the obligation does not arise until December 31. In the course of their stay. When the later check was encashed.P. If it is issued in payment of a pre-existing debt. The president accepts the condition.  Supposing one night. • Postdating of the check should be prior to or simultaneous with the contracting of the obligation. there is no estafa committed. J defaults in payment. 2008. may E be liable for estafa? YES. Two days later. There is a presumption of misappropriation when he failed to remit the amount collected. Even if the promissory note was a valid novation of his initial obligation. J signs a promissory note prepared by the company’s lawyer.  Supposing one afternoon. If the check bounce. a Cebu collecting agent. J failed to remit the amount. 22? YES. J went to Manila and confessed to the president of ABC Corp that he had misappropriated the money.  Supposing before the check was encashed. is he liable for estafa? YES. The promissory note executed on December 23 is a valid novation of the initial obligation.  Supposing after December 31. Assuming it was December 10. It does not extinguish criminal liability because there is no criminal liability to speak of. The later check was issued for payment of a pre-existing debt. J made no payment. May E be liable for estafa? No. E purchases grocery items worth P10. J was fired and could no longer pay the balance. MAXIMO P. Since E does not have enough cash at that time. There is no obligation until December 31. J executes a promissory note to assuring payment of the amount through monthly instalments.  Supposing that on December 31. May E be liable for violation of B. he issues a check in payment of the items bought. there is only civil liability. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 65 . On January 5. May J be charged of estafa? YES. collected P500. After two months. V agrees and allows E to take the grocery items home. J was holding the amount in trust and he already has the obligation to return it to its rightful owner. 2008 giving him until December 31 to remit the amount collected. Since there is no obligation. After three months. this does not bear any effect to his criminal liability. the company gives J a demand letter for the money giving him five days to turn it over. E takes it back and issues a different check. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.000 from V.

may A be liable for violation of B. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Infidelity in the custody of papers v. concealed or destroyed. 22 . it was dishonored for lack of funds. since it follows general principles of malum prohibitum. makes or draws check in payment of account or for value . drawer are punished but endorser is not. MAXIMO P.ANTI-BOUNCING CHECKS LAW • Good faith and honest intention are not defenses in a prosecution for violation of B. the offender must be a public officer in charge with the custody of documents removed. 22? YES. the issuer is still liable under B.  Supposing A issued a check as evidence of a long time agreement with B. In infidelity.P. the intent to defraud is not needed while in estafa. issuer. A indicated that the check is not intended for payment but merely to evidence an existing obligation.P. provided that the account of the issuer had sufficient funds PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. a worthless check is detrimental if placed in circulation • Manner of Commission (1) Making or drawing and issuing any check to apply on account or for value (Maker. 22  Supposing A issues a check to B.P. it does not punish a person for non-payment of contractual debt but for issuing a bum check.P. 22. the co-conspirators are also liable) • 1st Requisite – person issues. in estafa.Even if check is issued as a guarantee for the obligation of another or only as collateral or security for the monetary obligation of another.In infidelity. There is intent to defraud. funds were coming in from payments to be made by his other clients. the crime may be committed by any person. The check is not issued as payment of obligation or for value. Is A liable for violating B. anticipating that in the following week. The check is postdated for the following week. If the check bounces. the act must be done with intent to defraud. • 2nd Requisite – check is dishonoured by the bank for lack of funds. On the back of the check. estafa . there is no violation of B. insufficiency of funds. 22.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY.  Supposing a client destroys the documents of a bank to conceal fact of the existence of a loan.P. BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 22? No. What crime is he liable for? Estafa. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 66 . it was enacted to protect the interest of people in checks as a substitute for money. or that account is closed • If the check is dishonored for any other reason. A sets up good faith as a defense and honest belief that his other clients would be paying him in the amount that would suffice payment of his obligation on time. When B encashed the check.

P. A gave notice to the bank to stop payment because the payee did not comply with his obligation. drawer.)  Supposing A issues a check and at that time. May A be liable for violation of B. 22 gives the issuer the obligation to maintain in his account sufficient value to cover the amount of the check issued for a period of 90 days counted from the date appearing on the check (date of issuance. May he be liable for violation of B. 22 if the check is dishonored by the bank? No. A had sufficient funds and reason for the dishonor was the stop payment notice. having seen the notice of dishonor or demand of payment. written demand of payment • 4th Requisite – the maker.P. Before the presentation of the check. fails to pay the amount of the check within five banking days • All of the requisites must concur • Will the mere issuance of a bum check make a person liable for violation of B. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. • Is the mere evidence of notice sufficient? No. 22? YES. MAXIMO P.P. he had P200. is issuer already liable? No.P. • 3rd Requisite – Payee or holder gives notice of dishonor and demands the value of the check • A verbal demand is not acceptable. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 67 .P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing at the time A issued a check for P100.000 in the bank. Issuance of a worthless check is not a crime. or issuer. May he be liable for violation of B. 22? YES. (2) Failure to maintain sufficient funds to cover the value of the check in the event the check is presented for payment • B. The check would have been dishonored just the same for insufficiency of funds. there should be a formal. presumption of knowledge of the insufficiency of funds on the part of the accused sets in. Before the 90-day period elapsed. 22? No. A withdrew the amount sufficient to cover the value of the check.000. • Will the dishonor by the bank of the check make the issuer liable? No.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. He is still given five banking days to pay.  Supposing A did not have enough money to pay the debt and he knew of the insufficiency of the fund. Failure to pay after such period will make the person liable. A had more than enough funds to cover the value of the check. There must be evidence of receipt of the notice of dishonour or demand of payment. After such period. • Upon receipt of the notice of dishonor.

22. ARTICLE 327 . At the time of the taking.P. ARTICLE 332 .ARSON  Supposing X.WHO ARE LIABLE FOR MALICIOUS MISCHIEF • It cannot be committed negligently. SC issued a circular instructing lower courts to impose only the penalty of a fine. it must be deliberate. has the lawful possession of the cell phone even if A is the owner. O was already dead. The taking is wrongful. B.000 or imprisonment of one year or both.  Supposing N burned the body of O. there is already a prima facie evidence of violation of B. Is A liable? YES. with intent to kill. This is o because unless the accused is a blatant violator of B. What crime? Arson. • Penalty is a fine twice the amount of the value of the check but not exceeding P200. If the requisites concur.P. intentionally burned T to death what crime did X commit? Murder. by virtue of the agreement. May he be liable for violation of B. ARTICLE 316 . estafa. 22? According to a decision of the Supreme Court – YES the issuer is still liable.OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING  Supposing A runs out of cash so he pledges his cell phone to B for P5. The check was dishonored for lack of funds. MAXIMO P. After a week. ARTICLE 320 . or malicious mischief is committed or mutually caused by: 1) spouses. 22. or relatives by affinity within the same line 2) widowed spouse with respect to the property of deceased spousebefore the same has been distributed PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. ascendants or descendants.P. A is liable for other forms of swindling under Article 316. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing B presented to the bank a check issued to him by A beyond 90 days from the date of issuance. B leaves the cell phone on his table. • The law requires banks and financial institutions to indicate on the face of the check or on its back. the reason for dishonoring the same. the court adopts a liberal view against the accused. Their agreement was for A to pay back the amount within 30 days and for B to return the cell phone.PERSONS EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY • Applies only when the crime of either theft. • Is it necessary to have a testimony from a bank employee to back up the claim of presumption of knowledge? No. A sees it lying around so he takes it.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 68 .000.

The victim is already legally capacitated.m. checked-in to a motel room at 1:00 p. A is not exempt from criminal liability under Article 332. her neighbor. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 69 . and checked-out at 10:00p. One week after. Is the evidence enough to warrant conviction for adultery? YES. May the court take jurisdiction of the case? No. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3) brothers. It applies only when crime committed is theft. grandparents. or guardians if offended party is incapacitated.CONCUBINAGE • A single act of sexual intercourse between a married man and a woman not his wife is not punishable. a married woman. Her father signs the complaint.  Supposing a 19 year old woman refuses to file a case of acts of lasciviousness. • CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY • Private crimes .ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. ARTICLE 334 . sisters. or malicious mischief. and K. the court may take cognizance of the case.WHO ARE GUILTY OF ADULTERY • Is committed by a married woman having sexual intercourse with a man not her husband AND by the man knowing her to be married • Marriage contemplated may have defects but there must not be a judicial declaration of nullity or decree of annulment issued by the court • Is the presentation of an eyewitness necessary to prove the sexual intercourse? No. he finds it in A’s possession.m.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. ARTICLE 333 . will the case prosper? YES. Supposing the woman is only 10 years old? YES. Presentation of evidence of opportunity to have sexual intercourse between the accused is sufficient  Supposing the prosecution presented evidence that W. estafa. brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law who are living together  Supposing A’s brother-in-law loses his cell phone to a snatcher. MAXIMO P. The brother-in-law charges A with violation of the Anti-Fencing Law. Assuming that A lives with his brother-in-law.can be initiated by the offended party only or by his parents. Sexual intercourse is punishable under any of the following circumstances: 1) maintaining a concubine or mistress in the conjugal home or dwelling 2) cohabitation in any other place (living together as husband and wife) 3) sexual intercourse with another woman under scandalous circumstances (open to public) ARTICLE 336 .

the crime committed is kidnapping. she is taken with her consent • Also known in ordinary parlance as tanan ARTICLE 349 . ARTICLE 338 . accused may be charged of violation of R. woman has to be of good reputation • Committed by means of deceit .BIGAMY • Contracting a subsequent marriage before the 1st marriage is dissolved • The offender will not incur criminal liability if there is a judicial decree of dissolution of first marriage or judicial declaration of presumption of death PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue. 7610. the offender would be liable for rape ARTICLE 337 . 7610. age of offended party is immaterial • If there is no lewd design.FORCIBLE ABDUCTION • Taking of a woman against her will with the presence of lewd designs or lascivious intent. A. 8353 and qualified seduction are present. if victim is below 18.  Supposing. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Had there been sexual intercourse. the man would be liable for qualified seduction or simple seduction ARTICLE 342 . The student becomes pregnant with her and the teacher’s child.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. accused may be charged of the higher crime (rape). ARTICLE 339 . lewd design can only be proven by the actual physical acts of the offender ARTICLE 343 .A.SIMPLE SEDUCTION • The offended party may not be prostitute.CONSENTED ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS • Had there been sexual intercourse. What crime may the teacher be charged with? Rape through grave abuse of authority and violation of R.QUALIFIED SEDUCTION • Seduction: act of sexual intercourse • If both elements of R. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 70 .CONSENTED ABDUCTION • Victim is a woman over 12 years old and under 18 and is a virgin.this includes a false promise of marriage. a high school teacher fell in love with a 17-year old female student and the student fell in love with him also. A.

or before giving birth if she is pregnant. C confronted Z and grabbed her breasts. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue.PREMATURE MARRIAGE • Can be committed only by woman who contracts marriage within 301 days after the death of her husband or separation from the same. or manner of commission  Supposing C wanted to take revenge against his officemate Z for a prank she committed against him. MAXIMO P. C only wanted to embarrass Z. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 351 . place.SLANDER BY DEED • The difference of slander by deed from acts of lasciviousness is that in the latter. there is presence of lewd design. at the time of her husband’s death • The reason for the provision is to prevent doubtful paternity ARTICLE 359 . What crime may C be liable for? Slander by deed. Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena 71 . In the presence of their other co-workers.LECTURE AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED SPECIAL PENAL LAWS CRIMINAL LAW II (ATTY. This depends upon the circumstance of time. There is no lewd design.