You are on page 1of 132

CRIMINAL LAW 1

REVIEW NOTES

CRIMINAL LAW I
criminal offenses. It is urged that the right to prosecute
and punish crimes is an attribute of sovereignty, but by
reason of the principle of territoriality as applied in the
suppression of crimes, such power is delegated to
I. DEFINITION AND SOURCES subordinate government subdivisions such as territories.
The Philippine Legislature by virtue of the Jones Law,
like other territories of the US, has the power to define
and punish crimes. The present government of the
A. DEFINITION Philippines created by the US Congress is autonomous.
It is within the power of the legislature to prescribe the
Criminal law is that branch or division of law
form of the criminal complaint as long as the
which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and
constitutional provision of the accused to be informed of
provides for their punishment.
the nature of the accusation is not violated.

B. STATE AUTHORITY TO PUNISH US v. Pablo


CRIMES 35 Phil 94 (1916)
Facts: Pablo, a policeman, arrested Dato who
1. SOURCES OF PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL LAW was found in a vacant lot where a jueteng game was
(REYES) conducted. He presented a memorandum to his chief
a. The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) and its claiming that he saw Malicsi and Rodrigo leaving the
amendments area. However, during the trial, he changed his
b. Special penal laws passed by the Philippine statement and claimed that he did not see Malicsi nor
Commission, Philippine Assembly, Philippine Rodrigo leaving the area. As a result, the two accused
Legislature, National Assembly, the Congress were acquitted. Pablo was charged with the crime of
of the Philippines, and the Batasang perjury and was convicted under Act. No. 1697. It was
Pambansa. claimed that the Act repealed the provisions of the Penal
c. Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Code relative to perjury, and the last provision of the
Martial Law. Administrative Code repealed the Act, thus, there is no
penal sanction for the crime of false testimony or
perjury.
1987 Constitution Article II, Section 5
Held: Notwithstanding that the Act no. 1697
Declaration of Principles and State Policies. The
has been interpreted by this court in its decisions to
maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life,
have repealed provisions of the Penal Code relating to
liberty and property, and the promotion of the general
false testimony, it did not expressly repeal the pertinent
welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people
provisions of the RPC. Also, the Administrative Code, in
of the blessings of democracy.
totally repealing Act no. 1697, did not expressly repeal
the said articles of the Penal Code. Hence, the provisions
1987 Constitution Article VI, Section 1 of the Penal Code relative to perjury remain in force.
The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of The reason behind such interpretation is that crimes
the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate and a should not go unpunished or be freely committed
House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved without punishment of any kind.
to the people by the provision on initiative and
referendum. 2. LIMITATIONS TO STATE AUTHORITY TO PUNISH
CRIMES
People v. Santiago
43 Phil 124 (1922) 1987 Constitution, Art. III
Facts: Santiago was driving an automobile at a
high speed notwithstanding the fact that he had to pass Sec.1. No person shall be deprived of life,
a narrow space between a wagon standing on one side liberty or property without due process of law, nor shall
of the road and a heap of stones on the other side where any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
there were two boys standing. He ran over Parondo who Sec.14. No person shall be held to answer for
was instantly killed as a result of the accident. Santiago a criminal offense without due process of law.
was convicted by the lower court of the crime of In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall
homicide by reckless imprudence. The accused appealed be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and
challenging the validity of Act No. 2886 which amended shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel,
General Order no. 58 (which provides that all to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
prosecutions for public offenses shall be in the name of against him, to have a speedy, impartial and public trial,
the United States against the persons charged with the to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have
offenses), claiming that the legislature is not authorized compulsory process to secure the attendance of
to amend the latter because its provisions have the witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf.
character of Constitutional Law. Sec. 2 of Act No. 2866 However, after arraignment, trial may proceed
contains that all prosecutions for public offenses shall notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided
be in the name of the People of the Philippine Islands that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear
against the person charged with the offense. is unjustifiable.
Held: The procedure in criminal matters is not Sec.18. No person shall be detained solely by
incorporated in the Constitution of the States, but is left reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
in the hands of the legislature, so it that it falls within No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist
the realm of public statutory law. except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party
The states, as part of its police power, have a shall have been duly convicted.
large measure of discretion in creating and defining

1
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Sec.19. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, Pesigan v. Angeles


nor cruel degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. 129 SCRA 174 (1984)
Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for Facts: Anselmo and Marcelo Pesigan were
compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the transporting carabaos in the evening of April 2, 1982
Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty from Camarines Sur to Batangas when the carabaos
already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. were confiscated purportedly in accordance with E.O.
The employment of physical, psychological, or No. 626-A which prohibits transportation of carabao and
degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee carabeef from one province to another.
or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities Held: The E.O. should not be enforced against
under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. the Pesigans because it is a penal regulation (because of
Sec.20. No person shall be imprisoned for its confiscation and forfeiture provision) and was
debt or non-payment of a poll tax. published only in the Official Gazette on June 14, 1982.
Sec.22. No ex post facto law or bill of Justice and fairness dictate that the public must be
attainder shall be enacted. informed of that provision by means of publication in the
Gazette before violators of the executive order can be
bound thereby. The summary confiscation was not in
1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 115
order. The carabaos must be returned. However, the
Pesigans cannot transport the carabaos to Batangas
Section 1. Rights of accused at trial. In all
because they are now bound by the said E.O.
criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled to
the following rights:
Taada v. Tuvera
(a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary
136 SCRA 27 (1985)
is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Facts: The petitioners seek a writ of
(b) To be informed of the nature and cause of
mandamus to compel respondent public officials to
the accusation against him.
publish or cause the publication of various PDs, EOs,
(c) To be present and defend in person and by
LOIs etc. invoking the Constitutional right of the people
counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from
to information on matters of public concern.
arraignment to promulgation of the judgment. The
Held: The publication of all presidential
accused may, however, waive his presence at the trial
issuances of a public nature or of general applicability is
pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail, unless
mandated by law. It is a requirement of due process. It
his presence is specifically ordered by the court for
is a rule of law that before a person may be bound by
purposes of identification. The absence of the accused
law, he must first be officially and specifically informed
without justifiable cause at the trial of which he had
of its contents. The Court therefore declares that
notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to be
presidential issuances of general application which have
present thereat. When an accused under custody
not been published shall have no force and effect.
escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived his right to
However, the implementation of the PDs prior to its
be present on all subsequent trial dates until custody
publication is an operative fact which may have
over him is regained. Upon motion, the accused may be
consequences which cannot be justly ignored. The past
allowed to defend himself in person when it sufficiently
cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration.
appears to the court that he can properly protect his
From the report submitted by the clerk of court, it is
rights without the assistance of counsel.
undisputed that none of these unpublished PDs has ever
(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but
been implemented by the government.
subject to cross-examination on matters covered by
direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner
prejudice him. C. BASIC PRINCIPLES
(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a
witness against himself. Criminal law has three main characteristics: 1)
(f) To confront and cross-examine the general, 2) territorial, and 3) prospective.
witnesses against him at the trial. Either party may
utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness 1. GENERALITY OF CRIMINAL LAW
who is deceased, out of or can not with due diligence be
found in the Philippines, unavailable, or otherwise Civil Code, Article 14
unable to testify, given in another case or proceeding, Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall
judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and be obligatory upon all those who live or sojourn in the
subject matter, the adverse party having the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public
opportunity to cross-examine him. international law and to treaty stipulations.
(g) To have compulsory process issued to
secure the attendance of witnesses and production of The criminal law of the country governs and applies to
other evidence in his behalf. all persons in Philippine Territory, regardless of
(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial. nationality, age, gender or other personal
(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the circumstances.
manner prescribed by law.
Example: An American who visits the Philippines in order
to kill his Filipina girlfriend because of extreme jealousy
Civil Code, Article 2
is still liable for murder although he is a foreigner.
Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall
be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the
General Rule: The jurisdiction of the civil courts is not
Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public
affected by the military character of the accused.
international law and to treaty stipulations.
Civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction with
general court-martial over soldiers of the

2
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Armed Forces of the Philippines even in times privileges of duly accredited foreign diplomatic
of war, provided that in the place of the representatives in the Philippines.
commission of the crime no hostilities are in
progress and civil courts are functioning. iii. Principles of Public International
Law
When the military court takes cognizance of
the case involving a person subject to military Persons exempt from the operation of our criminal laws
law, the Articles of War apply, not the RPC or by virtue of the principles of public international law
other penal laws. (1) Sovereigns and other chiefs of state.
(2) Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary,
The prosecution of an accused before a court- ministers resident, and charges daffaires.
martial is a bar to another prosecution of the
accused for the same offense. a consul is not entitled to the privileges
and immunities of an ambassador or
Offenders accused of war crimes are triable by minister (Schneckenburger v. Moran, 63
military commission. A military commission has Phil. 250).
jurisdiction even if actual hostilities have
ceased as long as a technical state of war under the Constitution, members of
continues. Congress are not liable for libel or slander
in connection with any speech delivered
on the floor of the house during regular or
a. Exceptions to the general application of special session.
criminal law
US v. Sweet
Art. 2, RPC, Except as provided in the treaties 1 Phil 18 (1901)
or laws of preferential application Facts: Sweet was an employee of the US army
Art. 14, Civil Code, subject to the principles in the Philippines. He assaulted a prisoner of war for
of public international law and to treaty stipulations. which he was charged with the crime of physical
injuries. Sweet interposed the defense that the fact that
i. Treaty Stipulations he was an employee of the US military authorities
deprived the court of the jurisdiction to try and punish
An example of a treaty or treaty stipulation is the Bases him.
Agreement entered into by the Philippines and the US Held: The case is open to the application of the
on Mar. 14, 1947 and expired on Sept. 16, 1991. general principle that the jurisdiction of the civil
tribunals is unaffected by the military or other special
Another example would be the VFA signed on Feb. 10, character of the person brought before them for trial,
1998 where the Philippines agreed that: unless controlled by express legislation to the contrary.
a. US military authorities shall have the
right to exercise within the Philippines all Liang vs. People
criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction conferred 355 SCRA 125
on them by the military law of the US over US Facts: Petitioner is an economist working at
personnel in RP; the Asian Development Bank (ADB). Sometime in 1994,
b. US authorities exercise exclusive he was charged before the Metropolitan Trial Court of
jurisdiction over US personnel with respect to Mandaluyong City with two counts of oral defamation for
offenses, including offenses relating to the allegedly uttering defamatory words against his
security of the US punishable under the law of colleague. Thereafter, petitioner was arrested by virtue
the US, but not under the laws of RP; of a warrant. After fixing petitioners bail, the MeTC
c. US military authorities shall have the judge received an office of protocol from the DFA stating
primary right to exercise jurisdiction over US that petitioner is covered by immunity from legal
personnel subject to the military law of the US processes under Section 45 of the Agreement between
in relation to: (1) offenses solely against the ADB and the Philippine Government. As a result, the
property or security of the US or offenses MeTC judge dismissed the criminal case without notice
solely against the property or person of US to the prosecution.
personnel; and (2) offenses arising out of any Held: Petitioner is not covered by the
act or omission done in performance of official immunity. Courts cannot blindly adhere to the
duty. communication from the DFA that the petitioner is
covered by any immunity. It has no binding effect in
ii. Laws of Preferential Application courts. The court needs to protect the right to due
process not only of the accused but also of the
Parliamentary Immunity under Section 11, Article prosecution. Secondly, the immunity under Section 45 of
VI of the Constitution- Members of the Congress are the Agreement is not absolute, but subject to the
immune from arrest for all offenses punishable by not exception that the acts must be done in official
more than six years imprisonment while Congress is in capacity. Slandering a person could not possibly be
session. covered by the immunity agreement as the same was
not committed in the performance of petitioners official
An example of a law of preferential application would be duty.
R.A. No. 75 which penalizes acts which would impair
the proper observance by the Republic and inhabitants
of the Philippines of the immunities, rights, and

3
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

2. TERRITORIALITY OF CRIMINAL LAW French Rule It is the flag or nationality


of the vessel which determines jurisdiction
1987 Constitution, Article I unless the crime violates the peace and
The national territory comprises the Philippine order of the host country.
archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced
therein, and all other territories over which the English Rule The location or situs of
Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of the crime determines jurisdiction unless
its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domain including the the crime merely relates to the internal
territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular management of the vessel.
shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around,
between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago The Philippine adheres to the English Rule.
regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of
the internal waters of the Philippines. Disorders which disturb only the peace of the
ship or those on board are to be dealt with
exclusively by the sovereignty of the home of
the ship, but those which disturb the public
Art. 2. Application of its provisions. Except as
peace may be suppressed, and, if need be, the
provided in the treaties and laws of preferential
offenders punished by the proper authorities of
application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced
the local jurisdiction.
not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its
atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but
Smoking opium aboard a foreign vessel in
also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who:
Philippine waters constitutes a breach of public
1. Should commit an offense while on a
order because it causes such drug to produce
Philippine ship or airship
its pernicious effects within our territory
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or
(People v. Wong Cheng, G.R. No. L-18924, 19
currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and
October 1922).
securities issued by the Government of the Philippine
Islands;
Philippine courts have no jurisdiction over
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
offenses committed on board foreign warships
introduction into these islands of the obligations and
in territorial waters. Warships are always
securities mentioned in the presiding number;
reputed to be the territory of the country to
4. While being public officers or employees,
which they belong and cannot be subjected to
should commit an offense in the exercise of their
the laws of another state (U.S. v. Fowler, 1
functions; or
Phil. 614).
5. Should commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law of nations, defined in Title
The Philippines subscribes to the
One of Book Two of this Code.
Absolute Theory of Aerial Jurisdiction
that the subjacent state has complete
The RPC has therefore territorial and extraterritorial jurisdiction only to the innocent passage
application. The maritime zone extends to three miles by aircraft of a foreign country.
from the outermost coastline. Beyond that is the high
seas which is outside the territorial waters of the Under this theory, if the crime is
Philippines. committed in an aircraft, no matter how
high, as long as it can be established it is
a. Crimes committed aboard merchant within the Philippine atmosphere,
vessels (RPC, Art. [1]) Philippine criminal law will govern (See:
R.A. No. 6235 or Anti-Hijacking law ).
The RPC is applied to Philippine vessels if the
crime is committed while the ship is treading: b. When public officers or employees
Philippine waters (intra-territorial commit an offense in the exercise of their
application), or functions. (RPC, Art. [3])
The High Seas (waters NOT under the
jurisdiction of any State) The Revised Penal Code governs if the crime
[extraterritorial application] (whether or not in relation to the exercise of
Note: the country of registry determines the public functions) was committed within the
nationality of the vessel, not its ownership. Philippine Embassy or within the embassy
grounds in a foreign country. This is because
Example: a murder committed by a embassy grounds are considered an extension
Filipino seaman aboard a Filipino- of sovereignty. Thus, the crime is deemed to
owned vessel registered in China have been committed in Philippine soil.
while it is sailing the high seas is not
cognizable by Philippine Courts, but Illustration: A Philippine consulate official who
the courts of China. is validly married here in the Philippines and
who marries again in a foreign country cannot
There are two rules as to jurisdiction over be prosecuted here for bigamy because this is
crimes committed aboard merchant vessels a crime not connected with his official duties.
while in the territorial waters of another However, if the second marriage was
country: celebrated within the Philippine embassy, he
may be prosecuted here since it is as if he

4
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

contracted the marriage here in the as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this
Philippines. Code, although at the time of the publication of such
laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the
c. Commit any of the crimes against national convict is serving the same.
security and the law of nations, defined in
Title One of Book Two of the Revised Ex-Post Facto Law is prohibited
Penal Code. (RPC, Art. [4]) Ex post facto law is prohibited. Ex post facto law is one
that is specifically made to retroact to cover acts before
Examples: Piracy, Treason, Espionage. it became effective to the prejudice of the accused; or to
make a certain crime graver or prescribe a heavier
US v. Ah Sing penalty for it (The Matter Of The Petition For The
36 Phil 978 (1917) Declaration Of The Petitioner's Rights And Duties Under
Facts: Defendant is a subject of China who Sec. 8 Of R.A. No. 6132, G.R. No. L-32485, 22 October
bought eight cans of opium in Saigon and brought them 1970).
on board the steamship Shun Chang during the trip to
Cebu. When the steamer anchored in the port of Cebu, The law does not have any retroactive effect
the authorities in making the search found the 8 cans of EXCEPT if it favors the offender unless he is a
opium. Defendant admitted being the owner but did not habitual delinquent or the law otherwise provides.
confess as to his purpose in buying the opium.
Held: Bringing opium in local territory even if it This is consistent with the general principle that
is merely for personal use and does not leave the criminal laws, being a limitation on the rights of the
foreign merchant vessel anchored in Philippine waters is people, should be construed strictly against the
subject to local laws particularly under Sec. 4 Act. No. State and liberally in favor of the accused.
2381 a.k.a. Opium Law. Under the said law, importation
includes merely bringing the drug from a foreign country Different effects of repeal of penal law.
to Philippine port even if not landed. 1. If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the
new law, the new law shall be applied, except
Miquiabas v. Commanding General when the offender is a habitual delinquent or
80 Phil 626 (1948) when the new law is made not applicable to
Facts: Petitioner is a Filipino citizen and a pending action or existing causes of action.
civilian employee of the US army. He has been charged 2. If the new law imposes a heavier penalty, the
with disposing in the Port of Manila area things law in force at the time of the commission of
belonging to the US army. He is under the custody of the offense shall be applied.
Commanding General, Philippines-Ryukus command and 3. If the new law totally repeals the existing law
an appointed General Court Martial found him guilty and so that the act which was penalized under the
sentenced him to 15 years imprisonment. old law is no longer punishable, the crime is
Held: Gen. Court-Martial has no jurisdiction obliterated.
because the Port of Manila is not a base under the Bases
Agreement entered into by the Philippines and the US. When the repeal is absolute the offense ceases to
The Port area is merely a temporary quarters. Also, a be criminal.
civilian employee cannot be considered a member of the
US Army as stated in the agreement. Lastly, no waiver When the new law and the old law penalize the
of jurisdiction can be made either by the prosecuting same offense, the offender can be tried under the
attorney or by the Secretary of Justice. old law.

3. PROSPECTIVITY OF CRIMINAL LAW When the repealing law fails to penalize the offense
under the old law, the accused cannot be convicted
General Rule: Acts or omissions will only be subject to under the new law.
a penal law if they are committed AFTER a penal law had
already taken effect. A person erroneously accused and convicted under
a repealed statute may be punished under the
An act or omission which has been committed before the repealing statute.
effectivity of a penal law could not be penalized by such
penal law because penal laws operate only Gumabon v. Director of Prisons
prospectively. 37 SCRA (1971)
Facts: Petitioners who were serving their
Art.21. Penalties that may be imposed.-No felony shall sentence of life imprisonment for the complex crime of
be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law prior rebellion with murder and other crimes seek the
to its commission. retroactive application of the Hernandez doctrine which
was promulgated after their conviction. The Hernandez
Civil Code, Art. 4 ruling negated the existence of the crime charged
Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the stating that rebellion cannot be complexed with other
contrary is provided. crimes. Thus, the accused in the Hernandez case was
sentenced only to 10 years of imprisonment.
Exception: Held: Both RPC and the Civil Code allow for the
retroactive application of judicial decisions. While
reference in Art. 22 of the Civil Code is made to
Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. Penal laws
legislative acts, it would be merely an exaltation of the
shall have a retroactive effect in so far as they favor the
literal to deny its application to a case like the present.
person guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal,
The Civil Code provides that judicial decisions applying

5
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

or interpreting the constitution, as well as legislation, Held: PP 1017 is unconstitutional as it grants


form part of our legal system. President GMA the authority to promulgate decrees. It is
settled that legislative power is peculiarly within the
4. Nullum Crimen Nulla Poena Sine Lege province of the Legislature as stated under Section 1,
Article VI of the Constitution. Neither Martial Law, state
Art. 3. Definitions. Acts and omissions punishable of rebellion nor a state of emergency can justify the
by law are felonies (delitos). Presidents exercise of legislative power by issuing
decrees. Thus, PP1017 is void and cannot be enacted.

Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. No felony 5. STRICT CONSTRUCTION of penal laws against
shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law the State
prior to its commission.
1987 Constitution, Article III, Sec. 14(2)
There is no crime when where is no law punishing In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be
it. presumed innocent until the contrary is proved.

The phrase punished by law should be understood


Note: The Doctrine of Pro Reo
to mean punished by the Revised Penal Code, and
not by special law.
Whenever a penal law is to be construed or
applied and the law admits of two
Bernardo v. People
interpretations one lenient to the offender
123 SCRA 365 (1983)
and one strict to the offender- the
Facts: The accused were charged and
interpretation which is lenient or
convicted for violating PD No. 772 for possessing and
favorable to the offender will be adopted
squatting on a parcel of land owned by Cruz.
(Intestate Estate of Manolita Gonzales vda. De
Held: Conviction is null and void. PD No. 772
Carungcong, v. People, G.R. No. 181409, 11
does not apply to pasture lands because its preamble
February 2010).
shows that it was intended to apply to squatting in
urban communities. It is a basic principle of criminal law
Constitutional Limitations on the Power of the
that no person should be brought within the terms of a
Congress to enact Penal Laws:
penal statute who is not clearly within them nor should
any act be pronounced criminal which is not clearly
a. Equal Protection
made so by the statute.
No person or class of persons shall be deprived
to the same protection of the laws which is enjoyed by
People v. Pimentel
other persons or other classes in the same place and in
288 SCRA 542 (1998)
like circumstances. For classification to be reasonable, it
Facts: Respondent Tujan was charged with
must:
subversion under RA 1700. When he was arrested 7
years after he was charged, an unlicensed revolver and
(a) Rest on substantial distinctions;
ammunition was found in his possession. As such, he
(b) Germane to the purpose of the law;
was also charged with Illegal Possession of Firearms
(c) Not limited to existing conditions only;
under PD 1866.
(d) Apply equally to all members of the same class
Held: Tujan was not placed in double jeopardy
(Mendoza v. People, G.R. No. 183891, 19 October
because the issue had not yet arisen for he had not yet
2011).
been actually convicted.
RA 7636 totally repealed RA 1700 making
b. Due Process
subversion no longer a crime. Based on Art. 22 of RPC,
In criminal proceedings, due process requires
this law should be given retroactive effect since the law
that the accused be informed why he is being proceeded
is favorable to the accused and since he is not a habitual
against and what charge he has to meet, with his
delinquent. The Court convicted Tujan with simple illegal
conviction being made to rest on evidence that is not
possession of firearm and ammunition but since Tujans
tainted with falsity after full opportunity for him to rebut
length of detention is greater than the penalty
it and the sentence being imposed in accordance with a
prescribed, the court ordered immediate release.
valid law. It is assumed, therefore, that the court that
renders the decision is one of competent jurisdiction
David vs. GMA
(Ang Tibay v. CA, 69 Phil. 635).
489 SCRA 160, 259
Facts: Sometime in February 2006, President
c. Non-imposition of Cruel and Unusual
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (GMA) issued PP 1017, to be
Punishment or Excessive Fines
implemented by GO 5. These laws aim to suppress
lawlessness and the connivance of extremists to bring
Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel,
down the government. Pursuant to such laws, GMA
degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall
cancelled all plans to celebrate EDSA I and revoked all
death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling
permits issued for rallies and other public
reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress
organization/meeting. Notwithstanding the cancellation
hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already
of their permit, KMU head Randolf David proceeded to
imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua
rally which led to his arrest. Later that day, the Daily
(Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 19).
Tribune was raided by the CIDG, resulting in the
confiscation of its anti-GMA articles and write-ups.
The imposition of the penalty of death is
Another anti-GMA news agency was likewise raided on
prohibited. Accordingly, R.A. No. 8177 (Act
the same day.
Designating Death by Lethal Injection) is

6
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

repealed. R.A. No. 7659 (Death Penalty Law) Pascual v. Board of Medical Examiners
and all other laws, executive orders and 28 SCRA 344 (1969)
decrees, insofar as they impose the death Facts: Pascual was charged in an
penalty, are repealed or amended accordingly administrative case for immorality and was announced
(Sec. 1 of R.A. No. 9346, otherwise known as by counsel of complainants to be their first witness.
An Act Prohibiting The Imposition of Death Held: The Board of Medical examiners cannot,
Penalty in The Philippines). consistently with the self-incriminating clause, compel
the person proceeded against to take the witness stand
d. Bill of Attainder without his consent. A proceeding for malpractice
possesses a criminal or penal aspect in the sense that
A statute becomes a bill of attainder when it applies the respondent would suffer the revocation of his license
either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable as a medical practitioner which is even a greater form of
members of a group inflicting punishment on them deprivation than forfeiture of property.
amounting to a deprivation of any right, civil or political, While crime should not go unpunished and that
without judicial trial. Stated otherwise, the singling out the truth must be revealed, such desirable objective
of a definite class, the imposition of a burden on it, and should not be accomplished according to means
a legislative intent, suffice to stigmatize a statute as a offensive to high sense of respect accorded to human
bill of attainder (Montenegro v. Castaeda, 91 Phil. personality. More and more in line with the democratic
882). creed, the deference accorded to an individual even
those suspected of the most heinous crimes is given due
e. Ex Post Facto Law weight.

An Ex Post Facto Law is one which: D. GENERAL PROVISIONS


makes criminal an act done before the passage
of the law and which was innocent when done, Art. 1 Time when Act takes effect. This code shall
and punishes such an act; take effect on the first day of January, nineteen hundred
aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it and thirty.
was, when committed;
changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
The RPC consists of two books: Book One consists
punishment than the law annexed to the crime
of 1) basic principles affecting criminal liability and
when committed;
2) the provisions on penalties including criminal and
alters the legal rules of evidence, and
civil liability; Book Two defines felonies with the
authorizes conviction upon less or different
corresponding penalties.
testimony than the law required at the time of
the commission of the offense;
Two theories in criminal law
assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies
CLASSICAL
only, in effect imposes penalty or deprivation
POSITIVIST
of a right for something which when done was
lawful; and
The RPC is based mainly on principles of old or
deprives a person accused of a crime of some
classical school.
lawful protection to which he has become
entitled, such as the protection of a former
Characteristics of the classical theory
conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of
a. The basis of criminal liability is human
amnesty disadvantage (In Re Kay Villegas
free will and the purpose of the penalty is
Kami, Inc., G.R. No. L-32485, 22 October
retribution.
1970).
b. That man is essentially a moral creature
Rules of Construction of Penal Laws
with an absolutely free will to choose
1. Criminal statutes are liberally construed in
between good and evil thereby placing
favor of the offender. This means that no person
more stress upon the effect or result of
shall be brought within their terms of the law
the felonious act than upon the man, the
who is not clearly within them, nor should any
criminal himself.
act be pronounced criminal which is not clearly
made so by statute.
c. It has endeavored to establish a
2. The original text in which a penal law is
mechanical and direct proportion between
approved will govern in case of a conflict with an
crime and penalty.
official translation. Hence, the RPC, which was
approved in Spanish text, is controlling over its
d. There is a scant regard to the human
English translation.
element.
3. Interpretation by analogy has no place in
criminal matters.
Characteristics of the positivist theory
a. That man is subdued occasionally by a
- reasoning by analogy is applied only when
strange and morbid phenomenon which
similarities are limited and it is admitted that
constrains him to do wrong, inspite of or
significant differences also exist.
contrary to his volition.

b. That crime is essentially a social and


natural phenomenon, and as such, it
cannot be treated and checked by the
application of abstract principles of law

7
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

and jurisprudence nor by the imposition of 3. That the act is performed by means of dolo or the
a punishment which is fixed and omission incurred by means of culpa.
determined a priori; but rather through
the enforcement of individual measures in Definition of terms
each particular case after a thorough, ACT must be overt or external (mere
personal and individual investigation criminal thought or intent is not punishable)
conducted by a competent body of
psychiatrists and social scientists. Actus Reus/Physical Act
To be considered as a felony, there must
Art. 2. Application of its provisions. Except as be an act or omission;
provided in the treaties and laws of preferential An act refers to any kind of body
application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced movement that produces change in
not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its the outside world.
atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but A mere imagination, no matter how
also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who: wrong, does not amount to a felony.
1. Should commit an offense while on a
Philippine ship or airship OMISSION failure to perform a duty
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or required by law ex. Failure to render
currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and assistance, failure to issue receipt, non-
securities issued by the Government of the Philippine disclosure of knowledge of conspiracy against
Islands; the government.
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
introduction into these islands of the obligations and A. HOW
securities mentioned in the presiding number; COMMITTED
4. While being public officers or employees,
should commit an offense in the exercise of their Classification of felonies according to the means by
functions; or which they are committed (IN GENERAL ONLY)
5. Should commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law of nations, defined in Title 1. Dolo;
One of Book Two of this Code. 2. Culpa.

1. DOLO

II. FELONIES Requisites of dolo or malice


1. freedom that the act or omission was
voluntary and without external
Art. 3. Definitions. Acts and omissions punishable
compulsion.
by law are felonies (delitos).
2. intelligence knowledge needed to
Felonies are committed not only be means of
determine the morality and consequences
deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).
of an act. The imbecile, insane and minors
There is deceit when the act is performed with
have no criminal liability.
deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful
3. intent intent to commit the act with
act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of
malice, being purely a mental process, is
foresight, or lack of skill.
presumed and the presumption arises
from the proof of the commission of the
Felonies are acts and omissions punishable by the unlawful act (Reyes, pp. 38-39).
Revised Penal Code.
The offender in performing the act or incurring
Felony v. Offense the omission, has the intention to cause an
Felony Offense injury to another
The term felony is limited A crime punished under a
only to violations of the special law is called a The word deceit in par. 2 of Art. 3 is not the
Revised Penal Code. statutory offense proper translation of the word dolo. Dolus is
actually equivalent to malice which is the
intent to do an injury to another (Reyes, p.
Misdemeanor v. Crime 35).
Misdemeanor Crime
A misdemeanor is minor Whether the wrongdoing Intent presupposes the exercise of freedom
infraction of the law, such is punished under the and the use of intelligence (Reyes, supra.).
as a violation of an Revised Penal Code or
ordinance under a special law, the The existence of intent is shown by the overt
generic word crime can acts of a person (Reyes, supra.).
be used.
Criminal intent is presumed from the
Elements of Felonies commission of an unlawful act BUT the
1. There must be an act or omission; presumption of criminal intent does not arise
2. That the act or omission must be punishable by from the proof of the commission of an act
the RPC; and which is not unlawful.

8
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Facts: The accused, an illiterate, 15-year-old


Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea pushcart cargador, was convicted of the crime of murder
the act itself does not make a man guilty for the death of Ramon. The lone eyewitness claimed he
unless his intention were so saw the accused stab Ramon only once at the back. He
A crime is not committed if the mind of identified the accused alone at the funeral parlor without
the person performing the act complained of be being placed in a police line-up.
innocent. Held: The testimony of witness was weak. It
It must be borne in mind that the act from conflicted with the findings of the medico-legal officer
which the presumption of existence of criminal who identified 2 stab wounds which were inflicted while
intent springs must be a criminal act. assailant was in front of the victim. The manner by
which the witness was made to identify the accused was
Actus me invito factus non est meus actus pointedly suggestive and activated visual imagination
an act done by me against my will is not my when there was none. The method of identification
act (U.S. v. Ah Chong, 15 Phil. 499) became just a confrontation and was made in violation
of the constitutional right of the accused.
Presumption of Criminal Intent The court noted the total absence of motive
Criminal intent is presumed from the commission of an ascribed to the accused for stabbing Ramon who is a
unlawful act BUT the presumption of criminal intent does complete stranger to him. While as a general rule,
not arise from the proof of the commission of an act motive is not essential for purposes of complying with
which is not unlawful (Reyes, supra.). the requirement that a judgment of guilty must stem
from proof beyond reasonable doubt, the lack of motive
INTENT V. MOTIVE on the part of the accused plays a pivotal role towards
his acquittal. This is especially true where there is doubt
INTENT is the purpose to use a particular as to the identity of the culprit as when the identification
means to effect such result. is extremely tenuous as in this case.

There is no felony by dolo if there is no intent. People v. Delos Santos


403 SCRA 153 (2003)
MOTIVE is the moving power which impels Facts: Delos Santos stabbed Flores with a
one to action for a define result. kitchen knife hitting him on the different parts of his
body, inflicting upon him mortal wounds which directly
Motive is not an essential element of a crime, caused his death. Delos Santos then argues that since
and, hence need not be proved for purposes of the prosecution witnesses testified that there was no
conviction. (People v. Aposaga, G.R. No. L- altercation between him and Flores, it follows that no
32477, 30 October 1981). motive to kill can be attributed to him.
Held: The court held that the argument of
Motive is essential only when there is doubt as Delos Santos is inconsequential. Proof of motive is not
to the identity of the assailant. It is immaterial indispensable for a conviction, particularly where the
when the accused has been positively accused is positively identified by an eyewitness and his
identified. (People v. Gadiana, G.R. No. 92509, participation is adequately established. In People vs.
13 March 1991). Galano, the court ruled that in the crime of murder,
motive is not an element of the offense. It becomes
Proof of motive alone is not sufficient to material only when the evidence is circumstantial or
support a conviction but lack of motive may be inconclusive and there is some doubt on whether the
an aid in showing the innocence of the accused had committed it. In this case, the court finds
accused. (People v. Corput, 107 Phil 44, 49) that no such doubt exist as witnesses De Leon and
Tablate positively identified Delos Santos.
People v. Temblor
161 SCRA 623 (1988) MISTAKE OF FACT
Facts: Cagampang and his wife were It is a misapprehension of fact on the part of
conversing in the store adjacent to their house when the person who caused injury to another. He is not,
Temblor arrived and asked to buy cigarettes. Temblor however, criminally liable, because he did not act with
then shot Cagampang and demanded the wife to bring criminal intent. (Reyes, p. 42).
out her husbands firearm. Months after, the wife was
summoned to the police station and there she identified Requisites:
the accused. The accuseds defense was alibi and lack of 1. That the act done would have been lawful
motive. had the facts been as the accused
Held: The knowledge of the accused that believed them to be.
Cagampang possessed a firearm was enough motive to 2. That the intention of the accused in
kill him as killings were perpetrated by members of the performing the act should be lawful
NPA for the sole purpose of acquiring more arms and 3. That the mistake must be without fault or
ammunition. Their group is prevalent not only in Agusan carelessness on the part of the accused.
del Norte but elsewhere in the country. It is known as (Reyes, p. 43).
the NPAs agaw armas campaign. Moreover, proof of
motive is not essential when the culprit has been
positively identified. US v. Ah Chong
15 Phil 488 (1910)
People v. Hassan A houseboy who stabs his roommate in the
157 SCRA 261 (1988) dark, honestly mistaking the latter to be a robber
responsible for a series of break-ins in the area, and

9
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

after crying out sufficient warnings and believing himself through reckless imprudence was filed. Accused claimed
to be under attack, cannot be held criminally liable for that he was placed in twice in jeopardy.
homicide. Stabbing the victim whom the accused Held: The second case must be dismissed.
believed to be an intruder showed a mistake of fact on Once convicted or acquitted of a specific act of reckless
his part which led him to take the facts as they appear imprudence, the accused may not be prosecuted again
to him and was pressed to take immediate action. for the same act. For the essence of the quasi-offense
under Art. 365 of the RPC lies in the execution of an
People v. Oanis imprudent act which would be punishable as a felony.
74 Phil 257 (1988) The law penalizes the negligent act and not the result.
Police officers who shot a sleeping man in the The gravity of the consequences is only taken into
back mistaking him for a notorious escaped convict account to determine the penalty. It does not qualify the
wanted dead or alive, could still be held liable for the substance of the offense.
killing since they did not take reasonable precautionary
measures. Police officers are still liable because they are People vs. Pugay
not justified in killing a man whose identity they did not 167 SCRA 439
ascertain. The third requisite of mistake of fact is Facts: Miranda and the accused Pugay are
lacking. In this case, self-defense is not tenable as a friends. On the evening of May 19, 1982 a town fiesta
defense as there was no unlawful aggression but they was held in the public plaza of Rosario Cavite. Sometime
may avail of the defense of fulfillment of duty as a after midnight accused Pugay and Samson with several
mitigating circumstance. companions arrived (they were drunk), and they started
making fun of Bayani Miranda. Pugay after making fun
Criminal intent is replaced by negligence and of the Bayani, took a can of gasoline and poured its
imprudence in felonies committed by means of contents on the latter, Gabion (principal witness) told
culpa. Pugay not to do the deed. Then Samson set Miranda on
fire making a human torch out of him. They were
2. CULPA arrested the same night and barely a few hours after the
incident gave their written statements.
RPC, Art. 365 par. 7 Held: Having taken the can from under the
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, engine of the ferris wheel and holding it before pouring
but without malice, doing or failing to do an act from its contents on the body of the deceased, this accused
which material damage results by reason of inexcusable knew that the can contained gasoline. The stinging smell
lack of precaution on the part of the person performing of this flammable liquid could not have escaped his
or failing to perform such act, taking into consideration notice even before pouring the same. Clearly, he failed
his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence to exercise all the diligence necessary to avoid every
physical condition and other circumstances regarding undesirable consequence arising from any act that may
persons, time and place. be committed by his companions who at the time were
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of making fun of the deceased. Thus, he is guilty of
precaution displayed in those cases in which the damage homicide through reckless imprudence.
impending to be the cause is not immediate nor the
danger clearly manifest. B. CRIMES
DEFINED AND PENALIZED BY SPECIAL
Requisites of culpa: LAWS
1. freedom
2. intelligence
There are 3 classes of crimes. The RPC defines and
3. imprudence, negligence or lack of
penalizes the first two classes: 1) intentional and 2)
foresight and lack of skill
culpable felonies.
In culpable felonies, the injury caused to another
The third class of crimes is those defined and penalized
should be unintentional, it being simply the incident
by special laws which include crimes punished by
of another act performed without malice. (Reyes, p.
municipal or city ordinances.
49).
The provisions of this Code are not applicable
an act performed without malice but at the same
to offenses punished by special laws especially
time punishable though in a lesser degree and with
those relating to the requisite of criminal
an equal result
intent; the stages of commission; and the
application of penalties.
imprudence - lack of precaution to avoid
However, when the special law is silent, the
injury, usually involves lack of skill
Code can be given suppletory effect.
negligence - failure to foresee impending
Dolo is not required in crimes punished by
danger, usually involves lack of foresight
special laws because these crimes are mala
prohibita.
People v. Buan
In those crimes punished by special laws, the
22 SCRA 1383 (1968)
act alone irrespective of its motives,
Facts: The accused was driving a passenger
constitutes the offense.
bus. Allegedly because of his recklessness, the bus
Good faith and absence of criminal intent are
collided with a jeep injuring the passengers of the latter.
not valid defenses in crimes punished by
A case was filed against the accused for slight physical
special laws
injuries through reckless imprudence for which he was
tried and acquitted. Prior to his acquittal, a case for
1. MALA IN SE and MALA PROHIBITA
serious physical injuries and damage to property

10
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Mala in se - an act, by its very nature, is 269 SCRA 402 (1997)


inherently and morally wrong; it should be done with Facts: Padilla, driving his Pajero at high speed
criminal intent. despite the bad weather, hit a balot vendor. A chase
Malum prohibitum an act is wrong only took place and eventually, Padillas vehicle was stopped.
because there is a law punishing it. It is enough that the He was arrested and several firearms were found inside
prohibited act was voluntarily committed and need not his vehicle. He admitted possession claiming he used
be committed with malice or criminal intent to be them for shooting but was not able to produce any
punishable. permit to carry.
Held: Pd 1886 provides only 2 requisites to
Note, however, that not all violations of special establish crimes involving illegal possession of firearm:
laws are mala prohibita. While intentional (1) existence of subject firearm and (2) the fact that the
felonies are always mala in se, it does not accused who owned or possessed the firearm does not
follow that prohibited acts done in violation of have the corresponding permit to possess.
special laws are always mala prohibita. Even if Either the testimony of a representative of or a
the crime is punished under a special law, if certification from the PNP Firearms and explosives office
the act punished is one which is inherently would suffice to prove beyond reasonable doubt the
wrong, the same is malum in se, and second element of illegal possession.
therefore, good faith and the lack of criminal PD 1866 is constitutional. To justify
intent is a valid defense; unless it is the nullification, there must be a clear breach of the
product of criminal negligence or culpa constitution. The contention that the penalty of simple
(Arsenia Garcia v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. illegal possession is cruel and excessive in contravention
No.157161, 14 March 2006). of the constitution does not merit serious consideration.
The severity of a penalty does not ipso facto make the
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan same cruel and excessive.
369 SCRA 394 (2001) The court cited People v. Simon doctrine as to
Facts: Estrada is challenging the plunder law. the penalties to be imposed although PD 1866 is a
One of the issues he raised is whether plunder is a special law, the penalties therein were taken from the
malum prohibitum or malum in se. RPC, hence, the rules in the said code for graduating by
Held: Plunder is a malum in se which requires degrees or determining the proper period should be
proof of criminal of criminal intent. Precisely because the applied.
constitutive crimes are mala in se the element of mens
rea must be proven in a prosecution for plunder. It is People v. Saley
noteworthy that the amended information alleges that 291 SCRA 715 (1998)
the crime of plunder was committed willfully, unlawfully Facts: Saley was convicted of 16 cases of
and criminally. It thus alleges guilty knowledge on the illegal recruitment, one of which was on the large scale.
part of the petitioner. She was also convicted of 11 counts of estafa. She
claims that she was not engaged in recruitment but is
2. RELATION OF RPC TO SPECIAL LAWS merely acting as an agent. She also claimed that she
was merely aiding the processing of the complainants
Art. 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this visas.
Code. Offenses which are or in the future may be Held: Saley is guilty of illegal recruitment and
punishable under special laws are not subject to the estafa. She has no valid license or authority to engage in
provisions of this Code. This Code shall be placement of workers. There is no double jeopardy in
supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should this case. Conviction under the Labor Code for illegal
specially provide the contrary. recruitment is malum prohibita while estafa under the
RPC is malum in se.
Padilla v. Dizon
158 SCRA 127 (1988) People v. Simon
Facts: Padilla filed an administrative complaint 234 SCRA 555 (1994)
against RTC Judge Dizon for rendering a manifestly Facts: The accused was arrested after a buy-
erroneous decision acquitting Lo Chi Fai of the offense bust operation conducted by the police wherein the
charged for smuggling foreign currency out of the accused sold 2 tea-bags of marijuana to a poseur buyer
country in violation of Central Bank Circular No. 960. for P40.
The Circular prohibits transmission of foreign currency Held: To sustain a conviction for selling
out of the Philippines without authorization from the prohibited drugs under the Dangerous Drugs Act of
Central Bank. Penal sanction for such violation is 1972, the sale must be clearly established. The
provided in PD No. 1883. Judge Dizon then acquitted commission of the offense of illegal sale of prohibited
accused because of lack of intent to violate and benefit drugs requires merely the consummation of the selling
from the act alone. transaction.
Held: Judge showed gross ignorance of the The court held that in the instant case the
law. He ought to know that proof of malice or mens rea imposable penalty under RA 6425 as amended by RA
is not essential in offense punished by special laws 7659 is prison correccional to be taken from the medium
which are mala prohibita. The judge did not take into period thereof pursuant to Art. 64 of the RPC, there
consideration the admission of the accused that he was being no aggravating and mitigating circumstance.
a carrier of foreign currency for other people but chose Dissent: It is thus clear that an offense is
to give credence to the fantastic tale of the accused that punished by the RPC if both its definition and the
he and his alleged business associate were using the penalty therefore are found in the special law. That the
money for a particular investment. latter imports or borrows from the RPC its nomenclature
of penalties. In short, the mere use by a special law of a
Padilla v. CA penalty found in the RPC can by no means make an

11
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

offense thereunder an offense punished or punishable Bustinera was sentenced to an indeterminate


by the RPC. penalty of 14 years and 8 months as minimum, to 17
years and 4 months, as maximum for the crime of
Ladonga v People carnapping under RA 6539, as amended.
451 SCRA 673 (2005) C. PUNISHABLE CONDUCT
Facts: Spouses Ladonga were convicted by the
RTC for violation of BP. Blg. 22 (3 counts). The husband Art. 4. Criminal liability. Criminal liability shall be
applied for probation while the wife appealed arguing incurred:
that the RTC erred in finding her criminally liable for 1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although
conspiring with her husband as the principle of the wrongful act done be different from that which he
conspiracy is inapplicable to BP Blg. 22 which is a special intended.
law. 2. By any person performing an act which would be an
Held: B.P. Blg. 22 does not expressly prescribe offense against persons or property, were it not for the
the suppletory application of the provisions of the RPC. inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an
Thus, in the absence of contrary provision in B.P. Blg. account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual
22, the general provisions of the RPC which, by their means.
nature, are necessarily applicable, may be applied
suppletorily. The court cited the case of Yu vs. People,
1. WRONGFUL ACT DIFFERENT FROM THAT
where the provision on subsidiary imprisonment under
INTENDED
Article 39 of the RPC to B.P. Blg. 22 was applied
suppletorily.
One who commits an intentional felony is
The suppletory application of the principle of
responsible for all the consequences which may naturally
conspiracy in this case is analogous to the application of
and logically result therefrom, whether foreseen or
the provision on principals under Article 17 in U.S. vs.
intended or not.
Ponte. For once conspiracy or action in concert to
Rationale: el que es causa de la causa es
achieve a criminal design is shown, the act of one is the
causa del mal causado
act of all the conspirators, and the precise extent or
He who is the cause of the cause is the cause
modality of participation of each of them becomes
of the evil caused
secondary, since all the conspirators are principals.
When a person has not committed a felony,
The Court in this case however ruled in favor of
he is not criminally liable for the result which is not
Ladonga(wife) as the prosecution failed to prove that
intended.
she performed any overt act in furtherance of the
alleged conspiracy.
The felony committed must be the proximate
cause of the resulting injury.
People v. Bustinera
431 SCRA 284 (2004)
PROXIMATE CAUSE the cause, which, in
Facts: Bustinera was convicted by the trial
the natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any
Court for qualified theft under Article 310 of the Revised
efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and
Penal Code for the unlawful taking of the taxi cab driven
without which the result would not have occurred.
by him which is owned and operated by Cipriano and
was sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion
When death is presumed to be the natural
perpetua.
consequence of physical injuries inflicted:
Held: The unlawful taking of motor vehicles is
1. That the victim at the time the physical injuries
now covered by the anti-carnapping law (RA No. 6539)
were inflicted was in normal health.
and not by the provisions on qualified theft or robbery.
2. That the death may be expected from the
The trial court having convicted Bustinera of qualified
physical injuries inflicted.
theft instead of carnapping, erred in the imposition of
3. That death ensued within a reasonable time.
the penalty. While the information alleges that the crime
was attended with grave abuse of confidence, the same
The felony committed is not the proximate cause of the
cannot be appreciated as the suppletory effect of the
resulting injury when:
Revised Penal Code to special laws, as provided in
a. There is an active force that intervened
Article 10 of said Code, cannot be invoked when there is
between the felony committed and the resulting injury,
a legal impossibility of application, either by express
and the active force is a distinct act or fact absolutely
provision or by necessary implication.
foreign from the felonious act of the accused; or
Moreover, when the penalties under the special
b. The resulting injury is due to the intentional
law are different from and are without reference or
act of the victim.
relation to those under the Revised Penal Code, there
can be no suppletory effect of the rules, for the
The causes which may produce a result different from
application of penalties under the said Code or by other
that which the offender intended are:
relevant statutory provisions are based on or applicable
a. ERROR IN PERSONAE mistake in the
only to said rules for felonies under the Code.
identity of the victim; injuring one person
The court cited the case of People v. Panida
mistaken for another (this is a complex crime
which involved the crime of carnapping and the penalty
under Art. 49)
imposed was the indeterminate sentence of 14 years
b. ABERRATIO ICTUS mistake in the blow,
and 8 months, as minimum, to 17 years and 4 months,
that is, when the offender intending to do an
as maximum, this Court did not apply the provisions of
injury to one person actually inflicts it on
the Revised Penal Code suppletorily as the anti-
another; and
carnapping law provides for its own penalties which are
c. PRAETER INTENTIONEM the act exceeds
distinct and without reference to the said Code.
the intent, that is, the injurious result is
greater than that intended.

12
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Art. 234. Refusal to discharge elective office.


The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding
1,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person
People v. Sabalones who, having been elected by popular election to a public
294 SCRA 751 (1988) office, shall refuse without legal motive to be sworn in or
Facts: Two vehicles proceeded to the house of to discharge the duties of said office.
Stephen Lim when Sabalones et. al. fired towards the
vehicles killing 2 of the passengers and seriously injuring
Art. 275. Abandonment of person in danger and
3 others. The lower court convicted the accused.
abandonment of ones own victim. The penalty of
Appellants accuse the trial court of engaging in
arresto mayor shall be imposed upon:
conjecture in ruling that there was aberratio ictus in this
1. Any one who shall fail to render assistance to any
case.
person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place
Held: The allegation does not advance the
wounded or in danger of dying, when he can render
cause of the appellants. It must be stressed that the
such assistance without detriment to himself, unless
trial court relied on the concept of aberratio ictus to
such omission shall constitute a more serious offense.
explain why the appellants staged the ambush, not to
2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance
prove that appellants did in fact commit the crimes. In
to another whom he has accidentally wounded or
any event, the lower court was not engaging in
injured.
conjecture because the conclusion that the appellants
3. Anyone who, having found an abandoned child
killed the wrong persons was based on the extrajudicial
under seven years of age, shall fail to deliver said child
statement of appellant Beronga and the testimony of
to the authorities or to his family, or shall fail to take
one witness. Nonetheless, the fact that they were
him to a safe place.
mistaken does not diminish their culpability. Mistake in
the identity of the victim carries the same gravity as
when the accused zeroes in on his intended victim. It is the failure to perform a duty required by
law.
2. OMISSION It is important that there is a law requiring the
performance of an act. If there is no positive
duty, there is no liability
Art. 116. Misprision of treason. Every person
Examples: failure to render assistance, failure to
owing allegiance to (the United States) the Government
issue receipt or non-disclosure of knowledge of
of the Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner, and
conspiracy against the government.
having knowledge of any conspiracy against them,
conceals or does not disclose and make known the
3. PROPOSAL AND CONSPIRACY
same, as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of
the province, or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which
he resides, as the case may be, shall be punished as an Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony.
accessory to the crime of treason. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
punishable only in the cases in which the law specially
provides a penalty therefore.
Art. 137. Disloyalty of public officers or A conspiracy exists when two or more persons
employees. The penalty of prision correccional in its come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
minimum period shall be imposed upon public officers or felony and decide to commit it.
employees who have failed to resist a rebellion by all the There is proposal when the person who has
means in their power, or shall continue to discharge the decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to
duties of their offices under the control of the rebels or some other person or persons.
shall accept appointment to office under them.

Art. 115. Conspiracy and proposal to commit


Art. 208. Prosecution of offenses; negligence and treason; Penalty. The conspiracy or proposal to
tolerance. The penalty of prision correccional in its commit the crime of treason shall be punished
minimum period and suspension shall be imposed upon respectively, by prision mayor and a fine not exceeding
any public officer, or officer of the law, who, in P10,000 pesos, and prision correccional and a fine not
dereliction of the duties of his office, shall maliciously exceeding P5,000 pesos.
refrain from instituting prosecution for the punishment
of violators of the law, or shall tolerate the commission
of offenses. Art. 136. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup
detat, rebellion or insurrection. The conspiracy
and proposal to commit coup detat shall be punished by
Art. 223. Conniving with or consenting to evasion. prision mayor in minimum period and a fine which shall
Any public officer who shall consent to the escape of a not exceed eight thousand pesos (P8,000.00).
prisoner in his custody or charge, shall be punished:
1. By prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods and temporary special disqualification
in its maximum period to perpetual special
disqualification, if the fugitive shall have been sentenced Art. 141. Conspiracy to commit sedition. Persons
by final judgment to any penalty. conspiring to commit the crime of sedition shall be
2. By prision correccional in its minimum punished by prision correccional in its medium period
period and temporary special disqualification, in case the and a fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos
fugitive shall not have been finally convicted but only
held as a detention prisoner for any crime or violation of Art. 186. Monopolies and combinations in restraint
law or municipal ordinance. of trade. The penalty of prision correccional in its

13
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000 a. That two or more persons came to an
pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon: agreement:
1. Any person who shall enter into any contract - Agreement presupposes meeting of the
or agreement or shall take part in any conspiracy or minds of two or more persons.
combination in the form of a trust or otherwise, in b. That the agreement concerned the
restraint of trade or commerce or to prevent by artificial commission of a felony; and
means free competition in the market; - The agreement must refer to the commission
of a crime. It must be an agreement to act, to
effect, to bring about what has already been
Art. 306. Who are brigands; Penalty. When more
conceived and determined.
than three armed persons form a band of robbers for the
c. That the execution of the felony be
purpose of committing robbery in the highway, or
decided upon.
kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or to
- The conspirators have made up their minds
obtain ransom or for any other purpose to be attained
to commit the crime. There must be a
by means of force and violence, they shall be deemed
determination to commit the crime of
highway robbers or brigands.
treason, rebellion or sedition.
Persons found guilty of this offense shall be
punished by prision mayor in its medium period to
reclusion temporal in its minimum period if the act or PROPOSAL
acts committed by them are not punishable by higher
penalties, in which case, they shall suffer such high Requisites:
penalties. a. That a person has decided to commit a
If any of the arms carried by any of said felony; and
persons be an unlicensed firearm, it shall be presumed b. That he proposes its execution to some
that said persons are highway robbers or brigands, and other person or persons.
in case of convictions the penalty shall be imposed in
the maximum period. There is no criminal proposal when:
a. The person who proposes is not
determined to commit the felony.
Art. 340. Corruption of minors. Any person who
b. There is no decided, concrete and formal
shall promote or facilitate the prostitution or corruption
proposal.
of persons underage to satisfy the lust of another, shall
c. It is not the execution of a felony that is
be punished by prision mayor, and if the culprit is a
proposed. (Reyes, p. 128):
pubic officer or employee, including those in
government-owned or controlled corporations, he shall
It is not necessary that the person to whom the
also suffer the penalty of temporary absolute
proposal is made agrees to commit treason or rebellion.
disqualification.
Conspiracy and proposal is punishable in the
Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony are two following cases:
different acts or felonies: (1) conspiracy to commit a Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason;
felony, and (2) proposal to commit a felony. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup
d'etat, rebellion or insurrection;
GENERAL RULE: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a Conspiracy to commit sedition;
felony are not punishable Conspiracy or combination in restraint of
EXCEPTION: They are punishable only in the cases in trade;
which the law specially provides a penalty therefore. Conspiracy to commit arson;
RATIONALE: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a Conspiracy to commit terrorism; and
crime are only preparatory acts and the law regards
Conspiracy to commit importation, sale,
them as innocent or at least permissible except in rare
trading, administration, dispensation, delivery,
and exceptional cases.
distribution, transportation, manufacture,
cultivation of dangerous drugs and
CONSPIRACY maintenance of a den, dive or resort where
- exists when two or more persons come to an any dangerous drug is used in any form.
agreement concerning the commission of a felony and
decide to commit it. US v. Bautista
6 Phil 581 (1906)
The RPC specially provides a penalty for mere Facts: Appellants Bautista, Puzon and De
conspiracy in treason, coup detat, rebellion or sedition. Guzman were convicted in the Court of First Instance
Treason, coup detat, rebellion or sedition must not of Manila of the crime of conspiracy to overthrow, put
actually be committed or else conspiracy shall no longer down, and destroy by force the Government of the
be punishable because it is not a separate offense from United States in the Philippine Islands and the
the felony itself. Government of the Philippine Islands, as defined and
penalized in section 4 of Act No. 292 of the Philippine
INDICATIONS OF CONSPIRACY Commission.
- for a collective responsibility among the Held: Only Bautista and Puzon are guilty of
accused to be established, it is sufficient that at the time conspiracy. In this case, evidence on record shows that
of the aggression, all of them acted in concert, each Bautista was fully aware of the purposes of the
doing his part to fulfill their common design to commit meetings he participated in, and even gave an
the felony. (Reyes, p. 124). assurance to the chief of the military forces that he is
making the necessary preparations. On the other hand,
REQUISITES OF CONSPIRACY Puzon voluntarily accepted his appointment and in

14
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

doing so, assumed all the obligations implied by such Bello lead to no other conclusion than that she conspired
acceptance. These are considered evidence of the with her co-accused to commit the crime.
criminal connection of the accused. Conspiracy exists where the plotters agree,
De Guzman, on the other hand, is not guilty expressly or impliedly, to commit the crime and decide
of conspiracy. While he might have been helping the to pursue it. Conspiracy is predominantly a state of mind
conspirators by accepting bonds in bundles, he was not as it involves the meeting of the minds and intent of the
aware of the contents nor did he assume any obligation malefactors. Consequently, direct proof is not essential
with respect to these bonds. to establish it. The existence of the assent of minds of
the co-conspirators may be inferred from proof of facts
People v. Fabro and circumstances which, taken together, indicate that
325 SCRA 285 (2000) they are parts of the complete plan to commit the crime.
Facts: Petitioner Fabro together with her
common-law husband Pilay and Irene Martin was Li v. People
charged with the crime of "violation of Section 21 (b) 427 SCRA 217 (2001)
Art. IV, in relation to Section 4, Art. II of Republic Act Facts: Because of an altercation between
No. 6425 as amended, for selling to PO2 Apduhan, who Arugay and Li, the latter armed himself with a baseball
acted as poseur buyer, one kilo of dried marijuana bat and used the same to hit Arugay on the arm. Arugay
leaves. Fabro contends that her guilt was not proven armed with a bolo, retaliated by hacking Li on the head
beyond reasonable doubt as based on the testimony of causing the bat to fall from his hand and leaving him
the NBI, the real possessor of the confiscated properties unconscious or semi-unconsious. At this point in time,
was her co-accused Martin. Sangalang, who was also present stabbed Arugay
Held: Fabros contention that Martin was the several times which resulted to the latters death. The
real curlprit being the source of the contraband does not lower court held that there was conspiracy in the
in any way absolve her of the crime of selling marijuana. present case
While it is true that it was Martin who took the money, it Held: The existence of conspiracy should be
was Fabro who negotiated with the poseur buyers, ruled out. Sangalang was the main actor in stabbing
fetched her co-accused; and carried and handed over Arugay to death. As Li was incapacitated or probably
the marijuana to Apduhan. The acts of Martin and Fabro unconscious at the time Sangalang stabbed Arugay, it
clearly show a unity of purpose in the consummation of cannot be assumed that Sangalang did what he has
the sale of marijuana. done with the knowledge or assent of Li, much more in
It is clear that Section 21 (b) of R.A. 6425 coordination with each other. Based on the
punishes the mere conspiracy to commit the offense of circumstances, the Court is hard put to conclude that
selling, delivering, distributing and transporting of Sangalang and Li had acted in concert to commit the
dangerous drugs. Conspiracy herein refers to the mere offense. In fact, the stabbing of Arugay could very well
agreement to commit the said acts and not the actual be construed as a spur-of-the-moment reaction by
execution thereof. While the rule is that a mere Sangalang upon seeing that his friend Li was struck on
conspiracy to commit a crime without doing any overt the head by Arugay. From such a spontaneous reaction,
act is not punishable, the exception is when such is a finding of conspiracy cannot arise.
specifically penalized by law, as in the case of Section 21 Proving conspiracy is a dicey matter, especially
of Republic Act 6425. Conspiracy as crime should be difficult in cases such as the present wherein the
distinguished from conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal acts arose spontaneously, as opposed to
criminal liability the latter being applicable to the case. instances wherein the participants would have the
opportunity to orchestrate a more deliberate plan.
People v. Bello Spontaneity alone does not preclude the establishment
428 SCRA 388 (2004) of conspiracy, which after all, can be consummated in a
Facts: Accused Bello et. al. mapped out a plan moments notice through a single word of assent to a
to rob a moneychanger. Calling the moneychanger from proposal or an unambiguous handshake. Yet it is more
a motel room, Bello misrepresented that she came from difficult to presume conspiracy in extemporaneous
Japan and would like to convert her 40 pieces of yen to outbursts of violence; hence, the demand that it be
pesos. She requested that the currency conversion be established by positive evidence. A conviction premised
made in her room as she did not want to carry around a on a finding of conspiracy must be founded on facts, not
huge sum of money. During the occasion of the robbery, on mere inferences and presumption.
Andasan, the messenger who brought the money to
Bello was killed. The trial court ruled that Bello conspired People v. Bagano
with the other accused and was found guilty as principal 375 SCRA 470 (2002)
for the crime of robbery with homicide. Facts: Jeremias and his wife Merlinda were
Bello, argued that her alleged conspiracy with sleeping in their home when they were awakened by
the other accused was not sufficiently established by someone repeatedly calling Jeremias' name. Jeremias
circumstantial evidence as there was no showing that went to the window to see who it was and thereafter left
she had the same purpose and united with the other their room to go outside. Merlinda remained in their
accused in the execution of the crime. She alleged that room, but peering through the window, she saw Caete
her mere presence in the crime scene is not per se a suddenly embrace Jeremias as the latter was opening
sufficient indicium of conspiracy. She insists that she the gate. Thereupon, Bagano with ice pick in hand
acted against her will due to the irresistible force stabbed Jeremias on the chest. Jeremias struggled to
employed by her co-accused. free himself from Caete's clasp and ran, but Bagano
Held: The Court held that Bello conspired with gave chase. Jeremias died upon arrival at the hospital.
her co-accused to commit the crime. Records clearly Held: Conspiracy is attendant in the commission of the
reveal that Bello was part of the plan to rob the crime. For conspiracy to exist, it is sufficient that at the
moneychanger. The chain of events and the conduct of time of the commission of the offense the accused had
the same purpose and were united in its execution.

15
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Proof of an actual planning of the perpetuation of the and cooperated with each other in killing Lomida.
crime is not a condition precedent. From the mode and Appellant was the one who opened the door and allowed
manner in which the offense was perpetrated, and as the other accused to enter the house. She joined them
can be inferred from their acts, it is evident that Bagano in bringing the victim to the residence of Ramos, her
and Caete were one in their intention to kill Jeremias. brother-in-law. While her co-accused dragged the
Hence, in accordance with the principle that in helpless victim, tied him to a santol tree, stabbed him
conspiracy the act of one is the act of all, the fact that it twice by a bladed knife, and shot him 5 to 7 times,
was Bagano who delivered the fatal blow on Jeremias appellant merely watched intensely. She even turned
and Caete's participation was limited to a mere her back as the lifeless body of the victim was being
embrace is immaterial. Conspiracy bestows upon them burned. And after attaining their purpose, she fled with
equal liability; hence, they shall suffer the same fate for the other accused.
their acts. The above circumstances clearly show the
common purpose and concerted efforts on the part of
People v. Bangcado appellant and her co-accused.
346 SCRA 189 (2000)
Facts: SPO1 Bangcado together with SPO1 People v. Amar
Banisa frisked and searched Cogasi, Clemente, Adawan G.R. No. 194235 (2016)
and Lino to see if they were concealing any weapons. Each of the accused-appellants had intentional,
After making sure that the victims were unarmed, direct, and substantial participation in the victims
Bangcado directed the victims to form a line against a kidnapping for ransom. The victim's abduction, his
Ford Fierra. Because Bangcado and Banisa were holding being taken to and held up in a house in Ilocos Norte
handguns, Cogasi and his friends did as they were told under guard, the ransom demand and negotiation, and
and were caught unaware when they were shot by finally, the ransom payout, which all happened in a span
Bangcado. Adawan and Lino died of gunshot wounds in of six (6) days, clearly took planning and coordination
the head, while Cogasi and Clemente sustained head among accused-appellants. Accused-appellant Efren
wounds. The lower court convicted both Bangcado and Gascon (Gascon), in particular, was among the four
Banisa for 2 counts of murder and 2 counts of frustrated (4) men who abducted the victim in Meycauayan,
murder. Bulacan on October 8, 2002, and kept guard over the
Held: There being no finding of Conspiracy victim for six (6) days in Dingras, Ilocos Norte. In view
with Bangcado, the Court acquitted Banisa of all the thereof, accused-appellant Gascon could not be a mere
charges against him. In the absence of any previous accomplice as his presence at the scene/s of the crime
plan or agreement to commit a crime, the criminal was definitely more than just to give moral support; his
responsibility arising from different acts directed against presence and company were indispensable and essential
one and the same person is individual and not collective, to the perpetration of the kidnapping for ransom. Thus,
and that each of the participants is liable only for his all the accused-appellants, as co-conspirators, were
own acts. Consequently, Banisa must be absolved from found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
criminal responsibility for the assault on the victims. It is kidnapping for ransom.
clear that neither the victims nor Banisa could have
anticipated Bangcado's act of shooting the victims since People v. Olazo
the attack was sudden and without any reason or G.R. No. 220761 (2016)
purpose. Thus, the criminal design of Bangcado had not Facts: An Information was filed with the RTC
yet been revealed prior to the killings. against Eddie Olazo, Miguel and Charito, together with
Rogelio, Joseph, Dionesia, Rommel and Eddie with the
People v. Ramos crime of Robbery with Homicide. The RTC convicted
427 SCRA 299 (2004) Charito, together with Rogelio, Eddie Olazo and Miguel.
Facts: The trial court found appellant Eulalia Aggrieved Charito appealed before the CA, along with
San Roque guilty for conspiring and confederating with Eddie Olazo and Miguel. The CA affirmed the decision of
her co-accused for the murder of her live-in-partner the RTC insofar as the conviction of Charito. Charito
Lomida. Lomida was stabbed, shot and burned resulting then filed an Appeal with the Supreme Court claiming
to his death. Appellant argues that the fact of such that the prosecution was unable to prove his guilt
conspiracy has not been satisfactorily proven during the beyond reasonable doubt since his participation in the
trial of the case. She vigorously contends that she did planning stages of the crime was insufficient to sustain
not participate in the killing of the victim. his conviction and the finding of conspiracy between him
Held: In determining the existence of and his co-accused.
conspiracy, it is not necessary to show that all the Held: There is conspiracy when two or more
conspirators actually hit and killed the victim. The persons come to an agreement concerning the
presence of conspiracy among the accused can be commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
proven by their conduct before, during or after the Conspiracy is present when one concurs with the
commission of the crime showing that they acted in criminal design of another, indicated by the performance
unison with each other, evincing a common purpose or of an overt act which produces the crime. In proving
design. There must be a showing that appellant conspiracy, direct evidence is not indispensable as its
cooperated in the commission of the offense, either existence may be inferred from the conduct of the
morally, through advice, encouragement or agreement accused before, during, and after the commission of the
or materially through external acts indicating a manifest crime. In this, Joseph positively identified Charito and
intent of supplying aid in the perpetration of the crime in declared that he saw him during the initial planning of
an efficacious way. In such case, the act of one becomes the commission of the crime and noted Charitos express
the act of all, and each of the accused will thereby be agreement. He also testified that he saw Charito in the
deemed equally guilty of the crime committed. evening of August 8 2004, when he brought the accused
The series of events in this case convincingly near the house of spouses Vallecera and again upon
show that appellant and her co-accused acted in unison

16
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

return to the drop-off area almost an hour later. Hence,


Charitos appeal was dismissed. The commission of the felony is deemed commenced
directly by overt acts when 1) there be external acts; 2)
STAGES OF COMMISSION OF A CRIME such external acts have direct connection with the crime
intended to be committed.
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted
felonies. Consummated felonies as well as those OVERT ACT some physical activity or deed, indicating
which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable. the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a
A felony is consummated when all the mere planning or preparation, which if carried to its
elements necessary for its execution and complete termination following its natural curse, without
accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when being frustrated by external obstacles nor by voluntary
the offender performs all the acts of execution which desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and
would produce the felony as a consequence but which, necessarily ripen into a concrete offense.
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
independent of the will of the perpetrator. Drawing or trying to draw a pistol or raising a bolo as
There is an attempt when the offender if to strike the offended party with it is not an overt act
commences the commission of a felony directly by overt of homicide.
acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the felony by reason of some INDETERMINATE OFFENSE It is one where the
cause or accident other than this own spontaneous purpose of the offender in performing an act is not
desistance. certain. Its nature in relation to its objective is
ambiguous.
DEVELOPMENT OF A CRIME
The intention of the accused must be viewed from the
a. internal acts such as mere ideas in the nature of the acts executed by him, and not from his
mind of a person, are not punishable even if, admission.
had they been carried out, they would
constitute a crime SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE PHASES OF A
b. external acts cover a) preparatory and b) FELONY
acts of execution 1. SUBJECTIVE PHASE
c. preparatory acts tending toward the crime; - That portion of the execution of the
ordinarily not punishable unless specifically crime starting from the point where the offender
provided for; these acts do not yet constitute still has control over his acts.
even the first stage of the acts of execution; - If the offender reaches the point
intent not yet disclosed where he has no more control over is acts, the
d. acts of execution acts directly connected to subjective phase is passed.
the intended crime; varies with the crime and - If it is already passed but the felony is
is punishable under the code; usually overt not produced, it is frustrated.
acts with a logical relation to a particular
concrete offense 2. OBJECTIVE PHASE
- the result of the acts of execution,
STAGES OF COMMISSION that is, the accomplishment of the crime.
1. Attempted there is an attempt when the - If the subjective and objective phases
offender commences the commission of a are present, there is consummated felony.
felony directly by overt acts, and does not
produce it by reason of some cause or accident People v. Lamahang
other than his own spontaneous desistance. 61 Phil 703 (1935)
2. Frustrated it is frustrated when the offender Facts: The accused was caught in the act of
performs all the acts of execution which would making an opening with an iron bar on the wall of a
produce the felony as a consequence but store where the owner was sleeping. The accused had
which, nevertheless, do not produce it by only succeeded in breaking one board and in unfastening
reason of causes independent of the will of the another from the wall, when the policeman showed up,
perpetrator. who instantly arrested him. The trial court convicted him
3. Consummated a felony is consummated of attempted robbery.
when all the elements necessary for its Held: The conviction is erroneous. It is the
execution and accomplishment are present. opinion of the SC that the attempt to commit an offense
which the Penal code punishes is that which has a logical
relation to a particular, concrete offense; that, which is
the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt
ATTEMPTED FELONY
acts of the perpetrator, leading directly to its realization
ELEMENTS: and consummation. What we have here is an attempt to
1. The offender commences the commission of the commit an indeterminate offense.
felony directly by overt acts; There is no doubt that it was the intention of
2. He does not perform all the acts of execution the accused to enter the store by means of violence,
which should produce the felony; passing through the opening which he had started to
3. The offenders act is not stopped by his own make on the wall, but it is not sufficient, for the purpose
spontaneous desistance; of imposing penal sanction to make an assumption that
4. The non-performance of all acts of execution was the act was in preparation for the commission of
due to cause or accident other than his own robbery. There is no logical and natural relation between
spontaneous desistance.

17
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

the act of entering and robbery. Thus, he should be People v. Listerio


guilty of attempted trespass to dwelling. 335 SCRA 40 (2000)
Facts: Brothers Jeonito and Marlon were
passing by Tramo, Muntinlupa when a group composed
People v. Dio of Agapito Listerio, Samson, George, and Marlon, all
130 SCRA 151 (1984) surnamed Dela Torre and Bonifacio Bancaya blocked
Facts: The appellant and his companion tried their path and attacked them with lead pipes and bladed
to divest Crispulo of his Seiko wrist watch but Crispulo weapons. Listerio, Marlon and George, who were armed
resisted their attempt and fought the robbers. The with bladed weapons, stabbed Jeonito from behind.
victim was stabbed and later died. The Seiko watch was Jeonitos brother, Marlon, was hit on the head by
still strapped to his wrist. The lower court convicted the Samson and Bancaya with lead pipes and momentarily
appellant of the special complex crime of robbery with lost consciousness. When he regained his senses, he
homicide. saw that Jeonito was already dead. Their assailants then
Held: The decision of the lower court was fled after the incident. Marlon who sustained injuries in
erroneous. The accused were unsuccessful in their the arm and back, was thereafter brought to a hospital
criminal venture since the watch was still securely for treatment. The lower court found Listerio guilty for
strapped to the victims wrist. The crime of robbery was the attempt to kill Marlon.
therefore not consummated. The killing may be Held: The SC held that the crime is a
considered as merely incidental to the plan to carry out frustrated felony not an attempted offense considering
the robbery. The accused must be convicted of that after being stabbed and clubbed twice in the head
attempted robbery with homicide. as a result of which he lost consciousness and fell, Marlo
n's attackers apparently thought he was already dead
and fled.
People v. Trinidad A crime cannot be held to be attempted unless
169 SCRA 51 (1989) the offender, after beginning the commission of the
Facts: Deceased Soriano and Laroa together crime by overt acts, is prevented, against his will, by
with Tan were inside a Ford Fierra when Trinidad asked some outside cause from performing all of the acts
for a ride. The accused shot the two deceased. Tan got which should produce the crime. In other words, to be
off the Fierra and rode a jeepney which just passed by. an attempted crime the purpose of the offender must be
When he saw the accused riding at the back of the jeep, thwarted by a foreign force or agency which intervenes
he tried to run but when the jeep started driving away, and compels him to stop prior to the moment when he
he clung to its side. The accused fired two shots at Tan, has performed all of the acts which should produce the
one hitting him on his thigh. The lower court convicted crime as a consequence, which acts it is his intention to
him of frustrated murder. perform. If he has performed all the acts which should
Held: The accused can only be convicted of result in the consummation of the crime and voluntarily
Attempted Murder because the accused was unable to desists from proceeding further, it cannot be an
perform all acts of execution which would have produced attempt.
the murder. The victims wound in the right thigh was
not fatal and the doctrinal rule is that where the wound Valenzuela v. People (2007)
is inflicted on the victim is not sufficient to cause his Facts: A grocery boy was caught trying to
death, the crime is only attempted murder. abscond a box of Tide Ultrabar laundry soap from the
Super Sale Club. The guards apprehended him at the
People v. Campuhan store parking lot while trying to board a taxi. He claimed
329 SCRA 270 (2000) the theft was merely frustrated for he was not able to
Facts: The mother of the 4-year-old victim dispose of the goods.
caught the houseboy Campuhan in the act of almost Held: The Revised Penal Code provisions on
raping her daughter. The hymen of the victim was still theft have not been designed in such fashion as to
intact but since in previous Orita ruling, entry into labia accommodate the Adiao, Dino and Empelis rulings.
is considered rape even without rupture of hymen and Again, there is no language in Article 308 that expressly
full penetration is not necessary, question arises or impliedly allows that the free disposition of the items
whether what transpired was attempted or stolen is in any way determinative of whether the crime
consummated rape. of theft has been produced. We thus conclude that
Held: Attempted rape only. Mere touching of under the Revised Penal Code, there is no crime of
external genitalia by penis is already rape. However, frustrated theft.
touching should be understood as inherently part of
entry of penis into labia and not mere touching of the
pudendum. There must be clear and convincing proof FRUSTRATED FELONY
that the penis indeed touched the labia and slid into the ELEMENTS:
female organ and NOT MERELY STROKED THE 1. The offender performs all the acts of
EXTERNAL SURFACE. Some degree of penetration execution;
beneath the surface must be achieved and the labia 2. All the acts performed would produce the
majora must be entered. Prosecution did not prove that felony as a consequence;
the Campuhans penis was able to penetrate victims 3. But the felony is not produced;
vagina because the kneeling position of the accused 4. By reason of causes independent of the
obstructed the mothers view of the alleged sexual will of the perpetrator.
contact. The testimony of the victim herself claimed that
penis grazed but did not penetrate her organ. In frustrated felony, the offender must perform all the
There was only a shelling of the castle but no acts of execution. Nothing more is left to be done by the
bombardment of the drawbridge yet. offender, because he has performed the last act
necessary to produce the crime.

18
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Taking into account the nature, elements and


FRUSTRATED FELONY VS. ATTEMPTED FELONY manner of execution of the crime of rape and
1. In both, the offender has not accomplished his jurisprudence on the matter, it is hardly conceivable how
criminal purpose. the frustrated stage in rape can ever be consummated.
2. While in frustrated felony, the offender has People v. Caballero
performed all the acts of execution which would 400 SCRA 424 (2003)
produce the felony as a consequence, in Facts: As Eugene walked by the gate of the
attempted felony, the offender merely Mondragon Compound, Armando Caballero suddenly
commences the commission of a felony directly grabbed Eugene towards the compound. Eugene
by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of resisted. Spontaneously, Armandos brothers Ricardo,
execution. Marciano, Jr., and Robito joined Armando and assaulted
Eugene. Armando took the wooden pole supporting the
clothesline and hit Eugene with it. Eugenes sister,
ATTEMPTED OR IMPOSSIBLE CRIME Myrna, saw the Caballero brothers assaulting Eugene
FRUSTRATED and shouted for help. Arnold saw the commotion and
The evil intent of the offender is not accomplished rushed to the scene to pacify the protagonists. However,
The evil intent of the The evil intent of the Ricardo accosted Arnold and stabbed the latter on the
offender is possible of offender cannot be left side of his body. Forthwith, Robito, Marciano, Jr. and
accomplishment accomplished Armando ganged up on Arnold. Two of them stabbed
The evil intent cannot be The evil intent of the Arnold on his forearm. Arnold fled for his life and hid
accomplished because of offender cannot be under the house of a neighbor. Leonilo, who likewise
the intervention of certain accomplished because it is rushed to the scene was stabbed by Robito. Eugene and
cause or accident in which inherently impossible of Leonilo eventually died from the stab wounds they
the offender had no accomplishment or sustained. Dr. Quisumbing, who attended to and
participation. because the means operated on Arnold, testified that the stab wound
employed by the offender sustained by Arnold on the left side of his body was
is inadequate or mortal and could have caused his death were it not for
ineffectual. the timely and effective medical intervention:
Held: A crime is frustrated when the offender
People v. Eria has performed all the acts of execution which should
50 Phil 998 (1927) result in the consummation of the crime. The offender
Facts: The victim of the crime was a child of 3 has passed the subjective phase in the commission of
years and 11 months. There are doubts whether the the crime. Subjectively, the crime is complete. Nothing
accused succeeded in penetrating the vagina before interrupted the offender while passing through the
being disturbed in the timely intervention of the mother subjective phase. He did all that is necessary to
and sister. The physician found a slight inflammation of consummate the crime. However, the crime is not
the exterior parts of the organ, indicating an effort had consummated by reason of the intervention of causes
been made to enter the vagina but it is doubtful whether independent of the will of the offender. In homicide
the entry had been effected. cases, the offender is said to have performed all the acts
Held: Though complete penetration is not of execution if the wound inflicted on the victim is mortal
necessary, penetration of the labia is sufficient. and could cause the death of the victim barring medical
However, since there is no sufficient evidence of such intervention or attendance.
penetration, the act is merely frustrated.
Dissent: It is consummated rape.
CONSUMMATED FELONY
People v. Orita Requisites:
184 SCRA 105 (1990) 1. All the acts of execution are present
Facts: The victim was a 19-year old college 2. The result is achieved.
student. She arrived at her boarding house early
morning coming from a late-night party. The accused Every crime has its own elements which must all be
suddenly held her and poked a knife to her neck. They present to constitute a culpable violation of a precept of
entered a room and the victim was ordered to lie down. law.
The accused made the victim hold his penis and insert it
in her vagina. Because of their position, the accused How to determine whether the felony is
cannot fully penetrate her. Only a small part of his penis attempted, frustrated or consummated?
inserted her vagina. The victim was able to escape and
report to the police what happened. The lower court 1. the nature of the offense
convicted the accused of frustrated rape. ex. In arson, it is not necessary that the property is
Held: Perfect penetration is not essential for totally destroyed by fire. The crime of arson is
the consummation of rape. Entry of the labia or lips of therefore consummated even if only a portion of the
the female organ without rupture of the hymen or wall or any other part of the house is burned.
laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant
conviction. Clearly, in the crime of rape, from the 2. the elements constituting the felony
moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim, ex. In theft, the mere removal of the personal
he actually attains his purpose and, from that moment property belonging to another with intent to gain is
also all the essential elements of the offense have been sufficient to consummate the offense. In estafa, the
accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done by the offended party must actually be prejudiced or
offender, because he has performed the last act damaged. (Adiao case vs. Domiguez case)
necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony is
consummated rape. 3. the manner of committing the crime

19
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

are correctional, in accordance with the above-


a. formal crimes those which are consummated mentioned Art.
by a single act (ex. Slander, adultery)
There can be no ATTEMPT in a formal crime. Art. 9 classifies felonies according to their gravity.
b. crimes consummated by mere attempt (ex. a. GRAVE FELONIES those in which the law
Attempt to flee to an enemy country, treason) attaches a capital punishment or afflictive
There is not ATTEMPTED crime because the penalty.
overt act in itself consummates the crime.
Capital punishment is death penalty
c. felonies by omission
There can be no attempted stage because the The afflictive penalties in accordance with Art.
offender does not execute acts. He omits to 25 of this code are:
perform an act which the law requires him to do. reclusion perpetua
reclusion temporal
d. crimes committed by mere agreement perpetual or temporary absolute
- The offer made by one of the parties to the other disqualification
constitutes attempted felony, if the offer is perpetual or temporary special
rejected. disqualification
- In view of this rule, it would seem that there is prision mayor
no frustrated bribery but in People v. Diego Quin,
SC ruled that if the public officer returned the b. LESS GRAVE FELONIES those in which their
money given by the defendant, there is maximum period are correctional
frustrated bribery.
When the penalty prescribed for the offense is
e. material crimes composed of two or more distinct penalties, the
- There are three stages of consummation: higher or highest of the penalties must be a
attempted, frustrated and consummated. correctional penalty.

US v. Adiao (1955) The following are correctional penalties


Facts: Adiao is a customs inspector. He prision correccional
abstracted a leather belt from the luggage of a Japanese arresto mayor
and secreted the belt under his desk in the Customs suspension
House where it was found by other customs employees. destierro
Adiao was convicted of frustrated theft.
Held: Since the defendant performed all the c. LIGHT FELONIES those infractions of law in
acts of execution necessary for the accomplishment of which the penalty is arresto menor or a fine not
the felony, he is guilty of consummated crime of theft. exceeding P200 or both.
The fact that he was under observation during the entire
transaction and was unable to get the merchandise out A felony punishable by a fine not exceeding
of the Customs House is not decisive; all the elements of P200 and censure is a light felony, because public
the completed crime of theft are present. censure, like arresto menor, is a light felony.
People v. Hernandez (1925)
Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable. Light
Facts: The accused, a 70-year-old man was
felonies are punishable only when they have been
convicted by the trial court of frustrated rape for having
consummated, with the exception of those committed
intercourse with his granddaughter who was at that time
against person or property.
only 9 years of age. The lower court claimed that there
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the
can be no consummated rape without a complete
commission of which a penalty of arresto menor or a
penetration of the hymen.
fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both is provided.
Held: Finding the hymen intact is not always
proof that no rape has been committed. The law may
now indeed be considered as settled that while the This should be seen in the light of articles prescribing
rupturing of the hymen is not indispensable to a penalties for crimes in their different stages of
conviction, there must be proof of some degree of commission. This means that light felonies which are
entrance of the male organ within the labia of only attempted or frustrated are not punishable by law.
pudendum. In the present case, the physician found the
labia and the opening of the vagina inflamed together However, in the commission of crimes against persons
with an abundance of semen. Child even testified that and property, every stage of execution is punishable but
defendant succeeded partial penetration. The accused is only the principals and accomplices are liable in light
guilty of consummated rape. felonies, the accessories are not.

Rationale: Light felonies produce such slight or


D. CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES
insignificant moral and material injuries that public
conscience is assuaged b not providing for penalty for
Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light light felonies which are not consummated and to mere
felonies. Grave felonies are those to which the law accomplices.
attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in
any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Art.
25 of this Code.
Less grave felonies are those which the law
punishes with penalties which in their maximum period

20
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

c. PRAETER INTENTIONEM the act


exceeds the intent, that is, the injurious
result is greater than that intended.

III. CRIMINAL LIABILITY * RPC, Art. 13 Mitigating circumstance


That the offender had no intention to commit
so grave a wrong as that committed.
A. HOW INCURRED
2. By any person performing an act which would
Art. 4. Criminal liability. Criminal liability shall be be an offense against persons or property, were it
incurred: not for the inherent impossibility of its
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although accomplishment or an account of the employment
the wrongful act done be different from that which he of inadequate or ineffectual means.
intended.
2. By any person performing an act which would be an 3. Impossible Crimes
offense against persons or property, were it not for the
inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an Requisites:
account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual 1. That the act performed would be an offense
means. against persons or property.
FELONIES AGAINST PERSONS ARE:
This article has no reference to the manner criminal (P2RAHMID)
liability is incurred. The manner incurring criminal a. Murder
liability under the RPC is stated under Art. 3, that is, b. Homicide
performing or failing to do an act, when either is c. Infanticide
punished b law, by means of deceit or fault. d. Abortion
e. Duel
Art. 4 merely states that criminal liability is incurred f. Physical Injuries
by those mentioned by the said article. g. Rape
FELONIES AGAINST PROPERTY ARE:
1. By any person committing a felony although the (BRUT-SC2AM2)
wrongful act done be different from that which he a. Robbery
intended b. Brigandage
c. Theft
Requisites: d. Usurpation
a. That an intentional felony has been e. Culpable Insolvency
committed; and f. Swindling and other deceits
b. That the wrong done to the aggrieved g. Chattel Mortgage
party be the direct and natural and logical h. Arson and other crimes involving
consequence of the felony. destruction
i. Malicious Mischief
Any person who creates in anothers mind an 2. That the act was done with evil intent.
immediate sense of danger, which causes the latter to The offender must have intent to do injury to
do something resulting in the latters injuries, is liable another.
for the resulting injuries.
3. That its accomplishment is inherently
Wrong done must be the direct, natural and logical impossible, or that the means employed is
consequence of the felony committed. either inadequate or ineffectual.
- where it clearly appears that the injury would In impossible crime, the act performed by the
not have cased death, in the ordinary course of events, offender cannot produce an offense against persons
but would have healed in so many days and where it is or property because:
shown beyond all doubt that the death was due to the
malicious or careless acts of the injured person or a a. the commission of the offense is
third person, the accused is not liable for homicide. inherently impossible of accomplishment
- The act intended by the offender is by its
The offended party is not obliged to submit to a nature one of impossible accomplishment.
surgical operation to relieve the accused from the - There must either 1) LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY,
natural and ordinary results of his crime. or 2) PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY
The felony committed must be the proximate cause of - examples: 1) when one tries to kill another
the resulting injury. by putting in his substance which he believes to be
arsenic when in fact it is common salt; 2) when one
The causes which may produce a result different from tries to murder a corpse.
that which the offender intended are:
a. ERROR IN PERSONAE - mistake in the b. the means employed is either inadequate
identity of the victim; injuring one person or ineffectual
mistaken for another (this is a complex - example: when one tries to poison another but
crime under Art. 49) the quantity of arsenic added in his substance was
b. ABERRATIO ICTUS - mistake in the not sufficient to kill a person
blow, that is, when the offender intending - but where the means employed is adequate
to do an injury to one person actually and the result expected is not produced, it is not an
inflicts it on another; and impossible crime, but a frustrated felony.

21
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Andres laid the boy's lifeless body down in the grassy


4. That the act performed should not area. Shocked at the sudden turn of events, Garcia fled
constitute a violation of another provision of from the scene. For his part, Andres went to the house
the RPC of petitioner Melba Quinto, Wilson's mother, and
- example: A pointed a gun at B to rob the latter informed her that her son had died. Melba Quinto rushed
of a watch but B was not wearing a watch. It is to the drainage culvert while respondent Andres followed
not an impossible crime because As pointing his her.
gun at B already constituted at least the crime of Held: The court ruled that respondents cannot
grave threats. be held criminally nor civilly liable for the death of
Wilson. In this case, the petitioner failed to adduce proof
Why is an impossible crime punishable? of any ill-motive on the part of either respondent to kill
the deceased before or after the latter was invited to
It is punishable in order to suppress criminal join them in fishing. Indeed, the petitioner testified that
tendencies. Objectively, the offender has not committed respondent Andres used to go to their house and play
a felony, but subjectively, he is a criminal. with her son before the latter's death. When the
petitioner's son died inside the drainage culvert, it was
Urbano v. IAC respondent Andres who brought out the deceased. He
157 SCRA 1 (1998) then informed the petitioner of her son's death. Even
Facts: Urbano went to his rice field and found after informing the petitioner of the death of her son,
his palay flooded with water. Urbano found out that it respondent Andres followed the petitioner on her way to
was Javier who was responsible for the opening of the the grassy area where the deceased was.
irrigation canal. He got angry and tried to hack Javier
but the latter tried to parry the attack and in the People v. Valledor,
process, a two-inch incised wound was inflicted on the 383 SCRA 653 (2002)
right palm of Javiers hand. The wound was treated and Accused should be held liable only for
incapacitation was diagnosed to be from 7-9 days. 22 attempted murder and not frustrated murder. The
days after, Javier was rushed to the hospital in a very wound sustained by Roger Cabiguen on his right forearm
serious condition caused by tetanus toxin. Javier died was not fatal. The settled rule is that where the wound
the next day. Urbano was convicted of homicide. inflicted on the victim is not sufficient to cause his
death, the crime is only attempted murder, since the
Held: Urbano is acquitted because the infection accused did not perform all the acts of execution that
was distinct and foreign to the crime. The proximate would have brought about death.
cause of Javiers death was due to his own negligence as
he went back to work even if his wound had not yet
healed properly. The evidence on record also shows that B. CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING CRIMINAL
the wound inflicted by Urbano did not exhibit any signs LIABILITY
of being infected with tetanus; at most, it was only
infected with a mild form of tetanus and not the severe
form that killed him IMPUTABILITY RESPONSIBILITY
Quality by which an act Obligation of suffering the
Intod v. CA may be ascribed to a consequences of the
215 SCRA 52 (1992) person as its author or crime.
Facts: Intod et al. went to Palangpangans owner.
house, all armed with firearms. They went to the Implies that a deed may Implies that the person
bedroom and began firing their weapons. However, be imputed to a person. must take the
Palangpangan was in another city and her home was consequence of such deed.
occupied by her son-in-law and his family. No one was
in the room when the accused fired their weapons. RTC
convicted the accused of attempted murder.
1. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
Held: The accused is guilty of an impossible
crime. The factual situation in the case presents a
physical impossibility which rendered the intended crime Those where the act of a person is said to be
impossible of performance. in accordance with law, so that such person is deemed
not to have transgressed the law and is free from both
Quinto v. Andres criminal and civil liability.
453 SCRA 511 (2005)
Facts: Garcia, a Grade 4 elementary school The law recognizes the non-existence of a
pupil, and his playmate, Wilson Quinto, who was about crime by expressly stating in the opening sentence of
11 yrs old saw Andres and Pacheco who invited them to Art. 11 that the person therein mentioned DO NOT
go fishing inside a drainage culvert. Wilson assented but INCUR CRIMINAL LIABILITY.
Garcia seeing that it was dark inside opted to remain
seated in a grassy area about 2 meters from the
entrance of the drainage system. Pacheco, Andres and Art. 11. Justifying circumstances. The following do
Quinto, entered the drainage system which was covered not incur any criminal liability:
by concrete culvert about a meter high and a meter
wide, with water about a foot deep. After a while, 1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or
respondent Pacheco, who was holding a fish, came out rights, provided that the following circumstances concur;
of the drainage system and left without saying a word.
Andres also came out, went back inside, and emerged First. Unlawful aggression
again, this time, carrying Wilson who was already dead. Second. Reasonable necessity of the means

22
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

employed to prevent or repel it.


Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the 2. IMMINENT- that the danger is on the point of
part of the person defending himself. happening. It is not required that the attack already
begins, for it may be too late.
2. Any one who acts in defense of the person
or rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or A slap on the face constitutes unlawful aggression
legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or his since the face represents a person and his dignity.
relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those Slapping it is a serious personal attack.
consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided
that the first and second requisites prescribed in the Retaliation is different from an act of self-defense.
next preceding circumstance are present, and the In retaliation, the aggression that was begun by the
further requisite, in case the provocation was given by injured party already ceased to exist when the
the person attacked, that the one making defense had accused attacked him. In self-defense, the
no part therein. aggression was still existing when the aggressor was
injured or disabled by the person making a defense.
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person
or rights of a stranger, provided that the first and In self-defense, the person must have no time nor
second requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of occasion for deliberation and cool thinking.
this Article are present and that the person defending be
not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil The unlawful aggression must come from the
motive. person who was attacked by the accused.

4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or There is no unlawful aggression when there is
injury, does an act which causes damage, provided that agreement to fight because where the fight has been
the following requisites are present: agreed upon, each of the protagonists is at once
assailant and assaulted. But when the aggression is
First. That the evil sought to be avoided ahead of the stipulated time and place, it is unlawful.
actually exists.
Second. That the injury feared be greater The rule now is STAND GROUND WHEN IN THE
than that done to avoid it; RIGHT. So, where the accused is where he has the
Third. That there be no other practical and right to be, the law does not require him to retreat
less harmful means of preventing it. when his assailant is rapidly advancing upon him with
a deadly weapon.
5. Any person who acts in fulfillment of a duty
or in the lawful exercise of a right or office. The belief of the person may be considered in
determining the existence of unlawful aggression.
6. Any person who acts in obedience to an Ex. If the aggressor used a toy pistol but the
order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose. accused believed it was a real gun, he may claim self-
defense.

Article 11 recognizes the acts of such persons as b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed
justified. Such persons are not criminals, as there is no to prevent or repel it
crime committed.
The second requisite presupposes the existence of
Par. 1 SELF-DEFENSE unlawful aggression.

The law protects not only the person who repels


Self-defense includes not only the defense of
an aggression (meaning actual), but even the person
the person or body of the one assaulted but also that of
who tries to prevent an aggression that is expected
his rights, that is, those rights the enjoyment of which is
(meaning imminent).
protected by law.
The reasonableness of the necessity depends
Requisites:
upon the circumstances particularly the time and
location where the aggression took place.
a. There must be unlawful aggression
The means employed by the person making a
This is an indispensable requisite.
defense must be rationally necessary to prevent or
If there is no unlawful aggression, there is
repel an unlawful aggression.
nothing to prevent or repel.
Unlawful aggression is equivalent to assault or at
The reasonableness of the means used will depend
least threatened assault of an immediate and
upon the NATURE and QUALITY of the weapon used
imminent kind.
by the aggressor, his PHYSICAL CONDITION, SIZE
There must be an ACTUAL PHYSICAL assault upon
and other circumstances, and those of the person
a person, or at least a THREAT to inflict real injury.
defending himself, and also the place and occasion of
When there is no peril to ones life, limb or right,
the assault.
there is no unlawful aggression.
*** THE FIRST TWO REQUISITES ARE COMMON TO
PERIL TO ONES LIFE
THREE KINDS OF LEGITIMATE DEFENSE: 1) SELF-
DEFENSE, 2) DEFENSE OF A RELATIVE AND 3)
1. ACTUAL that the danger must be present, that
DEFENSE OF A STRANGER.
is, actually in existence.

23
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

The gauge of reasonable necessity of the means


c. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of employed to repel the aggression as against ones
the person defending himself self or in defense of a relative is to be found in the
situation as IT APPEARS TO THE PERSON
The third requisite of self-defense is present: REPELLING THE AGGRESSION (the defender).
1. When no provocation at all was given to the
aggressor by the person defending himself; or 3. In case the provocation was given by the
2. When, even if a provocation was giver, it person attacked, the one making a defense
was not sufficient; or had no part therein.
3. When, even if the provocation was There is still legitimate defense of relative even if
sufficient, it was not given by the person defending the relative being defended has given provocation,
himself; or provided that the one defending such relative has
4. When, even if a provocation was given by no part in the provocation.
the person defending himself, it was not proximate and
immediate to the act of aggression. Reason for the rule: Although the provocation
prejudices the person who gave it, its effects do not
reach the defender who took no part therein,
BATTERED WOMAN DEFENSE-R.A. 9262 (27 March because the latter was prompted by some noble or
2004) Sections 3 & 26 in relation to People v. generous sentiment in protecting and saving a
Genosa, 419 SCRA 537 (2004) relative.

Battered Woman Syndrome as a Par. 3 DEFENSE OF STRANGER


Defense
Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be Requisites:
suffering from battered woman syndrome do not 1. Unlawful aggression;
incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding 2. Reasonable necessity of the means
the absence of any of the elements for justifying employed to prevent or repel it;
circumstances of self-defense under the Revised 3. The person defending be not induced by
Penal Code. revenge, resentment or other evil motive.

Who are deemed strangers?


Par. 2 DEFENSE OF RELATIVES Any person not included in the enumeration of
relatives mentioned in paragraph 2 of this article, is
RELATIVES THAT CAN BE DEFENDED considered stranger for the purpose of paragraph 3.
1. Spouse
2. Ascendants BASIS: What one may do in his defense, another may
3. Descendants do for him. The ordinary man would not stand idly by
4. Legitimate, natural or adopted and see his companion killed without attempting to save
brothers and sisters, or relatives by his life.
affinity in the same degrees.
5. Relatives by consanguinity within the People v. Narvaez
fourth civil degree. 121 SCRA 389 (1983)
Facts: Narvaez was taking his rest inside his
Relatives by affinity, because of marriage, are parents- house when he heard that the wall of his house was
in-law, son or daughter-in-law, and brothers or sisters- being chiseled. He saw that Fleischer and Rubia,
in-law. together with their laborers, were fencing the land of the
father of the deceased Fleischer. If the fencing would go
Death of the spouse terminates the relationship by on, Narvaez would be prevented from getting into his
affinity; unless the marriage has resulted in issue who is house and the bodega of his ricemill so he asked the
still living, in which case the relationship of affinity group to stop but they refused. The accused got mad so
continues. he got his shotgun and shot Fleischer. Rubia ran towards
the jeep and knowing there is a gun on the jeep, the
Consanguinity refers to blood relatives. Brothers and accused fired at Rubia as well. Narvaez claimed he acted
sisters are within the second civil degree; uncle and in defense of his person and rights.
niece or aunt and nephew are within the third civil Held: The court took into consideration the fact
degree; and first cousins are within the fourth civil that the 2 deceased were accompanied with three
degree. laborers and that the were using tools which could be
lethal weapons such as nail and hammer, bolo, etc. and
REQUISITES OF DEFENSE OF RELATIVES: that the jeep the deceased used contained a gun leaning
1. Unlawful aggression; near the steering wheel. There was aggression on the
Unlawful aggression may not exist as a part of the victims not on the person of the accused but
matter of fact, it can be made to depend upon the on his property rights when Fleischer angrily ordered the
honest belief of the one making a defense. Ex. The continuance of the fencing.
sons of A honestly believed that their father was the The third element of self-defense is also
victim of an unlawful aggression when in fact it was present because there was no sufficient provocation on
their father who attacked B. If they killed B under the part of Narvaez since he was sleeping when the
such circumstance, they are justified. deceased where fencing.
However, the second element was lacking.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed Shooting the victims from the window of his house is
to prevent or repel it; disproportionate to the physical aggression by the

24
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

victims. Thus, there is incomplete self-defense and the Cubol advanced towards him, Sumicad drew out his bolo
accused is entitled to a penalty lower by one or two and struck him. Cubol tried to wrest the bolo from
degrees. Sumicad and to prevent this, the latter struck him again
Dissent: Defense of property is not of such twice which broke Cubols cranium resulting to his
importance as the right to life and defense of property death.
can only be invoked when it is coupled with some form Held: As a general rule, a man is not justified
of attack on the person of one entrusted with said in killing an assailant who is not armed with any
property. In this case before us, there is no evidence dangerous weapon. This rule applies only when the
that an attack was attempted. The utterance, no, contending parties are in the open and the person
gaddemit, proceed, go ahead is not unlawful aggression assaulted can escape. However, where one has no
which entitles him neither to a plea of self-defense nor means of escaping, the one who is assaulted can use a
to a mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense. weapon in any way reasonably necessary to his
protection against the aggressor.
People v. Boholst-Caballero The deceased here is a bully of known violent
61 SCRA 180 (1974) character and although unarmed, he attempted to take
Facts: Boholst (wife) and Caballero (husband) from the accused a bolo which is the only means of
are married to each other. But since their marriage was defense possessed by the latter. It would have been an
an unhappy one, they separated. One evening, the wife act of suicide on the part of the accused to allow the
went caroling with her friends and she was seen by her bolo to pass into the hands of his antagonist.
husband standing in a corner of the yard of Barabad. He
accused her of prostituting and threatened to kill her as People v. Luague
he held her by the hair, slapped her face until her nose 62 Phil 504 (1935)
bled. He, then, choked her and at the same time Facts: The deceased tried to rape the accused
continuously saying that he will kill her. The wife then while her husband was away. The deceased threatened
pulled out the knife of her husband tucked inside the the accused with a knife to compel her to have sex with
belt line and stabbed him. When she was released, she him. As the deceased was preparing to lie down with
ran home. The wife is claiming self-defense. her, he placed the knife on the floor and so the accused
Held: The wife who being strangled and choked took advantage of the situation by getting the knife and
by a furious aggressor had no other recourse but to get stabbing the deceased with it.
hold of any weapon within her reach to save herself. The Held: An attempt to rape is a sufficient
claim that it was not proper for the wife to be standing aggression for a legitimate claim of self-defense. We
in the middle of the night outside a yard giving the have the right to HONOR. Womans honor is a right as
impression that she is prostituting herself, is not precious as her very existence because chastity once
sufficient provocation. All that the accused did was to defiled cannot be restored.
provoke an imaginary commission of a wrong in the
mind of her husband which is not a sufficient People v. Dela Cruz
provocation under the law of self-defense. 61 Phil 344 (1935)
Facts: Accused was found guilty of homicide
People v. Alconga for stabbing and killing Rivera. Prosecution claimed that
78 Phil 366 (1947) Dela Cruz and Rivera had a relationship and that the
Facts: The deceased Barion was the banker in accused was madly in love with the deceased and was
the game of black jack. Raposo played the game while extremely jealous of another woman with whom Rivera
the accused posted himself behind Barion acting as a also had a relationship. Dela Cruz claimed, on the other
spotter of the cards of the latter and communicating it hand, that on her way home one evening, Rivera
to his partner Raposo. When Barion learned about what followed her, embraced and kissed her and touched her
Raposo and Alconga were doing, an exchange of words private parts. She didnt know that it was Rivera and
ensued. One morning, when Alconga was in the that she was unable to resist the strength of Rivera so
guardhouse, Barion arrived and swung his pingahan at she got a knife from her pocket and stabbed him in
the former but the accused was able to avoid the blow. defense of her honor.
In a crawling position, Alconga avoided the following Held: She is justified in using the pocketknife
blows and was able to draw his revolver and shoot in repelling what she believed to be an attack upon her
Barion. He was able to crawl out of the guardhouse and honor. It was a dark night and she could not have
a hand-to-hand fight ensued. Having sustained several identified Rivera. There being no other means of self-
wounds, Barion ran away but was followed by the defense.
accused and another fight took place. Alconga then
slashed Barions head with a bolo which caused the People v. Jaurigue
latters death. The accused pleaded self-defense. 76 Phil. 174 (1946
Held: An accused was no longer acting in self- Facts: Amado (deceased) has been courting
defense when he pursued and killed a fleeing adversary, the accused Avelina in vain. On the day of the crime,
though originally the unlawful aggressor, there being no Avelina and Amado were in Church. Amado sat beside
more aggression to defend against, the same having Avelina and placed his hand on her thigh. Thereafter,
ceased from the moment the deceased took to his heels. Avelina took out her knife and stabbed Amado in the
neck, causing the death of Amado.
People v. Sumicad Held: Although the defense of ones honor
56 Phil 643 (1932) exempts one from criminal liability, it must be proved
Facts: Sumicad was hauling logs when Cubol that there is actual danger of being raped. In this case,
suddenly struck him with his fist. Sumicad tried to 1) the church was well-lit, 2) there were several people
escape but Cubol continued to strike him with his fists. in the church, including the father of the accused and
Sumicad receded until he found himself cornered by a other town officials. In light of these circumstances,
pile of logs which prevented him from further retreat. As accused could not have possibly been raped. The means

25
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

employed in defense of her honor was evidently Held: It is an established principle that once
excessive. this justifying circumstance is raised, the burden of
proving the elements of the claim shifts to him who
US v. Bumaglang invokes it. The elements of self-defense are: (1) that the
14 Phil 644 (1909) victim has committed unlawful aggression amounting to
Facts: Bumanglang was missing 40 bundles of actual or imminent threat to the life and limb of the
palay. Later, accompanied by his co-defendants, he person claiming self-defense; (2) that there be
awaited the culprit and caught Ribis so they confronted reasonable necessity in the means employed to prevent
him assaulted him with sticks and other cutting and or repel the unlawful aggression; and (3) that there be
stabbing weapons. As a result, Ribis died. Defendants lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
declared that during the fight they only beat the claiming self-defense or, at least, that any provocation
deceased with sticks and Ribis unsheathed his bolo. executed by the person claiming self-defense be not the
Bumanglang et al were convicted of homicide. proximate and immediate cause of the victim's
Held: The bolo of the deceased was sheathed aggression. The condition of unlawful aggression is a
when the body was discovered. There was no unlawful sine qua non; otherwise stated, there can be no self-
aggression on the part of Ribis. Thus, there can be no defense, complete or incomplete, unless the victim has
claim of self-defense. committed unlawful aggression against the person
Separate Opinion: A man who ambushed one defending himself.
he suspects to be a thief can claim defense of property. Given the fact that the relationship between
Not only was there unlawful aggression against the parties had been marred by ill will and animosities,
Bumanglag, there was also a wrongful invasion of his and pursuant to the rule on the burden of evidence
habitat and attempt to commit a felony against his imposed by law on the party invoking self-defense, the
property. With the imminence of danger to his life, he admission of Eusebio that he killed Leo made it
realized that he had to ask assistance from his friends, incumbent upon appellant to convincingly prove that
considering Ribis criminal record, character and unusual there was unlawful aggression on the part of the victim
strength. which necessitated the use of deadly force by Eusebio.
Toledo v. People Unfortunately, Eusebio miserably failed to prove the
439 SCRA 94 (2004) existence of unlawful aggression on the part of the
Facts: Toledo saw his nephew, Ricky, and the victim. Eusebio is guilty of murder.
latter's friends about 5 m away from his house, having a
drinking spree. He ordered them not to make loud Cano v. People
noises, and they obliged. He then went to his house and 413 SCRA 92 (2003)
went to sleep. After some time, Ricky and his friends Facts: Conrado and his deceased brother were
also went to sleep. They had not laid down for long rivals in the Rush ID Photo business and had booths
when he heard stones being hurled at the roof of the along the sidewalk of Rizal Avenue, Sta. Cruz, Manila.
house. Ricky saw Toledo stoning their house and asked Condrado borrowed the permit of the deceased and had
him why he was doing the same. Toledo did not answer it photocopied without the latters permission. The
but met Ricky at the doorstep of his house and without deceased confonted Conrado and tried to stab him with
warning stabbed Ricky on the abdomen with a bolo a fan knife. The latter locked himself in the dark room of
which resulted to his death. In the lower court, Toledo his booth to protect himself but was followed by the
defended himself by alleging that his bolo accidentaly hit deceased and they ended up attacking each other.
the stomach of the victim and that he was able to prove During the scuffle, the scissors which Orlando was able
all the essential elements of self defense. to grab fell from his hands. He then grabbed the knife
Held: The Court ruled that it is an aberration of the deceased who in turn picked the scissors. They
for Toledo to invoke the two defenses at the same time again attacked each other which resulted to the death of
because the said defenses are intrinsically antithetical. the other.
There is no such defense as accidental self-defense in Held: Conrados act of killilng his brother was
the realm of criminal law. attended by a justifying circumstance of self-defense. It
The court further ruled that Toledo was not was the deceased who purposely sought and initially
justified in stabbing Ricky. There was no imminent attacked Orlando with a knife. The act of a person
threat to his life necessitating his assault. Records reveal armed with a bladed weapon pursuing another
that there is no unlawful agression, a condition sine qua constitutes unlawful agression because it signifies the
non for the justifying circumstance of self defense, on pursuers intent to commit an assault with his weapon.
the part of Ricky. Ricky arrived at Toledos house There was also lack of sufficient provocation on the part
unarmed. With no weapon to attack Toledo or defend of Condrado. His act of photocopying the permit of his
himself, no sign of hostility may be deduced from him. brother without the latters permission can hardly be
conidered as provocation to merit so deadly an assault
People vs. Enfectana with a bladed weapon.
381 SCRA 359 (2002)
Facts: While Adelaida and her husband Leo Balunueco v. CA
were on their way home, they were sideswiped by a 401 SCRA 76
tricycle driven by appellant Erwin with Efren both Facts: Amelia was coddling her youngest child
surnamed Enfectana as passenger. As a result, her in front of her house when she saw accused Reynaldo,
husband fell in a crouching position. When he was about his father Juanito, brothers Ricardo and Ramon, all
to get up, Eusebio also surnamed Enfectana came from surnamed Balunueco, and one Flores chasing her
behind to stab him. Then Erwin and Efren took turns in brother-in-law Servando. With the 5 individuals in hot
stabbing Leo. He died as a result. In court, Eusebio pursuit, Servando scampered into the safety of Amelia's
Enfectana admitted that he killed Leo. He, however, house. Meanwhile, Senando, who was then cooking
alleged that he acted in self-defense supper, went out of the house unaware of the
commotion going on outside. Upon seeing Senando,

26
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Reynaldo turned his attention on him and gave chase. one making the defense of a stranger would likewise
Senando instinctively fled towards the fields but he was cease to have any justification for killing, or even just
met by Armando who hit him with a stone, causing wounding, the former aggressor. From the defense
Senando to feel dizzy. Reynaldo, Ricardo, and Armando account, it would appear that Hilario was already
cornered their quarry near a canal and ganged up on disarmed and the unlawful aggression by Hilario (if
him. Armando placed a can on top of Senando's head indeed he was the aggressor) to have by then been
and Ricardo repeatedly struck Senando with an ax on abated, when Dijan still delivered the fatal thrusts on
the head, shoulder, and hand. At one point, Ricardo lost the victim.
his hold on the ax, but somebody tossed him a bolo and The number of wounds sustained by the victim
then he continued hacking the victim who fell on his would itself likewise negate Dijans claim of defense of a
knees. To shield him from further violence, Amelia put stranger. The autopsy conducted on the corpse would
her arms around her husband but it was not enough to show that the deceased sustained 14 injuries consisting
detract Ricardo from his murderous frenzy. Amelia was of 9 stab wounds, 3 punctured wounds, an incised
also hit on the leg. The RTC and CA convicted Ricardo of wound and an abrasion. Certainly, the nature and
Homicide. He now imputes errors to the CA in not taking number of wounds inflicted by an accused on the victim
into consideration the fact that if indeed he participated, should be significant indicia in determining the
he had acted in defense of his relatives. plausibility of the defense plea.
Held: Of the three (3) requisites of defense of
relatives, unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua People v. Nestor Roxas
non, for without it any defense is not possible or G.R. No. 218396, 10 February 2016
justified. In order to consider that an unlawful Facts: In the evening of October 25, 1995, Severino
aggression was actually committed, it is necessary that Manalo (victim) and Vicente were talking to each other
an attack or material aggression, an offensive act in front of the house of Alfredo Asi (Alfredo). Then,
positively determining the intent of the aggressor to Vicente saw the accused-appellant approach Severino
cause an injury shall have been made; a mere from behind and suddenly stab the latter thrice with a
threatening or intimidating attitude is not sufficient to white sharp bladed weapon. The three successive stab
justify the commission of an act which is punishable per blows landed on Severino's back, his stomach and on his
se, and allow a claim of exemption from liability on the side. Vicente testified that Severino was caught off
ground that it was committed in self-defense or defense guard when he was stabbed by the accused-appellant as
of a relative. the victim was facing the former while they were talking.
In the case at bar, petitioner Ricardo utterly Immediately after Severino was stabbed, the accused-
failed to adduce sufficient proof of the existence of a appellant fled from the place of the incident. For fear
positively strong act of real aggression on the part of the that he might also be attacked, Vicente scampered away
deceased Senando.. It was he and his kin who had to a safer distance until he reached his place where he
inititated the unlawful agression and not Senando. called for help. Vicente, together with some people,
Further, the natural impulse of any person who has returned to the crime scene where they found Severino
killed someone in defense of his person or relative is to sprawled on the ground already dead.
bring himself to the authorities and try to dispel any Accused raised self-defense as an excuse.
suspicion of guilt that the authorities might have against Held: After taking into account the location and the
him. Ricardo failed to do the same. With the exception number of stab wounds sustained by the victim, the
of his self-serving allegations, there is nothing on record accused-appellant's claim of self-defense further
that would justify his killing of Senando. crumbles. To reiterate, the first stab blow hit Severino's
back jibing with Vicente's assertion that the former was
People v. Dijan stabbed from behind. Then, when the victim was totally
383 SCRA 15 (2002) caught by surprise with the initial attack, the second and
Facts:Silvestre and Hilario were at a store to third stab blows were delivered. Additionally, the
buy some cigarettes when they saw the group of Dijan, number of wounds suffered by Severino invalidates the
Paglinawan and Lizardo, passing by the store. accused-appellant's allegation that he was only
Paglinawan suddenly confronted Hilario for purportedly defending himself for the number of wounds inflicted are
giving him a "bad stare." Silvestre apologized and rather demonstrative of deliberate and criminal intent to
explained that it was the natural way Hilario gazed at end the life of the victim. Likewise weakening accused
people. Dijan, Paglinawan and Lizardo then left the place appellant's contention that he acted in self-defense was
while Silvestre and Hilario proceeded home. While his behavior immediately after the incident. In the case
Silvestre and Hilario were walking, the 3 accused, at bar, the accused-appellant himself admitted that
ganged up on, and took turns in stabbing, Hilario. At upon seeing the victim lying on the ground, he boarded
that point, Hilario, who was walking slightly ahead of a jeep to go to his sister's place in San Pascual,
Silvestre, cried out and told the latter to flee. Silvestre Batangas before moving to Bicol where he hid from the
ran away until he was able to cling to a passing authorities for several years. The accused-appellant's
passenger jeepney. Hilario was found to have sustained flight negates his plea of self-defense and indicates his
several stab wounds, punctured and incised wounds, guilt.
and abrasion in various parts of the body which caused
his death. Appealing his conviction in court, Dijan
invoked the justifying circumstance of defense of a Par. 4 AVOIDANCE OF A GREATER EVIL
stranger.
Held: In order to successfully put up this Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury,
defense an accused must show the existence of unlawful does an act which causes damage to another.
aggression on the part of the victim. The unlawful
aggression must be a continuing circumstance or must DAMAGE TO ANOTHER the term covers
have been existing at the time the defense is made. injury to persons and damage to property.
Once unlawful aggression is found to have ceased, the

27
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

postdated checks against Metrobank payable to the


Requisites: hospital which were all dishonored by the drawee bank
1. That the evil sought to be avoided and returned unpaid to the hospital due to insufficiency
actually exists; of funds. For her defense, Ty claimed that she issued the
- The evil must actually exist and not checks because of an uncontrollable fear of a greater
merely expected or anticipated or may happen injury. She averred that she was forced to issue the
in the future. checks to obtain release for her mother who was being
inhumanely and harshly treated by the hospital. She
2. That the injury feared is greater than that alleged that her mother has comtemplated suicide if she
done to avoid it; would not be discharged from the hospital. Ty was found
Note: The instinct of self-preservation guilty by the lower courts of 7 counts of violation of
will always make one feel that his own safety is BP22.
of greater importance than that of another. Held:The court sustained the findings of the
- The greater evil should not be brought lower courts. The evil sought to be avoided is merely
about by the negligence or imprudence of the expected or anticipated. If the evil sought to be avoided
actor. is merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the
- The evil which brought about the greater future, the defense of an uncontrollable fear of a greater
evil must not result from a violation of law by injury is not applicable. Ty could have taken advantage
the actor. of an available option to avoid committing a crime. By
her own admission, she had the choice to give jewelry or
3. That there be no other practical and less other forms of security instead of postdated checks to
harmful means of preventing it. secure her obligation.
Moreover, for the defense of state of necessity
General rule: No liability in justifying to be availing, the greater injury feared should not have
circumstances because there is no crime. been brought about by the negligence or imprudence,
Exception: There is CIVIL LIABILITY under more so, the willful inaction of the actor. In this case,
this paragraph. It is borne by the persons benefited by the issuance of the bounced checks was brought about
the act. They shall be liable in proportion to the benefit by Ty's own failure to pay her mother's hospital bills.
which they may have received.

People v. Ricohermoso Par. 5 FULFILLMENT OF A DUTY OR LAWFUL


56 SCRA 431 (1974) EXERCISE OF RIGHT OR OFFICE.
Facts: The land Ricohermoso cultivated
belonged to Geminiano. When the latter went to the REQUISITES:
house of the former, as if by prearrangement, 1. That the accused acted in the
Ricohermoso unsheathed his bolo and approached performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of
Geminiano from the left while Severo (Ricos father-in- a right or office
law) got an axe and approached from the right. Rico
stabbed Geminiano first and while in a helpless position,
Art. 429. Civil Code. The owner or lawful
the latter was hacked on the back by Severo.
possessor of a thing has the right to exclude any person
At that same place and time while the killing of
from the enjoyment and disposal thereof. For this
Geminiano was taking place, Juan (son of Severo)
purpose, he may use such force as may be reasonably
suddenly embraced Marianito (son of Geminiano), who
necessary to repel or prevent an actual or threatened
had a gun slung on his shoulder, from behind. They
unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his property.
grappled and rolled downhill towards the camote patch.
(doctrine of self-help)
Marianito passed out and when he regained
consciousness, his rifle was gone. He walked uphill and
saw his father. Geminiano died later. Juan invoked the If in protecting his possession of the
justifying circumstance of greater necessity in explaining property he injured (not seriously) the one trying to get
his act of preventing Marianito from shooting Rico and it from him, he is justified.
Severo.
Held: The act of Juan was designed to insure The actual invasion of property may consist
the killing of Geminiano without any risk to his of a mere disturbance of possession or of a real
assailants. Juan was not avoiding any evil but his dispossession.
malicious intention was to forestall any interference in
the felonious assault. He acted in conspiracy with Rico 2. That the injury caused or the offense
and Severo. committed be the necessary consequence of the
due performance of duty or the lawful exercise of
Ty v. People such right or office.
439 SCRA 220 (2004)
Facts: Ty's mother Chua Lao So Un was Shooting an offender who refused to surrender is
confined at the Manila Doctors' Hospital from October justified but shooting a thief who refused to be arrested
1990 until June 1992. Being the patient's daughter, Ty is not justified.
signed the "Acknowledgment of Responsibility for
Payment" in the Contract of Admission. Ty's sister, Judy People v. Delima
Chua, was also confined at the same hospital. The total 46 Phil 738 (1922)
hospital bills of the two patients amounted to Facts: Napilon escaped from the jail where he
P1,075,592.95. Ty executed a promissory note wherein was serving sentence. Some days afterwards the
she assumed payment of the obligation in installments. policeman, Delima, who was looking for him found him
To assure payment of the obligation, she drew 7 in the house of Alegria, armed with a pointed piece of

28
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

bamboo in the shape of a lance. Delima demanded the menacingly advancing towards them, notwithstanding
surrender of the weapon but Napilon refused. Delima accused-appellant's previous warning shot and verbal
fired his revolver to impose his authority but the bullet admonition to the victim to lay down his weapon or he
did not hit him. The criminal ran away and Delima went would be shot. As a police officer, it is to be expected
after him and fired again his revolver this time hitting that accused-appellant would stand his ground. Up to
and killing him. that point, his decision to respond with a barrage of
Held: The killing was done in the performance gunfire to halt the victim's further advance was justified
of a duty. The deceased was under the obligation to under the circumstances. After all, a police officer is not
surrender and had no right, after evading service of his required to afford the victim the opportunity to fight
sentence, to commit assault and disobedience with a back. Neither is he expected when hard pressed and in
weapon in his hand, which compelled the policeman to the heat of such an encounter at close quarters to
resort to such extreme means, which, although it proved pause for a long moment and reflect coolly at his peril,
to be fatal, was justified by the circumstance. or to wait after each blow to determine the effects
thereof.
People v. Oanis However, he cannot be exonerated from
74 Phil 257 (1943) overdoing his duty during the second stage of the
Although an officer in making a lawful arrest is incident when he fatally shot the victim in the head,
justified in using such force as is reasonably necessary even after the latter slumped to the ground due to
to secure and detain the offender, overcome his multiple gunshot wounds sustained while charging at the
resistance, prevent his escape, recapture him if he police officers. Sound discretion and restraint dictated
escapes, and protect himself from bodily harm, yet he is that accused-appellant, a veteran policeman, should
never justified in using unnecessary force or in treating have ceased firing at the victim the moment he saw the
him with wanton violence or in resorting to dangerous latter fall to the ground. The victim at that point no
means when the arrest could be effected otherwise. longer posed a threat and was already incapable of
mounting an aggression against the police officers.
Pomoy v. People Shooting him in the head was obviously unnecessary.
439 SCRA 439 (2004) The law does not clothe police officers with
:
Fats Police sergeant Pomoy, went near the
authority to arbitrarily judge the necessity to kill- it must
be stressed that their judgment and discretion as police
door of the jail where Balboa was detained for robbery officers in the performance of their duties must be
and directed the latter to come out, purportedly for excercised neither capriciously nor oppressively, but
tactical interrogation at the investigation room. At that within reasonable limits.
time, petitioner had a gun, a .45 caliber pistol, tucked in
a holster which was hanging by the side of his belt. The
Par. 6 OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR
gun was fully embedded in its holster, with only the
SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE
handle of the gun protruding from the holster. Balboa
tried to remove Pomoys gun and the two grappled for
possession of the gun. Thereafter, 2 gunshots were Requisites:
heard. When the source of the shots was verified, 1. That an order has been issued by a
petitioner was seen still holding a .45 caliber pistol, superior.
facing Balboa, who was lying in a pool of blood. Pomoy 2. That such order must be for some lawful
invoked the defense of accident for his defense. purpose.
Held: Pomoy is acquitted. At the time of the 3. That the means used by the subordinate to
incident, petitioner was a member specifically, one of carry out said order is lawful.
the investigators of the Philippine National Police
(PNP) stationed at the Iloilo Provincial Mobile Force When the order is not for a lawful purpose,
Company. Thus, he was in the lawful performance of his the subordinate who obeyed it is criminally liable.
duties as investigating officer that, under the The subordinate is not liable for carrying out
instructions of his superior, he fetched the victim from an illegal order of his superior, if he is not aware of the
the latter's cell for a routine interrogation. illegality of the order and he is not negligent.
The participation of petitioner, if any, in the
victim's death was limited only to acts committed in the People v. Beronilla
course of the lawful performance of his duties as an 96 Phil 566(1955)
enforcer of the law. The removal of the gun from its Facts: Borjal was the elected mayor of La Paz,
holster, the release of the safety lock, and the firing of Abra at the outbreak of war and continued to serve as
the two successive shots all of which led to the death Mayor during Japanese occupation. Beronilla was
of the victim were sufficiently demonstrated to have appointed later as Military Mayor. Later, while the
been consequences of circumstances beyond the control operations for the liberation of Abra was in progress,
of petitioner. At the very least, these factual Beronilla, pursuant to his instructions, placed Borjal in
circumstances create serious doubt on Pomoys his custody and asked the residents to file charges of
culpability. espionage, aiding the enemy, and abuse of authority
against him. After trial, Borjals execution took place.
People v. Ulep Later, Beronilla, together with a priest, executioner,
340 SCRA 688 (2000) grave digger, etc. were indicted for murder. The
Accused-appellant and the other police officers prosecution claimed that Col. Volkmann transmitted a
involved originally set out to perform a legal duty: to radiogram message stating that the jury system
render police assistance, and restore peace and order at organized by the municipality is illegal and cannot order
Mundog Subdivision where the victim was then running execution of Borjal.
amuck. There were two (2) stages of the incident at Held: There is no proof that Beronilla was able
Mundog Subdivision. During the first stage, the victim to receive the radiogram message. The records are
threatened the safety of the police officers by ample to sustain the claim of the accused that the

29
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

arrest, prosecution and trial were done pursuant to


express orders of the 15th Infantry HQ. Where the xxx xxx xxx
accused acted upon orders of superior officers that the
military subordinates, could not question, and obeyed in 4. Any person who, while performing a lawful
good faith, without being aware of their illegality, act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident
without any fault or negligence on their part, the act is without fault or intention of causing it.
not accompanied by criminal intent. A crime is not
committed if the mind of the person performing the act 5. Any person who act under the compulsion of
be innocent. irresistible force.

Tabuena v. Sandiganbayan 6. Any person who acts under the impulse of


268 SCRA 332 (1997) an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.
Facts: Pres. Marcos instructed Tabuena over 7. Any person who fails to perform an act
the phone to pay directly to the Office of the President in required by law, when prevented by some lawful
cash what MIAA owes the Phil. National Construction insuperable cause.
Corporation (PNCC) which later was reiterated in writing.
The Marcos memo indicated the amount of P55m for One who acts by virtue of any of the exempting
partial payment of the obligation to PNCC as mentioned circumstances commits a crime, although by the
in Ongpins memo. In obedience to Marcos instruction, complete absence of any of the conditions which
the accused withdrew the amount by means of 3 constitute free will or voluntariness of the act, no
separate issuances of managers check and encashment criminal liability arise.
in 3 separate dates as well. The money withdrawn were
placed in peerless boxes and duffle bags and delivered
Par. 1 AN IMBECILE OR INSANE PERSON,
to the private secretary of Marcos also in 3 separate
UNLESS THE LATTER HAS ACTED DURING A LUCID
days. According to the accused, the disbursement was
INTERVAL
not in the normal procedure since it is paid in cold cash,
there were no vouchers supporting it and no receipt
from PNCC. IMBECILE
Tabuena and Peralta were convicted by the - one who, while advanced in age, has a
Sandiganbayan of malversation as defined in Art. 217, mental development comparable to that of children
RPC for misappropriating funds of Manila International between 2 and 7 years of age.
Airport Authority (MIAA) worth P55M. one who is deprived completely of reason or
Held: The accused are acquitted. The accused discernment and freedom of the will at the time of
is entitled to the justifying circumstance of obedience to committing the crime.
an order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose. - exempt in all cases from criminal liability
Sandiganbayan claimed that are Marcos memo was
unlawful because it orders disbursement of P55M when INSANE
the Ongpin memo reveals that the liability is only 34.5M. - there is a complete deprivation of intelligence
Granting this to be true, it will not affect Tabuenas good in committing the act but capable of having lucid
faith as to make him criminally liable. Thus, even if the intervals. During a lucid interval, the insane acts with
order is illegal if it is patently legal and the subordinate intelligence and thus, not exempt from criminal liability.
is not aware of its illegality, the subordinate is not liable,
for then there would only be a mistake of fact PROCEDURE WHEN AN IMBECILE OR INSANE
committed in good faith. COMMITTED A FELONY
- The court shall order his confinement in one
of the hospitals or asylums established for persons
2. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to leave
without first obtaining the permission of the court. The
Exempting circumstances (non-imputability) court must obtain the opinion of the Director of Health
are those grounds for exemption from punishment before permitting his release.
because there is wanting in the agent of the crime any
of the condition which make the act voluntary or When the person is sane at the time of the commission
negligent. of the crime but he becomes insane at the time of the
trial, he is liable criminally. The trial, however, shall be
The exemption from punishment is based on suspended until mental capacity of the accused be
the COMPLETE ABSENCE of intelligence, freedom of restored to afford him a fair trial.
action, or intent, or on the absence of negligence on the
part of the accused. Evidence of insanity must refer to the time preceding
the act under prosecution or to the very moment of its
Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal execution. If the evidence points to insanity subsequent
liability. the following are exempt from criminal to the commission of the crime, the accused cannot be
liability: acquitted.
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the
latter has acted during a lucid interval. Feeblemindedness is not imbecility because a feeble-
When the imbecile or an insane person has minded person can distinguish right from wrong.
committed an act which the law defines as a felony Cases covered under this article:
(delito), the court shall order his confinement in one of a. Dementia praecox
the hospitals or asylums established for persons thus b. Kleptomania if found by a competent
afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to leave psychiatrist as irresistible
without first obtaining the permission of the same court. c. Epilepsy

30
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

d. Somnambulism sleep-walking Held: The accused failed to prove that he was


e. Malignant malaria which affects the completely deprived of intelligence in committing the
nervous system act. He did not show any signs of insanity prior to and
immediately after the act. He was only diagnosed of
PP vs. Mejaro Roa schizophrenia months after the incident. Also, schizos
G.R. No. 225599 March 22, 2017 have lucid intervals.

Facts: Eliseo was approached from behind by People v. Bonoan


accused who suddenly stabbed him on the left lower 64 Phil 87 (1937)
back with a bolo. The accused surrendered voluntarily. A person suffering from dementia praecox
Accused is known to have suffered mental disorder prior pleaded insanity as a defense for committing murder. In
to his commission of the crime charged. The RTC found dementia praecox, the crime is usually preceded by
the accused guilty of the offense of Murder. The CA much complaining and planning. In these people,
affirmed the finding of conviction by the trial court. homicide attacks are common because of delusions that
they are being interfered with sexually or that their
Held: Insanity as an exempting circumstance is property is being taken. During period of excitement,
not easily available to the accused as a successful such person has no control whatever of his acts. An
defense. It is an exception rather than the rule on the irresistible homicide impulse was considered embraced
human condition. Anyone who pleads insanity as an in the term of insanity.
exempting circumstance bears the burden of proving it
with clear and convincing evidence. The testimony or People v. Taneo
proof of an accused's insanity must relate to the time 58 Phil 87(1933)
immediately preceding or simultaneous with the Facts: A fiesta was being celebrated in the
commission of the offense with which he is charged. barrio and visitors were being entertained at the house
Accused-appellant further argues that the presumption of Taneo and his wife. That afternoon, Taneo went to
of sanity must not be applied in his case, because of the sleep and while sleeping, he suddenly got up, left the
rule that a person who has been committed to a hospital room with a bolo in his hand. He wounded his wife who
or to an asylum for the insane is presumed to continue was pregnant at that time in the abdomen when she
to be insane. In this case, however, it is noteworthy that tried to stop him. He attacked two of his visitors and his
while accused-appellant was confined in a mental father, after which, he wounded himself. 5 days later,
institution in 2001, he was properly discharged his wife died because of the wound. He was charged of
therefrom in 2002. This proper discharge from his parricide.
confinement clearly indicates an improvement in his Held: The accused acted while in a dream and
mental condition; otherwise, his doctors would not have his acts, with which he is charged, were not voluntary in
allowed his discharge from confinement. Absent any the sense of entailing criminal liability.
contrary evidence, then, the presumption of sanity
resumes and must prevail.
People v. Formigones
87 Phil 658(1950)
People v. Tubogoca Held: One day, the accused stabbed his wife
285 SCRA 312(1998) from the back who was sitting at the top of the stairs in
Facts: Jacqueline, together with her sisters, their house. Accused admitted the killing and that he
lived with their father after their mother died. One night, was jealous and had suspicions that his wife and his
she was roused by her father who asked her to scratch brother were having a relationship. Counsel for accused
his back but later she was forced to have intercourse interposed the defense of insanity stating that in prison,
with him. Her sister Jinky also experienced the same the accused behaved like an insane person, would go
with his father 2 years after. When their grandmother stark naked in the presence of his fellow inmates,
found out about the incident, they filed charges against remain indifferent to his surroundings and sang chorus
the accused. The accused claim that he cannot with inmates or by himself.
remember anything because he often drinks liquor at Held: At most, the accused is found to be
home. feeble-minded but this does not exempt him from
Held: The law presumes every man to be sane. liability but may serve as a mitigating circumstance. The
The accused failed to overthrow the presumption of accused admitted to his motive for the killing which is
sanity. Failure to remember is in itself no proof of the jealousy so he must know what he was doing at that
mental condition of the accused when the crime was time. His actions immediately after he struck his wife
performed. His charade of amnesia is a desperate and his behavior in prison may only be due to remorse
gambit for exculpation. at having killed his wife due to his feeblemindedness.

People v. Madarang People v. Valledor (supra)


332 SCRA 99(2000) Facts: Roger was in his house working on a
Facts: Fernando and his wife quarreled. In the lettering job inside his bedroom together with his first
heat of the fight, the accused stabbed his wife causing cousin, Elsa and his friends, Simplicio and Antonio. All
her death. The accused declared that he had no of a sudden, Valledor entered the room uttered Roger's
recollection of the stabbing incident. Further, he alleges nickname ("Jer") and immediately attacked him with a
that he did not know where he was that day. Court knife. Valledor then stabbed Elsa on the chest and said,
ordered the accuseds confinement in a mental "Ako akabales den, Elsa." (I had my revenge, Elsa).
institution where it was found that he was inflicted with Thereafter, Valledor fled, leaving Simplicio and Antonio
schizophrenia. He was submitted to treatment for 2 unharmed. Roger and Elsa were immediately brought to
years, after which, he faced the charges against him. the hospital. On their way out, Antonio noticed a
commotion and saw that Ricardo, a neighbor of the

31
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

victim, who was likewise stabbed by Valledor was Discernment may be shown by 1) the manner the
wounded. Elsa was declared dead on arrival. Roger on crime was committed or 2) the conduct of the offender
the other hand was treated for the 5-centimeter wound after its commission.
sustained by him on his right forearm. Valledor invoked
the defense of insanity. R.A. 9344 Sec. 6 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare
Held: Valledor failed to discharge the burden of Act of 2006)
overcoming the presumption of sanity at the time of the
commission of the crime. A child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the
Judging from his acts, Valledor was clearly time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt
aware and in control of what he was doing as he in fact from criminal liability. However, the child shall be
purposely chose to stab only the two victims. Two other subjected to an intervention program.
people were also inside the room, but Valledor went for
the victims. His obvious motive of revenge against the A child above fifteen (15) years but below
victims was accentuated by calling out their names and eighteen (18) years of age shall likewise be exempt
uttering the words, "I had my revenge" after stabbing from criminal liability and be subjected to an
them. Finally, his act of immediately fleeing from the intervention program, unless he/she has acted with
scene after the incident indicates that he was aware of discernment, in which case, such child shall be
the wrong he has done and the consequence thereof. subjected to appropriate proceedings.
As consistently held by this Court, "A man may
act crazy but it does not necessarily and conclusively The exemption from criminal liability does not
prove that he is legally so. Then, too, the medical include exemption from civil liability.
findings showing that Valledor was suffering from a
mental disorder after the commission of the crime, has Note: A child fifteen (15) years of age or under at
no bearing on his liability. What is decisive is his mental the time of the commission of the offense shall be
condition at the time of the perpetration of the offense. exempt from criminal liability. A child is deemed to be
Failing to discharge the burden of proving that he was fifteen (15) years of age on the day of the fifteenth
legally insane when he stabbed the victims, he should anniversary of his/her birthdate (R.A. No. 10630,
be held liable for his felonious acts. amending Section 6 o R.A. No. 9344).

Serious Crimes committed by Children who are


Par. 2. A PERSON UNDER NINE YEARS OF AGE
Exempt from Criminal Responsibility (R.A. No.
10630, amending Section 20 of R.A. No. 9344)
FIFTEEN YEARS OR LESS presumed to be incapable
of committing a crime, and this presumption is an
A child who is above twelve (12) years of age
absolute one which cannot be overcome by any
up to fifteen (15) years of age and who commits
evidence. (R.A. NO. 9334)
parricide, murder, infanticide, kidnapping and serious
illegal detention where the victim is killed or raped,
Senility, although said to be the second childhood, is
robbery, with homicide or rape, destructive arson,
only mitigating.
rape, or carnapping where the driver or occupant is
killed or raped or offenses under Republic Act No. 9165
4 PERIODS OF THE LIFE OF A HUMAN BEING
(Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)
a. 15 years and below
punishable by more than twelve (12) years of
AGE OF ABSOLUTE IRRESPONSIBILITY
imprisonment, shall be deemed a neglected child under
b. between 15 and 18 years -
P.D. No. 603 (The Child and Youth Welfare Code), as
AGE OF CONDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
amended, and shall be mandatorily placed in a special
c. 18 or over to 70 years -
facility within the youth care faculty or Bahay Pag-asa
AGE OF FULL RESPONSIBILITY
called the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and Support
d. over 70 years of age AGE OF MITIGATED
Center (IJISC) (Sec. 20-A of R.A. No. 9344, as
RESPONSIBILITY.
amended).

Par. 3. A PERSON OVER 9 YEARS OF AGE AND Repetition of Offenses (R.A. No. 10630, amending
UNDER 15 UNLESS HE HAS ACTED WITH Section 20 of R.A. No. 9344)
DISCERNMENT, IN WHICH CASE, SUCH MINOR
SHALL BE PROCEEDED AGAINST IN COORDANCE A child who is above twelve (12) years of age
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 80 OF THIS up to fifteen (15) years of age and who commits an
CODE. offense for the second time or oftener shall be deemed
a neglected child under P.D. No. 603, as amended, and
A minor over 15 and under 18 years of age must have shall undergo an intensive intervention program
acted without discernment to be exempted from criminal supervised by the local social welfare and development
liability. officer, provided that:

DISCERNMENT means the mental capacity of a minor 1. the child was previously subjected to a
between 15 and 18 years of age to fully appreciate the community-based intervention program;
consequences of his lawful act. 2. if the best interest of the child requires
that he/she be placed in a youth care facility or Bahay
DISCERNMENT INTENT Pag-asa, the childs parents or guardians shall execute
Moral significance that a Desired act of the person a written authorization for the voluntary commitment
person ascribes to the said of the child; and
act 3. if the child has no parents or guardians or
if they refuse or fail to execute the written

32
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

authorization for voluntary commitment, the proper accused acted with discernment by evidence of physical
petition for involuntary commitment shall be appearance, attitude or deportment not only before and
immediately filed by the DSWD or the LSWDO pursuant during the commission of the act, but also after and
to P.D. No. 603, as amended (Sec. 20-B of R.A. No. during the trial. The surrounding circumstances must
9344, as amended). demonstrate that the minor knew what he was doing
and that it was wrong. Such circumstance includes the
gruesome nature of the crime and the minors cunning
Note: In the following cases the minor offenders are and shrewdness.
under 15 years of age when they committed the crime. In the present case, the petitioner, with
They are thus exempt from criminal liabilities. methodical fashion, dragged the resisting victim behind
the pile of hollow blocks near the vacant house to insure
People v. Doquena that passersby would not be able to discover his
68 Phil 580 (1939) dastardly acts. When he was discovered by Teofisto
A 13-year old student stabs the school bully, Bucud who shouted at him, the petitioner hastily fled
and is convicted for having shown discernment through from the scene to escape arrest. Upon the prodding of
his responsible demeanor and school performance. his father and her mother, he hid in his grandmothers
Doquenas discernment is gleaned from his academic house to avoid being arrested by policemen and
records, leadership qualities and demeanor while remained thereat until barangay tanods arrived and took
testifying in court. him into custody.
The discernment that constitutes an exception
to the exemption from criminal liability of a minor under When the minor is adjudged criminally irresponsible
fifteen years of age but over nine, is his mental capacity duty of court is to commit him to custody of his family or
to understand the difference between right and wrong, some institution.
and such capacity may be known by taking into
consideration all the facts and circumstances afforded by The allegation of with intent to kill in the information
the records in each case, the very appearance, the very is sufficient allegation of discernment.
attitude of said minor not only before and during the
commission of the act but also after and even during PD 603
trial. THE CHILD AND YOUTH WELFARE CODE

Jose v. People Article 189. Youthful Offender Defined. - A youthful


448 SCRA 116 (2005) offender is one who is over nine years but under twenty-one
Facts: Jose, 13 yrs old was in a car with his years of age at the time of the commission of the offense.
cousin Zarraga, when the latter inquired from the poseur A child nine years of age or under at the time of
buyer SPO1 Guevarra if he could afford to buy shabu. the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability and shall
Guevarra replied in the affirmative afterwhich Zarraga be committed to the care of his or her father or mother, or
nearest relative or family friend in the discretion of the court
called the petitioner to bring out and hand over the
and subject to its supervision. The same shall be done for a
shabu wrapped in plastic and white soft paper. Jose
child over nine years and under fifteen years of age at the
handed over the plastic containing the shabu to Zarraga time of the commission of the offense, unless he acted with
who handed the same to Guevarra. The trial court discernment, in which case he shall be proceeded against in
rendered judgment convicting both Jose and Zarraga. accordance with Article 192.
Held: Jose is acquitted. The prosecution failed The provisions of Article 80 of the Revised Penal
to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he acted with Code shall be deemed modified by the provisions of this
discernment relative to the sale of shabu. Aside from Chapter.
bringing out and handing over the plastic bag to
Zarraga, Jose merely sat in the car and had no other Article 190. Physical and Mental
participation in the transaction between his cousin and Examination. - It shall be the duty of the law-enforcement
the poseur buyer. There is no evidence that Jose knew agency concerned to take the youthful offender, immediately
what was inside the plastic and soft white paper before after his apprehension, to the proper medical or health
and at the time he handed the same to Zarraga. officer for a thorough physical and mental examination.
Whenever treatment for any physical or mental defect is
indicated, steps shall be immediately undertaken to provide
Llave v. People
the same.
488 SCRA 376 (2006) The examination and treatment papers shall form
Facts: A 12 year old honor student was part of the record of the case of the youthful offender.
charged with raping his seven year old neighbor. When
caught, the accused ran away and hid for a few days at Article 191. Care of Youthful Offender Held
his grandparents house. He claimed that he acted for Examination or Trial. - A youthful offender held for
without discernment. physical and mental examination or trial or pending appeal,
Held: Article 12, paragraph 3 of the Revised if unable to furnish bail, shall from the time of his arrest be
Penal Code provides that a person over nine years of committed to the care of the Department of Social Welfare
age and under fifteen is exempt from criminal liability, or the local rehabilitation center or a detention home in the
unless he acted with discernment. The basic reason province or city which shall be responsible for his
behind the exempting circumstance is complete absence appearance in court whenever required: Provided, That in
of intelligence, freedom of action of the offender which is the absence of any such center or agency within a
reasonable distance from the venue of the trial, the
an essential element of a felony either by dolus or by
provincial, city and municipal jail shall provide quarters for
culpa. Intelligence is the power necessary to determine
youthful offenders separate from other detainees. The court
the morality of human acts to distinguish a licit from an may, in its discretion, upon recommendation of the
illicit act. On the other hand, discernment is the mental Department of Social Welfare or other agency or agencies
capacity to understand the difference between right and authorized by the Court, release a youthful offender on
wrong. The prosecution is burdened to prove that the recognizance, to the custody of his parents or other suitable

33
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

person who shall be responsible for his appearance determine whether to dismiss the case in accordance with
whenever required. the next preceding article or to pronounce the judgment of
conviction.
Article 192. Suspension of Sentence and In any case covered by this article, the youthful
Commitment of Youthful Offender. - If after hearing the offender shall be credited in the service of his sentence with
evidence in the proper proceedings, the court should find the full time spent in actual commitment and detention
that the youthful offender has committed the acts charged effected under the provisions of this Chapter.
against him the court shall determine the imposable penalty,
including any civil liability chargeable against him. However, Article 198. Effect of Release of Child Based
instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, the court on Good Conduct. - The final release of a child pursuant to
shall suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such the provisions of this Chapter shall not obliterate his civil
minor to the custody or care of the Department of Social liability for damages. Such release shall be without prejudice
Welfare, or to any training institution operated by the to the right for a writ of execution for the recovery of civil
government, or duly licensed agencies or any other damages.
responsible person, until he shall have reached twenty-one
years of age or, for a shorter period as the court may deem Article 199. Living Quarters for Youthful
proper, after considering the reports and recommendations Offenders Sentence. - When a judgment of conviction is
of the Department of Social Welfare or the agency or pronounced in accordance with the provisions of Article 197,
responsible individual under whose care he has been and at the time of said pronouncement the youthful offender
committed. is still under twenty-one, he shall be committed to the
The youthful offender shall be subject to visitation proper penal institution to serve the remaining period of his
and supervision by a representative of the Department of sentence: Provided, That penal institutions shall provide
Social Welfare or any duly licensed agency or such other youthful offenders with separate quarters and, as far as
officer as the Court may designate subject to such conditions practicable, group them according to appropriate age levels
as it may prescribe. or other criteria as will insure their speedy rehabilitation:
Provided, further, That the Bureau of Prisons shall maintain
Article 193. Appeal. - The youthful offender agricultural and forestry camps where youthful offenders
whose sentence is suspended can appeal from the order of may serve their sentence in lieu of confinement in regular
the court in the same manner as appeals in criminal cases. penitentiaries.

Article 194. Care and Maintenance of Article 200. Records of Proceedings. - Where
Youthful Offender. - The expenses for the care and a youthful offender has been charged before any city or
maintenance of the youthful offender whose sentence has provincial fiscal or before any municipal judge and the
been suspended shall be borne by his parents or those charges have been ordered dropped, all the records of the
persons liable to support him: Provided, That in case his case shall be destroyed immediately thereafter.
parents or those persons liable to support him can not pay Where a youthful offender has been charged and
all or part of said expenses, the municipality in which the the court acquits him, or dismisses the case or commits him
offense was committed shall pay one-third of said expenses to an institution and subsequently releases him pursuant to
or part thereof; the province to which the municipality this Chapter, all the records of his case shall be destroyed
belongs shall pay one-third; and the remaining one-third immediately after such acquittal, dismissal or release, unless
shall be borne by the National Government. Chartered cities civil liability has also been imposed in the criminal action, in
shall pay two-thirds of said expenses; and in case a which case such records shall be destroyed after satisfaction
chartered city cannot pay said expenses, part of the internal of such civil liability. The youthful offender concerned shall
revenue allotments applicable to the unpaid portion shall be not be held under any provision of law, to be guilty of
withheld and applied to the settlement of said indebtedness. perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation by reason of
All city and provincial governments must exert his failure to acknowledge the case or recite any fact related
efforts for the immediate establishment of local detention thereto in response to any inquiry made of him for any
homes for youthful offenders. purpose.
"Records" within the meaning of this article shall
Article 195. Report on Conduct of Child. - The include those which may be in the files of the National
Department of Social Welfare or its representative or duly Bureau of Investigation and with any police department, or
licensed agency or individual under whose care the youthful any other government agency which may have been
offender has been committed shall submit to the court every involved in the case.
four months or oftener as may be required in special cases,
a written report on the conduct of said youthful offender as Article 201. Civil Liability of Youthful
well as the intellectual, physical, moral, social and emotional Offenders. - The civil liability for acts committed by a
progress made by him. youthful offender shall devolve upon the offender's father
and, in case of his death or incapacity, upon the mother, or
Article 196. Dismissal of the Case. - If it is in case of her death or incapacity, upon the guardian. Civil
shown to the satisfaction of the court that the youthful liability may also be voluntarily assumed by a relative or
offender whose sentence has been suspended, has behaved family friend of the youthful offender.
properly and has shown his capability to be a useful member Article 202. Rehabilitation Centers. - The
of the community, even before reaching the age of majority, Department of Social Welfare shall establish regional
upon recommendation of the Department of Social Welfare, rehabilitation centers for youthful offenders. The local
it shall dismiss the case and order his final discharge. government and other non-governmental entities shall
collaborate and contribute their support for the
Article 197. Return of the Youth Offender to establishment and maintenance of these facilities.
Court. - Whenever the youthful offender has been found Article 203. Detention Homes. - The
incorrigible or has wilfully failed to comply with the Department of Local Government and Community
conditions of his rehabilitation programs, or should his Development shall establish detention homes in cities and
continued stay in the training institution be inadvisable, he provinces distinct and separate from jails pending the
shall be returned to the committing court for the disposition of cases of juvenile offenders.
pronouncement of judgment. Article 204. Liability of Parents or Guardian
When the youthful offender has reached the age or Any Person in the Commission of Delinquent Acts
of twenty-one while in commitment, the court shall by Their Children or Wards. - A person whether the

34
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

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

35
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

(g) Child's Right to Counsel. The court, upon


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

36
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

After one month from the date temporary custody after taking into consideration the best interests
of the child was given to another suitable person, the and the welfare of the child, shall issue a
agency or individual shall submit to the court a verified resolution terminating the parental authority of
report on whether the temporary custody of the child the person, agency or institution to whom the
has promoted his best interests. child was committed by judicial order and
(n) Change of Custody. If the child is restoring parental authority to the movant.
committed to the Department, it shall have the authority q) Jurisdiction for Prosecution of Punishable Acts.
to change the custody of a child it had placed with any The Family Court which granted the involuntary
duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or commitment shall have jurisdiction over the prosecution
individual if it appears that such change is for the best of a child who left without prior permission from the
interests of the child. The Department shall notify the person or institution to which he has been judicially
court of any change in custody of the child. committed or the person under whose custody he has
When conflicting interests arise among child- been judicially committed in accordance with Subsection
placement or child-caring agencies, the court which (m) of Section 4 of this Rule. It shall likewise have
granted the involuntary commitment of the child, upon jurisdiction over the person who induced the child to
motion of the Department or any of the agencies leave such person or institution, except in case of actual
concerned, shall order the change of commitment of the or imminent grave physical or moral danger to the child.
child. The Family Court which granted the involuntary
(o) Removal of Custody. A motion to remove commitment shall also have jurisdiction over the
custody of a child may be filed by an authorized prosecution of parents or guardians of the child who
representative of the Department with knowledge of the may be held liable under Articles 59 and 60 of P.D. No.
facts against a child-placement or child-caring agency or 603 and Sections 9, 10 and 31 of R.A. No. 7610.
individual to whose custody a child has been committed
by the court on the ground of neglect of such child as SECTION 5. Voluntary Commitment of a Child
defined in Section 3 (e) of this Rule. The court shall set to an Institution or Individual. The parent or
the motion for hearing with notice to the public guardian of a dependent, abandoned or neglected child
prosecutor and the court-designated social worker. If may voluntarily commit him to the Department or any
the court finds after hearing that the allegations of the duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or
motion have been established and that it is for the best individual subject to the rules of the Department.
interests and welfare of the child, the court shall issue However, no child shall be committed unless he is
an order removing him from the custody of the person surrendered in writing by his parents or guardian stating
or agency, as the case may be, and committing him to such voluntary commitment and specifically naming the
the custody of another duly licensed child-placement or office, agency, or individual to whose custody the child
child-caring agency or individual. is to be committed. Such written instrument should be
In the same proceeding, the court may suspend or notarized and signed in the presence of an authorized
revoke the license of the agency or individual found representative of the Department after counseling and
guilty of such neglect depending upon the gravity or other services have been made available to encourage
frequency of the offense. the child's parents to keep the child.
(p) Restoration of Parental Authority After (a) Petition for removal of Custody.
Involuntary Commitment. (i) Who may file; Ground. The parents
(i) Who may file; Ground. The parents or guardian who voluntarily committed the child, or
or guardian of a child committed to the care of a in their absence or failure, any person with
person, agency or institution by judicial order knowledge of the facts, may file a verified petition
may file a verified motion for the restoration of to remove custody of the child against the child-
his rights over the child with the court which placement or child-caring agency or individual to
granted the involuntary commitment on the whose custody the child has been voluntarily
ground that he is now able to take proper care committed on the ground of neglect of such child as
and custody of said child, provided, however, defined in Section 3 (e) of this Rule. A child may
that the child has not yet been adopted. also be removed from the custody of the child-
HDATSI placement or child-caring agency or individual on
(ii) Notice of Hearing. The court shall the ground that the voluntary commitment of the
fix the time and date for the hearing of the child was unjustified.
motion, which shall not be earlier than thirty (30) (ii) Venue. The petition shall be filed
days nor later than sixty (60) days from the date with the Family Court of the province or city where
of the filing of said motion and cause notice of the child-placement or child-caring agency to which
the hearing to be sent to the person, agency or the child has been voluntarily committed is located
institution to which the child has been or where the child may be found.
committed, the public prosecutor and the court- (iii) Contents of Verified Petition The
designated social worker, at least five (5) days petition must state:
before the date of hearing. (1) The name and address of the child-
(iii) Hearing. At the hearing, any placement or child-caring agency or individual
person may be allowed to intervene at the to whose custody the child has been voluntarily
discretion of the court to contest the right to the committed; SEIDAC
relief demanded. Witnesses may be called and (2) The facts showing that the child has
examined by the parties or by the court motu been neglected by the agency or in cases
proprio. where the voluntary commitment was
(iv) Resolution. If it is found that the unjustified, that the parents of the child are
cause for the commitment of the child no longer actually capable of taking care and custody of
exists and that the movant is already able to take the child;
proper care and custody of the child, the court,

37
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

(3) The name, address and written arranged for the disabled child when his welfare and
consent of the duly licensed child-placement or interests are at stake. AEHTIC
child-caring agency or individual to whose care (b) Venue. The petition for commitment of a
the child may be transferred. disabled child shall be filed with the Family Court of the
(4) The facts showing that petitioner has place where the parent or guardian resides or where the
exhausted the administrative remedies child is found.
available to him. (c) Contents of Verified Petition. The petition for
(iv) Notice of Hearing. If the petition is commitment must state the following:
sufficient in form and substance, the court shall set (1) The facts showing that the child
the same for hearing with notice to the appears to be mentally retarded, physically
Department, the public prosecutor, the court- handicapped, emotionally disturbed, mentally ill,
designated social worker, the agency or individual with cerebral palsy or with similar afflictions and
to whom the child has been committed and in needs institutional care; IADCES
appropriate cases, the parents of the child. (2) The name of the parents and their
(v) Judgment. If after hearing the residence, if known, or if the child has no living
court finds that the allegations of the petition have parent, the name and residence of the guardian, if
been established and that it is for the best interests any; and
and welfare of the child, it shall issue an order (3) The fact that the parents or guardian
removing the child from the custody of the person or any duly licensed disabled child-placement or
or agency concerned, and committing him to the child-caring agency, as the case may be, has
custody of another duly licensed child-placement or opposed the commitment of such child;
child-caring agency or individual. (4) The name and written conformity of
The court, in the same proceeding may, after the institution where the child is to be committed.
hearing the comment or recommendation of the (5) An estimate of the costs and other
Department, suspend or revoke the license of the expenses of maintaining the child in the institution.
agency or individual found guilty of such neglect The verified petition shall be sufficient if based
depending upon the gravity or frequency of the offense. upon the personal knowledge of the petitioner.
(b) Restoration of Parental Authority After (d) Order of Hearing; Notice. If the petition filed
Voluntary Commitment. The restoration of rights of is sufficient in form and substance, the court, by an
the parent or guardian over the child who has been order reciting the purpose of the petition, shall fix the
voluntarily committed shall be governed by the rules of date of the hearing thereof, and a copy of such order
the Department, provided, however, that the petition for shall be served on the child alleged to be mentally
restoration is filed within six (6) months from the date of retarded, physically handicapped, emotionally disturbed,
voluntary commitment. In case the Department refuses mentally ill, with cerebral palsy or with similar afflictions
to grant legal custody and parental authority to the and on the person having charge of him or any of his
parent or guardian over the child who has been relatives residing in the province or city as the court
voluntarily committed to an agency or individual, the may deem proper.
parent or guardian may file a petition in court for The order shall also direct the sheriff or any other
restoration of parental authority in accordance with officer of the court to produce, if necessary, the alleged
Section 4 (p) of this Rule. disabled child on the date of the hearing.
(c) Jurisdiction for Prosecution of Punishable Acts. (e) Hearing and Judgment. If the court finds
The Family Court of the place where the child may be that the allegations of the petition have been established
found or where the duly licensed child-placement or and that institutional care of the child is for his best
child-caring agency or individual is located shall have interests or the public welfare and that his parents, or
jurisdiction over the prosecution of a child who left guardian or relatives are unable for any reason
without prior permission from the person or institution whatsoever to take proper care of him, the court shall
to which he has been voluntarily committed. It shall order his commitment to the proper institution for
likewise have jurisdiction over the person who induced disabled children. The court shall likewise make proper
the child to leave such person or institution, except in provisions for the custody of the property or money
case of grave actual or imminent physical or moral belonging to the committed child.
danger, to the child. The same Family Court shall also The expense of maintaining a disabled child in the
have jurisdiction over the prosecution of parents or institution to which he has been committed shall be
guardians of the child who may be held liable under borne primarily by the parents or guardian and
Articles 59 and 60 of P.D. No. 603 and Sections 9, 10 secondarily, by such disabled child, if he has property of
and 31 of R.A. No. 7610. his own.
In all cases where the expenses for the
SECTION 6. Petition for Commitment of a maintenance of the disabled child cannot be paid in
Disabled Child. accordance with the immediately preceding paragraph,
(a) Who may file. Where a child appears to be the Department shall bear the expenses, or such part
mentally retarded, physically handicapped, emotionally thereof as may remain unpaid.
disturbed, mentally ill, with cerebral palsy or with similar The court shall furnish the institution to which the
afflictions and needs institutional care but his parents or child has been committed with a copy of its judgment,
guardians are opposed thereto, the Department, or any together with all the reports and other data pertinent to
duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or the case.
individual may file a verified petition for commitment of (f) Discharge of Judicially Committed Disabled
the said child to any reputable institution providing care, Child. Upon motion of the parent, guardian or
training and rehabilitation for disabled children. institution to which the child has been judicially
The parents or guardian of the child may file a committed under this rule, the court, after hearing, shall
similar petition in case no immediate placement can be order the discharge of such child if it is established and
certified by the Department that:

38
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

(1) He is no longer a danger to himself e) To provide for the care, protection and
and the community; wholesome moral, mental, and physical development of
(2) He has been sufficiently rehabilitated, juveniles in conflict with the law.
from his physical handicap or if of working age, is SECTION 3. Interpretation. This Rule shall be
already fit to engage in gainful occupation; or interpreted liberally to promote the best interests of the
(3) He has been sufficiently relieved of child in conformity with Philippine laws and the United
his psychological, mental and emotional problems Nations' Convention on the Rights of the Child.
and is ready to assume normal social relations. SECTION 4. Definitions. As used in this Rule,
(a) To be in conflict with the law means being
SECTION 7. Effectivity. This rule shall take charged with the commission of an act defined and
effect on April 15, 2002 after its publication in a punished as a crime or offense under the law, including
newspaper of general circulation not later than March violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations, and
15, 2002. ordinances of local government units.
(b) Serious offense refers to any offense not
[A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC. February 28, 2002.] covered by Section 1, par. B, Criminal Cases, of the Rule
RE: PROPOSED RULE ON JUVENILES IN CONFLICT on Summary Procedure, to wit: (1) violations of traffic
WITH THE LAW laws, rules and regulations; (2) violations of the rental
RESOLUTION law; (3) violations of municipal or city ordinances; (4) all
Acting on the letter of the Chairman of the other offenses punished with imprisonment not
Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court submitting exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding one
for this Court's consideration and approval the Proposed thousand pesos (P1,000.00), or both, irrespective of
Rule on Juveniles In Conflict With The Law, the Court other imposable penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of
Resolved to APPROVE the same. the civil liability arising therefrom; provided, however,
The Rule shall take effect on April 15, 2002 that in offenses involving damage to property through
following its publication in a newspaper of general criminal negligence, the imposable fine is not in excess
circulation not later than March 15, 2002. of ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00).
February 28, 2002. (c) Youth detention center refers to a government-
owned or operated agency providing habilitating and
SECTION 1. Applicability of the Rule. rehabilitative facilities where a juvenile in conflict with
This Rule shall apply to all criminal cases involving the law may be physically restricted pending court
juveniles in conflict with the law. disposition of the charge against him.
A juvenile in conflict with the law is a person who at the (d) Intake report is a preliminary written report
time of the commission of the offense is below eighteen containing the personal and other circumstances of the
(18) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of juvenile in conflict with the law and prepared by the
age. social worker assigned by the Department of Social
This Rule shall not apply to an accused who at Welfare and Development (DSWD) or local government
the time of initial contact as defined in Section 4(p) of unit to assist him as soon as he enters the justice
this Rule, or at any time thereafter, shall have reached system.
the age of eighteen (18), in which case the regular rules (e) Case study report is a written report of the
on criminal procedure shall apply without prejudice to result of an investigation conducted by the social worker
the rights granted under Sections 36, 37, 38 and 39 of designated by the Family Court on the social, cultural,
this Rule. (n) economic and legal status or condition of the juvenile in
SECTION 2. Objective. The objective conflict with the law. It includes, among others, his
of this Rule is to ensure that the justice system treats developmental age; educational attainment; family and
every juvenile in conflict with the law in a manner that social relationships; the quality of his peer group; the
recognizes and upholds his human dignity and worth, strengths and weaknesses of his family; parental control
and instills in him respect for the fundamental rights and over him; his attitude toward the offense; the harm or
freedoms of others. The Rule considers his damage done to others resulting from the offense; his
developmental age and the desirability of his record of prior offenses, if any; and the attitude of his
reintegration into and assumption of a constructive role parents towards his responsibility for the offense.
in society in accordance with the principle of restorative (f) Diversion refers to an alternative child-
justice. appropriate process of determining the responsibility
To attain this objective, the Rule seeks: and treatment of a juvenile in conflict with the law on
a) To provide a procedure in the adjudication of the basis of his social, cultural, economic, psychological
juveniles in conflict with the law that takes into account or educational background without resorting to formal
their distinct circumstances and assures the parties of a court adjudication.
fair hearing with their constitutional and statutory rights (g) Diversion programs refer to programs that the
recognized and respected; juvenile in conflict with the law is required to undergo in
b) To divert from the justice system juveniles who lieu of formal court proceedings,
can be cared for or placed under community-based (h) Disposition conference is a meeting held by the
alternative programs of treatment, training and court with the social worker who prepared the case
rehabilitation in conformity with the principle of study report together with the juvenile in conflict with
restorative justice; the law and his parents or guardian ad litem, for the
c) To deal with the juvenile in a family purpose of determining the disposition measures
environment whenever possible, separate him from his appropriate to the personal and peculiar circumstances
parents only when necessary for his welfare or in the of the juvenile.
interest of public safety; (i) Recognizance is an undertaking in lieu of a
d) To remove from juveniles in conflict with the bond assumed by a parent or custodian who shall be
law the stigma of criminality and the consequences of responsible for the appearance in court by the juvenile
criminal behavior; and in conflict with the law when required.

39
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

(j) Probation is a disposition alternative under SECTION 6. Procedure in Taking a Juvenile


which a juvenile in conflict with the law is released and into Custody. Any person taking into custody a
permitted to remain in his home after conviction and juvenile in conflict with the law shall:
sentence. The juvenile is subject to conditions imposed (a) Identify himself and present proper
in the sentence and to supervision by the court and a identification to the juvenile;
probation officer who has the duty to return the juvenile (b) Inform the juvenile of the reason for such
to the court in case of violation of a condition of his custody and advise him of his constitutional rights in a
probation. language or dialect understood by him;
(k) Suspended sentence is the holding in abeyance (c) Refrain from using vulgar or profane words and
of the service of the sentence imposed by the court from sexually harassing or abusing, or making sexual
upon a finding of guilt of the juvenile in conflict with the advances on the juvenile;
law who will undergo rehabilitation. (d) Avoid displaying or using any firearm, weapon,
(l) Community continuum is a community-based handcuffs or other instruments of force or restraint,
group therapy process that provides continuous unless absolutely necessary and only after all other
guidance and support to the juvenile in conflict with the methods of control have been exhausted and have
law upon his release from rehabilitation and his failed;
reintegration into society. (e) Refrain from subjecting the juvenile to greater
(m) Age of criminal responsibility is the age when a restraint than is necessary for his apprehension;
juvenile who is nine (9) years or over but under fifteen (f) Avoid violence or unnecessary force;
(15) years commits an offense with discernment. (g) Notify the parents of the juvenile or his nearest
(n) Discernment means the mental capacity to relative or guardian, if any, and the local social welfare
understand the difference between right and wrong and officer as soon as the apprehension is made;
its consequences. (h) Take the juvenile immediately to an available
(o) Restorative Justice is a principle which requires government medical or health officer for a physical and
a process of resolving conflicts with the maximum mental examination. The examination results shall be
involvement of the victim, the offender, and the kept confidential unless otherwise ordered by the Family
community. It seeks to obtain reparation for the victim, Court. Whenever treatment for any physical or mental
reconciliation of the offender, the offended and the defect is necessary, steps shall be immediately taken by
community and reassurance to the offender that he can the said officer to provide the juvenile with the
be reintegrated into society. It. also enhances public necessary and proper treatment; and
safety by activating the offender, the victim and the (i) Hold the juvenile in secure quarters separate
community in prevention strategies. from that of the opposite sex and adult offenders.
(p) Initial contact is the apprehension or taking
into custody of a juvenile in conflict with the law by law SECTION 7. Taking Custody of a Juvenile
enforcement officers or private citizens. It includes the Without a Warrant. A peace officer or a private
time when the juvenile receives a subpoena under person taking into custody a juvenile in conflict with the
Section 3 (b) of Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of law without a warrant shall likewise follow the provisions
Criminal Procedure or summons under Section 6 (a) or of Sections 5, 8 and 9 of Rule 113 of the Revised Rules
Sec. 9 (b) of the same Rule in cases that do not require of Criminal Procedure and shall forthwith deliver him to
preliminary investigation or where there is no necessity the nearest police station. The juvenile shall be
to place the juvenile under immediate custody. proceeded against in accordance with Section 7 of Rule
(q) Corporal punishment is any kind of physical 112.
punishment inflicted on the body as distinguished from
pecuniary punishment or fine. SECTION 8. Conduct of Initial
SECTION 5. Exemption from Criminal Liability. Investigation by the Police. The police officer
A minor under nine (9) years of age at the time of the conducting the initial investigation of a juvenile in
commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal conflict with the law shall do so in the presence of either
liability. of the parents of the juvenile; in the absence of both
A minor nine (9) years and above but under fifteen parents, the guardian or the nearest relative, or a social
(15) years of age at the time of the commission of the welfare officer, and the counsel of his own choice. In
offense shall be committed to the care of his father or their presence, the juvenile shall be informed of his
mother, or nearest relative or family friend; in the sound constitutional rights during custodial investigation.
discretion of the court and subject to its supervision. The right of the juvenile to privacy shall be
However, if the prosecution proves that he has acted protected at all times. All measures necessary to
with discernment; he shall be proceeded against in promote this right shall be taken, including the exclusion
accordance with Sections 24 to 28, or 36 to 40 of this of the media.
Rule, as the case may be, and subjected to a
delinquency prevention program as determined by the SECTION 9. Fingerprinting and
court. Photographing of the Juvenile. While under
Exemption from criminal liability does not include investigation, no juvenile in conflict with the law shall be
exemption from civil liability which shall be enforced in fingerprinted or photographed in a humiliating and
accordance with the provisions of Article 221 of the degrading manner. The following guidelines shall be
Family Code in relation to Article 101 of the Revised observed when fingerprinting or photographing the
Penal Code and Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of juvenile:
Criminal Procedure. (a) His fingerprint and photograph files shall be
In case the act or omission of the juvenile involves kept separate from those of adults and shall be kept
a quasi-delict, Article 2180 of the Civil Code shall apply. confidential. They may be inspected by law enforcement
officers only when necessary for the discharge of their
duties and upon prior authority of the Family Court;
TADCSE

40
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

(b) His fingerprints and photographs shall be released on recognizance to the custody of their parents
removed from the files and destroyed: (1) if the case or other suitable person who shall be responsible for the
against him is not filed, or is dismissed; or (2) when the juveniles' appearance in court whenever required.
juvenile reaches twenty one (21) years of age and there
is no record that he committed an offense after reaching SECTION 16.When Bail a Matter of Right. All
eighteen (18) years of age. juveniles in conflict with the law shall be admitted to bail
as a matter of right before final conviction of an offense
SECTION 10.Intake Report by the Social not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life
Welfare Officer. Upon the taking into custody of a imprisonment.
juvenile in conflict with the law, the social welfare officer In the event the juvenile cannot post bail for lack of
assigned to him by the DSWD shall immediately under financial resources, the Family Court shall commit the
take a preliminary background investigation of the juvenile pursuant to Section 18 of this Rule.
juvenile and submit, prior to arraignment of the However, where the juvenile does not pose a threat
juvenile, a report on his findings to the Family Court in to public safety, the Family Court may, motu proprio or
which the case may be filed. upon motion and recommendation of the DSWD, release
the juvenile on recognizance to the custody of his
SECTION 11.Filing of Criminal Action. A parents or other responsible person.
criminal action may be instituted against a juvenile in
conflict with the law by filing a complaint with the SECTION 17.When Bail Not A Matter of Right.
prosecutor or the municipal trial court in cases where a No juvenile charged with an offense punishable by
preliminary investigation is required. In Manila and other death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment shall be
chartered cities, if their charters so provide, the admitted to bail when evidence of guilt is strong.
complaint shall be filed with the Office of the Prosecutor.
It may also be filed directly with the Family Court if no SECTION 18.Care of Juveniles in Conflict with
preliminary investigation is required under Section 1 of the Law. The juvenile charged with having
Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. committed a delinquent act, held for trial or while the
All criminal actions commenced by complaint or case is pending appeal, if unable to furnish bail or is
information shall be prosecuted under the direction and denied bail, shall, from the time of his being taken into
control of the public prosecutor assigned to the Family custody, be committed by the Family Court to the care
Court. of the DSWD, a youth detention center, or a local
rehabilitation center recognized by the government in
SECTION 12.Prosecution of Civil Action. the province, city or municipality within the jurisdiction
When a criminal action is instituted against a juvenile in of the said court. The center or agency concerned shall
conflict with the law, the action for recovery of civil be responsible for the juvenile's appearance in court
liability arising from the offense charged shall be whenever required. In the absence of any such center or
governed by Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal agency within a reasonable distance from the venue of
Procedure. the trial, the juvenile shall be detained in the provincial,
city or municipal jail which shall provide adequate
SECTION 13.Preliminary Investigation. As quarters for the juvenile separate from adult detainees
far as consistent with this Rule, the preliminary and detainees of the opposite sex.
investigation of a juvenile in conflict with the law shall
be governed by Section 3 of Rule 112 of the Revised SECTION 19.Case Study Report. After the
Rules of Criminal Procedure. If clarificatory questions institution of the criminal action, the social worker of the
become necessary, the Rule on Examination of a Child Family Court shall immediately undertake a case study
Witness shall apply. of the juvenile and his family, his environment and such
If a preliminary investigation is required before the other matters relevant to the proper disposition of the
filing of a complaint or information, the same shall be case. His report shall be submitted within the period
conducted by the judge of the Municipal Trial Court or fixed by the Family Court, preferably before
the public prosecutor in accordance with the pertinent arraignment, to aid it in the proper disposition of the
provisions of Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal case.
Procedure.
If the investigating prosecutor finds probable cause SECTION 20.Diversion Proceedings Before
to hold the juvenile for trial, he shall prepare the Arraignment. Where the maximum penalty imposed
corresponding resolution and information for approval by by law for the offense with which the juvenile in conflict
the provincial or city prosecutor, as the case may be. with the law is charged is imprisonment of not more
The juvenile, his parents/nearest relative/guardian and than six (6) months, regardless of fine or fine alone
his counsel shall be furnished forthwith a copy of the regardless of amount, and the corresponding complaint
approved resolution. or information is filed with the Family Court, the case
shall not be set for arraignment; instead, it shall
SECTION 14.Venue. Subject to the provisions forthwith be referred to the Diversion Committee which
of Section 15, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal shall determine whether the juvenile can be diverted
Procedure, any criminal or civil action involving a and referred to alternative measures or services offered
juvenile in conflict with the law shall be instituted and by non-court institutions. Pending determination by the
tried in the Family Court of or nearest the place where Committee, the court shall deliver the juvenile on
the offense was committed or where any of its essential recognizance to the custody of his parents or legal
elements occurred. guardian who shall be responsible for the presence of
the juvenile during the diversion proceedings.
SECTION 15.Recognizance. Before final
conviction, all juveniles charged with offenses falling SECTION 21.Diversion Committee. In each
under the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure shall be Family Court, there shall be a Diversion Committee to be

41
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

composed of its branch clerk of court as chairperson, under the supervision and control of the Family Court,
and the prosecutor, a lawyer of the Public Attorney's shall contain the following terms and conditions:
Office and the social worker assigned to the said Family a) The juvenile shall present himself to the social
Court as members. worker of the Family Court that approved the diversion
The chairperson of the Committee shall call for a program at least once a month for evaluation of its
conference with notice to the juvenile, his parents/legal effectiveness. Whenever the juvenile is permitted to
guardian and his counsel, and the private complainant reside in a place under the jurisdiction of another Family
and his counsel, and recommend to the Family Court Court, control and supervision over him shall be
whether the juvenile should be diverted to a diversion transferred to the Family Court of that place, and in
program or undergo formal court proceedings. In such case, a copy of the undertaking, the intake and
making its recommendation, the Committee shall case study reports and other pertinent records shall be
consider the following factors: furnished the said court. Thereafter, the Family Court to
a) The record of the juvenile on his conflict with which jurisdiction over the juvenile is transferred shall
the law; have the power with respect to the latter that was
b) Whether the imposable maximum penalty of previously possessed by the Family Court that approved
the offense is more than six (6) months, regardless of the diversion and such other conditions as the
fine; or only a fine, regardless of amount; Committee may deem just and proper under the
c) Whether the juvenile is an obvious threat to circumstances.
himself and/or the community; b) The juvenile shall faithfully comply with the
d) Whether the juvenile is unrepentant; terms and conditions in the undertaking. His non-
e) Whether the juvenile or his parents are compliance shall be referred by the Committee to the
indifferent or hostile; and Family Court where the case has been transferred for a
Whether the juvenile's relationships with his peers show-cause hearing with notice to the juvenile and
increase the possibility of delinquent behavior. private complainant. The court shall determine whether
If the Committee recommends diversion, it shall the juvenile should continue with the diversion program
submit the diversion program for the juvenile for the or his case returned to the original court for formal
consideration and approval of the court. proceedings.
The Committee cannot recommend diversion should The Family Court shall exert its best efforts to
the juvenile or the private complainant object thereto. If secure satisfaction of the civil liability of the juvenile and
no diversion program is recommended, the court shall his parents or guardian. However, inability to pay the
include the case in its calendar for formal proceedings. said liability shall not by itself be a ground to discontinue
Consent to diversion by the juvenile or payment by the diversion program of the juvenile.
him of civil indemnity shall not in any way be construed
as admission of guilt and used as evidence against him SECTION 25.Closure Order. The juvenile
in the event that his case is included in the court subject of diversion proceedings shall be visited
calendar for formal proceedings. periodically by the Family Court social worker who shall
submit to the Committee his reports thereon. At any
SECTION 22.Diversion Programs. The time before or at the end of the diversion period, a
diversion program designed by the Committee shall be report recommending closure or extension of diversion,
distinct to each juvenile in conflict with the law limited as the case may be, shall be filed by the Committee with
for a specific period. It may include any or a the Family Court. The report and recommendation shall
combination of the following: be heard by the Family Court within fifteen (15) days
a) Written or oral reprimand or citation; from its receipt thereof, with notice to the members of
b) Return of property; the Committee, the juvenile and his parents or legal
c) Payment of the damage caused; guardian and counsel and the complainant to determine
d) Written or oral apology; whether the undertaking has been fully and satisfactorily
e) Guidance and supervision orders; complied with. If the juvenile has complied with his
f) Counseling for the juvenile and his family; undertaking, the Family Court shall issue the
g) Training, seminars and lectures on (i) anger corresponding closure order terminating the diversion
management skills; (ii) problem-solving and/or conflict program. It may, however, extend the period of
resolution skills; (iii) values formation; and (iv) other diversion to give the juvenile a further chance to be
skills that will aid the juvenile to properly deal with rehabilitated. In the event the court finds that the
situations that can lead to a repetition of the offense; diversion program will no longer serve its. purpose, it
h) Participation in available community-based shall include the case of the juvenile in its calendar for
programs; formal proceedings.
i) Institutional care and custody; or j) Work-
detail program in the community. SECTION 26. Duty of the Family Court to
Protect the Rights of the Juvenile. In all criminal
SECTION 23.Hearing of Diversion Program. proceedings in the Family Court, the judge shall ensure
The Family Court shall set the recommendation and the protection of the following rights of the juvenile in
diversion program for hearing within ten (10) days from conflict with the law:
receipt thereof. a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is
proved beyond reasonable doubt;
SECTION 24.Undertaking. In all cases where a b) To be informed promptly and directly of the
juvenile in conflict with the law is given the benefit of a nature and cause of the charge against him, and if
diversion program, an undertaking describing the appropriate, through his parents or legal guardian;
program shall be signed by him, his parents or legal c) To be present at every stage of the
guardian and the complainant, and approved by the proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of
Family Court. The program, which shall be enforced judgment. The juvenile may, however, waive his
presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set

42
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

forth in his bail, unless his presence at the trial is


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

43
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

been issued disposition measures, even before he has


reached eighteen (18) years of age, and order a final SECTION 36.Confidentiality of Proceedings
discharge if it finds that the juvenile has behaved and Records. All proceedings and records involving
properly and has shown the capability to be a useful juveniles in conflict with the law from initial contact until
member of the community. final disposition of the case by the Family Court shall be
If the Family Court, however, finds that the juvenile considered privileged and confidential. The public may
has not behaved properly, has been incorrigible, has not be excluded from the proceedings and, pursuant to the
shown the capability of becoming a useful member of provisions of Section 31 of the Rule on Examination of a
society, has willfully failed to comply with the conditions Child Witness, the records shall not be disclosed directly
of his disposition or rehabilitation program, or should his or indirectly to anyone by any of the parties or the
continued stay in the training institution where he has participants in the proceedings for any purpose
been assigned be not in his best interests, he shall be whatsoever, except to determine if the juvenile may
brought before the court for execution of his judgment. have his sentence suspended under Section 25 of this
If the juvenile in conflict with the law has reached Rule or if he may be granted probation under the
the age of eighteen (18) years while in commitment, the Probation Law, or to enforce the civil liability imposed in
Family Court shall determine whether to dismiss the the criminal action.
case in accordance with the first paragraph of this The Family Court shall take other measures to
Section or to execute the judgment of conviction. In the protect this confidentiality of proceedings including non-
latter case, unless the juvenile has already availed of disclosure of records to the media, the maintenance of a
probation under Presidential Decree No. 603 or other separate police blotter for cases involving juveniles in
similar laws, he may apply for probation if qualified conflict with the law and the adoption of a system of
under the provisions of the Probation Law. coding to conceal material information, which will lead to
The final release of the juvenile shall not extinguish the juvenile's identity. Records of juveniles in conflict
his civil liability. The parents and other persons with the law shall not be used in subsequent
exercising parental authority over the juvenile shall be proceedings or cases involving the same offender as an
civilly liable for the injuries and damages caused by the adult.
acts or omissions of the juvenile living in their company
and under their parental authority subject to the SECTION 37.Non-liability for perjury or
appropriate defenses provided by law. concealment or misrepresentation. Any person
who has been in conflict with the law as a juvenile shall
SECTION 34.Probation as an Alternative to not be held guilty of perjury or of concealment or
Imprisonment. After promulgation of sentence and misrepresentation by reason of his failure to
upon application at any time by the juvenile in conflict acknowledge the case or recite any fact related thereto
with the law within the period to appeal, the Family in response to any inquiry made to him for any purpose.
Court may place the juvenile on probation, if he is
qualified under the Probation Law. SECTION 38.Sealing of Records. The Family
Court motu proprio, or on application of a person who
SECTION 35.Credit in Service of Sentence. has been adjudged a juvenile in conflict with the law, or
The juvenile in conflict with the law who has undergone if still a minor, on motion of his parents or legal
preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service guardian, shall, upon notice to the prosecution and after
of his sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty, with hearing, order the sealing of the records of the case if it
the full time during which he has undergone preventive finds that two (2) years have elapsed since the final
imprisonment, if he agrees voluntarily in writing to abide discharge of the juvenile after suspension of sentence or
by the same or similar disciplinary rules imposed upon probation, or from the date of the closure order and he
convicted prisoners, except in any of the following has no pending case of an offense or a crime involving
cases: moral turpitude.
1. When the juvenile is a recidivist or has been Upon entry of the order, the case shall be treated
convicted previously twice or more times of any crime; as if it never occurred. All index references shall be
or deleted and in case of inquiry, the Family Court,
2. When upon being summoned for execution of prosecution, law enforcement officers and all other
sentence, he failed to surrender voluntarily. offices and agencies that dealt with the case shall reply
If the juvenile does not agree to abide by the same that no record exists with respect to the juvenile
disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he concerned. Copies of the order shall be sent to these
shall be credited in the service of his sentence with four- officials and agencies named in the order. Inspection of
fifths of the time during which he has undergone the sealed records thereafter may be permitted only by
preventive imprisonment. order of the Family Court upon petition. of the juvenile
Whenever the juvenile has undergone preventive who is the subject of the records or of other proper
imprisonment for a period equal to or more than the parties.
possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged This procedure shall be without prejudice to the rule
to which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet on destruction of video or audio tapes under Section 31
terminated, he shall be released immediately without of the Rule on the Examination of a Child Witness.
prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the
proceeding on appeal, if the same is under review. In SECTION 39.Prohibition Against Labeling. In
case the maximum penalty to which the juvenile may be the conduct of proceedings from initial contact with the
sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after thirty juvenile in conflict with the law to the final disposition of
(30) days of preventive imprisonment. the case, there shall be no branding or labeling of the
Any form of physical restraint imposed on the latter as a young criminal, juvenile delinquent,
juvenile in conflict with the law, including community prostitute, vagrant, or attaching to him in any manner
service and commitment to a rehabilitation center, shall any derogatory name. Likewise, no discriminatory
be considered preventive imprisonment. remarks and practices shall be allowed, particularly with

44
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

respect to the juvenile's social or economic status, Concepcion arrived and fired his rifle twice or thrice past
physical disability or ethnic origin. the ears of Galang, who was then sitting, but without
injuring him. After that, however, Concepcion thrust the
SECTION 40.Contempt Powers. A person who barrel of the gun against the abdomen of Galang. Then
directly or indirectly disobeys any order of the Family there was an explosion. Galang was shot in the thigh. At
Court or obstructs or interferes with its proceedings or least 3 more shots were fired, hitting him in the chest.
the enforcement of its orders issued under this Rule Lorenzo died instantly. In his defense Concepcion
shall be liable for contempt of court. claimed that the shooting was only accidental.
Held: There was no accident. By Concepcions
SECTION 41.Effectivity. This rule shall take own testimony, the victim was unarmed. In contrast, he
effect on April 15, 2002 after its publication in a had an armalite and a handgun. It is highly
newspaper of general circulation not later than March inconceivable that an unarmed man could pose bodily
15, 2002. harm to another who is heavily armed. Concepcions gun
discharged several shots that hit vital parts of the
Par. 4. ANY PERSON WHO, WHILE PERFORMING victim's body. As observed by the trial court, recklessly
A LAWFUL ACT WITH DUE CARE, CAUSES AN appellant had put his finger on the trigger of his cocked
INJURY BY MERE ACCIDENT WITHOUT FAULT OR and loaded rifle. In that state, with the slightest
INTENTION OF CAUSING IT. movement of his finger, the rifle would fire readily. And
it did not just once but several fires. Concepcion is
ELEMENTS: guilty of homicide.
1. A person
performing a lawful act; People v. Agliday
2. With due care; 367 SCRA 273 (2001)
3. He causes an Facts: The wife of the accused was washing
injury to another by mere accident; dishes in the kitchen when her son was shot with a
4. Without fault or shotgun by her husband. Conchita claimed that she and
intention of causing it. her husband quarreled before the incident and then her
husband left the kitchen got his shotgun and went back
Striking another with a gun in self-defense, even if it to the kitchen to shoot his son.
fired and seriously injured the assailant is a lawful act. Accused claimed that it was only an accident.
He was merely cleaning his gun and the gun accidentally
ACCIDENT something that happens outside the sway went off and his sons buttock was hit.
of our will and although it comes about through some Held: The exemption from criminal liability
act of our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly under the circumstance showing accident is based on
foreseeable consequences. the lack of criminal intent. In the case at bar, accused
- If the consequences are plainly foreseeable, got his shotgun and returned to the kitchen to shoot his
it will be a case of negligence. son who had intervened in the quarrel between the
US v. Tanedo former and his wife. There was clear intent to fire and
15 Phil 196 (1910) not mere accident.
Facts: The accused, while hunting, saw wild
chickens and fired a shot. The slug, after hitting a wild Nieva v. People
chicken, recoiled and struck the tenant who was a G.R. No. 188751, (2016)
relative of the accused. The man who was injured died. Petitioner Nieva cannot invoke the exempting
Held: If life is taken by misfortune or accident circumstance of accident to free him from criminal
while the actor is in the performance of a lawful act liability. Article 12 (4), Book I of the Revised Penal Code
executed with due care and without intention of doing states that any person who, while performing a lawful
harm, there is no criminal liability. act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident
without fault or intention of causing it shall be exempt
People v. Bindoy from criminal liability. The basis for exemption under
56 Phil 15(1931) said provision is the complete absence of negligence and
Facts: The accused, while in a drinking session, intent. The accused commits a crime but there is no
offered some tuba to Pacas wife but she refused so the criminal liability. An accident is a fortuitous
accused threatened to injure her if she didnt accept. circumstance, event or happening; an event happening
Pacas stepped in to defend his wife, attempting to take wholly or partly through human agency, an event which
away from the accused the bolo he carried. In the under the circumstances is unusual or unexpected by
course of the struggle, accused succeeded in the person to whom it happens. It is an affirmative
disengaging himself from Pacas, wrenching the bolo defense which the accused is burdened to prove by clear
from the latters hand towards the left behind the and convincing evidence.
accused, with such violence that the point of the bolo
reached Emigdios chest who was then behind the To successfully claim the defense of accident,
accused. the accused must show that the following circumstances
Held: The accused, in his effort to free himself are present: (1) a person is performing a lawful act; (2)
hit Emigdio in the chest. There is no evidence that this with due care; (3) he causes an injury to another by
was done deliberately. It is merely accidental. mere accident; and (4) he had no fault in or intention of
causing the injury.
People v. Concepcion
386 SCRA 74(2002)
Facts: Galang got involved in a quarrel at the Par 5. ANY PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER THE
town plaza. He was brought to the barangay hall for COMPULSION OF AN IRRESISTIBLE FORCE.
questioning by Brgy Captain Capitli. Shortly after,

45
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

ELEMENTS: least equal to that which he required to commit and that


1. That the compulsion is by means of it promised an evil of such gravity and imminence that it
physical force. might be said that the ordinary man would have
2. That the physical force must be succumbed to it. Evidence fails to establish that the
irresistible. threat directed to the accused by the chiefmate, if any,
3. That the physical force must come from a was of such character as to deprive him of all volition
third person and to make him a mere instrument without will. The
fear was not insuperable.
Before force can be considered to be an irresistible
one, it must produce such an effect upon the individual US v. Caballeros
that, in spite of all resistance, it reduces him to a mere 4 Phil 350 (1905)
instrument and, as such, incapable of committing a Facts: The defendants have been sentenced as
crime. accessories in the crime of assassination of 4 American
school teachers. The defendants took part in the burial
The irresistible force can never consist in an impulse or of the corpses of the victims.
passion or obfuscation. It must consist of an extraneous Held: The defendant Baculi is exempt from
force coming from a third person. criminal liability because he only assisted in the burial
because he was compelled to do so by the murderers.
A person who acts under the compulsion of an As to defendant Caballeros, there is no proof that he
irresistible force, like one who acts under the impulse of took part in any way in the execution of the crime. His
uncontrollable fear of equal or greater injury is exempt confession cannot be accepted as proof on a trial
from criminal liability because he does not act with because it was not done voluntarily.
freedom.
People v. Fronda
People v. Lising 222 SCRA 71 (1993)
285 SCRA 595 (1998) Facts: Balaan brothers were taken by 7 armed
Facts: Manalili asked Garcia if he could find NPA members accompanied by accused Fronda and
someone who could effect the arrest of Robert Herrera, Padua. The accused are both residents of the same
the suspect on the killing of his brother. Garcia place. The two were convicted of murder. Fronda
introduced Lising and they came up with an agreement. appealed claiming he was merely taken by the armed
Lisings surveillance group was at the Castanos men as a pointer.
residence in the hope of spotting Herrera. The group Held: Records show that appellants
saw a man and a woman (the victims) leave the participation in the commission of the crime consisted
residence and followed them. Alighting from the car, the of: 1) leading the members of the armed group to the
two were accosted. The abduction of the 2 hit the front house where the victims were found, 2) tying the
pages and two guards told the police that their friends victims hands and 3) digging the grave where the
who were employees of Lising informed them that Lising victims were buried. He is not a principal by
killed the 2 victims. Later, the bodies of the 2 were indispensable cooperation but only an accomplice. The
found. Lower court found that since there was an defense of uncontrollable fear cannot be accepted
agreement among Manalili, Garcia and Lising, they were because the fact that the accused was seen being
all co-conspirators of the crime and therefore liable handed by and receiving a hunting knife from one of the
principally. Garcia claimed that he acted under armed men, as well as, his inexplicable failure to report
compulsion of irresistible force. the incident to the authorities for more than 3 years
Held: To be exempt from criminal liability, a negates the existence of uncontrollable fear, such acts
person invoking irresistible force must show that the being indicative of his conscious concurrence with the
force exerted was such that it reduced him to a mere acts of the assailants.
instrument who acted not only without will but against
his will. Garcias participation and presence from the Ty v. People (supra)
time the abduction was hatched up to the killing of the Facts: Ty's mother Chua Lao So Un was
victims is undisputed. Conspiracy has been established. confined at the Manila Doctors' Hospital from October
1990 until June 1992. Being the patient's daughter, Ty
People v. Elicanal signed the "Acknowledgment of Responsibility for
35 Phil 209 (1916) Payment" in the Contract of Admission. Ty's sister, Judy
Facts: The accused was a member of the crew Chua, was also confined at the same hospital. The total
of a lorcha and Guiloresa was the chief mate. The latter hospital bills of the two patients amounted to
mentioned that he was going to kill the captain because P1,075,592.95. Ty executed a promissory note wherein
he was very angry with him and asked him to assist she assumed payment of the obligation in installments.
him. The accused took this statement as a joke and he To assure payment of the obligation, she drew 7
was smiling only when he made the statement. The postdated checks against Metrobank payable to the
following morning, Guillermo assaulted the captain and hospital which were all dishonored by the drawee bank
with the help of the crew (except the accused) seized and returned unpaid to the hospital due to insufficiency
the captain and tied him with a rope. Guillermo then of funds. For her defense, Ty claimed that she issued the
struck the captain at the back of the neck with an iron checks because of an uncontrollable fear of a greater
bar and then, delivering the weapon to the accused injury She averred that she was forced to issue the
ordered him to come forward and assist. The accused checks to obtain release for her mother who was being
struck the captain on the head which caused the latters inhumanely and harshly treated by the hospital. She
death. alleged that her mother has comtemplated suicide if she
Held: Before one uses the defense of acting would not be discharged from the hospital. Ty was found
under uncontrollable fear, it must appear that the threat guilty by the lower courts of 7 counts of violation of
which caused the fear was an evil greater than or at BP22.

46
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Held:The court sustained the findings of the ELEMENTS:


lower courts. The evil sought to be avoided is merely 1. That an act is required by law to be done;
expected or anticipated. If the evil sought to be avoided 2. That a person fails to perform such act;
is merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the 3. That his failure to perform such act was
future, the defense of an uncontrollable fear of a greater due to some lawful or insuperable cause.
injury is not applicable. Ty could have taken advantage
of an available option to avoid committing a crime. By US v. Vicentillo
her own admission, she had the choice to give jewelry or 19 Phil 118 (1911)
other forms of security instead of postdated checks to A policeman cannot be held liable for illegal
secure her obligation. detention when after arresting his victims, it took him
Moreover, for the defense of state of necessity three days to reach the nearest judge. The distance
to be availing, the greater injury feared should not have which required a journey for three days was considered
been brought about by the negligence or imprudence, to be an insuperable cause.
more so, the willful inaction of the actor. In this case,
the issuance of the bounced checks was brought about People v. Bandian
by Ty's own failure to pay her mother's hospital bills. 63 Phil 530 (1936)
A woman cannot be held liable for infanticide
when she left her newborn child in the bushes without
Par 6. ANY PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER THE being aware that she had given birth at all. Severe
IMPULSE OF AN UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR OF AN dizziness and extreme debility made it physically
EQUAL OR GREATER INJURY. impossible for Bandian to take home the child plus the
assertion that she didnt know that she had given birth.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the threat which causes the fear is of
an evil greater than or at least equal to,
that which he is required to commit;
3. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
2. That it promises an evil of such gravity
and imminence that the ordinary man Mitigating circumstances are those which, if
would have succumbed to it. present in the commission of the crime, do not entirely
free the actor from criminal liability, but serve only to
REQUISITES: a. existence of an uncontrollable fear; b. reduce the penalty.
the fear must be real and imminent; and c. the fear of They are based on the diminution of either
an injury is greater than or at least equal to that freedom of action, intelligence or intent or on the lesser
committed. perversity of the offender.

Duress as a valid defense should be based on real, CLASSES OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES


imminent or reasonable fear for ones life or limb and
should not be speculative, fanciful or remote fear. 1. ORDINARY MITIGATING
- Those mentioned in subsections 1 to 10 of Art.
A threat of future injury is not enough. The compulsion 13.
must be of such a character as to leave no opportunity
to the accused for escape or self-defense in equal 2. PRIVILEGED MITIGATING
combat.
Art. 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person
Speculative, fanciful and remote fear is not under eighteen years of age. When the offender is
uncontrollable fear. a minor under eighteen years and his case is one
coming under the provisions of the paragraphs next to
The case of US v. Exaltation is also an example were the last of Article 80 of this Code, the following rules
there is real, imminent or reasonable fear. shall be observed:
1. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE UNCONTROLLABLE years of age, who is not exempted from liability by
FEAR reason of the court having declared that he acted with
The offender uses violence The offender employs discernment, a discretionary penalty shall be imposed,
or physical force to compel intimidation or threat in but always lower by two degrees at least than that
another person to commit compelling another to prescribed by law for the crime which he committed.
the crime. commit a crime. 2. Upon a person over fifteen and under
eighteen years of age the penalty next lower than that
JUSTIFYING EXEMPTING prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in the
There is neither a crime There is a crime but no proper period.
nor a criminal. criminal. The act is not
justified but the actor is Art. 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime
not criminally liable. committed is not wholly excusable. A penalty
No civil liability except in There is civil liability lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law
no. 4 except no. 4 and 7. shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable by
reason of the lack of some of the conditions required to
justify the same or to exempt from criminal liability in
Par. 7 ANY PERSON WHO FAILS TO PERFORM AN the several cases mentioned in Article 11 and 12,
ACT REQUIRED BY LAW, WHEN PREVENTED BY provided that the majority of such conditions be present.
SOME LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE. The courts shall impose the penalty in the period which

47
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

may be deemed proper, in view of the number and TO JUSTIFY OR TO EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL
nature of the conditions of exemption present or lacking. LIABILITY IN THE RESPECTIVE CASES ARE NOT
ATTENDANT.
Privileged mitigating circumstances which are
applicable only to particular crimes: The circumstances of justification or exemption
1. Art. 268, par. 3. Voluntary release of the which may give place to mitigation, because not all the
person illegally detained within 3 days without the requisites necessary to justify the act or to exempt from
offender attaining his purpose and before the institution criminal liability in the respective cases are attendant,
of criminal action. The penalty is one degree lower. are the ff: (see Article 69)
2. Art. 333, par. 3. Abandonment without 1. Self-defense
justification of the spouse who committed adultery. The 2. Defense of Relatives
penalty is one degree lower. 3. Defense of Strangers
4. State of necessity
5. Performance of duty
ORDINARY MC PRIVILEDGED MC 6. Obedience to order of superior
Susceptible of being offset Cannot be offset by 7. Minority over 15 and under 18 years of
by any aggravating aggravating circumstance age
circumstance 8. Causing injury by mere accident
If not offset by The effect of imposing 9. Uncontrollable fear
aggravating circumstance, upon the offender the
produces the effect of penalty lower by one or INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE
applying the penalty two degrees than that
provided by law for the provided by law for the 1. Incomplete self-defense, defense of
crime in its min period in crime. relatives, defense of stranger
case of divisible penalty
In these 3 classes of defense, UNLAWFUL
NOTE: Mitigating circumstances only reduce the AGGRESSION must always be present. It is an
penalty but do not change the nature of the crime. indispensable requisite.
Par. 1 of Art. 13 is applicable only when unlawful
Art. 13. Mitigating circumstances. The following aggression is present but the other 2 requisites are not
are mitigating circumstances; present in any of the cases referred to in circumstances
1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, number 1, 2 and 3 or Art. 11.
when all the requisites necessary to justify or to exempt Ex. When the one making defense against unlawful
from criminal liability in the respective cases are not aggression used unreasonable means to prevent or repel
attendant. it, he is entitled to a privileged mitigating circumstance.
2. That the offender is under eighteen year of
age or over seventy years. In the case of the minor, he 2. Incomplete justifying circumstance of
shall be proceeded against in accordance with the avoidance of greater evil or injury.
provisions of Art. 80.
3. That the offender had no intention to REQUISITES under par. 4 of Art. 11:
commit so grave a wrong as that committed. a. That the evil sought to be avoided
4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the actually exists;
part of the offended party immediately preceded the act. b. That the injury feared be greater
5. That the act was committed in the than that done to avoid it;
immediate vindication of a grave offense to the one c. That there be no other practical and
committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, less harmful means of preventing it.
or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.
6. That of having acted upon an impulse so Avoidance of greater evil or injury is a justifying
powerful as naturally to have produced passion or circumstance if all the three requisites mentioned in par.
obfuscation. 4 of Art. 11 are present. But if any of the last two
7. That the offender had voluntarily requisites are lacking, there is only a mitigating
surrendered himself to a person in authority or his circumstance.
agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt
before the court prior to the presentation of the 3. Incomplete justifying circumstance of
evidence for the prosecution; performance of duty.
8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or
otherwise suffering some physical defect which thus REQUISITES under par. 5 of Art. 11:
restricts his means of action, defense, or a. That the accused acted in the
communications with his fellow beings. performance of a duty or in the lawful
9. Such illness of the offender as would exercise of a right or office; and
diminish the exercise of the will-power of the offender b. That the injury caused or offense
without however depriving him of the consciousness of committed be the necessary consequence
his acts. of the due performance of such duty or
10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a the lawful exercise of such right or office.
similar nature and analogous to those above mentioned.
In People v. Oanis, the SC considered one of
the 2 requisites as constituting the majority. It seems
that there is no ordinary mitigating circumstance under
Par. 1- THOSE MENTIONED IN THE PRECEDING Art. 13 par. 1 when the justifying or exempting
CHAPTER, WHEN ALL THE REQUISITES NECESSARY circumstance has 2 requisites only.

48
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

age or for such less period as the court may deem


INCOMPLETE EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE proper.
The court, in committing said minor as
1. Incomplete exempting circumstance of provided above, shall take into consideration the religion
minority over 15 and under 18 years of age. of such minor, his parents or next of kin, in order to
avoid his commitment to any private institution not
REQUISITES under par. 3 of Art. 12: under the control and supervision of the religious sect or
a. That the offender is over 9 and under 15 denomination to which they belong.
years old; and The Director of Public Welfare or his duly
b. That he does not act with discernment. authorized representatives or agents, the
superintendent of public schools or his representatives,
2. Incomplete exempting circumstance of or the person to whose custody or care the minor has
accident. been committed, shall submit to the court every four
months and as often as required in special cases, a
REQUISITES under par. 4 of Art. 12 : written report on the good or bad conduct of said minor
a. A person is performing a lawful act; and the moral and intellectual progress made by him.
b. With due care; The suspension of the proceedings against a
c. He causes an injury to another by mere minor may be extended or shortened by the court on
accident; and the recommendation of the Director of Public Welfare or
d. Without fault or intention of causing it. his authorized representative or agents, or the
superintendent of public schools or his representatives,
If the 2nd requisite and 1st part of the 4th according as to whether the conduct of such minor has
requisite are absent, the case will fall under Art. 365 been good or not and whether he has complied with the
which punishes reckless imprudence. conditions imposed upon him, or not. The provisions of
the first paragraph of this article shall not, however, be
If the 1st requisite and 2nd part of the 4th affected by those contained herein.
requisite are absent, it will be an intentional felony. If the minor has been committed to the
custody or care of any of the institutions mentioned in
3. Incomplete exempting circumstance of the first paragraph of this article, with the approval of
uncontrollable fear. the Director of Public Welfare and subject to such
conditions as this official in accordance with law may
REQUISITES under par. 6 of Art. 12: deem proper to impose, such minor may be allowed to
a. That the threat which caused the fear was stay elsewhere under the care of a responsible person.
of an evil greater than, or at least equal If the minor has behaved properly and has
to, that which he was required to commit; complied with the conditions imposed upon him during
b. That it promised an evil of such gravity his confinement, in accordance with the provisions of
and imminence that an ordinary person this article, he shall be returned to the court in order
would have succumbed to it. that the same may order his final release.
In case the minor fails to behave properly or to
If only one of these requisites is present, comply with the regulations of the institution to which
there is only a mitigating circumstance. he has been committed or with the conditions imposed
upon him when he was committed to the care of a
Par. 2 THAT THE OFFENDER IS [UNDER 18 YEARS responsible person, or in case he should be found
OF AGE] OR OVER 70 YEARS. IN THE CASE OF THE incorrigible or his continued stay in such institution
MINOR, HE SHALL BE PROCEEDED AGAINST IN should be inadvisable, he shall be returned to the court
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ART. 80. in order that the same may render the judgment
corresponding to the crime committed by him.
Par. 2 contemplates the ff: The expenses for the maintenance of a minor
1. An offender over 70 years old. delinquent confined in the institution to which he has
been committed, shall be borne totally or partially by his
Art. 80. Suspension of sentence of minor parents or relatives or those persons liable to support
delinquents. Whenever a minor of either sex, under him, if they are able to do so, in the discretion of the
sixteen years of age at the date of the commission of a court; Provided, That in case his parents or relatives or
grave or less grave felony, is accused thereof, the court, those persons liable to support him have not been
after hearing the evidence in the proper proceedings, ordered to pay said expenses or are found indigent and
instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, shall cannot pay said expenses, the municipality in which the
suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such offense was committed shall pay one-third of said
minor to the custody or care of a public or private, expenses; the province to which the municipality
benevolent or charitable institution, established under belongs shall pay one-third; and the remaining one-third
the law of the care, correction or education of orphaned, shall be borne by the National Government: Provided,
homeless, defective, and delinquent children, or to the however, That whenever the Secretary of Finance
custody or care of any other responsible person in any certifies that a municipality is not able to pay its share in
other place subject to visitation and supervision by the the expenses above mentioned, such share which is not
Director of Public Welfare or any of his agents or paid by said municipality shall be borne by the National
representatives, if there be any, or otherwise by the Government. Chartered cities shall pay two-thirds of
superintendent of public schools or his representatives, said expenses; and in case a chartered city cannot pay
subject to such conditions as are prescribed herein said expenses, the internal revenue allotments which
below until such minor shall have reached his majority may be due to said city shall be withheld and applied in
settlement of said indebtedness in accordance with
section five hundred and eighty-eight of the

49
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Administrative Code. condition. When the accused realized the fearful


consequences of his act, he allowed the victim to secure
medical treatment.

People v. Amit
LEGAL EFFECTS OF VARIOUS AGES OF OFFENDER: 32 SCRA 95(1970)
1. Minor delinquent under 18 years of age, the Facts: Amit pleads guilty to rape with homicide
sentence may be suspended. (Art. 192, PD No. and sentenced to death. Amit appeals claiming that
603 as amended by PD 1179) there are 3 mitigating circumstances including lack of
2. Under 18 years of age, privileged mitigating intention to commit so grave a wrong.
circumstance (Art. 68) Held: A great disproportion between means
3. 18 years or over, full criminal responsibility. employed to accomplish the criminal act on the one
hand, and its consequences on the other, must first be
shown. Otherwise, the mitigating circumstance could
Par. 3 THAT THE OFFENDER HAD NO INTENTION not be considered.
TO COMMIT SO GRAVE WRONG AS THAT Based on the narration given by the accused
COMMITTED. where he said that he held victims neck down as he
boxed her in the face, and considering moreover that
This circumstance can be taken into account the victim was 57 years old while the accused was only
only when the facts proven show that there is a notable 32, the court held that the means employed by the
and evident disproportion between the means accused was sufficient to have caused the death of the
employed to execute the criminal act and its victim.
consequences. Death penalty should be imposed. It is a single
The intention, as an internal act, is judged indivisible penalty applied regardless of mitigating
not only by the proportion of the means employed by circumstance, especially when records of the present
him to the evil produced by his act, but also by the fact case evince the aggravating circumstances of nighttime
that the blow was or was not aimed at a vital part of and abuse of superior strength.
the body.
Intention must be judged by considering the People v. Regato
weapon used, the injury inflicted and the attitude of the 127 SCRA 287 (1984)
mind when the accused attacked the deceased. Facts: Regato, Ramirez and Salceda robbed
This mitigating circumstance is not the store of Victor Flores. Victor was maltreated to force
applicable when the offender employed brute force. him to reveal where their money was. The robbers
Lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong is found the money in a place different from where Victor
not appreciated where the offense committed is revealed to them. Ramirez got mad and called Victor a
characterized by treachery. liar. Victor retorted, you robbers!. With this remark,
In crimes against persons who do not die as Ramirez shot Victor and the three rushed out of the
a result of the assault, the absence of the intent to kill house.
reduces the felony to mere physical injuries, but it does Held: The SC did not find merit in the
not constitute a mitigating circumstance under Art. 13 contention that there was lack of intent to commit so
par 3. grave a wrong as that committed. Intention is a mental
It is not applicable to felonies by negligence process and is an internal state of mind. The intention
because in these kinds of felonies, there is no intent on must be judged by the ACTION, CONDUCT and
the part of the offender which may be considered EXTERNAL ACTS of the accused. What men do is the
diminished. best index of their intention. In the case at bar, the
Par. 3 is only applicable to offense resulting aforesaid mitigating circumstance cannot be
in physical injuries or material harm. It is not applicable appreciated considering that the acts employed by the
to defamation or slander. accused were reasonably sufficient to produce the
result that they actually made the death of the victim.
People v. Ural
56 SCRA 138 (1974) People v. Callet
Facts: Witness Alberto saw policeman Ural 382 SCRA 43 (2002)
inside the jail boxing detention prisoner Napola. As Facts: Alfredo, Lecpoy and Eduardo were
Napola collapsed on the floor, Ural went out to get a beside each other as they watched a cara y cruz game.
bottle. He poured the contents to the dress of Napola Alfredo sat close to the ground, with his buttocks
and set it on fire. Napola got burned and he asked resting on his right foot. Lecpoy and Eduardo sat on a
mercy from Ural. Instead, Ural locked him up and piece of wood and on a stone, respectively. Out of
threatened the witness not to tell anyone or else he will nowhere, the accused, Callet, appeared behind Alfredo
be burned also. When Napola was already suffering and stabbed the latter on the left shoulder near the
much from the burns, Ural became frightened and he base of the neck with a 9-inch hunting knife.
and Siton helped put out the fire. Napola died later Instinctively, Alfredo stood up and managed to walk a
because of the burns. few meters. When he fell on the ground, Lecpoy and
Held: Offender is criminally liable although Eduardo rushed to help him but to no avail. Alfredo died
consequence of his felonious act was not intended by shortly thereafter. Calleto voluntary surrendered. He
him. This is covered by Art. 4 of the RPC. The TC failed claims that his liabiity should be mitigated by the fact
to appreciate the mitigating circumstance that the that he had no intention to commit so grave a wrong.
offender has no intention to commit so grave a wrong Held: The lack of "intent" to commit a wrong
as that committed. It is manifest from the facts that the so grave is an internal state. It is weighed based on the
accused had no intent to kill the victim. His only design weapon used, the part of the body injured, the injury
was only to maltreat him maybe because of his drunken inflicted and the manner it is inflicted. The fact that the

50
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

accused used a 9-inch hunting knife in attacking the Romera ceased harming Roy for fear he might kill him.
victim from behind, without giving him an opportunity
to defend himself, clearly shows that he intended to do
what he actually did, and he must be held responsible
Held: There was sufficient provocation and the
therefor, without the benefit of this mitigating
circumstance of passion or obfuscation attended the
circumstance.
commission of the offense. Thrusting his bolo at
Romera, threatening to kill him, and hacking the
Par. 4. THAT SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR bamboo walls of his house are sufficient provocation to
THREAT ON THE PART OF THE OFFENDED PARTY enrage any man, or stir his rage and obfuscate his
IMMEDIATELY PRECEDED THE ACT thinking, more so when the lives of his wife and
children are in danger. Romera stabbed the victim as a
PROVOCATION result of those provocations, and while Romera was still
- Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the in a fit of rage.
offended party, capable of exciting, inciting, or irritating The court however stressed that provocation
anyone. and passion or obfuscation are not 2 separate
REQUISITES: mitigating circumstances. Well-settled is the rule that if
a. That the provocation must be sufficient these 2 circumstances are based on the same facts,
b. That it must originate from the offended they should be treated together as one mitigating
party circumstance. From the facts established in this case, it
c. That the provocation must be immediate is clear that both circumstances arose from the same
to the act, i.e., to the commission of the crime by set of facts aforementioned. Hence, they should not be
the person who is provoked. treated as two separate mitigating circumstances.

People v. Pagal Par. 5. THAT THE ACT WAS COMMITTED IN THE


79 SCRA 570 (1977) IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE
Facts: Pagal and Torcelino, employees of Gau TO THE ONE COMMITTING THE FELONY (DELITO),
Guan, conspired together to take away from their HIS SPOUSE, ASCENDANTS, DESCENDANTS,
employer P1,281. When Gau Guan refused to open the LEGITIMATE, NATURAL OR ADOPTED BROTHERS
kaha de yero, they stabbed him with an icepick and OR SISTERS, OR RELATIVES BY AFFINITY WITHIN
clubbed him with an iron pipe which resulted to his THE SAME DEGREE.
death. The two accused were charged with the crime of
robbery with homicide. On appeal, they claimed that REQUISITES:
they are entitled to 2 mitigating circumstances: a. That there be a grave offense done to the
sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the one committing the felony, his spouse,
offended party and having acted upon an impulse so ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or
powerful as to produce passion and obfuscation. adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by
Held: The 2 mitigating circumstances cannot affinity within the same degree.
be considered as 2 distinct and separate circumstances b. That the felony is committed in vindication
but should only be treated as one because they both of such grave offense. A lapse of time is allowed
arose from the same incident the alleged between the vindication and the doing of the
maltreatment of Pagal and Torcelino by Gau Guan. The grave offense.
circumstance of passion and obfuscation cannot be
mitigating in a crime which is planned and calmly PROVOCATION VINDICATION
meditated before its execution. Also, provocation in It is made directly only to The grave offense may be
order to be mitigating must be sufficient and the person committing the committed also against the
immediately preceding the act. In this case, it was offense offenders relatives
months ago when the incident of alleged maltreatment mentioned in the law.
took place. The cause that brought The offended party must
about the provocation have done a grave offense
Romera v. People need not be a grave to the offender or his
434 SCRA 467(2004) offense. relatives mentioned in the
Facts: While lying in bed, Romera heard the law.
victim Roy call him and his wife, asking if they had beer It is necessary that the The vindication of the
and a fighter for sale. He did not answer Roy because provocation or threat grave offense may be
he knew that Roy was already drunk. Roy asked for immediately preceded the proximate, which admits of
Romera but when the latter's wife told him that he was act. an interval of time
already asleep, Roy told her to wake her husband up. between the grace offense
Romera went down the house and asked who was at done by the offended party
the door. Just as he opened the door for Roy, Roy and the commission of the
thrust his bolo at him. He successfully parried the bolo crime.
and asked Roy what it was all about. Roy answered he
would kill Romera. Romera tried to prevent Roy from
entering, so he pushed the door shut. As Roy was Basis to determine the gravity of offense in
hacking at the wall, Romeras wife held the door to vindication
allow Romera to exit in another door to face Roy. He The question whether or not a certain personal
hurled a stone at Roy, who dodged it. Roy rushed to offense is grave must be decided by the court, having in
him and hacked him, but he parried the blow. Petitioner mind the social standing of the person, the place and
grappled for the bolo and stabbed Roy in the stomach. the time when the insult was made.
Wounded, Roy begged petitioner for forgiveness.

51
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Vindication of a grave offense and passion or Facts: While having a drinking spree in a
obfuscation cannot be counted separately and cottage, Anthony tried to let Dennis Torpio drink gin
independently. and as the latter refused, Anthony bathed Dennis with
gin and mauled him several times. Dennis crawled
US v. Ampar beneath the table and Anthony tried to stab him with a
37 Phil 201 (1917) 29 fan knife but did not hit him. Dennis got up and ran
Facts: A fiesta was in progress and the accused towards their home. Upon reaching home, he got a
Ampar went to the kitchen and asked from Patobo some knife. He went back to the cottage by another route
of the roast pig. Patobo replied, There is no more. and upon arrival Anthony was still there. Upon seeing
Come here and I will make roast pig of you. Later, Dennis, Anthony avoided Dennis and ran by passing the
while Patobo was squatting down, Ampar struck him on shore towards the creek but Dennis met him, blocked
the head with an ax, causing his death the following him and stabbed him. When he was hit, Anthony ran
day. The TC appreciated the mitigating circumstance of but got entangled with a fishing net beside the creek
immediate vindication of a grave offense. and fell on his back. Dennis then mounted on him and
Held: The offense which the defendant was continued stabbing him resulting to the latters death.
endeavoring to vindicate would be to the average person Thereafter, Dennis left and slept at a grassy meadow
considered as a mere trifle. But to this defendant, an old near a Camp. In the morning, he went to Estrera, a
man, it evidently was a serious matter to be made the police officer to whom he voluntarily surrendered.
butt of a joke in the presence of so many guests. The TC Held: The mitigating circumstance of having
was correct. acted in the immediate vindication of a grave offense is
properly appreciated. Dennis was humiliated, mauled
Peope v. Parana and almost stabbed by Anthony. Although the unlawful
64 Phil 331 (1937) aggression had ceased when Dennis stabbed Anthony,
Facts: The preceding night, Parana and Lamay it was nonetheless a grave offense for which Dennis
were at the house of the deceaseds brother playing may be given the benefit of a mitigating circumstance.
cards when the two had an exchange of words so the However, the mitigating circumstance of sufficient
deceased asked them to leave. The accused refused so provocation cannot be considered apart from the
the deceased slapped him and ordered him to leave. circumstance of vindication of a grave offense. These
The morning after, Parana was about to surprise the two circumstances arose from one and the same
deceased and stab him from behind when the chauffeur incident, i.e., the attack on the appellant by Anthony,
shouted to warn the deceased. The deceased, so that they should be considered as only one
defending himself retreated until he fell into a ditch. mitigating circumstance.
The appellant mounted astride of the deceased and
continued to stab him with the dagger. The deceased Par. 6. THAT OF HAVING ACTED UPON AN
was first brought to the hospital but expired 6 days IMPULSE SO POWERFUL AS NATURALLY TO HAVE
after. PRODUCED PASSION OR OBFUSCATION.
Held: The mitigating circumstance that he had
acted in the immediate vindication of a grave offense REQUISITES:
committed against him a few hours before, when he a. The accused acted upon an impulse.
was slapped by the deceased in the presence of many b. The impulse must be so powerful that it
persons, must likewise be taken into consideration. naturally produce passion or obfuscation
Although this offense (slapping) was not so immediate, in him.
the court believes that the influence thereof, by reason
of its gravity and the circumstances under which it was Passion or obfuscation may constitute as a mitigating
inflicted, lasted until the moment the crime was circumstance only when the same arose from LAWFUL
committed. SENTIMENTS. It is not applicable when:
a. The act committed in a spirit of LAWLESSNESS.
People v. Diokno b. the act is committed in a spirit of REVENGE.
63 Phil 601 (1936)
Facts: The deceased and the daughter of The crime committed must be the result of a sudden
accused Epifanio eloped. Epifanio and his son, Roman impulse of natural and uncontrollable fury.
went to look for them. When they were able to find the
deceased, they stabbed him several times until he died. The accused who raped a woman is not entitled to the
Held: The presence of the 5th mitigating mitigating circumstance of having acted upon an
circumstance must be taken into consideration. There impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced
was no interruption from the time the offense was passion just because he finds himself in a secluded
committed to the vindication thereof. The herein place with that young ravishing woman, almost naked
accused belong to a family of old customs to whom the and therefore, liable to succumb to the uncontrollable
elopement of a daughter with a man constitutes a grave passion of his bestial instinct.
offense to their honor and causes disturbance of the
peace of the home. The fact that the accused saw the The mitigating circumstance of obfuscation arising
deceased run upstairs when he became aware of their from jealousy cannot be invoked in favor of the accused
presence, as if he refused to deal with them after whose relationship with the woman was illegitimate.
having gravely offended them, was certainly a stimulus
strong enough to produce in their mind a fit of passion Passion and obfuscation may lawfully arise from
which blinded them and led them to commit that crime. causes existing only in the honest belief of the offender.
People v. Torpio
PASSION OR IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
431 SCRA 9 (2004)
OBFUSCATION
Mitigating circumstance Exempting circumstance

52
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Cannot give rise to an Note: when the court used the word illicit,
irresistible force because it doesnt mean that it is an illegitimate or
the latter requires physical bigamous relationship. It means that it is
force cohabitation without a valid marriage.
Passion or obfuscation is in Irresistible force must
the offender himself come from a third person People v. Germina
Must arise from lawful The irresistible force is 290 SCRA 146(1998)
sentiments unlawful Facts: One night, the accused went to the
Angeles residence to look for Raymund. He went to
PASSION PROVOCATION verifiy the news that the latter mauled and stabbed the
Produced by an impulse Comes form the injured accuseds mentally retarded brother, Rafael. Raymund
which may be caused by party was not yet at home and the moment he arrived, the
provocation accused spotted him and shot him.
Need not be immediate. It Must immediately precede Held: There is no treachery. Passion cannot co-
is only required that the the commission of the exist with treachery because in passion, the offender
influence thereof lasts crime loses his control and reason while in treachery the
until the moment the means employed are consciously adopted. One who
crime is committed loses his reason and self-control could not deliberately
employ a particular method or form of attack in the
The effect is the loss of reason and self-control on the
execution of the crime. Passion existed in this case
part of the offender.
because it clearly arose from lawful sentiments or
legitimate feelings. The accused committed the crime
People v. Muit
due to the maltreatment inflicted by the victim on his
117 SCRA 696 (1982)
mentally retarded brother.
Facts: Rosario Muit was the Brgy. Zone
President and Torrero was the zone auditor. They used
People v. Gonzalez
to meet frequently because they were having an affair
359 SCRA 352 (2001)
which eventually reached the husband of Rosario,
Facts: Both of the families of Andres and that
Delfin. Delfin shot Torrero 3 times at the front yard of
of Gonzalez were on their way to the exit of the Loyola
the Muits. Delfin surrendered himself and turned in the
Memorial Park. Gonzales was with his grandson and 3
pistol he had used.
housemaids, while Andres was driving with his pregnant
Held: Muit is guilty of murder with mitigating
wife, Feliber, his 2yr old son, Kenneth, his nephew Kevin
circumstances of voluntary surrender and passion and
and his sister-in-law. At an intersection, their two
obsfuscation. The accused was driven strongly by
vehicles almost collided. Gonzales continued driving
jealousy. The feeling of resentment resulting from the
while Andres tailed Gonzales vehicle and cut him off
rivalry in amorous relations with a woman is a powerful
when he found the opportunity to do so, then got out of
stimulant to jealousy and prone to produce anger and
his vehicle and knocked on the appellant's car window.
obfuscation.
Heated exchange of remarks followed. On his way back
to his vehicle, he met Gonzales son, Dino. Andres had a
US v. Hicks
shouting match this time with Dino. Gonzales then
14 Phil 217(1909)
alighted from his car and fired a single shot at the last
Facts: For about 5 years, Hicks and Sola lived
window on the left side of Andres' vehicle at an angle
together as husband and wife when they separated. A
away from Andres. The single bullet fired hit Kenneth,
few days later, Sola contracted new relations with
Kevin and Feliber which caused the latters death.
another negro named Wallace. Hicks went to Wallaces
Held: The mitigating circumstance of passion
house and asked the latter to go out. They talked for
and obfuscation is not obtaining. Andres' act of shouting
awhile and then Hicks shot Wallace
at Gonzales son, who was then a nurse and of legal
Held: Even if it is true that the accused acted
age, is not sufficient to produce passion and obfuscation.
with obfuscation because of jealousy, the mitigating
Dino was shouting back at Andres. It was not a case
circumstance cannot be considered in his favor because
wherein Gonzales son appeared helpless and oppressed
the causes which mitigate criminal responsibility for the
that Gonzales lost his reason and shot at the vehicle of
loss of self-control are such which originate from
Andres. The same holds true for Gonzales claim of
legitimate feelings and not those which arise from
provocation on the part of Andres. Provocation must be
vicious, unworthy and immoral passions. The cause of
sufficient to excite a person to commit the wrong
the passion of the accused was his vexation
committed and that the provocation must be
engendered by the refusal of the woman to continue to
commensurate to the crime committed. The sufficiency
live in illicit relations with him, which she had a perfect
of provocation varies according to the circumstances of
right to do.
the case. The aggressive behavior of Andres towards
Gonzales and his son may be demeaning or humiliating
US v. De la Cruz
but it is not sufficient provocation to shoot at Gonzales
22 Phil 429 (1912)
vehicle.
Facts: The evidence clearly discloses that the
convict, in the heat of passion, killed the deceased, who
People v. Lab-eo
had theretofore been his lover upon discovering her in
373 SCCRA 461 (2002)
flagrante in carnal communication with a mutual
Facts: After being told to go away by the
acquaintance.
victim. Lab-eo left and returned to where the victim
Held: The accused was entitled to the
was selling clothes and then and there stabbed her at
mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation
the back with a knife. Thereafter, he surrendered to the
because the impulse was caused by the sudden
Chief of Police. Lab-eo argues for the appreciation of the
revelation that she was untrue to him, and his
discovery of her in flagrante in the arms of another.

53
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

mitigating circumstances of passion and obfuscation, as a. That the offender had not been actually
well as of sufficient provocation, in his favor. arrested.
Held: For a person to be motivated by passion b. That the offender surrendered himself to a
and obfuscation, there must first exist an unlawful act person in authority or to the latters agent.
that would naturally produce an impulse sufficient to c. That the surrender was voluntary.
overcome reason and self-control. There is passional
obfuscation when the crime is committed due to an Merely requesting a policeman to accompany the
uncontrollable burst of passion provoked by prior unjust accused to the police HQ is not equivalent to voluntary
or improper acts, or due to a legitimate stimulus so surrender.
powerful as to overcome reason. In asking Labeo to
leave, the victim did not do anything unlawful. There is Other examples:
an absolute lack of proof that the Lab-eo was utterly a. The warrant of arrest showed that the
humiliated by the victim's utterance. Nor was it shown accused was in fact arrested.
that the victim made that remark in an insulting and b. The accused surrendered only after the
repugnant manner. The victim's utterance was not the warrant of arrest was served.
stimulus required by jurisprudence to be so c. The accused went into hiding and
overwhelming as to overcome reason and self-restraint. surrendered only when they realized that the forces of
the law were closing in on them.
People v. Bates
400 SCRA 95 (2003) Surrender must be SPONTANEOUS. He surrendered 1)
Facts: While Edgar, Simon, and Jose are along because he acknowledges his guilty or 2) because he
a trail leading to the house of Carlito Bates, the latter wishes to save them the trouble and expenses
suddenly emerged from the thick banana plantation necessarily incurred in his search and capture.
surrounding the trail, aiming his firearm at Jose who was
then walking ahead of his companions. Jose grabbed The surrender must be by reason of the commission of
Carlito's right hand and elbow and tried to wrest the crime for which he is prosecuted.
possession of the firearm. While the 2 were grappling for
possession, the gun fired, hitting Carlito who People v. Pinca
immediately fell to the ground. At that instant, Marcelo 318 SCRA 270 (1999)
Bates and his son Marcelo Bates, Jr., brother and Facts: Pinca and Abenir, after drinking at a
nephew of Carlito, respectively, emerged from the bakeshop, hitched a ride with a tricycle driver on their
banana plantation, each brandishing a bolo. They way home. After passing a man who was apparently
immediately attacked Jose hacking him several times. drunk because he was swaying while he walked, the
Jose fell to the ground and rolled but Marcelo and his accused asked the driver to drop them off already. Pinca
son kept on hacking him. told Abenir that that was the guy who spilled a drink on
Held: Passion and obfuscation may not be him earlier that day. The accused picked up a long piece
properly appreciated in favor of the appellant. To be of wood and waited for the man to pass by. When the
considered as a mitigating circumstance, passion or latter did, the accused hit him at the back of his head
obfuscation must arise from lawful sentiments and not which led to his death.
from a spirit of lawlessness or revenge or from anger When the police came, the accused readily
and resentment. In the present case, clearly, Marcelo went with them and proceeded to tell his story that he
was infuriated upon seeing his brother, Carlito, shot by was innocent and that it was Abenir who killed the man.
Jose. However, a distinction must be made between the The accused was convicted of the crime of murder.
first time that Marcelo hacked Jose and the second time Held: For voluntary surrender to be
that the former hacked the latter. When Marcelo hacked appreciated, 3 requisites should be present: 1) the
Jose right after seeing the latter shoot at Carlito, and if offender has not been actually arrested; 2) the offender
appellant refrained from doing anything else after that, surrendered to a person of authority and 3) the
he could have validly invoked the mitigating surrender was voluntary. The actions of the accused
circumstance of passion and obfuscation. But when, belied this claim. He actually DENIED having committed
upon seeing his brother Carlito dead, Marcelo went back the crime. He went on to try and clear his name. There
to Jose, who by then was already prostrate on the is no voluntary surrender.
ground and hardly moving, hacking Jose again was a
clear case of someone acting out of anger in the spirit of People v. Amaguin
revenge. 229 SCRA 166 (1994)
Facts: Celso and Gildo, together with others,
Par. 7. THAT THE OFFENDER HAD VOLUNTARILY attacked the Oros. During the fray, Gildo was armed
SURRENDERED HIMSELF TO A PERSON IN with a knife and an Indian target. And just as they
AUTHORITY OR HIS AGENTS, OR THAT HE HAD were about to finish off the Oro brothers, Willie, the
VOLUNTARILY CONFESSED HIS GUILT BEFORE THE eldest of the Amaguins, appeared with a revolver and
COURT PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE delivered the coup de grace.
EVIDENCE FOR THE PROSECUTION. Held: SC agrees with the accused-appellants
view that voluntary surrender should be appreciated in
2 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER THIS their favor. While it may have taken both Willie and
PARAGRAPH: Gildo a week before turning themselves in, the fact is,
1. Voluntary surrender to a person in authority or they voluntarily surrendered to the police before arrest
his agents; could be effected.
2. Voluntary confession of guilt before the court
prior to the presentation of evidence for the prosecution. People v. Dulos
237 SCRA 141 (1994)
REQUISITES OF VOLUNTARY SURRENDER:

54
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Facts: The accused hired two professional * Plea of guilty is mitigating because it indicates a moral
entertainers to entertain his guests. One of the disposition in the accused, favorable to his reform. It is
entertainers, Susan, accepted an offer to check in with an act of repentance and respect for the law.
the accused guests but later on changed her mind and
rejected the offer. When she went home with her People v. Crisostomo
boyfriend, the accused chased them and asked for the 160 SCRA 47(1988)
amount paid to Susan by one of his guests. Susan Facts: On Christmas day, while the accused
denied this. Susans boyfriend was shot by the accused was passing near the house of Romeo, he met the latter
which resulted to his death. and invited him to go drinking. Romeo declined and
Held: Voluntary surrender cannot be suddenly, the accused rushed towards Romeo from
appreciated where there was no conscious effort on the behind and shot him with a revolver.
part of the accused to voluntarily surrender. Here, there After the arraignment wherein accused entered
was no conscious effort on the part of the accused to a plea of not guilty and again during the trial, the
voluntary surrender to the military authorities when he accused signified his intention to withdraw his plea of
went to Camp Siongco after the fateful incidents. As he not guilty to a lesser charge of homicide and prayed that
himself admitted, he was not placed under custody by he be allowed to prove the mitigating circumstances.
the military authorities as he was free to roam around Held: The appellant offered to enter a plea of
as he pleased. guilty to the lesser offense of homicide only after some
There is no voluntary surrender also where an evidence of the prosecution had been presented. He
accused merely surrendered the gun he used in the reiterated his offer after the prosecution rested its case.
killing, without surrendering his person to the This is certainly not mitigating.
authorities.

Andrada v. People People v. Jose et al.,


452 SCRA 685 (2005) 37 SCRA 450 (1971)
Facts: On 24 September 1986, accused Facts: The Maggie De la Riva story. Maggie
Andrada attacked, assaulted and hacked Arsenio Ugerio was driving her car with her maid inside when they were
on the head. Evidence of the prosecution showed that stopped by another car. The appellant, Pineda, together
after attacking the victim, he was apprehended by with his 3 companions took Maggie with them leaving
responding police officers. Accused, however, alleged the maid behind. Maggie who was blindfolded was
that he voluntarily surrendered to the police. brought to a hotel. Inside the room, her blindfold was
Held: For voluntary surrender to be removed and she was asked to strip for them. Then, the
appreciated, the surrender must be spontaneous, appellants raped her.
made in such a manner that it shows the interest of the Held: Pineda contends that because the charge
accused to surrender unconditionally to the authorities, against him and his co-appellants is a capital offense
either because he acknowledges his guilt or wishes to and the amended complaints cited aggravating
save them the trouble and expenses that would be circumstances, which, if proved, would raise the penalty
necessarily incurred in his search and capture. Accuseds to death, it was the duty of the court to insist on his
surrender is not voluntary as he was apprehended by presence during all stages of the trial. The contention is
responding police officers in the waiting shed at the untenable. While a plea of guilty is mitigating, at the
corner of Cambas Road and Magsaysay Avenue. Hence, same time it constitutes an admission of all the material
the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender facts alleged in the information, including the
should not have been appreciated in his favor. aggravating circumstances, and it matters not that the
offense is capital, for the admission covers both the
REQUISITES OF PLEA OF GUILTY crime and its attendant circumstances qualifying and/or
a. That the offender spontaneously aggravating the crime. Because of the aforesaid legal
confessed his guilt; effect of Pinedas plea of guilty, it was not incumbent
upon the trial court to receive his evidence, much less to
Plea of guilty on appeal is not mitigating. require his presence in court.

b. That the confession of guilty was made in People v. Montinola


open court, that is, before the competent court that is 360 SCRA 631 (2001)
to try the case; and To be entitled to the mitigating circumstance of
plea of guilty, the accused must have voluntarily
The extrajudicial confession made by the confessed his guilt before the court prior to the
accused is not voluntary confession. Such presentation of the evidence for the prosecution. The
confession was made outside the court. The following requirements must therefore concur: (1) the
confession must be made in open court. accused spontaneously confessed his guilt; (2) the
confession of guilt was made in open court, that is,
c. That the confession of guilt was made before a competent court trying the case; and (3) the
prior to the presentation of evidence for the confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of
prosecution. evidence for the prosecution. The third requisite is
wanting in the present case.
The change of plea should be made at the
first opportunity when his arraignment was People v. Dawaton
first set. 389 SCRA 277 (2002)
A conditional plea of guilty is not mitigating Facts: On 20 September 1998, one Lavares
and several of his companions, including respondent
Dawaton were drinking. Intoxicated, Lavares decided to
sleep while the respondent Dawaton and his companions

55
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

continued drinking. Lavares was thereafter awakened


when respondent Dawaton stabbed him at the base of In Emilio Cimafranca v. Sandiganbayan
his neck. Respondent Dawaton continued stabbing (G.R. No. 94408, 14 February 1991), the Supreme Court
Lavares until the latter died. Respondent Dawaton held that the return of the funds malversed is not a
pleaded not guilty when he was first arraigned, but defense and will not be an exempting circumstance nor
during the pre-trial, he offered to plead guilty to the a ground for extinguishing the criminal liability of the
lesser offense of homicide but was rejected by the accused but it can be a mitigating circumstance
prosecution, hence, the case proceeded to trial. The analogous to voluntary surrender.
trial court found respondent Dawaton guilty of murder,
and sentenced him to death. In the instant case, the return of the
Held: The plea of guily to the cime of homicide property malversed was not mitigating
cannot be considered as a mitigating circumstance in because it took the accused several years
this case. While the accused offered to plead guilty to before he returned the government
the lesser offense of homicide, he was charged with property. In fact, when the engine was
murder for which he had already entered a plea of not returned, it was already scrap and the
guilty. The Supreme Court had already ruled that an revolver was rusty and had to be reblued.
offer to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense cannot
be considered as an attenuating circumstance under the CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH ARE NEITHER
provisions of Art. 13 of the Revised Penal Code because EXEMPTING NOR MITIGATING
to be voluntary the plea of guilty must be to the offense
charged. 1. Mistake in the blow or aberratio ictus, for
under Art. 48, there is a complex crime
committed. The penalty is even higher.
Par. 8. THAT THE OFFENDER IS DEAF AND DUMB, 2. Mistake in the identity of the victim, for under
BLIND OR OTHERWISE SUFFERING FROM SOME Art. 4, par. 1, the accused is criminally liable
PHYSICAL DEFECT WHICH THUS RESTRICTS HIS even if the wrong done is different from that
MEANS OF ACTION, DEFENSE, OR which is intended.
COMMUNICATION WITH HIS FELLOW BEINGS. 3. Entrapment of the accused.
4. The accused is over 18 years of age. If the
This paragraph does not distinguish between educated offender is over 18 years old, his age is neither
and uneducated deaf-mute or blind persons. exempting nor mitigating.
Physical defect referred to in this paragraph is such as 5. Performance of righteous action.
being armless, cripple, or a stutterer, whereby his
means to act, defend himself or communicate with his
fellow beings are limited.
4. AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Aggravating circumstances are those which, if


Par. 9. SUCH ILLNESS OF THE OFFENDER AS
attendant in the commission of the crime, serve to
WOULD DIMINISH THE EXERCISE OF THE WILL-
increase the penalty without, however, exceeding the
POWER OF THE OFFENDER WITHOUT HOWEVER
maximum of the penalty provided by law for the offense.
DEPRIVING HIM OF CONSCIOUSNESS OF HIS
ACTS.
They are based on the greater perversity of the
offender manifested in the commission of the felony as
shown by:
REQUISITES: a. motivating power itself;
a. That the illness of the offender must b. the place of commission;
diminish the exercise of his will-power. c. the means and ways employed;
b. That such illness should not deprive the d. the time; or
offender of consciousness of his acts. e. the personal circumstances of the
offender, or of the offended party.
When the offender completely lost the exercise of will-
power, it may be an exempting circumstance. FOUR KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
It is said that this paragraph refers only to diseases 1. GENERIC Those that can generally apply
of pathological state that trouble the conscience or will. to all crimes. Nos. 1, 2, 3 (dwelling), 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14,
Ex. A mother who, under the influence of a puerperal 18, 19, and 20 except by means of motor vehicles.
fever, killed her child the day following her delivery. 2. SPECIFIC Those that apply only to
particular crimes. Nos. 3 (except dwelling), 15, 16, 17
Par. 10. AND FINALLY, ANY OTHER and 21.
CIRCUMSTANCE OF A SIMILAR NATURE AND 3. QUALIFYING Those that change the
ANALOGOUS OF THOSE ABOVEMENTIONED. nature of the crime. Art. 248 enumerates the qualifying
AC which qualify the killing of person to murder.
Over 60 years old with failing sight, similar to over 70 4. INHERENT Those that must accompany
years of age mentioned in paragraph 2. the commission of the crime.
Voluntary restitution of the property stolen by the
accused or immediately reimbursing the amount GENERIC AC QUALIFYING AC
malversed is a mitigating circumstance as analogous to The effect of a generic AC, The effect of a qualifying
voluntary surrender. not offset by any AC is not only to give the
Not resisting arrest is not analogous to voluntary mitigating circumstance, is crime its proper and
surrender. to increase the penalty exclusive name but also to
Testifying for the prosecution is analogous to plea of which should be imposed place the author thereof in
guilty.

56
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

upon the accused to the such a situation as to 11. That the crime be committed in
MAXIMUM PERIOD. deserve no other penalty consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
than that specially 12. That the crime be committed by means of
prescribed by law for said inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel
crime. or intentional damage thereto, derailment of a
A generic aggravating A qualifying AC cannot be locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving
circumstance may be offset by a mitigating great waste and ruin.
compensated by a circumstance. 13. That the act be committed with evident
mitigating circumstance. premeditation.
According to the new rules, generic and qualifying 14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be
aggravating circumstances must be alleged in order to employed.
be appreciated. 15. That advantage be taken of superior
strength, or means be employed to weaken the defense.
16. That the act be committed with treachery
(alevosia).
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH DO NOT There is treachery when the offender commits
HAVE THE EFFECT OF INCREASING THE PENALTY any of the crimes against the person, employing means,
AC 1) which in themselves constitute a crime methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend
specially punishable by law, or b) which are included by directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk
the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty to himself arising from the defense which the offended
therefore shall not be taken into account for the purpose party might make.
of increasing the penalty (Art. 62, par. 1) 17. That means be employed or circumstances
brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects
AC which arise: a) from the moral attributes of the of the act.
offender or b) from his private relations with the 18. That the crime be committed after an
offended party, or c) from any other personal cause, unlawful entry.
shall only serve to aggravate the liability of the There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of
principals, accomplices, and accessories as to whom a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.
such circumstances are attendant. 19. That as a means to the commission of a
crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.
Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. The following 20. That the crime be committed with the aid
are aggravating circumstances: of persons under fifteen years of age or by means of
1. That advantage be taken by the offender of motor vehicles, motorized watercraft, airships, or other
his public position. similar means. (As amended by RA 5438).
2. That the crime be committed in contempt or 21. That the wrong done in the commission of
with insult to the public authorities. the crime be deliberately augmented by causing other
3. That the act be committed with insult or in wrong not necessary for its commissions.
disregard of the respect due the offended party on
account of his rank, age, or sex, or that is be committed
in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not
given provocation.
4. That the act be committed with abuse of
confidence or obvious ungratefulness. People v. Antonio
5. That the crime be committed in the palace 393 SCRA 169 (2002)
of the Chief Executive or in his presence, or where public Facts: Kevin Paul, 7 yr old son of the victim
authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, Sergio was lying on the bed beside his father Sergio in
or in a place dedicated to religious worship. the bedroom when he heard a window being opened and
6. That the crime be committed in the night the sound of feet stepping on the floor. Then someone
time, or in an uninhabited place, or by a band, whenever kicked open the door to the bedroom. Kevin saw Wilson
such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the Antonio carrying a shotgun. Wilson aimed his gun at
offense. Sergio who was asleep on the bed and fired hitting
Whenever more than three armed malefactors Sergio on the chest, shoulder and back. He was also hit
shall have acted together in the commission of an on his left thigh. Immediately after firing his gun, Wilson
offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a hurriedly left the room. When the police arrived, Sergio
band. was already dead. Wilson surrendered to the police
7. That the crime be committed on the after eluding arrest for more than 1 yr. The trial court
occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, convicted him of murder qualified by treachery and
epidemic or other calamity or misfortune. aggravated by the circumstance of evident
8. That the crime be committed with the aid of premeditation, dwelling and unlawful entry. The above
armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity. agrravating circumstances were not alleged in the
9. That the accused is a recidivist. Information.
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial Held: Pursuant to the 2000 Revised Rules of
for one crime, shall have been previously convicted by Criminal Procedure, every Complaint or Information
final judgment of another crime embraced in the same must state not only the qualifying but also the
title of this Code. aggravating circumstances. This rule may be given
10. That the offender has been previously retroactive effect in the light of the well-established rule
punished by an offense to which the law attaches an that statutes regulating the procedure of the courts will
equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to be construed as applicable to actions pending and
which it attaches a lighter penalty. undetermined at the time of their passage. The
aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation,

57
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

dwelling and unlawful entry, not having been alleged in


the Information, may not now be appreciated to The mere fact that he was in fatigue uniform and had
enhance the liability of Wilson. army rifle at the time is not sufficient to established that
he misused his public position in the commission of the
People v. Suela crimes (People v. Pantoja)
373 SCRA 163 (2002)
Facts: Brothers Edgar and Nerio Suela, and Even if defendant did not abuse his office, if it is
Edgardo Batocan sporting ski masks, bonnets and proven that he has failed in his duties as such public
gloves, brandishing handguns and knife barged into the officer, this circumstance would warrant the aggravation
room of Director Rosas who was watching television of his penalty.
together with his adopted son, Norman and his friend
Gabilo. They threatened Rosas, Norman and Gabilo to Taking advantage of public position, cannot be taken
give the location of their money and valuables, which into consideration in offenses where it is made by law an
they eventually took. They dragged Gabilo downstairs integral element of the crime such as in malversation or
with them. Upon Nerios instructions, Batocan stabbed in falsification of documents committed by public
Gabilo 5 times which caused the latters death . The trial officers.
court sentenced Edgar, Nerio and Batocan to suffer the
penalty of death appreciating the aggravating People v. Capalac
circumstance of disguise which was not alleged in the 117 SCRA 874 (1982)
Information against the three. Facts: Magaso stabbed Moises in a cockpit. The
Held: Following current Rules on Criminal aggressor attempting to escape was confronted by 2
Procedure particularly Section 9 of the new Rule 110, brothers of Moises, Jesus (deceased) and appellant
and current jurisprudence, the aggravating circumstance Mario Capalac. Magaso, seeing that he was cornered,
of disguise cannot be appreciated against appellants. In raised his hands as a sign of surrender. The brothers
as much as the same was not alleged in the were not appeased. Mario proceeded to pistol-whip
Information, the aggravating circumstance of disguise Magaso and after he had fallen, Jesus stabs him. The
cannot now be appreciated to increase the penalty to lower court convicted the accused of murder and took
death notwithstanding the fact that the new rule into consideration the aggravating circumstance of
requiring such allegation was promulgated only after the taking advantage of public office because the accused is
crime was committed and after the trial court has a police officer.
already rendered its Decision. It is a cardinal rule that Held: On the aggravating circumstance that
rules of criminal procedure are given retroactive the accused used his public position as a policeman, it
application insofar as they benefit the accused. was held that the mere fact that he was a member of
the police force was insignificant to the attack. He acted
People v. Mendoza like a brother, instinctively. He pistol-whipped the
327 SCRA 695 (2000) deceased because he had a pistol with him. It came in
Facts: Anchito and Marianito passed by handy and so he acted accordingly. That he was a
appellant's house and asked for a drink from appellant's policeman is of no relevance.
wife, Emily. Anchito began talking with Emily and they
were about 4 arms-length from Marianito when
appellant suddenly appeared. Appellant hacked Anchito
on the nape, which prompted Marianito to flee out of
fear for his life. Anchito died in a kneeling position with People v. Gapasin
hack wounds at the back of the neck and body. 231 SCRA 728 (1994)
Appellant voluntary surrendered. The trial court ruled Facts: Gapasin was a member of the Phil.
that voluntary surrender was offset by the aggravating Constabulary. He was issued a mission order to
circumstance of treachery. investigate a report regarding the presence of
Held: The trial court erred in ruling that unidentified armed men in one barrio. He was informed
voluntary surrender was offset by the aggravating that a certain Calpito had an unlicensed firearm. He shot
circumstance of treachery. Treachery in the present case Calpito with the use of an armalite after seeing the latter
is a qualifying, not a generic aggravating circumstance. walking along the road. Gapasin was convicted of
Its presence served to characterize the killing as murder.
murder; it cannot at the same time be considered as a Held: The accused took advantage of his public
generic aggravating circumstance to warrant the position because as a member of the PC, he committed
imposition of the maximum penalty. Thus, it cannot the crime with an armalite which was issued to him
offset voluntary surrender. when he received his order.

Par. 1. - THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN BY THE People v. Villamor


OFFENDER OF HIS PUBLIC POSITION. 373 SCRA 254 (2002)
Facts: Brothers Jerry and Jelord Velez were on
their way home on board a motorcycle. Jerry was
The public officer must use the influence, prestige or
driving. As they neared a junction, they heard a
ascendancy which his office gives him as the means by
speeding motorcycle fast approaching from behind. The
which he realizes his purpose. The essence of the matter
brothers ignored the other motorcycle, which caught up
is presented in the inquiry, did the accused abuse his
with them. As they were about to cross the bridge
office in order to commit the crime?
leading to their home, gunshots rang out from behind
them. They abruptly turned the motorcycle around
When a public officer commits a common crime
towards the direction of the gunfire. The light of their
independent of his official functions and does acts that
motorcycle's headlamp fell on their attackers aboard the
are not connected with the duties of his office, he should
second motorcycle. The assailants fired at them a
be punished as a private individual without this AC.

58
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

second time and fled. Jerry saw PO3 Villamor and Four circumstances are enumerated in this paragraph,
Maghilom on board the motorcycle behind them. which can be considered single or together. If all the 4
Maghilom was driving the motorcycle while Villamor was circumstances are present, they have the weight of one
holding a short gun pointed at them. Jerry sustained aggravating circumstance only.
gunshot wounds but survived. Jelord, however, died on
the spot during the first gunburst. This circumstance (rank, age or sex) may be taken
Held: There was no showing that Villamor took into account only in crimes against person or honor.
advantage of his being a policeman to shoot Jelord Velez
or that he used his "influence, prestige or ascendancy" There must be evidence that in the commission of the
in killing the victim. Villamor could have shot Velez even crime, the accused deliberately intended to offend or
without being a policeman. In other words, if the insult the sex or age of the offended party.
accused could have perpetrated the crime even without
occupying his position, there is no abuse of public (1) WITH INSULT OR IN DISREGARD OF
position. The Court cited the case of People v. Herrera, THE REPECT DUE THE OFFENDED PARTY ON
where the Court emphatically said that the mere fact ACCOUNT:
that accused-appellant is a policeman and used his
government issued .38 caliber revolver to kill is not (a) OF THE RANK OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
sufficient to establish that he misused his public position ex. An attempt upon the life of a general of the
in the commission of the crime. Philippine Army is committed in disregard of his rank.

(b) OF THE AGE OF THE OFFENDED PARTY


Par. 2. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN ex. When the aggressor is 45 years old and the
CONTEMPT OR WITH INSULT TO THE PUBLIC victim was an octogenarian.
AUTHORITIES. It is not proper to consider disregard of old
age in crimes against property. Robbery with homicide is
REQUISITES: primarily a crime against property.
a. That the public authority is engaged in the
exercise of his functions. (c) OF THE SEX OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
b. That he who is thus engaged in the This refers to the female sex, not to the male
exercise of his functions is not the person sex (Reyes)
against whom the crime is committed. Killing a woman is not attended by this AC if
c. The offender knows him to be a public the offender did not manifest any specific insult or
authority. disrespect towards her sex.
d. His presence has not prevented the THIS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE IS
offender from committing the criminal act. NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FOLLOWING:
1. When the offender acted with passion and
PUBLIC AUTHORITY / PERSON IN AUTHORITY obfuscation.
A public officer who is directly vested with 2. When there exists a relationship between the
jurisdiction, that is, a public officer who has the power to offended party and the offender.
govern and execute the laws. The councilor, mayor, 3. When the condition of being a woman is
governor, barangay captain etc. are persons in indispensable in the commission of the crime
authority. A school teacher, town municipal health i.e. parricide, rape, etc.
officer, agent of the BIR, chief of police, etc. are now
considered a person in authority. Disregard of sex absorbed in treachery.

Par. 2 is not applicable if committed in the presence of (2) THAT BE COMMITTED IN THE
an agent only such as a police officer. DWELLING OF THE OFFENDED PARTY

AGENT DWELLING BUILDING OR STRUCTURE,


A subordinate public officer charged with the EXCLUSIVELY USED FOR REST AND COMFORT.
maintenance of public order and the protection and a combination house and store or a market
security of life and property, such as barrio policemen, stall where the victim slept is not a dwelling.
councilmen, and any person who comes to the aid of This is considered an AC primarily because of
persons in authority. the sanctity of privacy, the law accords to human abode.
Also, in certain cases, there is an abuse of confidence
The crime should not be committed against the public which the offended party reposed in the offender by
authority or else it becomes direct assault. opening the door to him.
The evidence must show clearly that the
Lack of knowledge on the part of the offender that a defendant entered the house of the deceased to attack
public authority is present indicates lack of intention to him.
insult the public authority. The offended party must not give
provocation. If the provocation did not take place in the
Par. 3. - THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED (1) WITH house, dwelling may be considered as an AC.
INSULT OR IN DISREGARD OF THE RESPECT DUE Dwelling is aggravating, even if the offender
THE OFFENDED PARTY ON ACCOUNT OF HIS (a) did not enter the upper part of the house where the
RANK, (b) AGE, OR (c) SEX, OR (2) THAT IS BE victim was, but shot from under the house.
COMMITTED IN THE DWELLING OF THE OFFENDED Even if the killing took place outside the
PARTY, IF THE LATTER HAS NOT GIVEN dwelling, it is aggravating provided that the commission
PROVOCATION. of the crime was begun in the dwelling.

59
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Dwelling is aggravating in abduction or illegal all intents and purposes a dwelling as the term is used
detention. in Art. 14(3) of the RPC. Be she a lessee, a boarder, or a
It is not aggravating where the deceased was bedspacer, the place is her home the sanctity of which
called down from his house and he was murdered in the the law seeks to protect and uphold.
vicinity of his house.
Dwelling includes dependencies, the foot of People v. Banez
the staircase and the enclosure under the house. If the 301 SCRA 248 (1999)
deceased was only about to step on the first rung of the Facts: The accused was living with his parents.
ladder when he was assaulted, the AC of dwelling will His sisters complained to their father that the accused
not be applicable. made trouble whenever he was drunk. They wanted to
put the accused in another house. That night while they
DWELLING NOT APPLICABLE: were discussing the plans for the accused, while their
1. When both offender and offended party are father went to his room, the accused, who looked drunk,
occupants of the same house. ran to the kitchen and got 2 knives and then stabbed
2. When the robbery is committed by the use of the father. The father died.
force upon things, dwelling is not aggravating because Held: The aggravating circumstance of dwelling
it is inherent to the crime. cannot be considered aggravating where the accused
3. In the crime of trespass to dwelling, it is also and the victim were living in the same house where the
inherent or included by law in defining the crime. crime was committed. The rationale for considering
4. When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient dwelling an aggravating circumstance is the violation by
and immediate provocation. the offender of the sanctity of the home of the victim by
5. When the dwelling where the crime was trespassing therein to commit the crime. This reason is
committed did not belong to the offended party. entirely absent in this case.
6. When the rape was committed in the ground
floor of the 2-storey structure, the lower floor being People v. Lapaz
used as a video rental store and not as a private place 171 SCRA 539 (1989)
of abode or residence. Facts: Eulalia Cabunag, a 70-year-old woman
who was living alone, was beaten to death by 3 men.
A victim raped in the boarding house where she was a Appellant Barleso, Lapaz and Cristoto agreed to kill
bedspacer. Her room constituted a dwelling. Eulalia because there was one incident when the victim
called Barleso a thief in front of many people.
Dwelling may be temporary dwelling. Held: The presence of treachery is clear as
Barleso invited two companions to help him execute his
Note: The Code speaks of dwelling, not domicile. plan to beat the victim to death with pieces of wood in
the middle of the night insuring the killing of the victim
Dwelling is not aggravating in adultery when paramour without risk to himself arising from the defense with the
also lives in the conjugal home. offended party might make.
While it may be true that nighttime is absorbed
Dwelling is not included in treachery. in the aggravating circumstance of treachery, the
aggravating circumstance of disregard of sex and age
cannot be similarly absorbed. Treachery refers to the
manner of the commission of the crime. Disregard of sex
and age pertains to the relationship of the victim, who is
People v. Rodil a 70-year old woman, and the appellant who is a young
109 SCRA 308 (1981) man, 27 years old, at the time of the commission of the
Facts: Lt. Mesana approached Rodil and offense.
identifies himself as a PC officer. He asked Rodil whether
or not the gun which the latter possessed had a license. People v. Taboga
Rodil attempted to draw his gun but was prevented by 376 SCRA 500 (2002)
Mesanas companions. Rodil was asked to sign a Facts: Taboga entered the house of Tubon, a
document attesting to the confiscation of the gun but he widowed septuagenarian, robbed, stabbed and burned
refused. Instead, he drew a dagger and managed to beyond recognition the latters house.
stab Mesana in the chest repeatedly. Held: Anent the circumstance of age, there
Held: The AC of disregard of rank should be must be a showing that the malefactor deliberately
appreciated because it is obvious that Mesana identified intended to offend or insult the age of the victim.
himself as a PC officer to the accused who is merely a Neither could disregard of respect due to sex be
member of the Anti-Smuggling Unit and therefore appreciated if the offender did not manifest any
inferior both in rank and social status to the victim. intention to offend or disregard the sex of the victim. In
other words, killing a woman is not attended by the
People v. Daniel aggravating circumstance if the offender did not
86 SCRA 511 (1978) manifest any specific insult or disrespect towards the
Facts: 13-year-old Margarita was at the bus offended party's sex. In the case at bar, there is
station when the accused, Daniel, started molesting her, absolutely no showing that Taboga deliberately intended
asking her name and trying to get her bag to carry it for to offend or insult the victim. However, even if
her. She refused and asked the help of the conductor disrespect or disregard of age or sex were not
and driver but they did not help her. She ran to the appreciated, the four circumstances enumerated in
jeepney stop and rode the jeep. Daniel followed her to Article 14, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code, as
the boarding house and he raped her. amended, can be considered singly or together.
Held: Although Margarita was merely renting a
bedspace in a boarding house, her room constituted for People v. De Mesa

60
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

354 SCRA 397 (2001) store, Rios bought cigarettes. Ambrocio confronted Rios
Facts: Motas, Barangay Chairman of Barangay about the stoning incident and an altercation ensued
Sta. Cruz Putol, San Pablo City, was shot by De Mesa between them. Having heard the appellant shout at
while playing a card game with some townmates at a Ambrocio, Mesa intervened and requested the 2 to part
neighborhood store resulting to his death. The trial ways and escorted them to their respective residences.
court, in convicting De Mesa for murder, appreciated the A few minutes later, appellant went back to the store.
aggravating circumstance of commission of the crime in Ambrocio went to the terrace of their house. Appellant
contempt of or with assault to public authorities. suddenly approached Ambrocio and stabbed his right
Held: The trial court also erred in appreciating stomach. Mesa and his group saw Anacita weeping while
the aggravating circumstance that the commission of Ambrocio was lying lifeless in the terrace of their house.
the crime was in contempt of or with assault to public Ambrocio died before he was brought to the hospital.
authorities. The requisites of this circumstance are: (1) The trial court appreciated the aggravating circumstance
the public authority is engaged in the discharge of his of dwelling.
duties and (2) he is not the person against whom the Held: The trial court correctly appreciated the
crime is committed. None of these circumstances are aggravating circumstance of dwelling or morada in this
present in this case. In the first place, the crime was case. The word dwelling includes every dependency of
committed against the barangay chairman himself. At the house that forms an integral part thereof and
the time that he was killed, he was not engaged in the therefore it includes the staircase of the house and much
discharge of his duties as he was in fact playing a card more, its terrace. When a crime is committed in the
game with his neighbors. dwelling of the offended party and the latter has not
given provocation, dwelling may be appreciated as an
People v. Montinola (Supra) aggravating circumstance.
Facts: Montinola boarded a passenger jeepney
driven by Hibinioda. Among the passengers was People v. Arizobal
Reteracion. All of a sudden, appellant drew his gun, an 348 SCRA 143 (2000)
unlicensed firearm, .380 cal pistol and directed Facts: Arizobal and two others entered the
Reteracion to hand over his money or else he would be house of spouses Clementina and Laurencio Gimenez.
killed. Montinola aimed the firearm at the neck of They then ransacked the house and ordered Laurencio
Reteracion and fired successive shots at the latter. As a to go with them to his son Jimmys house. Upon
result Reteracion slumped dead. Montinola was charged reaching the house of Jimmy, they tied the latter and
with robbery with homicide and illegal possession of one Francisco also surnamed Gimenez. They consumed
firearm. the food and cigarettes Jimmys wife Erlinda, was
Held: DIsregard of age, sex or rank is not selling. They proceeded to ransacked the household in
aggravating in robbery with homicide, which is primarily search of valuables. Thereafter, Erlinda was ordered to
a crime against property, as the homicide is regarded as produce P100,000 in exchange for Jimmys life. Erlinda
merely incidental to the robbery. offered to give a certificate of large cattle but the
document was thrown back at her. The 3 then dragged
People v. Tao Jimmy outside the house together with Laurencio. One
331 SCRA 448 (2000) of the culprits returned and told Erlinda that Jimmy and
Facts: Amy was tending a video rental shop Laurencio had been killed for trying to escape. The trial
owned by Marina. Tao kept going in and out of the court appreciated the aggravating circumstance of
shop and on the last time he went inside said shop, he dwelling.
suddenly jumped over the counter, strangled Amy, Held: The trial court is correct in appreciating
poked a knife at the left side of her neck, pulled her dwelling as an aggravating circumstance. Generally,
towards the kitchen where he forced her to undress, and dwelling is considered inherent in the crimes which can
gained carnal knowledge of her against her will and only be committed in the abode of the victim, such as
consent. Before they could reach the upper floor, he trespass to dwelling and robbery in an inhabited place.
suddenly pulled Amy down and started mauling her until However, in robbery with homicide the authors thereof
she lost consciousness; then he freely ransacked the can commit the heinous crime without transgressing the
place. Leaving Amy for dead after repeatedly banging sanctity of the victim's domicile. In the case at bar, the
her head, first on the wall, then on the toilet bowl, he robbers demonstrated an impudent disregard of the
took her bracelet, ring and wristwatch. He then inviolability of the victims' abode when they forced their
proceeded upstairs where he took as well the jewelry way in, looted their houses, intimidated and coerced
box containing other valuables belonging to his victim's their inhabitants into submission, disabled Laurencio and
employer. The trial court appreciated dwelling as an Jimmy by tying their hands before dragging them out of
aggravating circumstance because the incident took the house to be killed.
place supposedly at the residence of private
complainant's employer, "which doubles as a video Par. 4. - THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH (1)
rental shop. ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR (2) OBVIOUS
Held: Dwelling cannot be appreciated as an UNGRATEFULNESS.
aggravating circumstance in this case because the rape
was committed in the ground floor of a two-story
(1) ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE
structure, the lower floor being used as a video rental
store and not as a private place of abode or residence.
REQUISITES:
a. That the offended party had trusted the offender.
People v. Rios
b. That the offender abused such trust by
333 SCRA 823(2000)
committing a crime against the offended party.
Facts: Rios hurled stones at the house of
c. That the abuse of confidence facilitated the
Ambrocio and Anacita Benedicto. A few minutes later,
commission of the crime.
and while the Benedicto spouses were tending their

61
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

The confidence between the offender and the offended are in the performance of performing their duties
party must be immediate and personal. their duties must be in outside of their offices.
their office.
It is inherent in malversation, qualified theft, estafa by The public authority may The public authority should
conversion or misappropriation and qualified seduction. be the offended party. not be the offended party.

(2) OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS If it is the Malacaang palace or a church, it is


aggravating, regardless of whether State or official or
The ungratefulness must be obvious religious functions are being held.
manifest and clear.
The President need not be in the palace. His presence
People v. Mandolado alone in any place where the crime is committed is
123 SCRA 128 (1983) enough to constitute the AC. It also applies even if he is
Facts: Mandolado and Ortillano, with Erinada not engaged in the discharge of his duties in the place
and Simon are trainees/draftees of the AFP. They got to where the crime was committed.
know each other and had a drinking session at the bus
terminal. The accused was drunk. He got his gun and But as regards the place where the public authorities
started firing. Erinada and Simon rode a jeep and tried are engaged in the discharge of their duties, there must
to escape from Mandolado and Ortillano but the two be some performance of public functions.
eventually caught up with them. The two accused shot
the victims to death. Cemeteries are not places dedicated for religious
Held: There is no aggravating circumstance of worship.
abuse of confidence. In order that abuse of confidence
be deemed as aggravating, it is necessary that there Offender must have the intention to commit a crime
exists a relation of trust and confidence between the when he entered the place.
accused and one against whom the crime was
committed and that the accused made use of such a Par. 6. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED (1) IN
relationship to commit the crime. It is also essential that THE NIGHT TIME, OR (2) IN AN UNINHABITED
the confidence between the parties must be immediate PLACE, OR (3) BY A BAND, WHENEVER SUCH
and personal such as would give the accused some CIRCUMSTANCES MAY FACILITATE THE
advantage to commit the crime. It is obvious that the COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE.
accused and the victims only met for the first time so WHENEVER MORE THAN THREE ARMED
there is no personal or immediate relationship upon MALEFACTORS SHALL HAVE ACTED TOGETHER IN
which confidence might rest between them. THE COMMISSION OF AN OFFENSE, IT SHALL BE
DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED BY A BAND.
People v. Arrojado
350 SCRA 679 (2001)
Facts: Arrojado is the first cousin of the victim, These 3 circumstances may be considered separately
Mary Ann and lived with her and her father. Arrojado when their elements are distinctly perceived and can
helped care for the victims father for which he was paid subsist independently, revealing a greater degree of
a P1,000 monthly salary. Arrojado killed Mary Ann by perversity.
stabbing her with a knife. Thereafter he claimed that the Nighttime, uninhabited place or band is
latter committed suicide. aggravating:
Held: The aggravating circumstance of abuse 1. When it facilitated the commission of the
of confidence is present in this case. For this crime; or
aggravating circumstance to exist, it is essential to show 2. When especially sought for by the
that the confidence between the parties must be offender to insure the commission of the crime or
immediate and personal such as would give the accused for the purpose of impunity; or
some advantage or make it easier for him to commit the 3. When the offender took advantage thereof
criminal act. The confidence must be a means of for the purpose of impunity.
facilitating the commission of the crime, the culprit
taking advantage of the offended party's belief that the (1) NIGHTTIME
former would not abuse said confidence. - The commission of the crime must begin and
be accomplished in the nighttime.
- The offense must be actually committed in
Par. 5. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN THE the darkness of the night. When the place is illuminated
PALACE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OR IN HIS by light, nighttime is not aggravating.
PRESENCE, OR WHERE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES ARE
ENGAGED IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR DUTIES, (2) UNINHABITED PLACE
OR IN A PLACE DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS - One where there are no houses at all, a place
WORSHIP. at a considerable distance from town, or where the
houses are scattered at a great distance from each
PLACE WHER PUBLIC CONTEMPT OR INSULT other.
AUTHORITIES ARE TO PUBLIC - TEST: WON in the place of the commission of
ENGAGED IN THE AUTHORITIES the offense, there was a reasonable possibility of the
DISCHARGE OF THEIR (par. 2) victim receiving some help.
DUTIES (par. 5) - The fact that persons occasionally passed in
The public authorities are in the performance of their the uninhabited place and that on the night of the
duties. murder another hunting party was not a great distance
The public authorities who The public authorities are away, does not matter. It is the nature of the place
which is decisive.

62
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

- It must appear that the accused SOUGHT Normas parents and house of Carlito. These cannot,
THE SOLITUDE of the place where the crime was however, be seen from the couples house because of
committed, in order to better attain his purpose. the many fruit trees and shrubs prevalent in the area.
- The offenders must choose the place as an
aid either (1) to an easy and uninterrupted People v. Silva
accomplishment of their criminal designs or (2) to insure 387 SCRA 77 (2002)
concealment of the offense. Facts: Accused armed with a gun, a bolo, a
rope and a flashlight abducted brothers Edmund and
(3) BAND Manuel Ceriales while the two were playing a game of
- Whenever more than 3 armed malefactors cards inside their house in the middle of the night. They
shall have acted together in the commission of an tied both their hands and feet with a rope and they
offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a brought the brothers at an isolated place. Manuel was
band. stabbed and beheaded causing his instantaneous death.
- The armed men must act together in the Edmund Ceriales was able to escape while the accused
commission of the crime. were about to kill his brother. The trial court appreciated
- If one of the four armed persons is a principal nighttime as an aggravating circumstance.
by inducement, they do not form a band. Held: By and of itself, nighttime is not an
- All the armed men, at least four in number, aggravating circumstance, however, it becomes
must take direct part in the execution of the act aggravating only when: (1) it is especially sought by the
constituting the crime. offender; or (2) it is taken advantage of by him; or (3) it
- Considered in crimes against property and facilitates the commission of the crime by ensuring the
persons and not to crimes against chastity. offender's immunity from capture. In this case, the trial
- It is inherent in brigandage. court correctly appreciated nighttime as aggravating
considering that nighttime facilitated the abduction of
People v. Jose (supra) the Ceriales brothers, the killing of Manuel and the
Facts: The Maggie Dela Riva story. Maggie, the attempt to kill Edmund. Evidence shows that accused-
victim, was on her way home, driving her car appellants took advantage of the darkness to
accompanied by her maid, when she was stopped by successfully consummate their plans. The fact that they
another car boarded by 4 men. Accused Pineda pulled brought with them a flashlight clearly shows that they
her out of the car and forced her inside the assailants intended to commit the crime in darkness.
car. She was brought to a hotel and there, the 4
accused raped her. People v. Ancheta
Held: Supreme Court found that there was 431 SCRA 42 (2004)
committed forcible abduction with rape. With rape as the Facts: Appellant Ulep and his group, robbed
more serious crime, the penalty to be imposed is the Alfredo Roca of 35 sacks of Palay after killing his son, his
maximum in accordance with Art. 48 of the RPC. With wife and his mother with their guns. Thereafter, they
this finding, the extreme penalty of death was imposed. boarded their jeep and left.
While the Supreme Court found no necessity of Held: The offense was proven to have been
considering the aggravating circumstances, the Court executed by a band. A crime is committed by a band
still considered the aggravating circumstances for the when at least four armed malefactors act together in the
purpose of determining the proper penalty to be commission thereof. In this case, all six accused were
imposed in each of the other 3 crimes of simple rape. armed with guns which they used on their victims.
The court claimed that there was an AC of nighttime Clearly, all the armed assailants took direct part in the
because of appellants have purposely sought such execution of the robbery with homicide.
circumstance to facilitate the commission of these
crimes. People v. Librando
335 SCRA 232 (2000)
People v. Desalisa Facts: Edwin and his daughter Aileen, and a
229 SCRA 35 (1994) relative, Fernando, were traversing a hilly portion of a
Facts: Moved by hatred and jealousy, the trail on their way home when they met Raelito Librando,
accused, armed with a sharp pointed instrument, Larry and Eddie. Edwin was carrying a torch at that time
attacked and inflicted physical injuries on the vagina of as it was already dark. Raelito inquired from Edwin the
his wife who was about 5 months pregnant. Thereafter, whereabouts of Fernando and without any warning hit
the accused hanged his wife to a jackfruit tree, causing Edwin with a piece of wood. Eddie followed suit and
her death and that of her fetus. delivered another blow to Edwin. Edwin ran but he was
He was found guilty of the complex crime of chased by Raelito. Thereafter, the three men took turns
parricide with unintentional abortion and was sentenced hitting Edwin with pieces of wood until the latter fell and
to life imprisonment by the lower court. died. The trial court considered nighttime and
Held: The aggravating circumstance of uninhabited place as just one aggravating circumstance.
uninhabited place is present. The uninhabitedness of a Held: The court did not err in considering
place is determined not by the distance of the nearest nighttime and uninhabited place as just one aggravating
house to the scene of the crime but whether or not in circumstance. The court cited the case of People vs.
the place of the commission, there was reasonable Santos where it has been held that if the aggravating
possibility of the victim receiving some help. Considering circumstances of nighttime, uninhabited place or band
that the killing was done during nighttime and many concur in the commission of the crime, all will constitute
fruit trees obstruct the view of neighbors and passersby, one aggravating circumstance only as a general rule
there was no reasonable possibility for the victim to although they can be considered separately if their
receive any assistance. The couple lived on a small nipa elements are distinctly perceived and can subsist
house on a hill. There are 2 other houses in the independently, revealing a greater degree of perversity.
neighborhood which are 150 meters away; the house of

63
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Par. 7. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED ON THE of his conduct or other circumstances he shall not be
OCCASION OF A CONFLAGRATION, SHIPWRECK, worthy of such clemency.
EARTHQUAKE, EPIDEMIC OR OTHER CALAMITY OR
MISFORTUNE. A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one
crime, shall have been previously convicted by final
The reason for the existence of this AC is found in the judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of
debased form of criminality met in one who, in the midst the RPC.
of a great calamity, instead of lending aid to the
afflicted, adds to their suffering by taking advantage of REQUISITES:
their misfortune to despoil them. a. That the offender is on trial for an offense;
b. That he was previously convicted by final
The offender must take advantage of the calamity or judgment of another crime;
misfortune. c. That both the first and the second
offenses are embraced in the same title of the
OR OTHER CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE refers to Code;
other conditions of distress similar to conflagration, d. That the offender is convicted of the new
shipwreck, earthquake or epidemic. offense.

Par. 8. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED WITH What is controlling is the time of trial, not the time of
THE AID OF ARMED MEN OR PERSONS WHO the commission of the crime.
INSURE OR AFFORD IMPUNITY. There is no recidivism if the subsequent conviction is
for an offense committed before the offense involved in
the prior conviction.
REQUISITES:
1. That the armed men or persons took part
Sec. 7 of Rule 120 , Rules of Court, provides that a
in the commission of the crime, directly or
judgment in a criminal case becomes final
indirectly.
(1) after the lapse of the [period for perfecting
2. That the accused availed himself of their
an appeal, or
aid or relied upon them when the crime was
(2) when the sentence has been partially or
committed.
totally satisfied or served, or
(3) the defendant has expressly waived in
The armed men must take part directly or indirectly in
writing his right to appeal, or
the offense.
(4) the accused has applied for probation.
This AC shall not be considered when both the
attacking party and the party attacked were equally
There is recidivism even if the lapse of time between
armed.
two felonies is more than 10 years. Recidivism must be
This AC is not present when the accused as well as
taken into account no mater how many years have
those who cooperated with him in the commission of the
intervened between the 1st and 2nd felonies.
crime, acted under the same plan and for the same
purpose.
Pardon does not obliterate the fact that the accused
was a recidivist; but amnesty extinguishes the penalty
and its effects.
WITH AID OF ARMED BY A BAND
MEN (par. 8) (par. 6) People v. Molina
Aid of armed men is More than 3 armed 336 SCRA 400(2000)
present even if one of the malefactors that have Facts: Brothers Joseph and Angelito, along
offenders merely relied on acted together in the with their cousin, Danny were on their way home when
their aid, for actual aid is commission of an offense. they heard somebody shout kuba, referring to Joseph,
not necessary. a hunchback. They asked who said that but no one
admitted. As the 3 were about to go, Molina delivered a
If there are 4 armed men, aid of armed men is strong stabbing blow at the back of Joseph. Angelito
absorbed by employment of a band came to aid his brother but Molina also stabbed him at
Aid of armed men includes armed women the back. Joseph was dead on arrival at the clinic.
Held: To prove recidivism, it is necessary to
Par. 9. - THAT THE ACCUSED IS A RECIDIVIST. allege the same in the information and to attach thereto
certified copies of the sentences rendered against the
Art. 160. Commission of another crime during service accused. Nonetheless, the trial court may still give such
of penalty imposed for another offense; Penalty. AC credence if the accused does not object to the
Besides the provisions of Rule 5 of Article 62, any presentation of evidence on the fact of recidivism.
person who shall commit a felony after having been In the case at bar, the accused never voiced
convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve out any objection when confronted with the fact of his
such sentence, or while serving the same, shall be previous conviction for attempted homicide.
punished by the maximum period of the penalty
prescribed by law for the new felony. People v. Dacillo
Any convict of the class referred to in this 427 SCRA 528 (2004)
article, who is not a habitual criminal, shall be pardoned Facts: Pacot stabbed and strangled Rosemarie
at the age of seventy years if he shall have already leading to the latters death. Dacillo for his part, hold
served out his original sentence, or when he shall down Rosemaries legs to prevent her from struggling.
complete it after reaching the said age, unless by reason The two men stopped only when they were sure that the
victim was already dead. Dacillo then encase her corpse

64
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

in a cement. The trial court imposed the death penalty more crimes to which it attaches lighter penalty
on the ground that Dacillo admitted during re-cross han that for the new offense; and
examination that he had a prior conviction for the death c. That he is convicted of the new
of his former live-in partner. The fact that Dacillo was a offense.
recidivist was appreciated by the trial court as a generic
aggravating circumstance which increased the imposable REITERACION/ RECIDIVISM
penalty from reclusion perpetua to death HABITUALITY
Held: The aggravating circumstance of It is necessary that the It is enough that a final
recidivism was not alleged in the information and offender shall have served judgment has been
therefore cannot be appreciated against appellant. out his sentence for the rendered in the first
In order to appreciate recidivism as an first offense. offense.
aggravating circumstance, it is necessary to allege it in The previous and It is the requirement that
the information and to attach certified true copies of the subsequent offenses must the offenses be included in
sentences previously meted out to the accused. 26 This not be embraced in the the same title of the Code.
is in accord with Rule 110, Section 8 of the Revised same title of the Code.
Rules of Criminal Procedure which states: SEC. 8. Reiteracion is not always Recidivism is not always to
Designation of the offense. The complaint or an aggravating be taken into consideration
information shall state the designation of the offense circumstance. in fixing the penalty to be
given by the statute, aver the acts or omissions imposed upon the
constituting the offense, and specify its qualifying and accused.
aggravating circumstances. If there is no designation of
the offense, reference shall be made to the section or FOUR FORMS OR REPETITION:
subsection of the statute punishing it. 1. RECIDIVISM

Par. 10. - THAT THE OFFENDER HAS BEEN 2. REITERACTION OR HABITUALITY


PREVIOUSLY PUNISHED BY AN OFFENSE TO
WHICH THE LAW ATTACHES AN EQUAL OR 3. MULTI-RECIDIVISM OR HABITUAL
GREATER PENALTY OR FOR TWO OR MORE CRIMES DELINQUENCY
TO WHICH IT ATTACHES A LIGHTER PENALTY. - when a person, within a period of 10 years
from the date of his release or last conviction of the
Art. 62. Effect of the attendance of crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
mitigating or aggravating circumstances and of robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, is found guilty of
habitual delinquency. Mitigating or aggravating any of said crimes a third time or oftener. In habitual
circumstances and habitual delinquency shall be taken delinquency, the offender is either a recidivist or one
into account for the purpose of diminishing or increasing who has been previously punished for two or more
the penalty in conformity with the following rules: offenses (habituality). He shall suffer an additional
5. Habitual delinquency shall have the penalty for being a habitual delinquent.
following effects:
(a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be 4. QUASI-RECIDIVISM
sentenced to the penalty provided by law for the last - Any person who shall commit a felony after
crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional having been convicted by final judgment, before
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and beginning to serve such sentence or while serving the
maximum periods; same, shall be punished by the maximum period of the
(b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall penalty prescribed by law for the new felony.
be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime
of which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty People v. Gaorana
of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods; 289 SCRA 652 (1998)
and Facts: Marivel, upon instruction of Rowena
(c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the (common-law wife of the accused) went to the house of
culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the Gaorana and saw the couple lying down. Marivel was
last crime of which he be found guilty and to the asked to come and Rowena stood up to urinate. Gaorana
additional penalty of prision mayor in its maximum covered her mouth and pointed a hunting knife to her
period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period. neck and raped her. The second incident of rape
Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of occurred while Marivel was sleeping in the sala with her
the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender, in brother and sister. Marivel did not shout because she
conformity herewith, shall in no case exceed 30 years. was afraid of the accused who was a prisoner and had
For the purpose of this article, a person shall already killed somebody.
be deemed to be habitual delinquent, is within a period Held: The 2 Information alleged that both
of ten years from the date of his release or last instances of rape were attended by the aggravating
conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious circumstance of quasi-recidivism. The trial court made
physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is no express ruling that the appellant was a quasi-
found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. recidivist, and rightly so. During the trial, the
prosecution manifested that appellant had been
convicted by the RTC and was serving sentence for the
REQUISITES:
crime of homicide. However, the prosecution failed or
a. That the accused is on trial for
neglected to present in evidence the record of
an offense;
appellants previous conviction. Quasi-recidivism, like
b. That he previously served
recidivism and reiteracion, necessitates the presentation
sentence for another offense to which the law
of a certified copy of the sentence convicting an
attaches an equal or greater penalty, or for 2 or
accused. The fact that appellant was an inmate of

65
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

DAPECOL does not prove that final judgment had been The evidence must show that one of the accused used
rendered against him. money or other valuable consideration for the purpose
of inducing another to perform the deed.
People v. Villapando
178 SCRA 341 (1989) Par. 12. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED BY
Facts: The accused was charged before the MEANS OF INUNDATION, FIRE, POISON,
RTC with the crimes of murder and of attempted EXPLOSION, STRANDING OF A VESSEL OR
homicide. INTERNATIONAL DAMAGE THERETO, DERAILMENT
Held: The court does not agree that reiteracion OF A LOCOMOTIVE, OR BY THE USE OF ANY OTHER
or habituality should be appreciated in this case. The ARTIFICE INVOLVING GREAT WASTE AND RUIN.
appellant was found by the trial court to have committed
offenses prior to and after the incident of Jan. 14, 1979.
Unless used by the offender as a means to accomplish
In habituality, it is essential that the offender be
a criminal purpose, any of the circumstances in
previously punished, that is, he has served the
paragraph 12 cannot be considered to increase the
sentence, for an offense in which the law attaches, or
penalty or to change the nature of the offense.
provides for an equal or greater penalty than that
When another AC already qualifies the crime, any of
attached by law to the second offense, or for two or
these ACs shall be considered as generic aggravating
more offenses, in which the law attaches a lighter
circumstance only.
penalty. Here, the records do not disclose that the
When the crime intended to be committed is arson and
appellant has been previously punished by an offense to
somebody dies as a result thereof, the crime is simply
which the law attaches an equal or greater or penalty or
arson and the act resulting in the death of that person is
for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter
not even an independent crime of homicide, it being
penalty.
absorbed.
The killing of the victim by means of such
People v. Cajara
circumstances as inundation, fire, poison or explosion
341 SCRA 192 (2000)
qualifies the offense to murder.
Facts: Accused Cajara raped 16-year old
Marita in front of his common-law wife who is the half-
It will be noted that each of the circumstances of
sister of the victim and his two small children. The trial
fire, explosion, and derailment of a locomotive may
court convicted him as charged and sentenced him to
be a part of the definition of particular crime, such as,
death.
arson, crime involving destruction, and damages and
Held: The records show that the crime was
obstruction to means of communication.
aggravated by reiteracion under Art. 14, par. 10, of The
In these cases, they do not serve to increase
Revised Penal Code, the accused having been convicted
the penalty, because they are already included by the
of frustrated murder in 1975 and of homicide, frustrated
law in defining the crimes.
homicide, trespass to dwelling, illegal possession of
firearms and murder sometime in 1989 where his
sentences were later commuted to imprisonment for 23 Par. 13. - THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH
years and a fine of P200,000.00. He was granted EVIDENT PREMEDITATION.
conditional pardon by the President of the Philippines on
8 November 1991. Reiteracion or habituality under Art. Evident premeditation implies a deliberate planning of
14, par. 10, herein cited, is present when the accused the act before executing it.
has been previously punished for an offense to which
the law attaches an equal or greater penalty than that The essence of premeditation is that the execution of
attached by law to the second offense or for two or more the criminal act must be preceded by cool thought and
offenses to which it attaches a lighter penalty. As reflection upon the resolution to carry out the criminal
already discussed, herein accused can be convicted only intent during the space of time sufficient to arrive at a
of simple rape and the imposable penalty therefor is calm judgment.
reclusion perpetua. Where the law prescribes a single
indivisible penalty, it shall be applied regardless of the Evident premeditation may not be appreciated absent
mitigating or aggravating circumstances attendant to any proof as to how and when the plan was hatched or
the crime, such as in the instant case. what time elapsed before it was carried out.

Par. 11. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN REQUISITIES:


CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD, OR 1. The time when the offender
PROMISE. determined to commit the crime;
2. An act manifestly indicating that
the culprit has clung to his determination; and
When this AC is present, there must be 2 or more
- When the crime was carefully planned by the
principals, the one who gives or offers the price or
offenders;
promise and the one who accepts it, both of whom are
- When the offenders previously prepared the
principals to the former, because he directly induces
means which they considered adequate to
the latter to commit the crime, and the latter because
carry it out.
he commits it.
3. A sufficient lapse of time
between the determination and execution, to
When this AC is present, it affects not only the person
allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his
who received the price or reward, but also the person
act and to allow his conscience to overcome the
who gave it.
resolution of his will.
- The offender must have an opportunity to
coolly and serenely think and deliberate on the

66
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

meaning and the consequences of what he resolution of his will had he desired to hearken to its
planned to do, an interval long enough for his warnings.
conscience and better judgment to overcome
his evil desire and scheme. People v. Ilaoa
233 SCRA 231 (1994)
Conspiracy generally presupposes premeditation. Facts: The 5 accused were charged for the
Evident premeditation, while inherent in robbery, may gruesome murder of Nestor de Loyola. The conviction
be aggravating in robbery with homicide if the was based on the following circumstances: a) The
premeditation included the killing of the victim. deceased was seen on the night before the killing in a
drinking session with some of the accused; 2) The
People v. Bibat drunken voices of accused Ruben and Nestor were later
290 SCRA 27 (1998) heard and Nestor was then seen being kicked and
Facts: At around 1:30 pm, Bibat stabbed to mauled by the 5 accused; 3) some of the accused
death one Lloyd del Rosario as the latter was on his way borrowed the tricycle of Alex at about 2 a.m.; 4) blood
to school waiting for a ride. The suspect fled while the was found in Rubens shirt.
victim was brought to the hospital where he was Held: Evident premeditation cannot be
pronounced dead on arrival. A witness testified that the considered. There is nothing in the records to show that
accused and several others often met in Robles house. appellant, prior to the night in question, resolved to kill
In one of their meetings, the accused and his Nestor, nor is there proof to show that such killing was
companions hid some guns and tusok in the house. the result of meditation, calculation or resolution on his
Also, other witnesses saw the accused at around 11:30 part. On the contrary, the evidence tends to show that
am with some companions and heard the plan to kill the series of circumstances which culminated in the
someone. killing constitutes an unbroken chain of events with no
Held: There is evident premeditation because interval of time separating them for calculation and
the 3 requisites are present. There was evident meditation.
premeditation where 2 hours had elapsed from the time
the accused clung to his determination to kill the victim People v. Mondijar
up to the actual perpetration of the crime. 392 SCRA 356(2002)
Facts:. In a previous incident, Aplacador had
People v. Lug-aw stabbed Mondijar, his father in law on the knee. A
229 SCRA 308 (1994) month after, Mondiijar stabbed and hacked his son-in-
Facts: Pal-loy was fencing the boundary limits law with the use of a sharp and pointed bolo which
of the land he was farming when his daughter, Sonia, resulted to his death.
heard a shot. Immediately, she went uphill and just as a Held: There was no evident premeditation. For
second gun shot resounded, she saw Bannay and Lug- the circumstance of evident premeditation to be
aw from a distance and that her father was about to appreciated, the prosecution must present clear and
draw his bolo when Lug-aw shot him. positive evidence of the planning and preparation
Held: The SC ruled that there was no evident undertaken by the offender prior to the commission of
premeditation because no one witnessed the initial the crime. Settled is the rule that evident premeditation,
attack. As Sonia herself testified, she heard the first like any other circumstance that qualifies a killing to
shot, went up a hill, climbed a tree and from there, saw murder, must be established beyond reasonable doubt
Lug-aw shooting her father with the shot reverberating as conclusively and indubitably as the killing itself. In
as the second gun report. What she did see was her the present case, no evidence was presented by the
father trying to repel the assault with a bolo but he prosecution as to when and how appellant planned and
failed because a second shot hit him. The records are prepared for the killing of the victim. There is no
bereft of evidence that the crime was committed with showing of any notorious act evidencing a determination
evident premeditation. to commit the crime which could prove appellant's
criminal intent.
People v. Camilet
142 SCRA 402 (1986) People v. Torpio (supra)
Facts: After a prayer meeting was held at the Facts: While having a drinking spree in a
place of the victim, a deaf-mute boy arrived crying and cottage, Anthony tried to let Dennis Torpio drink gin
while making signals, was able to convey that he was and as the latter refused, Anthony bathed Dennis with
strangled and spanked. Accompanied by some of his gin and mauled him several times. Dennis crawled
guests, the victim proceeded to go to the place where beneath the table and Anthony tried to stab him with a
the boy said he was accosted. Nearing the place, the 22 fan knife but did not hit him. Dennis got up and ran
victim was suddenly stabbed by the accused in the towards their home. Upon reaching home, he got a
stomach with a long knife. knife. He went back to the cottage by another route
Held: Evident premeditation was not and upon arrival Anthony was still there. Upon seeing
established by the prosecution. Although the facts tend Dennis, Anthony avoided Dennis and ran by passing the
to show that Camilet might have harbored ill-feelings shore towards the creek but Dennis met him, blocked
towards the Camanchos after they took a portion of the him and stabbed him. When he was hit, Anthony ran
land he was farming and, as he himself stated to the but got entangled with a fishing net beside the creek
police, they also took the produce from his cornfield, and fell on his back. Dennis then mounted on him and
there is no proof that Camilet conceived of killing the continued stabbing him resulting to the latters death.
victim. Indeed, there is no evidence of 1) the time when Thereafter, Dennis left and slept at a grassy meadow
he determined to commit the crime, 2) an act manifestly near a Camp. In the morning, he went to Estrera, a
indicating that he has clung to his determination and police officer to whom he voluntarily surrendered.
execution to allow him to reflect upon the consequences Held: No evident premeditation exist in this
of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the case. There was no sufficient interregnum from the

67
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

time Dennis was stabbed by the victim, when Dennis Facts: An Information was filed with the RTC
fled to their house and his arming himself with a knife, against Eddie Olazo, Miguel and Charito, together with
and when he stabbed the victim. In a case of fairly Rogelio, Joseph, Dionesia, Rommel and Eddie with the
recent vintage, it was ruled that there is no evident crime of Robbery with Homicide alleging evident
premeditation when the fracas was the result, not of a premeditation and taking advantage of superior strength
deliberate plan but of rising tempers, or when the and conspiracy. However, both the RTC and the CA
attack was made in the heat of anger. failed to consider evident premeditation and taking
advantage of superior strength as ordinary aggravating
People v. Bernal circumstance.
388 SCRA 211 (2002) Held: The requirements to prove the
Facts: Appellant, Fernando, Felix, Rey all aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation are
surnamed Bernal and the victim Pedrito went to a the following: (i) the time when the offender determined
pubhouse. Pedrito, Rey and appellant went inside while to commit the crime; (ii) an act manifestly indicating
Fernando and Felix waited outside. Fernando later went that the culprit has clung to his determination; and (iii)
inside and saw the three in a sleeping position. Fernando sufficient lapse of time between the determination and
then asked Felix to start the tricycle as they would bring execution to allow him to reflect upon the consequences
home the three. He first brought Pedrito out of the pub of his act. To warrant a finding of evident premeditation,
and had him seated at the passengers seat inside the it must appear not only that the accused decided to
tricycle. Fernado then got appellant who was roused commit the crime prior to the moment of its execution,
when they reached the tricycle. While Fernado was but also that such decision was the result of "meditation,
fetching Rey, accused positioned himself at the back of calculation, reflection, or persistent attempt".
Pedrito who was still asleep and discharged his firearm While the SC had previously ruled that the
twice hitting the latter on the head. circumstance of evident premeditation is inherent in
Held: The Court ruled that there was no Robbery, it may be considered in the special complex
evidence directly showing any pre-conceived plan or crime of Robbery with Homicide if there is premeditation
devise employed by accused-appellant to kill the victim. to kill besides stealing. Here, the evidence clearly
Accused-appellant did not go to Barangay Dangdangla, established how and when Charito and his co-
Bangued to kill the victim but to attend to some conspirators hatched their plan to rob the spouses
important matters. Accused-appellant was just invited Vallecera and likewise kill Erlinda. The first attempt of
by his relatives, whom he had not seen for a while after the malefactors to carry out their scheme was foiled and
he changed residence, to have a drinking spree. The it was only on their second attempt that they were able
probability is that the decision to shoot the victim was to consummate the conspiracy. Hence, that there were
made only right there and then. This should at least cast persistent attempts made by the accused sufficiently
reasonable doubt on the existence of a premeditated demonstrate how determined they were to adhere to
plan to kill the victim. Further, the mere existence of ill- their agreement despite the sufficient lapse of time.
feeling or grudge between the parties is not sufficient to Moreover, that Charito and his cohorts went to great
establish premeditated killing. Hence, it would be lengths to hire Joseph to ferry them back and forth to
erroneous to declare that the killing of the victim was the scene of the crime shows the sobriety and
premeditated. circumspection surrounding their decision. Such
circumstances therefore show that the crime committed
People v. Biso was a product of intent and coordination among the
400 SCRA 300 (2003) accused. Hence, the aggravating circumstance of
Facts: Dario, a black belt in karate, entered an evident premeditation is present in this case.
eatery, seated himself beside Teresita and made sexual
advances to her in the presence of her brother, Eduardo.
Eduardo contacted his cousin, Biso, an ex-convict and a
known toughie in the area, and related to him what People v. Zaldy Salahuddin
Dario had done to Teresita. Eduardo and Pio, and 2 G.R. No. 206291 (2016)
others decided to confront Dario. They positioned Facts:On February 10, 2004, at around 5:30 in
themselves in the alley near the house of Dario. When the afternoon, Atty. Segundo Sotto Jr., a prominent law
Dario arrived on board a taxicab, the four assaulted practitioner in Zamboanga City, together with his niece,
Dario. Eduardo held, with his right hand, the wrist of Liezel Mae Java left the former's law office and went
Dario and covered the mouth of Dario with his left hand. home driving an owner type jeep. On the way towards
The 2 others held Dario's right hand and hair. Pio then their house at farmer's Drive, Sta. Maria, Zamboanga
stabbed Dario near the breast with a fan knife. Eduardo City, they passed by Nunez Street, then turned left
stabbed Dario and fled with his three companions from going to Governor Camins Street and through Barangay
the scene. Sta. Maria. When the jeep was nearing farmer's Drive,
Held: There was no evident premeditation. The the jeep slowed down, then, there were two gun shots.
prosecution failed to prove that the four intended to kill Liezel Mae, the one sitting at the right side of the jeep
Dario and if they did intend to kill him, the prosecution felt her shoulder get numb. Thinking that they were the
failed to prove how the malefactors intended to ones being fired at, she bent forward and turned left
consummate the crime. Except for the fact that the towards her uncle. While bending downwards, she heard
appellant and his three companions waited in an alley a sound of a motorcycle at her right side. Then, she
for Dario to return to his house, the prosecution failed to heard another three (3) gunshots from the person in the
prove any overt acts on the part of the appellant and his motorcycle. After that, the motorcycle left.
cohorts showing that that they had clung to any plan to While Liezel's head was touching the abdomen
kill the victim. of her uncle, she was crying and calling out his name. A
few minutes later, rescuers arrived. Liezel and Alty.
People v. Olazo, supra Segundo, with the use of tricycles, were brought to
Western Mindanao Medical Center (WMMC).

68
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Dr. Lim and Dr. Melvin Talaver attended to the Held: The following aggravating circumstances
victim, but they pronounced the victim to be dead on were proved a) nighttime; 2) unlawful entry; 3) dwelling
arrival. of the offended parties; 4) disguise, that is by
Held: In this case, the trial court correctly pretending to be PC officers; and 5) by utter disregard
ruled that the fatal shooting of Atty. Segundo was due to victims age and sex.
attended by treachery because appellant shot the said
victim suddenly and without any warning with a deadly People v. Empacis
weapon, thus: x x x Atty. Segundo G. Sotto, Jr., who 222 SCRA 59 (1993)
was driving his jeep with his teenage niece as passenger Facts: Empacis et al. held-up the store of Fidel
sitting on his right side on the front seat, was totally and his wife. As Fidel was about to give the money, he
unaware that he will be treacherously shot just 200 decided to fight. He was stabbed several times which
meters away from his residence. He was unarmed and resulted to his death. Empacis was stabbed by the son
was not given any opportunity to defend himself or to of Fidel. When he went to a clinic for treatment, he was
escape from the deadly assault. After he was hit when arrested.
the gunman fired the first two shots at him and his niece Held: Langomes and Empacis pretended to be
and after he lost control of his jeep which bumped an bona fide customers of the victims store and on this
interlink wire fence and stopped, he was again shot pretext gained entry into the latters store and into
three times by the gunman. another part of his dwelling. Thus, the aggravating
circumstance of craft was taken into consideration.
Par. 14. - THAT THE CRAFT, FRAUD OR DISGUISE
BE EMPLOYED. People v. Labuguen
337 SCRA 488 (2000)
Facts: Under the pretext of selling 3 cows to
CRAFT involves intellectual trickery and cunning on
the victim, Labuguen convinced the victim to see the
the part of the accused. It is employed as a scheme in
cows and bring P40,000 with him. The two rode on the
the execution of the crime.
victiims motorcycle and Labuguen lured him to where
e.x. Where the defendants pretended to be
he could divest the victim of his money with the least
constabulary soldiers to gain entry into the place of the
danger of being caught. He then boarded a bus leaving
victims.
the motorcycle of the victim on the side of the road. The
The act of the accused in pretending to be
victims dead body was found on the middle of a rice
bona fide passengers of the taxicab driven by the
field, 50 meters from the service drop of an irrigation
deceased, when they were not so in fact, in order not to
canal.
arouse his suspicion, and then killing him, constituted
Held: The generic aggravating circumstances
craft.
of fraud and craft is present in this case. Craft involves
intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of the
Where craft partakes of an element of the offense, the
offender. When there is a direct inducement by insidious
same may not be appreciated independently for the
words or machinations, fraud is present. By saying that
purpose of aggravation.
he would accompany the victim to see the cows which
the latter intended to buy, appellant was able to lure the
FRAUD insidious words or machinations used to
victim to go with him.
induce the victim to act in a manner which would enable
the offender to carry out his design.
e.x. To enter the house, one of the accused
shouted from the outside that they wanted to buy Par. 15. - THAT (1) ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN OF
cigarettes. SUPERIOR STRENGTH, OR (2) MEANS BE
EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN THE DEFENSE.
There is a hairline distinction between craft and fraud.
(1) SUPERIOR STRENGTH
DISTINCTION: When there is a DIRECT INDUCEMENT
by insidious words or machinations, fraud is present; To TAKE ADVANTAGE of superior strength
otherwise, the act of the accused done in order NOT TO means to use purposely excessive force out of
AROUSE THE SUSPICION of the victim constitutes craft. proportion to the means of defense available to the
person attacked.
DISGUISE resorting to any device to conceal identity. One who attacks another with passion and
ex. Wearing of masks obfuscation dos not take advantage of his superior
strength.
The purpose of the offender in using any device must An attack made by a man with a deadly
be to conceal his identity. weapon upon an unarmed and defenseless woman
constitutes the circumstance of abuse of that superiority
People v. Marquez which his SEX and the WEAPON used in the act afforded
117 SCRA 165 (1982) him, and from which the woman was unable to defend
Facts: Francisca was in their house together herself.
with her children and maid when somebody called in No abuse of superior strength in parricide
front of their window who identified themselves as PC against the wife because it is inherent in the crime. It is
soldiers looking for contraband. The men ordered her to generally accepted that the husband is physically
open up otherwise they will shoot up their house. Then stronger than the wife.
accused Marquez went inside together with other armed There must be evidence that the accused
companions. They took some of their belongings and was physically stronger and that they abused such
one of them even raped Francisca, Leticia (daughter of superiority. The mere fact of there being a superiority in
Francisca) and Rufina (maid). numbers is not sufficient to bring the case within the
aggravating circumstance.

69
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

There is abuse of superior strength when generic circumstance in the imposition of the correct
weapon used is out of proportion to the defense penalty.
available to the offended party.
Abuse of superior strength is absorbed in People v. Padilla
treachery. 233 SCRA 46 (1994)
Abuse of superior strength is aggravating in Facts: Pat. Omega was on duty when Ontuca
coercion and forcible abduction, when greatly in excess approached him asking for help claiming he was being
of that required to commit the offense. maltreated by strangers. They proceeded to the place
where they saw 3 men and a woman. An argument
BY A BAND ABUSE OF SUPERIOR ensued between Ontuca and the 3 men, one of which
STRENGTH was Sgt. Padilla. Omega left but returned when he saw
When the offense is The gravamen of abuse of that the 3 men were ganging up on Ontuca. The latter
committed by more than 3 superiority is the taking was stripped of his service revolver. Ontuca was pursued
armed malefactors advantage by the culprits by Padilla. The former, with only a piece of plywood as a
regardless of the of their collective strength defense, was shot by the latter in the head.
comparative strength of to overpower their weaker Held: The killing was qualified by the AC of
the victim. victims. abuse of superior strength which was alleged in the
information and proved during trial. The abuse of
superior strength is present not only when the offenders
(2) MEANS EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN DEFENSE enjoy numerical superiority, or there is a notorious
inequality of forces between the victim and the
This circumstance is applicable only to aggressor, but also when the offender uses a powerful
crimes against persons and sometimes against person weapon which is out of proportion to the defense
and property, such as robbery with physical injuries or available to the victim as in this case.
homicide.
This AC is absorbed in treachery. People v. Lobrigas
Ex. One who, while fighting with another, 394 SCRA 170 (2002)
suddenly casts sand or dirt upon the latters eyes and Facts: Frank, Marlito, both surnamed Lobrigas
then wounds or kills him, evidently employs means and Mante mauled and box Taylaran who was already 76
which weaken the defense of his opponent. years old. The victim died caused by severe beating and
mauling on the chest portion on the victims body.
People v. Cabato Held: The crime committed was murder
160 SCRA 98(1988) qualified by the aggravating circumstance of abuse of
Facts: The accused with 2 other men who are superior strength. To appreciate abuse of superior
still at large, armed with firearms and stones and using strength, there must be a deliberate intent on the part
face masks, entered the dwelling of the victim. They of the malefactors to take advantage of their greater
held the victim tight as well as the wife, who was able to number. They must have notoriously selected and made
scratch the face of the masked man, and as a result was use of superior strength in the commission of the crime.
able to identify the accused. Not satisfied with the To take advantage of superior strength is to use
money given by the couple, the two unknown robbers excessive force that is out of proportion to the means for
hit the victim with stone at the back of his head and the self-defense available to the person attacked; thus, the
accused did the same to the wife which caused her prosecution must clearly show the offenders' deliberate
death. The prosecution argued that since the attack was intent to do so.
by a robust man of 29 years with a huge stone against
an ageing defenseless human, abuse of superior
strength should aggravate the crime.
Held: The prosecution failed to prove that People v. Barcelon
there was indeed a notorious inequality between the 398 SCRA 556(2002)
ages, sizes and strength of the antagonists and that Facts: Barcelon went inside the house of
these notorious advantages were purposely sought for Amador. Thereafter, accused strangled and stabbed the
or used by the accused to achieve his ends. victim with a knife. Amador died as a result. At the time
the crime was committed, Amador was a 69 year-old
People v. Ruelan woman and Barcelon was only 29 years old.
231 SCRA 650(1994) Held: Abuse of superior strength was present
Facts: Ruelan (20 yrs old) was hired by the in the commission of the crime. The court cited the case
spouses Ricardo and Rosa (76 yrs old) to help them sell of People vs. Ocumen, where an attack by a man with a
and deliver rice to their customers. One day, Rosa asked deadly weapon upon an unarmed woman constitutes the
Ruelan to accompany her in opening their store in the circumstance of abuse of that superiority which his sex
public market; she also ordered him to bring a sack and and the weapon used in the act afforded him, and from
an axe. When they were about to leave the premises, which the woman was unable to defend herself.
the house dog got loose and went towards the street. The disparity in age between the assailant and
Rosa got angry and scolded Ruelan. Ruelan pleaded her the victim, aged 29 and 69, respectively, indicates
to stop but Rosa did not so Ruelan struck her behind her physical superiority on appellant's part over the
right ear, causing her to fall face down. He left her in a deceased. It did not matter that appellant was "dark"
grassy portion beside the street and fled. He with a "slim body build" or "medyo mataba." What
surrendered to the police after 2 days. mattered was that the malefactor was male and armed
Held: Although abuse of superior strength was with a lethal weapon that he used to slay the victim.
proven since Ruelan was only 20 years old whereas his
victim was 76 years old already, this was not pleaded in People v. Sansaet
the information, hence, it shall only be considered as a 376 SCRA 426 (2002)

70
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Facts Uldarico was drinking with 15 other men b. That the offender consciously
that include the Sansaet brothers, Rogelio, Leopoldo and adopted the particular means, method or form
Silverio. Because of a bad joke that cropped up, verbal of attack employed by him.
exchanges ensued. Thereafter, Rogelio and Uldarico Treachery does not connote the element of surprise
started hacking each other with bolos. Silverio and alone.
Leopolo positioned themselves behind the victim and There is no treachery when the attack is preceded by a
also hacked him. Uldarico retaliated wounding Silverio. warning or the accused gave the deceased a chance to
Rogelio then hacked Uldarico a 2 nd time. Leopoldo and prepare.
Rogelio continued hacking Uldarico when the latter fell. The qualifying circumstance of treachery may not be
They then dragged Uldarico towards the river and there simply deduced from presumption as it is necessary that
they each twice hacked Uldarico resulting to his death. the existence of this qualifying or aggravating
Held: Mere superiority in number, even circumstance should be proven as fully as the crime
assuming it to be a fact, would not necessarily indicate itself in order to aggravate the liability or penalty
the attendance of abuse of superior strength. The incurred by the culprit.
prosecution should still prove that the assailants
purposely used excessive force out of proportion to the RULES REGARDING TREACHERY
means of defense available to the persons attacked. a. Applicable only to crimes against
Finally, to appreciate the qualifying persons.
circumstance of abuse of superior strength, what should b. Means, methods or forms need
be considered is whether the aggressors took advantage not insure accomplishment of crime.
of their combined strength in order to consummate the c. The mode of attack must be
offense. To take advantage of superior strength means consciously adopted.
to purposely use excessive force out of proportion to the
means available to the person attacked to defend Mere suddenness of the attack is not enough to
himself. In the case at bar, the victim Uldarico de Castro constitute treachery. Such method or form of attack
was the one who picked a fight with the accused- must be deliberately chosen by the accused.
appellants because he did not like the joke by one of the
accused-appellants. There was no evidence to show that ATTACKS SHOWN INTENTION TO ELIMINATE
the accused-appellants purposely sought and took RISK:
advantage of their number to subdue the victim. a. Victim asleep
b. Victim half-awake or just awakened
People v. Ventura c. Victim grappling or being held.
433 SCRA 389 (2004) d. Attacked from behind
Facts: Ventura armed with a .38 Caliber Home-
made Revolver and Flores armed with a bladed weapon, There is treachery in killing a child because the
entered the house of the Bocatejas by cutting a hole in weakness of the victim due to his tender age results in
the kitchen door. Ventura announced a hold-up and hit the absence of any danger to the accused.
Jaime on the head and asked for the keys. Jaime called
out for help and tried to wrestle the gun away from ADDITIONAL RULES:
Ventura. Flores then stabbed Jaime 3 times. Flores also 1. When the aggression is CONTINUOUS,
stabbed Jaimes wife Aileen who had been awakened. treachery must be present in the BEGINNING
Aileen tried to defend herself with an elecrtric cord to of the assault.
no avail. Aileen died on the hospital on the same day. 2. When the assault WAS NOT CONTINUOUS, in
Held: By deliberately employing a deadly that there was an interruption, it is sufficient
weapon against Aileen, Flores took advantage of the that treachery was present AT THE MOMENT
superiority which his strength, sex and weapon gave THE FATAL BLOW WAS GIVEN.
him over his unarmed victim. The fact that Aileen
attempted to fend off the attack on her and her husband In treachery, it makes no difference whether or not
by throwing nearby objects, such as an electric cord, at the victim was the same person whom the accused
appellant Flores does not automatically negate the intended to kill.
possibility that the latter was able to take advantage of When it is NOT SHOWN that the principal by induction
his superior strength directed the killer of the deceased to adopt the means or
methods actually used by the latter in accomplishing the
Par. 16. - THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH murder, because the former left to the latter the details
TREACHERY (ALEVOSIA). as to how it was to be accomplished, treachery cannot
be taken into consideration as to the principal by
induction.
TREACHERY means that the offended party
was not given opportunity to make a defense.
There is treachery when the offender TREACHERY ABUSE OF MEANS
commits any of the crimes against the person, SUPERIOR EMPLOYED TO
employing means, methods or forms in the execution STRENGTH WEAKEN
thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its DEFENSE
execution, without risk to himself arising from the The means, The offender The offender,
defense which the offended party might make. methods or does not employ like in treachery,
forms of attack means, methods employs means
REQUISITES: are employed to or forms of but the means
a. That at the time of the attack, make it attack; he only employed only
the victim was not in a position to defend impossible or takes advantage materially
himself; and hard for the of his superior weakens the
offended party strength. resisting power

71
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

to defend of the offended without risk to himself arising from the defense which
himself. party. the offended party might make. In the case, the
evidence on record reveals that at the time of the
When there is conspiracy, treachery is considered shooting incident, the victims were at the porch of their
against all the offenders. house totally unaware of the impending attack. In
Treachery, evident premeditation and use of superior addition, they were all unarmed thus unable to mount a
strength are, by their nature, inherent in the offense of defense in the event of an attack. The use of disguise
treason. was likewise correctly appreciated as an aggravating
circumstance in this case. There could be no other
Treachery absorbs abuse of superior strength, aid of possible purpose for wearing a bonnet over appellants
armed men, by a band and means to weaken the face but to conceal his identity
defense.
People v. Umayam
Nighttime and craft are absorbed in treachery except if 381 SCRA 323 (2002)
treachery rests upon an independent factual basis. Facts: Umayam and the victim, Mendoza were
living as husband and wife in a shanty erected inside a
Treachery is inherent in murder by poisoning. compound owned by Velasquez. During the couples stay
in the compound, Velasquez would notice them
Treachery cannot co-exist with passion and frequently quarelling and Mendoza on occasions would
obfuscation. run to Velasquez for help for the beatings inflicted on
her by her husband. Velasquez then noticed a foul odor
PP vs. Calinawan (Treachery) emanating from the couples shanty which he at first
G.R. no. 226145 Feb 13, 2017 thought to be that of a poultry feed or kaning baboy.
With the assistance of the police who broke the shantys
Facts: Janices seven year old daughter saw walls, the decomposing body of Mendoza was found
Calinawan stabbing her mother in their kitchen. inside. The trial court found Umayam guilty of murder.
Thereafter, Calinawan quickly fled the scene. Janice told Held: The qualifying circumstance of treachery
his husband that Calinawan stabbed her. After three was not established with concrete evidence. The
days, Janice died due to the severity of the injuries. circumstantial evidence on record does not clearly show
that there was any conscious and deliberate effort on
Held: The following elements must be the part of the accused to adopt any particular means,
established before the existence of treachery may be method or form of attack to ensure the commission of
appreciated: (a) at the time of the attack, the victim the crime without affording the victim any means to
was not in a position to defend himself; and (b) the defend herself. The conclusion that there was treachery
accused consciously and deliberately adopted the can hardly be gleaned because the victim and Umayam
particular means, methods, or forms of attack employed were inside their shanty and no one witnessed how the
by him. The suddenness or unexpectedness alone, killing took place. Notably, the medical findings of the
however, of the attack is insufficient to support the victim's cadaver show, contusions on her arms and legs,
finding of treachery. Other than Marigor's first-hand indicating that there may have been a quarrel prior to
account, no other witness actually saw the stabbing the stabbing. This reasonably negates treachery.
incident. Obviously, her narration of the events that
unfolded was crucial in determining how the killing was People v. Piedad
perpetrated because she was the only one who actually 393 SCRA 488 (2002)
saw its execution. Her testimony, however, was lacking The essence of treachery is a deliberate and
in details; thus, it is insufficient to conclude that the sudden attack, affording the hapless, unarmed and
killing was attended with treachery. Absent clear and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or to escape.
convincing evidence on how the attack was perpetrated, While it is true that the victim herein may have been
the conclusion that there was treachery is nothing more warned of a possible danger to his person, since the
but an assumption. It is unfortunate that the particular victim and his companion headed towards their
means, manner or method of attack was never clearly residence when they saw the group of accused-
illustrated in her testimony leaving the evidence for appellants coming back for them after an earlier quarrel
murder wanting. just minutes before, in treachery, what is decisive is that
the attack was executed in such a manner as to make it
People vs. Sibbu impossible for the victim to retaliate.
G.R. No. 214757 March 29, 2017 In the case at bar, Mateo did not have any chance of
defending himself from the accused-appellant's
Facts: Bryan saw from a distance a person in concerted assault, even if he was forewarned of the
camouflage uniform with a long firearm slung across his attack. Mateo was obviously overpowered and helpless
chest and a black bonnet over his head. Bryan also saw when accused-appellants' group numbering around
two men in crouching position at a distance of three eight, ganged up and mauled him. Luz came to Mateo's
meters away from the appellant. Fearing the worst, succor by embracing him and pacifying his aggressors,
Bryan shouted a warning to his family. Appellant then but accused-appellants were unrelenting. More
fired upon them killing three persons. The RTC found the importantly, Mateo could not have actually anticipated
accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder and the sudden landing of a large concrete stone on his
attempted murder. The CA affirmed the RTCs decision. head. The stone was thus treacherously struck. Neither
could the victim have been aware that Lito came up
Held: Treachery is present when the offender beside him to stab his back as persons were beating him
commits any of the crimes against person, employing from every direction. Lito's act of stabbing the victim
means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof with a knife, inflicting a 15-cm deep wound shows
which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, deliberate intent of using a particular means of attack.

72
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Considering the location of the injuries sustained by the Romeo fell to the ground while appellant quickly ran
victim and the absence of defense wounds, Mateo away from the scene.
clearly had no chance to defend himself. Held: The appellants sudden attack on Romeo
amply demonstrates that treachery was employed in the
People v. Dumadag commission of the crime. It is of no consequence that
432 SCRA 65 (2004) appellant was in front of Romeo when he thrust the
Facts: Prudente with his friends including knife to his torso. Records show that appellant initially
Meliston agreed to meet at a swimming pool to celebrate came from behind and then attacked Romeo from the
the feast of St. John. On their way home, there was front. In any event, "[e]ven a frontal attack could be
heavy downpour so they decided to take a shelter at a treacherous when unexpected and on an unarmed victim
store where 2 men, 1 of whom is Dumadag are having who would be in no position to repel the attack or avoid
some drinks. Dumadag offered Prudente a drink of it," as in this case. Undoubtedly, the RTC and CA
Tanduay but the latter refused then left. Dumadag correctly held that the crime committed was murder
followed Prudente and stabbed the victim on his breast under Article 248 of the RPC by reason of the qualifying
with a knife which resulted to his death. circumstance of treachery.
Held: As a general rule, a sudden attack by the
assailant, whether frontally or from behind, is treachery People v. Libre
if such mode of attack was deliberately adopted by him G.R. No. 192790 (2016)
with the purpose of depriving the victim of a chance to There is treachery when the killing was
either fight or retreat. The rule does not apply if the committed through an unexpected and sudden attack
attack was not pre-conceived but merely triggered by which renders the victim unable and unprepared to put
infuriation of the appellant on an act made by the up a defense.
victim. In the present case, it is apparent that the attack There is treachery when the offender commits
was not preconceived. It was triggered by the any of the crimes against the person, employing means,
appellant's anger because of the victim's refusal to have methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend
a drink with the appellant and his companions. directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk
to himself arising from the defense which the offended
People v. Rebucan party might make. The essence of treachery is that the
G.R. No. 182551 (2011) attack comes without a warning and in a swift,
Facts: Carmela stated that at the time of the deliberate, and unexpected manner, affording the
incident, she was playing with a toy camera inside the hapless, unarmed, and unsuspecting victim no chance to
house and she was situated beside a chicken cage, near resist or escape.
a bench. Felipe, her grandfather was also there near the Respondents attack was well-planned and the
bench and he was carrying Ranil, her brother, in his series of events that transpired clearly established
right arm. Accused-appellant then came inside the conspiracy among them. First, the perpetrators
house in a sudden manner. She insisted that Ranil was undoubtedly acted in concert as they went to the house
carried by Felipe when the accused-appellant entered of Ruben together, each with his own firearms. Second,
the house. She said that no fight or altercation occurred the perpetrators used Lucy Sabando and her child to
between Felipe and the accused-appellant. After Felipe trick Ruben and ensure that he will come out of the
was hacked, he immediately ran outside of the house clueless to their presence. Third, after a moment
house. Carmela and Jericho then ran to the back of the of struggling, Caman immediately shot Ruben Barte at
house. the back. Fourth, perpetrators simultaneously strafed
Held: The abruptness of the unexpected Barte's house for a long period to ensure that those
assault rendered Felipe defenseless and deprived him of inside the house are likewise killed. Fifth, despite Juanita
any opportunity to repel the attack and retaliate. As Barte's plea to stop shooting as there were children with
Felipe was carrying his grandson Ranil, the child them, the shooting continued thus manifesting clear
unfortunately suffered the same fatal end as that of his intent to kill. Lastly, when they ceased firing, they
grandfather. In the killing of Ranil, the trial court rested at the same time and fled together. The
likewise correctly appreciated the existence of suddenness and unexpectedness of the assault deprived
treachery. The said circumstance may be properly the victims of an opportunity to resist it or offer any
considered, even when the victim of the attack was not defense of their persons. Clearly, the victims were
the one whom the defendant intended to kill, if it unaware that they would be attacked by accused with a
appears from the evidence that neither of the two hail of bullets from their firearms. In fact, they were
persons could in any manner put up defense against the already in bed when Lucy Sabando called for help which
attack or become aware of it. Furthermore, the killing of prompted Ruben Barte to come out of the house. Hence,
a child is characterized by treachery even if the manner the subsequent shooting was deliberate, unexpected,
of assault is not shown. For the weakness of the victim swift and sudden which foreclosed any escape,
due to his tender years results in the absence of any resistance or defense coming from the victims.
danger to the accused.
People v. Oandasan
People v. Amora G.R. No. 194605 (2016)
G.R. No. 190322 (2014) Facts: Three informations were filed against
Facts: Anselmo, Aurelio, and the victim Romeo Oandasan, two of which were for murder involving the
were walking on their way to Sampol Market in San Jose fatal shooting of Tamanu and Montegrico, and the third
Del Monte City. As they were making their way to the was for frustrated homicide involving the near-fatal
market, they saw appellant in his store located on the shooting of Paleg alleging treachery in all the
right side of the street. Suddenly, appellant rushed informations. The trial court properly appreciated the
towards them and stabbed Romeo twice - one on the attendance of treachery and pronounced that Oandasan
chest and another on the abdomen. They were all guilty of murder for the fatal shooting of Montegrico.
caught by surprise due to the suddenness of the attack. However, the trial court pronounced Oandasan guilty of

73
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

homicide for killing Tamanu and frustrated homicide as treachery should not be appreciated, for in that
to the wounding of Paleg, on the basis that treachery situation, the assailant was filled with anger and rage
was not shown to be attendant which was affirmed by and excitement, and had no time to reflect on his
the CA. actions; in other words, he could not be shown to have
Held: Treachery is also attendant in the consciously adopted the mode of attacking the victim
shooting of Tamanu and Paleg The evidence in this case from behind to facilitate the killing without risk to
shows that the attack was unexpected and swift. himself.
Montegrico and his friends were just drinking outside the
bunkhouse when the appellant suddenly appeared from People v. Berk
the back of a dump truck, walked towards their table G.R. No. 204896 (2016)
and, without any warning, fired at Montegrico. This shot Facts: Berk and his co-accused Serencio were
was followed by more shots directed at Montegrico's charged with Murder for the death of Disu. During
friends, Tamanu and Paleg. Indisputably, Montegrico arraignment, Berk pleaded not guilty to the crime
was caught off guard by the sudden and deliberate charged. Serencio remains at large. After trial, the RTC
attack coming from the appellant, leaving him with no gave credence to the eyewitness accounts of Marbie and
opportunity to raise any defense against the attack. Loreto of Berks liability in the killing of the victim and
Also, appellant deliberately and consciously adopted his found him guilty of Murder, qualified by treachery which
mode of attack by using a gun and made sure that was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Montegrico, who was unarmed, would have no chance to Held: In the prosecution of the crime of
defend himself. Hence, the accused is guilty of two murder as defined in Article 248 of the Revised Penal
counts of murder and one count of frustrated murder. Code (RPC), the following elements must be established
by the prosecution: (1) that a person was killed; (2)
People v. Buenafe that the accused killed that person; (3) that the killing
G.R. No. 212930 (2016) was attended by treachery; and (4) that the killing is not
Facts: Appellant and two (2) unidentified men infanticide or parricide.
alighted from a vehicle and thereafter, while Rommel The prosecution ably established the presence
was unwarily texting inside a tent, the two men of the element of treachery as a qualifying circumstance.
suddenly restrained his arms behind his back. The shooting of the unsuspecting victim was sudden and
Subsequently, appellant approached Rommel and unexpected which effectively deprived her of the chance
delivered several blows to his abdomen until he to defend herself or to repel the aggression, insuring the
crumpled to the ground. After which, appellant walked commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor
towards a nearby hut while the two men dragged and without any provocation on the part of the victim.
Rommel. Inside the hut, appellant shot the victim using
a lead pipe ("sumpak"). People v. Zaldy Salahuddin (supra)
Held: In this case, the victim was merely The essence of treachery is the sudden attack
unwarily texting inside the tent when the two men held by the aggressor without the slightest provocation on
him from behind so that the appellant can deliver blows the part of the victim, depriving the latter of any real
to his abdomen. The victim was too unprepared and chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring the
helpless to defend himself against these three men. commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor.
Furthermore, appellant's acts of dragging him to the Two conditions must concur for treachery to exist,
nearby hut and using a lead pipe (sumpak) evidently namely, (a) the employment of means of execution gave
shows that he consciously adopted means to ensure the the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or
execution of the crime. Thus, treachery is appreciated. to retaliate; and (b) the means or method of execution
was deliberately and consciously adopted.
Rustia v. People
G.R. No. 208351 (2016)
There is no treachery when the killing was Par. 17. - THAT MEANS BE EMPLOYED OR
committed during the heat of an argument. CIRCUMSTANCES BROUGHT ABOUT WHICH ADD
Treachery exists when the following elements IGNOMINY TO THE NATURAL EFFECTS OF THE ACT.
are present: (a) at the time of the attack, the victim was
not in a position to defend himself; and (b) the accused
IGNOMINY it is a circumstance pertaining to the
consciously and deliberately adopted the particular
moral order, which adds disgrace and obloquy to the
means, methods, or forms of attack employed by him.
material injury caused by the crime.
Thus, it is not sufficient that the victim was unable to
defend himself. It must be clearly shown that the
This AC is applicable to crimes against chastity and
accused consciously adopted such mode of attack to
persons.
facilitate the perpetration of the killing without risk to
himself. Since the killing of the victim was committed in
When the accused raped a woman after winding cogon
the heat of their argument, it is quite clear that
grass around his genital organ, he thereby augmented
Benjamin, Jr. had not consciously adopted his mode of
the wrong done by increasing its pain and adding
attack in killing the victim. The fact remains that it was
ignominy thereto (People v. Torrefiel).
the victim who had brought the gun to the meeting. To
* NOTE: According to Professor Ambion, this is
establish the attendance of treachery in such an
not ignominy but cruelty.
environment, the Prosecution's evidence must
competently and convincingly show that the accused
The means employed or the circumstances brought
made some preparation to kill the victim; hence, a
about must tend to make the effects of the crime MORE
killing done at the spur of the moment cannot be
HUMILIATING or TO PUT THE OFFENDED PARTY TO
treacherous. Even where the victim was shot from
SHAME.
behind, if the shooting was done in the course of a
ex. When the accused raped a married woman
heated argument between the victim and the assailant,
in the presence of her husband.

74
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Gloria, thereby aggravating and compounding her moral


People v. Siao sufferings. Ignominy was appreciated in a case where a
327 SCRA 231 (2000) woman was raped in the presence of her betrothed, or
Facts: Estrella worked as a housemaid of Rene of her husband, or was made to exhibit to the rapists
Siaos family. One day, Rene ordered Reylan, their her complete nakedness before they raped her.
houseboy, to bring Estrella to a room. While holding a
gun, Rene forced Reylan to have sex with Estrella (oral
sex, missionary position, and in the manner dogs Par. 18. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED AFTER
perform sexual intercourse). AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY.
Held: The accused was held guilty of rape with THERE IS AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY WHEN AN
the use of a deadly weapon, which is punishable by ENTRANCE IS EFFECTED BY A WAY NOT INTENDED
reclusion perpetua to death. But the trial court FOR THE PURPOSE.
overlooked and did not take into account the
aggravating circumstance of ignominy and sentenced
There is unlawful entry when an entrance is effected
accused to the single indivisible penalty of reclusion
by a way not intended for the purpose.
perpetua. It has been held that where the accused in
Unlawful entry must be a means to effect entrance and
committing the rape used not only the missionary
not for escape.
position, the AC of ignominy attended the commission
There is no unlawful entry when the door is broken
thereof.
and thereafter the accused made an entry thru the
broken door. The breaking of the door is covered by
People v. Cachola
paragraph 19.
420 SCRA 520 (2004)
Facts: Jessie was about to leave their house to
RATIONALE FOR PAR. 18: One who acts, not respecting
watch cartoons in his uncle's house next door when
the walls erected by men to guard their property and
accused suddenly entered the front door of their house.
provide for their personal safety, shows a greater
They ordered Jessie to drop to the floor, and then hit
perversity, a greater audacity; hence, the law punishes
him in the back with the butt of a long gun. Without
him with more severity.
much ado, the intruders shot to death Jessie's uncle,
Victorino who was then in the living room. Jessie
This AC is inherent in robbery with force upon things.
forthwith crawled and hid under a bed, from where he
Dwelling and unlawful entry is taken separately in
saw the feet of a third man who had also entered the
murders committed in a dwelling.
house. The men entered the kitchen and continued
Unlawful entry is not aggravating in trespass to
shooting. When the rampage was over and after the
dwelling.
malefactors had already departed, Jessie came out of his
hiding place and proceeded to the kitchen. There he saw
People v. Baello
his mother, Carmelita; his brother Felix.; and his cousin
224 SCRA 218 (1993)
Rubenson all slaughtered. The death certificate of
Facts: Brgy. Captain Borja awoke one night to
Victorino reveals that his penis was excised.
find out that their front door was open and that their TV
Held: Ignominy cannot be appreciated in this
set was missing. He and his wife saw their dead
case. For ignominy to be appreciated, it is required that
daughter lying in bed. The TV set was recovered by the
the offense be committed in a manner that tends to
police at the house of Tadifo, Baellos brother-in-law.
make its effect more humiliating, thus adding to the
Tadifo claimed that Baello and Jerry had an agreement
victim's moral suffering. Where the victim was already
to rob the house of Borja. It was Jerry who killed Borjas
dead when his body or a part thereof was dismembered,
daughter because it was he who was left inside the
ignominy cannot be taken against the accused. In this
house.
case, the information states that Victorino's sexual
Held: The aggravating circumstances of
organ was severed after he was shot and there is no
unlawful entry was properly appreciated against the
allegation that it was done to add ignominy to the
accused as he and his companion, Jerry, had entered
natural effects of the act. We cannot, therefore, consider
the Borja residence through the second floor window, a
ignominy as an aggravating circumstance.
way not intended for ingress.
People v. Bumidang
346 SCRA 807(2000) Par. 19. - THAT AS A MEANS TO THE COMMISSION
Facts: Baliwang Bumidang raped Gloria in front OF A CRIME, A WALL, ROOF, FLOOR, DOOR, OR
of her 80 year old father, Melecio. Melecio helplessly saw WINDOW BE BROKEN.
the accused rape her daughter but did not move
because he was too afraid and weak. Before raping the To be considered as an AC, breaking the door must be
victim, Baliwang examined the genitals of Gloria with a utilized as a means to the commission of the crime.
flashlight.
Held: The aggravating circumstance of It is only aggravating in cases where the offender
ignominy shall be taken into account if means are resorted to any of said means TO ENTER the house. If
employed or circumstances brought about which add the wall, etc. is broken in order to get out of the place, it
ignominy to the natural effects of the offense; or if the is not aggravating.
crime was committed in a manner that tends to make its
effects more humiliating to the victim, that is, add to her Par. 20. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED (1)
moral suffering. It was established that Baliwang used WITH THE AID OF PERSONS UNDER FIFTEEN
the flashlight and examined the genital of Gloria before YEARS OF AGE (SEE R.A 9344) OR (2) BY MEANS
he ravished her. He committed his bestial deed in the OF MOTOR VEHICLES, MOTORIZED WATERCRAFT,
presence of Gloria's old father. These facts clearly show AIRSHIPS, OR OTHER SIMILAR MEANS. (AS
that Baliwang deliberately wanted to further humiliate AMENDED BY RA 5438).

75
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

wrong by causing another wrong not necessary for its


(1) WITH THE AID OF PERSONS UNDER 15 YEARS commission or inhumanly increased the victims
OF AGE suffering or outraged or scoffed at his person or corpse.
(2) BY MEANS OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
It is aggravating where the accused used the
motor vehicle in going to the place of the crime, in People v. Ilaoa (supra)
carrying away the effects thereof, and if facilitating their The fact that Nestors decapitated body bearing
escape. 43 stab wounds, 24 of which were fatal, was found
If the motor vehicle was used only in dumped in the street is not sufficient for a finding of
facilitating the escape, it should not be an aggravating cruelty where there is no showing that appellant Ilaoa,
circumstance. for his pleasure and satisfaction, caused Nestor to suffer
Estafa, which is committed by means of slowly and painfully and inflicted on him unnecessary
deceit or abuse of confidence, cannot be committed by physical and moral pain. Number of wounds alone is not
means of motor vehicle. the criterion for the appreciation of cruelty as an
Theft, which is committed by merely taking aggravating circumstance. Neither can it be inferred
personal property which need not be carried away, from the mere fact that the victims dead body was
cannot be committed by means of motor vehicles. dismembered.
or other similar means the expression
should be understood as referring to MOTORIZED People v. Catian
vehicles or other efficient means of transportation 374 SCRA 514 (2002)
similar to automobile or airplane. Facts: Catian repeatedly strike Willy with a
"chako" on the head, causing Willy to fall on his knees.
Par. 21. - THAT THE WRONG DONE IN THE Calunod seconded by striking the victim with a piece of
COMMISSION OF THE CRIME BE DELIBERATELY wood on the face. When Willy finally collapsed,
AUGMENTED BY CAUSING OTHER WRONG NOT Sumalpong picked him up, carried him over his
NECESSARY FOR ITS COMMISSION. shoulder, and carried Willy to a place where they burned
Willy. The latters skeletal remains were discovered by a
child who was pasturing his cow near a peanut
CRUELTY
plantation.
There is cruelty when the culprit enjoys and
Held: The circumstance of cruelty may not be
delights in making his victim suffer slowly and gradually,
considered as there is no showing that the victim was
causing him unnecessary physical pain in the
burned while he was still alive. For cruelty to exist, there
consummation of the criminal act.
must be proof showing that the accused delighted in
making their victim suffer slowly and gradually, causing
For cruelty to exist, it must be shown that the accused
him unnecessary physical and moral pain in the
enjoyed and delighted in making his victim suffer.
consummation of the criminal act. No proof was
presented that would show that accused-appellants
REQUISITES:
deliberately and wantonly augmented the suffering of
1. That the injury caused be deliberately
their victim.
increased by causing other wrong;
2. That the other wrong be unnecessary for
People v. Guerrero
the execution of the purpose of the
389 SCRA 389 (2002)
offender.
Appellant first severed the victim's head
before his penis was cut-off. This being the sequence of
Cruelty refers to physical suffering of victim purposely
events, cruelty has to be ruled out for it connotes an act
intended by offender.
of deliberately and sadistically augmenting the wrong by
Plurality of wounds alone does not show cruelty.
causing another wrong not necessary for its commission,
or inhumanely increasing the victim's suffering. As
There is no cruelty when other wrong was done after
testified to by Dr. Sanglay, and reflected in her medical
the victim was dead.
certificate, Ernesto in fact died as a result of his head
being severed. No cruelty is to be appreciated where the
IGNOMINY CRUELTY
act constituting the alleged cruelty in the killing was
Involves moral suffering. Refers to physical
perpetrated when the victim was already dead.
suffering.

People v. Lacao SPECIAL AGGRAVATING


60 SCRA 89 (1974)
Facts: Gallardo, coming from a gathering, CIRCUMSTANCES
decided to go home. As he was descending the stairs
Balatazar followed him and stabbed him with a knife at Republic Act 8353
the right side of his body. Baltazar tried to pull out the An act expanding the definition of the crime of
knife. Gallrado ran. When the latter reached the bamboo rape, reclassifying the same as a crime against persons,
grove, he was assaulted by David and his son, Salvador, amending for the purpose act no. 3815, as amended,
Jose and Federico. Gallardo sustained 14 wounds by otherwise known as the revised penal code, and for other
different bladed instruments. His assailants dragged him purposes
to the field. He died later. It was found that each of the SECTION 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be
9 wounds could have caused his death if there were no known as "The Anti-Rape Law of 1997".
timely medical assistance. SECTION 2. Rape as a Crime Against
Held: The numerousness of wound is not the Persons. - The crime of rape shall hereafter be classified as
criterion for appreciating cruelty. The test is whether the a Crime Against Persons under Title Eight of Act 3815, as
accused deliberately and sadistically augmented the amended, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code.

76
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Accordingly, there shall be incorporated into Title Eight of (9) When the offender knew of the pregnancy of
the same Code a new chapter to be known as Chapter Three the offended party at the time of the commission of the
on Rape, to read as follows: crime.
"Chapter Three Rape" (10) When the offender knew of the mental
disability, emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the
Article 266-A. Rape: When and How Committed. - Rape is offended party at the time of the commission of the crime.
Committed- Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding
article shall be punished by prision mayor.
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly
woman under any of the following circumstances: weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be
prision mayor to reclusion temporal.
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation; When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion
or otherwise unconscious; temporal.
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave When the rape is attempted and a homicide is
abuse of authority; committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) shall be reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua.
years of age or is demented, even though none of the When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
circumstances mentioned above be present; homicide is committed, the penalty shall be reclusion
perpetua.
2) By any person who, under any of the Reclusion temporal shall also be imposed if the
circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall rape is committed by any of the ten aggravating/qualifying
commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into circumstances mentioned in this article.
other person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or
object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person. Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon - The subsequent
valid marriage between the offender and the offended party
Article 266-B. Penalties. - Rape under paragraph 1 of the shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed.
next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the
perpetua. subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party
Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty. Provided,
deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall That the crime shall be extinguish or the penalty shall not be
be reclusion perpetua to death. abated if the marriage is void ab initio.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion Article 266-D. Presumptions. - Any physical
perpetua to death. overt act manifesting resistance against the act of rape in
When the rape is attempted and a homicide is any degree from the offended party, or where the offended
committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty party is so situated as to render her/him incapable of giving
shall be reclusion perpetua to death. valid consent, may be accepted as evidence in the
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, prosecution of the acts punished under Article 266-A."
homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death. SECTION 3. Separability Clause.- If any part, section, or
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the provision of this Act is declared invalid or unconstitutional,
crime of rape is committed with any of the following the other parts thereof not affected thereby shall remain
aggravating/qualifying circumstances: valid.
1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of
age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, SECTION 4. Repealing Clause.- Article 335 of Act No.
guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the 3815, as amended, and all laws, acts presidential decrees,
third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent executive orders, administrative orders, rules and
of the victim. regulations, inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of
2) When the victim is under the custody of the this Act are deemed amended, modified or repealed
police or military authorities or any law enforcement of penal accordingly.
institution.
3) When the rape is committed in full view of the SECTION 5. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen
spouse, parent, any of the children or other relatives within (15) days after completion of its publication in two (2)
the third civil degree of consanguinity. newspapers of general circulation.
4) When the victim is a religious engaged in
legitimate religious vocation or calling and is personally Under Republic Act No. 10591, otherwise
known to be such by the offender before or at the time of
known as the Comprehensive Firearms and
the commission of the crime.
Ammunition Regulation Act:
(5) When the victim is a child below seven (7)
years old.
(6) When the offender knows that he is afflicted If the use of a loose firearm is inherent in the
with Human Immune-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired commission of a crime punishable under the RPC or
Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually other special laws the use of loose firearm is an
transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted aggravating circumstance. Hence, the penalty for the
to the victim. use of a loose firearm is not imposed (Sec. 29).
(7) When committed by any member of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines or paramilitary units thereof or the However, if the crime is committed by the
Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency or person without using the loose firearm, the violation of
penal institution, when the offender took advantage of his this law shall be considered as a distinct and separate
position to facilitate the commission of the crime. offense (Sec. 29).
(8) When by reason or on the occasion of the
rape, the victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or Under the Republic Act No.9165 otherwise
disability.
known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act of 2002:

77
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be


Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to taken into consideration when the offended party is the
the contrary, a positive finding for the use of dangerous spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural, or
drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating circumstance in adopted brother or sister, or relative by affinity in the
the commission of a crime by an offender, and the same degrees of the offender.
application of the penalty provided for in the Revised The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into
Penal Code shall be applicable (Sec. 25). consideration as a mitigating circumstances when the
offender has committed a felony in a state of
People v. Balgos intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to
323 SCRA 372 (2000) the plan to commit said felony but when the intoxication
Facts: Balgos was accused of raping a 6-year is habitual or intentional, it shall be considered as an
old child named Criselle. While the victim was playing, aggravating circumstance.
the accused asked his nieces to go outside and buy
cheese curls. When they left, the accused opened his The alternative circumstances are:
zipper and made Criselle hold his penis. The 2 girls came a. RELATIONSHIP
back and he asked them to go out and buy more cheese b. INTOXICATION
curls. When they left, he locked the door and had carnal c. DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND
knowledge with Criselle. The accused cannot penetrate EDUCATION OF THE OFFENDER
the victims organ. The lower court convicted the
accused of qualified rape. a. RELATIONSHIP
Held: The trial court was correct. Under Art.
335 of the RPC as amended by RA 7659 and further This is taken into consideration when the
amended by RA 8353, the penalty of death shall be offended party is the:
imposed if the crime of rape is committed against a child a. spouse
below 7 years of age. There is no dispute that the victim b. ascendant
was 6 years of age when the accused had carnal c. descendant
knowledge with her. d. legitimate, natural or adopted brother or
sister
People v. Ladjaalam e. relative by affinity in the same degree of
340 SCRA 617(2000) the offender
Facts: Accused who is maintaining a drug den
fired an unlicensed M-14 rifle at the policemen who were As a rule, relationship is MITIGATING in crimes against
about to enter his house to serve a search warrant. property by analogy to the provisions of Art. 332.
Held: If an unlicensed firearm is used in the - Under Art. 332 of the RPC, no criminal, but
commission of any crime, there can be no separate only civil, liability shall result from commission of the
offense of simple illegal possession of firearms. Hence, if crime of theft, swindling or malicious mischief
the "other crime" is murder or homicide, illegal committed or caused mutually by spouses, ascendants,
possession of firearms becomes merely an aggravating and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same
circumstance, not a separate offense. Since direct line; brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
assault with multiple attempted homicide was sisters-in-law, if living together.
committed in this case, appellant can no longer be held - Relationship becomes actually an exempting
liable for illegal possession of firearms. circumstance since there is no occasion to consider a
Moreover, penal laws are construed liberally in mitigating or an aggravating circumstance because there
favor of the accused. In this case, the plain meaning of is no criminal liability.
RA 8294's simple language is most favorable to herein It is aggravating in CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS in
appellant. Verily, no other interpretation is justified, for cases where the offended party is a relative of a higher
the language of the new law demonstrates the degree than the offender, or when the offender and the
legislative intent to favor the accused. Accordingly, offended party are relatives of the same level, as killing
appellant cannot be convicted of 2 separate offenses of a brother, a brother-in-law, a half-brother or adopted
illegal possession of firearms and direct assault with brother.
attempted homicide. Since the crime committed was
direct assault and not homicide or murder, illegal When the CRIME AGAINST PERSONS is any of the
possession of firearms cannot be deemed an
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES (Art. 263), even if the
aggravating circumstance. (Decided under the old law)
offended party is a descendant of the offender,
relationship is an AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE.
5. ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES - But the serious physical injuries must not be
inflicted by a parent upon his child by excessive
chastisement.
Alternative circumstances are those which must be
taken into consideration as AGGRAVATING or
When the crime is less serious physical injuries or
MITIGATING according to the nature and effects of the
slight physical injuries, ordinary rule applies;
crime and the other conditions attending its commission.
relationship is MITIGATING if the offended party is a
relative of lower degree and AGGRAVATING if the
Art. 15. Their concept. Alternative circumstances offended party is a relative of a higher degree than the
are those which must be taken into consideration as offender.
aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and
effects of the crime and the other conditions attending When the crime against persons is homicide or
its commission. They are the relationship, intoxication murder, relationship is aggravating even if the victim of
and the degree of instruction and education of the the crime is a relative of lower degree.
offender.

78
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Relationship is mitigating in trespass to dwelling. - This clause means that the offenders mental
faculties must be affected by drunkenness.
Relationship is neither mitigating nor aggravating, - The accuseds state of intoxication must be
when relationship is an element of the offense. proved.

In crimes against chastity, relationship is always WHEN THE INTOXICATION IS HABITUAL


aggravating. - A habitual drunkard is one given to
- Because of the nature and effect of the crime intoxication by excessive use of intoxicating drinks. The
committed, it is considered AGGRAVATING although the habit should be actual and confirmed, but it is not
offended party is a relative of lower degree. necessary that it be continuous or by daily occurrence.

People v. Atop People v. Renejane


286 SCCRA 157 (1998) 158 SCRA 258 (1988)
Facts: 11-year-old Regina lives with her Facts: The accused was convicted for the crime
grandmother. Atop is the common-law husband of her of murder of 1 policeman and his companion. It was
grandmother. Atop was found guilty of 4 counts of rape found that Renejane was with these 2 persons and some
which was committed in 1993 (2x), 1994 and 1995. The other people and they were having a drinking session
lower court took into account the aggravating when the incident took place. It was also found that the
circumstance of relationship. policeman apprehended Renejane a month before the
Held: The law cannot be stretched to include incident for illegal possession of marijuana.
persons attached by common-law relations. In this case, Held: Drunkenness is not necessarily an
there is no blood relationship or legal bond that links aggravating circumstance. The fact that the accused
Atop to his victim. drank liquor prior to the commission of the crime did not
necessarily qualify such action as an aggravating
People v. Marcos circumstance. Intoxication is aggravating if it is habitual
349 SCRA 537 (2001) or intentional. There is no finding of either by the lower
Facts: Virgilio arrived at the house of the court. The affair was an ordinary drinking party. Neither
Marcoses and proceeded to the artesian well (jetmatic) can this be considered as a mitigating circumstance in
located just at the back of the house. Virgilio bent down the absence of proof that the intake of alcoholic drinks
to put on the ground the tools he was carrying. Cesar was of such quantity as to blur the appellants reason
then came out of the kitchen door with a bolo in hand and deprive him of a certain degree of control.
and suddenly hacked Virgilio from behind. Virgilio was
hit on the nape of the neck which caused him to fall to People v. Camano
the ground. Then Cesar hacked him again and this time 115 SCRA 688 (1982)
Virgilio was hit on the right side of the head. Virgilio is Facts: After the accused had been drinking
the elder brother of Cesar. liquor, he stabbed twice the victim Pascua with a bolo
Held: In order that the alternative while the latter was walking along the barrio street.
circumstance of relationship may be taken into After hacking and stabbing to death the victim, the
consideration in the imposition of the proper penalty, accused proceeded to the seashore and on finding
the offended party must either be the (a) spouse, (b) Buenaflor hacked the latter with the same bolo.
ascendant, (c) descendant, (d) legitimate, natural or Held: Intoxication is mitigating if accidental,
adopted brother or sister, or (e) relative by affinity in not habitual nor intentional, that is, no subsequent to
the same degree, of the offender. In the case at bar, the plan to commit the crime. It is aggravating if
Cesar and Virgilio Marcos are brothers. Accused likewise habitual or intentional. To be mitigating, it must be
declared that Virgilio is his brother. That the victim is indubitably proved. A habitual drunkard is one given to
the elder brother of Cesar is likewise alleged in the intoxication by excessive use of intoxicating drinks. The
Information. The rule is that relationship is aggravating habit should be actual and confirmed. It is unnecessary
in crimes against persons as when the offender and the that it be a matter of daily occurrence. It lessens
offended party are relatives of the same level such as individual resistance to evil thought and undermines
killing a brother. Thus, relationship was correctly will-power making its victim a potential evil doer.
appreciated as an aggravating circumstance. The intoxication of the appellant not being
habitual and considering that the said appellant was in a
b. INTOXICATION state of intoxication at the time of the commission of the
felony, the alternative circumstance of intoxication
MITIGATING should be considered mitigating.
a. if intoxication is not habitual, or
b. if intoxication is not subsequent to the c. DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION OF
plan to commit a felony. THE OFFENDER
Low degree of instruction and education or lack
AGGRAVATING of it is generally mitigating. High degree of instruction
a. if intoxication is habitual; or and education is aggravating, when the offender avails
b. if it is intentional (subsequent to the plan himself of his learning in committing the crime.
to commit a felony)
- It is intentional when the offender LACK OF INSTRUCTION, AS MITIGATING
drinks liquor fully knowing its effects, to find in - Lack of instruction cannot be taken into
the liquor a stimulant to commit a crime or a account where the defendant admitted that he studied in
means to suffocate any remorse. the first grade in a public elementary school. Art. 15
applies only to him who really has not received any
When the offender has committed a felony in a state instruction.
of intoxication.

79
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Not illiteracy alone, but also lack of sufficient People v. Lua Chu and Uy Se Ting
intelligence are necessary to invoke the benefit of the 56 Phil. 44 (1931)
alternative circumstance of lack of instruction, the Facts: Samson was the chief of customs secret
determination of which is left to the trial court. service in Cebu and Natividad was the former collector
of customs. He was instructed to make sure that the
Lack of sufficient instruction is not mitigating when the shipment containing opium shall be unloaded in the
offender is a city resident who knows how to sign his country. He went along the plan and then he informed
name. the Philippine Constabulary of all that had taken place
and they discussed a plan to capture the opium owners.
Lack of instruction must be proved positively and Held: The mere fact that the chief of customs
directly and cannot be based on mere deduction or secret service pretended to agree to a plan for
inference. smuggling illegally imported opium through the
customhouse, in order the better to assure the seizure
The question of lack of instruction cannot be raised for of said opium and the arrest of its importers, is no bar to
the first time in appellate court. the prosecution and conviction of the accused.
Samson did not induce nor instigate the
Ordinarily, LOW DEGREE OR LACK OF INSTRUCTION accused to import the opium but merely pretended to
IS MITIGATING IN ALL CRIMES. have an understanding with the collector of customs.
Exceptions: There is nothing immoral in this or against the public
(1) crimes against property such as estafa, theft, good which should prevent the government from
robbery arson except theft of large cattle and robbery prosecuting and punishing the culprits, for this is not a
with homicide. case where an innocent person is induced to commit a
(2) crimes against chastity crime merely to prosecute him, but it is simply a trap
(3) treason: because love of country should be a set to catch a criminal.
natural feeling of every citizen, however unlettered or
uncultured he may be Araneta v. CA
(4) murder: because to kill is forbidden by 142 SCRA 532 (1986)
natural law which every rational being is endowed to Facts: Atty. Araneta was the hearing officer of
know and feel. the Dept. of Labor in Cabanatuan while Mrs. Yoyongco is
the widow of a government employee. The latter went to
HIGH DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION, AS AGGRAVATING see Araneta regarding her claim for death compensation
and Araneta asked for P100 for her claim to be
Degree of instruction is aggravating when the processed. The widow reported this to the PC and the PC
offender availed himself or took advantage of it in decided to entrap Araneta. The entrapment was
committing the crime. successful and Atty. Araneta was charged for violating
the anti-graft law.
ABSOLUTORY CAUSES AND OTHER Held: Entrapment is not a defense in a criminal
case. It is different from instigation. There is instigation
SPECIAL SITUATIONS when the accused was induced to commit the crime. In
entrapment, the mens rea originates from the mind of
Absolutory causes are those where the act the criminal. Entrapment does not exempt the criminal
committed is a crime but for reasons of public policy and from liability.
sentiment there is no penalty imposed.
People v. Pacis
a. ENTRAPMENT AND INSTIGATION 384 SCRA 684 (2002)
Facts: Atty. Yap, supervising agent of the
ENTRAPMENT INSTIGATION Dangerous Drugs Division-NBI, received information that
Ways and means are The instigator practically Pacis was offering to sell kg of "shabu." A buy-bust
resorted to for the purpose induces the would-be operation was approved. Yap and Senior Agent Congzon,
of trapping and capturing accused into the Jr., were assigned to handle the case. Yap, Congzon
the lawbreaker in the commission of the offense and the informant then went to the house of Pacis. The
execution of his criminal and himself becomes a co- informant introduced Yap to Pacis as interested buyer.
plan principal. They negotiated the sale of kg of shabu. It was
The means originate from The law enforcer conceives agreed that payment and delivery of shabu would be
the mind of the criminal. the commission of the made on the following day. The next day, the NBI
crime and suggests to the agents and the informant went to Pacis's house as
accused who adopts the agreed. Pacis handed to Yap a paper bag with markings
idea and carries it into "yellow cab". When he opened the bag, Yap found a
execution. transparent plastic bag with white crystalline substance
A person has planned or is A public officer or a private inside. While examining it, Pacis asked for the payment.
about to commit a crime detective induces an Yap instructed Congzon to get the money from the car.
and ways and means are innocent person to commit Congzon returned and gave the "boodle money" to Atty.
resorted to by a public a crime and would arrest Yap who handed the money to Pacis. Upon Pacis' receipt
officer to trap and catch him upon or after the of the payment, the officers identified themselves as NBI
the criminal. commission of the crime agents and arrested him.
by the latter. Held: The operation that led to the arrest of
Not a bar to the The accused must be appellant was an entrapment, not an instigation. In
prosecution and conviction acquitted. entrapment, ways and means are resorted to for the
of the lawbreaker. purpose of trapping and capturing lawbreakers in the
execution of their criminal plan. In instigation on the

80
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

other hand, instigators practically induce the would-be accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are
defendant into the commission of the offense and such with respect to their spouses, ascendants,
become co-principals themselves. It has been held in descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers
numerous cases by this Court that entrapment is and sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same
sanctioned by law as a legitimate method of degrees, with the single exception of accessories falling
apprehending criminal elements engaged in the sale and within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the next
distribution of illegal drugs. preceding article.

b. EFFECT OF PARDON
Art. 247. Death or physical injuries inflicted
under exceptional circumstances. Any legally
RPC, Art. 23. Effect of pardon by the offended married person who having surprised his spouse in the
party. A pardon of the offended party does not act of committing sexual intercourse with another
extinguish criminal action except as provided in Article person, shall kill any of them or both of them in the act
344 of this Code; but civil liability with regard to the or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any
interest of the injured party is extinguished by his serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of
express waiver. destierro.
If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of
any other kind, he shall be exempt from punishment.
R.A. No. 8353. Anti-Rape Law of 1997. These rules shall be applicable, under the same
Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon - The circumstances, to parents with respect to their
subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the daughters under eighteen years of age, and their
offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the seducer, while the daughters are living with their
penalty imposed. parents.
In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the Any person who shall promote or facilitate the
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended prostitution of his wife or daughter, or shall otherwise
party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty. have consented to the infidelity of the other spouse shall
Provided, That the crime shall be extinguish or the not be entitled to the benefits of this article.
penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab
initio. Art. 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling.
Any private person who shall enter the dwelling of
A pardon by the offended party does not another against the latter's will shall be punished by
extinguish criminal action because a crime is an offense arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.
against the State. In criminal cases, the intervention of If the offense be committed by means of violence or
the aggrieved parties is limited to being witnesses for intimidation, the penalty shall be prision correccional in
the prosecution. its medium and maximum periods and a fine not
Compromise does not extinguish criminal liability. exceeding 1,000 pesos.
The offended party in crimes of adultery and The provisions of this article shall not be
concubinage cannot institute criminal prosecution, if he applicable to any person who shall enter another's
shall have consented or pardoned the offenders. dwelling for the purpose of preventing some serious
- the pardon here may be implied, as harm to himself, the occupants of the dwelling or a third
continued inaction of the offended party after learning person, nor shall it be applicable to any person who shall
the offense. enter a dwelling for the purpose of rendering some
- both offenders must be pardoned by the service to humanity or justice, nor to anyone who shall
offended party. enter cafes, taverns, inn and other public houses, while
the same are open.
c. ABSOLUTORY CAUSES
Art. 332. Persons exempt from criminal
Art. 6(3). - There is an attempt when the offender liability. No criminal, but only civil liability, shall
commences the commission of a felony directly or over result from the commission of the crime of theft,
acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution swindling or malicious mischief committed or caused
which should produce the felony by reason of some mutually by the following persons:
cause or accident other than this own spontaneous 1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or
desistance. relatives by affinity in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the
Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable. property which belonged to the deceased spouse before
Light felonies are punishable only when they have been the same shall have passed into the possession of
consummated, with the exception of those committed another; and
against person or property. 3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
sisters-in-law, if living together.
Art. 16. Who are criminally liable. The The exemption established by this article shall
following are criminally liable for grave and less grave not be applicable to strangers participating in the
felonies: commission of the crime.
1. Principals.
2. Accomplices. Art. 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery,
3. Accessories. concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts
of lasciviousness. The crimes of adultery and
Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a
criminal liability. The penalties prescribed for complaint filed by the offended spouse.

81
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

The offended party cannot institute criminal 3. Accessories.


prosecution without including both the guilty parties, if The following are criminally liable for light felonies:
they are both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have 1. Principals
consented or pardoned the offenders. 2. Accomplices.
The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or
acts of lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except The treble division of persons criminally
upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her responsible for an offense rests upon the very nature of
parents, grandparents, or guardian, nor, in any case, if their participation in the commission of the crime.
the offender has been expressly pardoned by the above The ACCESSORIES are not liable for light felonies
named persons, as the case may be. because in the commission of light felonies, the social
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of wrong as well as the individual prejudice is so small that
lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of the offender penal sanction is deemed not necessary for accessories
with the offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him. RULES RELATIVE TO LIGHT FELONIES:
The provisions of this paragraph shall also be applicable a. Light felonies are punishable only when they
to the co-principals, accomplices and accessories after have been consummated.
the fact of the above-mentioned crimes. b. But when light felonies are committed
against persons or property, the are punishable even if
d. ACTS NOT COVERED BY LAW AND IN CASE OF they are only in the attempted or frustrated stage of the
EXCESSIVE PUNISHMENT execution.
c. Only principals and accomplices are liable for
Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection light felonies.
with acts which should be repressed but which are d. Accessories are not liable for light felonies,
not covered by the law, and in cases of excessive even if they are committed against persons or property.
penalties. Whenever a court has knowledge of any
act which it may deem proper to repress and which is Only natural persons can be the active
not punishable by law, it shall render the proper subject of crime because of the highly personal nature of
decision, and shall report to the Chief Executive, through the criminal responsibility.
the Department of Justice, the reasons which induce the
court to believe that said act should be made the subject Only a natural person can be the
of legislation. offender because:
In the same way, the court shall submit to the a. The RPC requires that the culprit should
Chief Executive, through the Department of Justice, have acted with personal malice or negligence. An
such statement as may be deemed proper, without artificial or juridical person cannot act with malice or
suspending the execution of the sentence, when a strict negligence.
enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result b. A juridical person, like a corporation, cannot
in the imposition of a clearly excessive penalty, taking commit a crime in which a willful purpose or a malicious
into consideration the degree of malice and the injury intent is required.
caused by the offense. c. There is substitution of deprivation of liberty
(subsidiary imprisonment) for pecuniary penalties in
case of in case of insolvency of the accused.
People v. Veneracion d. Other penalties consisting in imprisonment
249 SCRA 244 (1995) and other deprivation of liberty like destierro, can be
Facts: The accused was found guilty of the executed only against individuals.
crime of Rape with Homicide. The instant petition raised
the issue whether or not the respondent judge acted Officers, not the corporation, are criminally
with grave abuse of discretion when he failed or refused liable.
to impose the mandatory penalty of death under RA Juridical persons are criminally liable under
7659 certain special laws.
Held: The law plainly and unequivocably In all crimes there are always 2 parties:
provides that when by reason or on the occasion of ACTIVE (the criminal) and PASSIVE (the injured party).
rape, a homicide is committed, the penalty shall be
death. Courts are not concerned with wisdom, efficacy A. PRINCIPALS
or morality of law. The discomfort faced by those forced
by law to impose death penalty is an ancient one, but it Art. 17. Principals. The following are considered
is a matter upon which judges have no choice. The Rules principals:
of Court mandates that after an adjudication of guilt, the 1. Those who take a direct part in the
judges should impose the proper penalty and civil execution of the act;
liability provided for by the law on the accused. 2. Those who directly force or induce others to
commit it;
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of
the offense by another act without which it would not
V. PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE have been accomplished.

Art. 16. Who are criminally liable. The When a single individual commits a crime, there is
following are criminally liable for grave and less grave no difficulty in determining his participation in the
felonies: commission thereof.
1. Principals. But when 2 or more persons are involved, it is
2. Accomplices. necessary to determine the participation of each.

82
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

A person in conspiracy with others, who had


PAR. 1. PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION desisted before the crime was committed by the other,
is not criminally liable.
The principal by direct participation When there is conspiracy, it is not necessary
PERSONALLY TAKES PART IN THE EXECUTION OF THE to ascertain the specific act of each conspirator.
ACT constituting the crime. There could be no conspiracy to commit an
offense through negligence.
Two or more persons who took part in the commission In cases of criminal negligence or crimes
of the crime are principals by direct participation, when punishable by special law, allowing or failing to prevent
the following requisites are present: an act to be performed by another, makes one a co-
1. That they participated in the principal.
criminal resolution
2. That they carried out their plan Second requisite that the culprits carried out
and personally took part in its execution by their plan and personally took part in its
acts which directly tended to the same end. execution, by acts which directly tended to the
same end.
First requisite Participation in the criminal
resolution The principals by direct participation must
Two or more persons are said to have be at the scene of the crime, personally taking part in its
participated in the criminal resolution when they were in execution.
conspiracy at the time of the commission of the crime. The acts of each offender must directly tend
It is well settled that a person may be to the same end.
convicted for the criminal act of another where, between One serving as guard pursuant to the
them, there has been conspiracy or unity of purpose and conspiracy is a principal by direct participation.
intention in the commission of the crime charged. When the second requisite is lacking, there
is only conspiracy.
CONSPIRACY
A conspiracy exists when 2 or more persons People v. Nunag
come to an agreement concerning the commission of a 173 SCRA 274 (1989)
felony and decide to commit it. Facts: The victim claimed that while she was
The conspiracy contemplated in the first standing outside the house of her neighbor peeping
requisite is not a felony, but only a manner of incurring through an open window to watch a TV program, Nunag
criminal liability. came towards her appearing to be drunk. Nunag,
In order to hold an accused guilty as co- threatening to kill her, led her to a nearby ricefield.
principal by reason of conspiracy, it must be established Later, they were joined by the other 4 accused. Nunag
that he performed an over act in furtherance of the then undressed her and had sexual intercourse with her.
conspiracy, either by actively participating in the actual Mandap followed and she lost consciousness after. She
commission of the crime, or by lending moral assistance regained consciousness only when Manalili was abusing
to his co-conspirators by being present at the scene of her.
the crime, or by exerting moral ascendancy over the Held: Accused Nunag, Mandap and Manalili are
rest of the conspirators as to move them to executing found guilty of 3 distinct and separate crimes of rape.
the conspiracy. They being principals by direct participation while the
Mere knowledge without cooperation or other 2 accused as principals by indispensable
agreement to cooperate is not enough to constitute cooperation since there is no sufficient evidence that the
conspiracy. latter also had sexual intercourse with the victim. The
Silence does not make one a conspirator victim lost consciousness and only assumed that the two
The existence of conspiracy does not require also raped her.
necessarily an agreement for an appreciable length of
time prior to the execution of its purpose, since from the People v. Dela Cerna
legal viewpoint, conspiracy exists if, at the time of the 21 SCRA 569 (1967)
commission of the offense, the accused had the same Facts: Rafael filed an ejectment suit against
purpose and were united in its execution. dela Cernas father wherein the court ruled in his favor.
Conspiracy arises on the very instant the Later he was shot by the accused while the former and
plotters agree, expressly or impliedly, to commit the his family were bringing sacks of corn. He was taken
felony and forthwith decide to pursue it. away by his family to tend his wounds but Dela Cerna
Formal agreement or previous acquaintance and company followed them and Rafael was shot again
among several persons not necessary in conspiracy. resulting to his death. Maquiling, one companion of Dela
Must be established by positive and Cerna, shot Casiano, a relative of Rafael.
conclusive evidence. Held: Dela Cerna cannot be held liable for the
When there is no conspiracy, each of the death of Casiano because the conspiracy was to kill
offenders is liable only for the act performed by him. Rafael only. The rule has always been: co-conspirators
are liable only for acts done pursuant to the conspiracy;
It is not enough that a person participated for other acts done outside the contemplation of the co-
in the assault made by another in order to consider him conspirators or which are not the necessary and logical
a co-principal in the crime committed. He must also consequence of the intended crime, only the actual
participate in the criminal resolution of the other. perpetrators are liable. Although Maquiling got the gun
When there is conspiracy, the act of one is from Dela Cerna, the latter only gave it to the former as
the act of all. There is collective criminal responsibility. per their agreement to shoot Rafael
Conspiracy may cover persons previously As to the other companions, facts prove their
undetermined. active participation in the killing. They are all principals.

83
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

principal by inducement.
The inducement involves The proposal to be
People v. Dacillo (supra) any crime punishable must involve
Facts: Pacot stabbed and strangled Rosemarie only treason or rebellion.
leading to the latters death. Dacillo for his part, hold
down Rosemaries legs to prevent her from struggling. EFFECTS OF ACQUITTAL OF PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT
The two men stopped only when they were sure that the PARTICIPATION UPON THE LIABILITY OF
victim was already dead. Dacillo then encase her corpse PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT
in cement. 1) Conspiracy is negated by the acquittal of co-
Held:. Two or more persons taking part in the defendant.
commission of a crime are considered principals by 2) One cannot be held guilty of having instigated
direct participation if the following requisites are the commission of a crime without first being
present: 1. they participated in the criminal resolution shown that the crime has been actually
and 2. they carried out their plan and personally took committed by another.
part in its execution by acts which directly tended to the
same end. Both requisites were met in this case. Further People v. Dela Cruz
Dacillos admission that he participated in the 97 SCRA 385 (1980)
commission of the crime by holding Rosemaries legs Facts: Dela Cruz met with Salip and a
made him a principal by direct participation. couple of other men when he proposed to them the
killing of Antonio Yu and the kidnapping of the latters
PAR. 2. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCTION brother for a ransom. A group of men sailed for Basilan
where they met with Salip. They proceeded to the
Those who directly force or induce others to accuseds house where the accused informed the group
commit it. of the whereabouts of the Chinese brothers and other
The principal by induction becomes liable details of the plan. The group was able to kidnap and
only when the principal by direct participation committed detain the brother for a short while before he attempted
the act induced. to escape and was shot by one of the men.
Held: The contention of the accused that
2 WAYS OF BECOMING PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION since he did not take part in the commission of the
1) BY DIRECTLY FORCING ANOTHER TO crime, conspiracy does not exist, is untenable. The
COMMIT A CRIME requisites necessary in order that a person may be
convicted as principal by inducement are present.
a. By using IRRESISTIBLE FORCE Without Dela Cruz, the crime would not have been
b. By causing UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR conceived, much less committed. Clearly, he was the
principal by induction.
2) BY DIRECTLY INDUCING ANOTHER TO
COMMIT A CRIME. US v. Indianan
a. By giving price, or offering reward or 24 Phil. 203 (1913)
promise. Facts: Indianan was the HEADMAN of the
b. By using words of command. district of Parang. He ordered his subordinates to seize
Sariol (victim) and bring the latter to Indianan. The
REQUISITES: victim was detained by Indianan until nightfall, then
1. That the inducement be made directly with the Indianan ordered his subordinates to take Sariol to an
intention of procuring the commission of the crime; isolated place and kill him. Indianan bolstered his
and command by claiming that he had an order from the
a. A thoughtless expression without intention to governor that Sariol be executed. Indianans
produce the result is not an inducement to subordinates took Sariol to a cemetery and killed him.
commit a crime. Held: Indianan had a very powerful
b. The inducement may be by acts of command, influence over his subordinates based on TRADITION
advice, or through influence, or agreement AND CUSTOM as well as his representation that he had
for consideration. an order from the governor. Hence, his power over them
was such that any order issued by him had the force and
2. That such inducement be the determining cause efficacy of physical coercion. The domination of Indianan
of the commission of the crime by the material was such as to make him responsible for whatever they
executor. did in obedience to such orders. He is a principal by
- The words of advice of the influence must inducement.
have actually moved the hands of the principal by
direct participation. PAR. 3. PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE
COOPERATION
PRINCIPAL BY PROPOSAL TO COMMIT
INDUCEMENT THE FELONY Those who cooperate in the commission
There is an inducement to commit a crime. of the offense by another act without which it would not
The principal by The mere proposal to have been accomplished.
inducement becomes liable commit a felony is
only when the crime is punishable in treason and REQUISITES:
committed by the principal rebellion. The person to 1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that is,
by direct participation. whom the proposal is there is either anterior conspiracy or unity of
made should not commit criminal purpose and intention immediately
the crime; otherwise, the before the commission of the crime charged;
proponent becomes a and

84
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense they themselves have have reached the decision
by performing another act, without which it decided upon such course and only then do they
would not have been accomplished. of action. agree to cooperate in its
execution.
To be liable as principals, the offender must fall Conspirators decide that a Accomplices merely assent
under any of the three concepts defined in Article 17. crime should be to the plan and cooperate
There is collective criminal responsibility when committed. in it accomplishment
the offenders are criminally liable in the same manner
and to the same extent. The penalty to be imposed must Conspirators are the Accomplices are merely
be the same for all. authors of a crime instruments who perform
Principals by direct participation have collective acts not essential to the
criminal responsibility. Principal by induction, except perpetration of the
that who directly forced another to commit a crime, and offense.
principal by direct participation have collective criminal
responsibility. Principal by indispensable cooperation has REQUISITES:
collective criminal responsibility with the principal by 1. That there be community of design; that
direct participation. is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by
direct participation, he concurs with the latter in
People v. Montealegre his purpose;
161 SCRA 700 (1988) 2. That he cooperates in the execution of the
Facts: Abadilla was eating at a restaurant offense by previous or simultaneous acts, with
when he detected the smell of marijuana smoke coming the intention of supplying material or moral aid in
from a nearby table. Intending to call a policeman, he the execution of the crime in an efficacious way;
went outside and saw a police and reported the matter. and
The police approached the table and held Montealgre 3. That there be a relation between the acts
and Capalad. Capalad suddenly pulled out his knife and done by the principal and those attributed to the
started stabbing the police at the back. The police person charged as accomplice.
released the 2 in order to draw his gun but Montealegre
restrained the police so that Capalad may continue The community of design need not be to
stabbing. The 3 grappled and the police was able to commit the crime actually committed. It is sufficient if
draw his gun and fired at the 2 assailants. A chase there was a common purpose to commit a particular
ensued. Capalad was shot which resulted to his death. crime and that the crime actually committed was a
The police also died because of the wounds inflicted by natural or probable consequence of the intended crime.
Capalad. The cooperation of an accomplice is not due
Held: The accused was correctly considered a to a conspiracy.
co-principal for having collaborated with Capalad in the When the acts of the accused are not
killing of the police officer. The 2 acted in concert. Even indispensable in the killing, they are merely accomplices.
if the accused did not himself commit the act of The accomplice merely supplies the principal
stabbing, he is nonetheless equally guilty thereof for with material or moral aid without conspiracy with the
having prevented the police from resisting the attack latter.
against him. The accused was a principal by The wounds inflicted by an accomplice in
indispensable cooperation. crimes against persons should mot have caused the
B. ACCOMPLICES death of the victim.

Art. 18. Accomplices. Accomplices are those persons RULES:


who, not being included in Art. 17, cooperate in the 1. The one who had the original criminal
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous design is the person who committed the
acts. resulting crime.
2. The accomplice, after concurring in the
In quasi-collective criminal responsibility, criminal purpose of the principal, cooperates
some of the offenders in the crime are principals and the by previous or simultaneous acts.
others are accomplices. When the cooperation is by simultaneous act,
The participation of an accomplice the accomplice takes part while the crime is
presupposes the commission of the crime by the being committed by the principal by direct
principal by direct participation. participation or immediately thereafter.
When there is no conspiracy between or 3. The accomplice in crimes against persons
among the defendants but they were animated by one does not inflict the more or most serious
and the same purpose to accomplish the criminal wounds.
objective, those who cooperated by previous or
simultaneous act but cannot be held liable as principals The moral aid may be through advice,
are accomplices. encouragement or agreement.
An accomplice does not have a previous There must be a relation between the criminal act
agreement or understanding or is not in conspiracy with of the principal and the act of the one charged as
the principal by direct participation. accomplice.

CONSPIRATOR ACCOMPLICE PRINCIPAL by ACCOMPLICE


They know and agree with the criminal design. COOPERATION
Conspirators know the Accomplices come to know Cooperation is Cooperation is not
criminal intention because about it after the principals indispensable in the indispensable in the
commission of the act. commission of the act.

85
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Held: Roche can not be held liable as an


accomplice for the crime charged. There is no evidence
People v. Mandolado (supra) to show that he performed any previous or simultaneous
Held: An accomplice cooperates in the act to assist Caballes in killing Roderick. It has not been
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous proven that he was aware of Caballes plan to attack
acts, provided he has no direct participation in its and kill Roderick. Absent any evidence to create the
execution or does not force or induce others to commit moral certainty required to convict Roche, the court
it, or his cooperation is not indispensable to its cannot uphold the trial courts finding of guilt.
accomplishment.
In the case at bar, Ortillano, by his acts People v. Pilola
showed knowledge of the criminal design of Mandolado. 405 SCRA 134 (2003)
He was present when the latter tried to attack the driver Facs: Joselito, Julian, Edmar and Odilon were
of the Ford Fiera with a knife and fired at the vehicle having a drinking spree. In the course of their drinking,
hitting a female passenger. When Mandolado cocked his an altercation between Edmar and Julian ensued. Edmar
gun and ordered Tenorio to stop the jeep, their 2 other and Odilon then left the store. Joselito and Julian were
companion, Simon and Erinada, immediately jumped off also about to leave when Edmar and Odilon returned,
the jeep and ran away but Ortillano stayed. In a display blocking their way. Edmar punched Julian in the face.
of unity with Mandolado, Ortillano fired his armalite The two then traded fist blows. For his part, Odilon
while they were riding in the jeep of the victim. And positioned himself on top of a pile of hollow blocks and
Ortillanos act of firing his gun towards the ground watched as Edmar and Julian swapped punches. Joselito
manifested his concurrence with the criminal intent. In tried to placate the protagonists but his intervention
other words, his simultaneous acts supplied moral aid in apparently did not sit well with Odilon. He pulled out his
the execution of the crime in an efficacious way. His knife with his right hand and stepped down from his
presence served to encourage Mandolado, the principal, perch. He placed his left arm around Joselito's neck, and
or to increase the odds against the victims. stabbed the latter. Ronnie and the appellant Pilola, who
were across the street, saw their gangmate Odilon
People v. Doctolero stabbing the victim and decided to join the fray. They
193 SCRA 632 (1991) pulled out their knives, rushed to the scene and stabbed
Facts: The 3 accused, Ludovico, Conrado Joselito. The victim fell in the canal. Odilon and the
and Virgilio (all surnamed Doctolero) threw stones at appellant fled. Before running away from the scene,
Saguns house and called to all the men in the house to Ronnie picked up a piece of hollow block and with it
come out. Epifiana and Lolita and Jonathan (1 year bashed Joselito's head. Not content, Ronnie got a piece
old child of Lolita) were struck and stabbed by the of broken bottle and struck Joselito once more. Joselito
accused inside the house of Sagun. Epifiana and Lolita died on the spot.
died while Jonathan was slightly injured. The same Held: To hold a person liable as an accomplice,
accused while already on the road, hacked and stabbed two elements must concur: (a) the community of
Marcelo which caused his death. criminal design; that is, knowing the criminal design of
Held: There is no question that while the the principal by direct participation, he concurs with the
3 accused were still stoning at the house, they heard the latter in his purpose; (b) the performance of previous or
2 women protesting and Ludovico went inside and simultaneous acts that are not indispensable to the
brutally killed the 2 women inside the room of the said commission of the crime. Accomplices come to know
house. It is impossible to claim that Virgilio and Conrado about the criminal resolution of the principal by direct
did not know what their brother was doing. They knew participation after the principal has reached the decision
and they just stood by and did nothing to stop their to commit the felony and only then does the accomplice
brother. Their presence gave Ludovico encouragement agree to cooperate in its execution. Accomplices do not
in the commission of the crime. Thus, the 2 are decide whether the crime should be committed; they
accomplices. One can be an accomplice even if he did merely assent to the plan of the principal by direct
not know of the actual crime intended by the principal participation and cooperate in its accomplishment.
provided he was aware that it was an illicit act. However, where one cooperates in the commission of
the crime by performing overt acts which by themselves
People v. Roche are acts of execution, he is a principal by direct
330 SCRA 91 (2000) participation, and not merely an accomplice
Facts: Roderick and Rodel Ferol were having All things considered, it was ruled that Ronnie
drinks with a friend named Bobot inside the Ferol and the appellant conspired with Odilon to kill the
compound. Without any warning, Roche and Gregorio victim; hence, all of them are criminally liable for the
barged into the compound. Gregorio tried to hit Rodel latter's death. The appellant is not merely an accomplice
with an empty beer bottle but failed because his but is a principal by direct participation.
common-law wife, Helen, pulled him away on time. Even assuming that the appellant did not
Roderick however was stabbed on the back with an ice conspire with Ronnie and Odilon to kill the victim, the
pick by Roche. Roderick ran towards the house of his appellant is nevertheless criminally liable as a principal
friend Bobot but outside the compound, Caballes caught by direct participation. The stab wounds inflicted by him
up with him. Roderick fell to the ground and was cooperated in bringing about and accelerated the death
repeatedly stabbed with a knife by Caballes. One Rossel of the victim or contributed materially thereto.
tried to stop Caballes but he was chased by the latter. A
brother of the victim, Jon-Jon, threw bottles at Caballes, People v. Garcia
forcing the latter to run away, and leave his victim 373 SCRA 134 (2002)
behind. Roderick was then taken to his house by Rogelio Facts: Valler and Garcia kidnapped Atty.
and Jon-Jon. But at the time, Roderick was already Tioleco for the purpose of extorting ransom. Lariba and
dead. Rogel were caught by police officers inside the house
where a handcuffed and blinfolded Atty. Tioleco was

86
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

detained. Both were unarmed although guns inside the


house are found in their possession. 1. BY PROFITING THEMSELVES OR
Held: Lariba and Rogel, were merely guarding ASSISTING THE OFFENDER TO PROFIT BY
the house for the purpose of either helping the other THE EFFECTS OF THE CRIME
accused-appellants in facilitating the successful - The accessory must receive the property
denouement to the crime or repelling any attempt to from the principal. He should not take it without the
rescue the victim, as shown by the availability of arms consent of the principal, or else, he is not an
and ammunition to them. They thus cooperated in the accessory but a principal in the crime of theft.
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous - When is profiting by the effect of the
acts by means of which they aided or facilitated the crime punished as the act of principal, and not the
execution of the crime but without any indispensable act act of accessory?
for its accomplishment. Under Art. 18 of The Revised When a person knowingly acquired or
Penal Code, they are mere accomplices. received property taken by the brigands.

C. ACCESSORIES 2. BY CONCEALING OR DESTROYING THE


BODY OF THE CRIME TO PREVENT ITS
Art. 19. Accessories. Accessories are those who, DISCOVERY.
having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and
without having participated therein, either as principals BODY OF THE CRIME corpus delicti which means
or accomplices, take part subsequent to its commission that a specific offense was in fact committed by
in any of the following manners: someone
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the crime. 3. BY HARBORING, CONCEALING OR
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the ASSISTING IN THE ESCAPE OF THE
crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order to PRINCIPAL OF THE CRIME
prevent its discovery.
3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the 2 CLASSES:
escape of the principals of the crime, provided the
accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or a. Public officers who harbor conceal or assist in the
whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason, escape of the principal of any crime (not light
parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the felony) with abuse of his public functions
Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of REQUISITES:
some other crime. (1) The accessory is a public officer;
(2) He harbors, conceals, or assists in
the escape of the principal;
An accessory does not participate in the
(3) The public officer acts with abuse
criminal design, nor cooperate in the commission of the
of his public functions.
felony, but, with knowledge of the commission of the
(4) The crime committed by the
crime, he subsequently takes part in 3 ways:
principal is any crime, provided it is not a
a) by profiting from the effects of the crime;
light felony.
b) by concealing the body, effects or instruments
of the crime in order to prevent its discovery;
b. Private persons who harbor, conceal or assist in
and
the escape of the author of the crime guilty of
c) by assisting in the escape or concealment of
treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt against
the principal of the crime, provided he acts
the life of the President, or who is known to be
with abuse of his public functions or the
habitually guilty of some other crime.
principal is guilty of treason, parricide, murder,
REQUISITES:
or an attempt to take the life of the Chief
(1) The accessory is a private person.
Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of
(2) He harbors, conceals or assists in
some other crime.
the escape of the author of the crime.
(3) The crime committed by the
knowledge of the commission of the crime
principal is either: (a) treason, (b)
Mere possession of stolen property does not
parricide, (c) murder, (d) attempt against
make the accused an accessory where the thief was
the life of the president, or (e) that the
already convicted.
principal is known to be habitually guilty
Entertaining suspicion that a crime has been
of some other crime.
committed is not enough.
Knowledge of the commission of the crime may
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 1612
be established by circumstantial evidence
ANTI-FENCING LAW OF 1979
commission of the crime
WHEREAS, reports from law enforcement agencies
the crime committed by the principal must be reveal that there is rampant robbery and thievery of
proved beyond reasonable doubt. government and private properties;
WHEREAS, such robbery and thievery have
without having participated therein either as become profitable on the part of the lawless elements
principals or accomplices because of the existence of ready buyers, commonly known
as fence, of stolen properties;
take part subsequent to its commission WHEREAS, under existing law, a fence can be
The accessory takes part AFTER the crime has prosecuted only as an accessory after the fact and punished
been committed. lightly;
SPECIFIC ACTS OF THE ACCESSORIES

87
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

WHEREAS, is imperative to impose heavy shall promulgate such rules and regulations to carry out the
penalties on persons who profit by the effects of the crimes provisions of this section. Any person who fails to secure the
of robbery and theft. clearance or permit required by this section or who violates
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, any of the provisions of the rules and regulations
President of the Philippines by virtue of the powers vested in promulgated thereunder shall upon conviction be punished
me by the Constitution, do hereby order and decree as part as a fence.
of the law of the land the following: Section 7. Repealing Clause. All laws or parts
thereof, which are inconsistent with the provisions of this
Section 1. Title. This decree shall be known as Decree are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
the Anti-Fencing Law. Section 8. Effectivity. This Decree shall take
effect upon approval.
Section 2. Definition of Terms. The following Done in the City of Manila, this 2nd day of March,
terms shall mean as follows: in the year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-nine.
(a) "Fencing" is the act of any person who, with
intent to gain for himself or for another, shall buy, receive, ACCESSORY DISTINGUISHED FROM PRINCIPAL
possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall
AND FROM ACCOMPLICE
buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any article,
1. The accessory does not take direct part or
item, object or anything of value which he knows, or should
be known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of cooperate in, or induce, the commission of the crime.
the crime of robbery or theft. 2. The accessory does not cooperate in the
(b) "Fence" includes any person, firm, association commission of the offense by acts either prior thereto or
corporation or partnership or other organization who/which simultaneous therewith.
commits the act of fencing. 3. That the participation of the accessory in all
cases always takes place after the commission of the
Section 3. Penalties. Any person guilty of fencing crime.
shall be punished as hereunder indicated:
(a) The penalty of prision mayor, if the value of Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal
the property involved is more than 12,000 pesos but not liability. The penalties prescribed for accessories
exceeding 22,000 pesos; if the value of such property
shall not be imposed upon those who are such with
exceeds the latter sum, the penalty provided in this
respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants,
paragraph shall be imposed in its maximum period, adding
one year for each additional 10,000 pesos; but the total legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or
penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with the
years. In such cases, the penalty shall be termed reclusion single exception of accessories falling within the
temporal and the accessory penalty pertaining thereto provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article.
provided in the Revised Penal Code shall also be imposed.
(b) The penalty of prision correccional in its The exemption is based on the ties of blood
medium and maximum periods, if the value of the property and the preservation of the cleanliness of ones name,
robbed or stolen is more than 6,000 pesos but not exceeding which compels one to conceal crimes committed by
12,000 pesos. relatives.
(c) The penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods, if the value of the property
An ACESSORY is exempt from criminal
involved is more than 200 pesos but not exceeding 6,000
pesos. liability, when the principal is his:
(d) The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium 1. spouse,
period to prision correccional in its minimum period, if the 2. ascendant,
value of the property involved is over 50 pesos but not 3. descendant,
exceeding 200 pesos. 4. legitimate, natural or adopted brother,
(e) The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium sister or relative by affinity within the
period if such value is over five (5) pesos but not exceeding same degree.
50 pesos. - even if only two of the principals guilty of
(f) The penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum murder are the brothers of the accessory and the others
period if such value does not exceed 5 pesos. are not related to him, such accessory is exempt from
criminal liability.
Section 4. Liability of Officials of Juridical - a nephew or niece is not included
Persons. If the fence is a partnership, firm, corporation or
association, the president or the manager or any officer
An accessory is NOT EXEMPT from criminal
thereof who knows or should have known the commission of
the offense shall be liable. liability even if the principal is related to him, if such
accessory (1) PROFITED by the effects of the crime, or
Section 5. Presumption of Fencing. Mere (2) assisted the offender to profit by the effects of
possession of any good, article, item, object, or anything of the crime
value which has been the subject of robbery or thievery shall
be prima facie evidence of fencing. People v. Talingdan
84 SCRA 19 (1978)
Section 6. Clearance/Permit to Sell/Used Second Facts: Bernardo and Teresa lived together
Hand Articles. For purposes of this Act, all stores, but for quite some time their relationship has gotten
establishments or entities dealing in the buy and sell of any bitter. Bernardo knew that Teresa had an illicit
good, article item, object of anything of value obtained from relationship with Talingdan. Their child testified that on
an unlicensed dealer or supplier thereof, shall before offering the day the killing occurred, there were 4 men inside
the same for sale to the public, secure the necessary
their house and Bernardo knew about it but continued
clearance or permit from the station commander of the
plowing his field. Later, when Bernardo came inside the
Integrated National Police in the town or city where such
store, establishment or entity is located. The Chief of
kitchen, Talingdan and Tobias fired at Bernardo and the
Constabulary/Director General, Integrated National Police 4 climbed the stairs of the batalan. Seeing that the

88
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

victim was alive, they fired at him again. Teresa came obvious; it is based on ties of blood and the preservation
out after from her room and pulled her child to question of the cleanliness of one's name, which compels one to
her. Teresa threatened to kill her if she would reveal the conceal crimes committed by relatives so near as those
incident. mentioned in the above-quoted article. Ruby Mariano is
Held: One who conceals or assists in the acquitted.
escape of the principal in the crime can be held guilty as
accessory. There is morally convincing proof that Teresa
is an accessory to the offense. She was inside the room V. PENALTIES
when her husband was shot. As she came out after the
shooting, she inquired from the child if she was able to
Penalty is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for
recognize the assailants and when the latter identified
the transgression of a law.
the 4 accused as the culprits, Teresa did not only enjoin
her daughter not to reveal what she knew to anyone but
Different Juridical Conditions of Penalty:
she went to the extent of warning her not to tell anyone
1. Must be PRODUCTIVE OF SUFFERING, without
or else she would kill her. Later when the police came,
however affecting the integrity of the human
she claimed she had no suspects in mind. She, thus,
personality.
became active in her cooperation with the 4 accused.
2. Must be COMMENSURATE with the offense
different crimes must be punished with
People v. Tolentino (2002)
different penalties.
Facts: Wilfredo Tolentino hit Herman Sagario
3. Must be PERSONAL no one should be
with a piece of wood and later stabbed him with a bolo.
punished for the crime of another.
Wilfedo then instructed appellant Jonathan Fabros and
4. Must be LEGAL it is the consequence of a
Merwin Ledesma to help him bring Hernan out of the
judgment according to law.
house. Wilfredo held him by the neck while both
5. Must be CERTAIN no one may escape its
appellant and Merwin grasped his feet. They then
effects.
carried Hernan towards a creek. Appellant assisted
6. Must be EQUAL for all.
Wilfredo out of fear and when he noticed that Sagario
7. Must be CORRECTIONAL.
regained conciousness, he ran away towards a banana
plantation. Wilfredo then stab Sagario on the different
The purpose of the State in punishing crimes is TO
parts of his body causing his death. Thereafter, Wilfredo
SECURE JUSTICE. Penal justice must therefore be
pushed and waded Sagario on the water.
exercised by the State in the service and satisfaction of
Held: Appellant Jonathan Fabros cannot be
a duty and rests primarily on the moral rightfulness of
convicted as an accessory. Under paragraph 2 of Article
the punishment inflicted.
19 of the Revised Penal Code, the concealment or the
destruction of the body of the crime or of the effects or
Theories justifying penalty:
the instruments thereof must have been done in order
a. PREVENTION to suppress danger to the State
to prevent the discovery of the crime. That, precisely, is
b. SELF-DEFENSE to protect the society from
wanting in the present case. Appellant was afraid that
the threat and wrong inflicted by the criminal.
his co-accused would hurt him if he refused so he
c. REFORMATION to correct and reform the
agreed to assist the latter in carrying the victim towards
offender.
the river. The fact that appellant left thereafter likewise
d. EXEMPLARITY to serve as an example to
indicated his innocence of the charge. Verily, he
deter others from committing crimes.
adequately explained his conduct prior to the stabbing
e. JUSTICE for retributive justice, a vindication
incident was one born of fear for his own life. It is not
of absolute right and moral law violated by the
incredible for an eyewitness to a crime, especially if
criminal.
unarmed, to desist from assisting the victim if to do so
would put the former's life in peril.
Purpose of penalty under the RPC:
a. RETRIBUTION OR EXPIATION the penalty is
People v. Mariano
commensurate with the gravity of the offense.
347 SCRA 109 (2000)
b. CORRECTION OR REFORMATION as shown
Facts: Ruth and their maid Michelle often
by the rules which regulate the execution of
engaged in a physical fight. The fight usually ends with
the penalties consisting in deprivation of
Ruth pouring boiling water on Michelle. During their
liberty.
fights which number to at least 6 times a month, Ruth
c. SOCIAL DEFENSE shown by its inflexible
would bang Michelles head and pull on her hair. Michelle
severity to recidivist and habitual delinquents.
subsequently died as a result. Ruth placed the body of
Michelle in a box which she then loaded inside the
luggage compartment of her sister Rubys car. Ruth and A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Ruby were both convicted of murder by the trial court.
Held: Ruby is the sister of Ruth. As such, their NO ex post facto laws
relationship exempts Ruby from criminal liability under
Art. 20 of the Revised Penal Code ARTICLE 20. Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. No felony
Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability.The shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law
penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed prior to its commission.
upon those who are such with respect to their spouses,
ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural and
This article prohibits the Government from
adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity
punishing any person for any felony with any penalty
within the same degrees, with the single exception of
which has not been prescribed by the law.
accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1
of the preceding article. The reason for exemption is

89
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

It has no application to any of the provisions WON the Anti-subversion Act is a bill of
of the RPC for the reason that for every felony defined in attainder? The trial court ruled that the Act is a bill of
the Code, a penalty has been prescribed. attainder because it tars and feathers the communist
REASON: An act or omission cannot be party as a continuing menace to the freedom and
punished by the State if at the time it was committed security of the country.
there was no law prohibiting it, because a law cannot be Held: A bill of attainder is a legislative act
rationally obeyed unless it is first shown, and a man which inflicts punishment without a trial. The Act simply
cannot be expected to obey an order that has not been declares the Communist Party to be an organized
given. conspiracy for the overthrow of the government. Its
focus is not on the individuals but on the conduct. It is
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITIONS not enough that the statute specify persons or groups in
order that it may be called a bill of attainder. It is
necessary that it must apply retroactively and reach
1987 CONSTITUTION
past conduct. This requirement follows from the nature
Section 18. (1) No person shall be detained
of a bill of attainder as a legislative adjudication of guilt.
solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist
People v. Bracamonte
except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party
257 SCRA 380 (1996)
shall have been duly convicted.
Facts: Violeta and her common law husband,
Section 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be
Clark Din, arrived home and saw 3 men rushing out of
imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
the house. Inside the house, they found their maid
inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless,
hands tied with her mouth gagged and bathed in her
for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the
own blood. Thereafter, they saw their son in the kitchen
Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty
his head and body immersed in a pail of water, dead.
already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
Held: To impose upon the accused the death
Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for
penalty reimposed by RA 7659 which took effect on Dec.
debt or non-payment of a poll tax.
31, 1993 for a crime committed back on Sep. 23, 1987
Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of
would violate the basic rule in criminal law that, if the
attainder shall be enacted.
new law imposes a heavier penalty, the law in force at
the time of the commission of the offense shall be
In Re: Kay Villegas Kami applied.
35 SCRA 429 (1970)
Facts: Petition for declaratory relief People v. Valdez
challenging the validity of Sec. 8 of RA 6132 on the 304 SCRA 611 (1999)
ground that it violates due process, right of association, Facts: Accused was convicted by the RTC and
freedom of expression and that it is an ex post facto sentenced him to death for the complex crime of
law. Multiple Murder with Double Frustrated Murder, and
Held: An ex post facto law is one which: likewise separately sentenced him to suffer the prison
1. makes criminal an act done before the passage of term of reclusion perpetua for the crime of Illegal
the law and which was innocent when done, and Possession of Firearms (PD 1866)
punishes such an act. Held: There can be no separate conviction of
2. aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it the crime of illegal possession under PD 1866 in view of
was when committed; the amendments introduced by RA 8294 wherein illegal
3. changes the punishment and inflicts a greater possession being merely taken as an aggravating
punishment than the law annexed to the crime circumstance to other crimes committed. Insofar as RA
when committed; 8294 will spare the accused from a separate conviction
4. alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes for the crime of illegal possession, it may be given
conviction upon less or different testimony than retroactive effect.
the law required at the time of the commission of
the offense;
PROSPECTIVITY; EXCEPTION
5. assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies
only, in effect imposes penalty or deprivation of a
right for something which when done was lawful; RPC, Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. No
and felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed
6. deprives a person accused of a crime of some by law prior to its commission.
lawful protection to which he has become
entitled, such as the protection of a former Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. Penal
conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor
amnesty. the persons guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual
criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of
The constitutional inhibition refers only to criminal this Code, although at the time of the publication of such
laws which are given retroactive effect. While it is true laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the
that Sec. 18 penalizes a violation of any provision of RA convict is serving the same.
6132 including Sec. 8 thereof, the penalty is imposed
only for acts committed after the approval of the law
CIVIL CODE, Art. 14. Penal laws and those of public
and not those perpetrated prior thereto.
security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live
or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the
People v. Ferrer
principles of public international law and to treaty
48 SCRA 382(1972)
stipulations.

90
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

GENERAL RULE: TO GIVE CRIMINAL LAWS Facts: The accused were convicted of
PROSPECTIVE EFFECT Robbery with Physical Injuries and Robbery with Multiple
Exception: to give them retroactive effect when Rape and were sentenced to imprisonment and death
favorable to the accused. penalty respectively for the two convictions.
Reason for the exception: The sovereign, in Held: There is no question that the
enacting a subsequent penal law more favorable to the abolition of the death penalty benefits herein accused.
accused, has recognized that the greater severity of the The subsequent reimposition of the death penalty will
former law is unjust. The sovereign would be not affect them. The framers of the Constitution
inconsistent if it would still enforce its right under themselves state that the law to be passed by Congress
conditions of the former law, which has already been reimposing the death penalty (RA 7659) can only have
regarded by conscientious public opinion as juridical prospective application. A subsequent statute cannot be
burdensome. so applied retroactively as to impair a right that accrued
under the old law.
The favorable retroactive effect of a new law may find
the defendant in one of these 3 situations: DIFFERENT EFFECTS OF REPEAL OF PENAL LAW.
a. The crime has been committed and prosecution a. If the repeal makes the penalty
begins; lighter in the new law, the new law shall be applied,
b. Sentence has been passed but service has not except when the offender is a habitual delinquent or
begun; when the new law is made not applicable to
c. The sentence is being carried out. pending action or existing causes of action.
When the culprit is HABITUAL DELINQUENT, he is not b. If the new law imposes a heavier
entitled to the benefit of the provisions of the new penalty, the law in force at the time of the
favorable statute. commission of the offense shall be applied.
A person shall be deemed to be a HABITUAL c. If the new law totally repeals the
DELINQUENT if within a period of 10 years from the date existing law so that the act which was penalized
of his release of last conviction of the crimes of serious under the old law is no longer punishable, the crime
or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or is obliterated.
falsification, he is found guilt of an said crimes a third
time or oftener. When the repeal is absolute the offense ceases
The principle against retroactivity does not apply to to be criminal.
civil liability.
- but a new law increasing the civil liability When the new law and the old law penalize the
cannot be given retroactive effect. same offense, the offender can be tried under
The provisions of this article are applicable even to the old law.
special laws which provide more favorable conditions to
the accused. When the repealing law fails to penalize the
Criminal liability under the former law is obliterated offense under the old law, the accused cannot
when the repeal is absolute. be convicted under the new law.
Criminal liability under the repealed law subsists:
a. When the provisions of the former law are A person erroneously accused and convicted
REENACTED; or under a repealed statute may be punished
b. When the repeal is by IMPLICATION; under the repealing statute.
c. When there is a SAVING CLAUSE
A new law which omits anything contained in
What penalty may be imposed for the commission of a the old law dealing on the same subject,
felony? operates as are penal of anything not so
- Only the penalty prescribed by law prior tot the included in the amendatory act.
commission of the felony may be imposed.
- Felonies are punishable under the laws in force People v. Pimentel (supra)
at the time of their commission. Held: Where the repeal of a penal law is total
- But the penalty prescribed by law enacted after and absolute and the act which was penalized by a prior
the commission of the felony may be imposed, if law ceases to be criminal under the new law, the
it is favorable to the offender. previous offense is obliterated.
With the enactment of RA 7636, the charge of
People v. Gallo illegal possession of firearm and ammunition qualified by
315 SCRA 461 (1999) subversion should be amended to simple illegal
Facts: The accused seeks a modification of his possession of firearm and ammunition, since subversion
death sentence to reclusion perpetua in line with the is no longer a crime.
new Court rulings which annunciate that the 7 attendant
circumstances introduced in Sec. 11 of RA 7659 partake B. PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE IMPOSED
of the nature of qualifying circumstances that must be
pleaded in the indictment in order to warrant the Art. 25. Penalties which may be imposed. The
imposition of the penalty (Garcia doctrine reiterated in penalties which may be imposed according to this Code,
Medina). and their different classes, are those included in the
Held: By operation of law, the appellant is following:
rightfully entitled to the beneficial application of the
Garcia or Medina doctrine. Sentence modified. Scale
PRINCIPAL PENALTIES
People v. Patalin
311 SCRA 187 (1999)

91
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Capital punishment: NOTE: Public censure is a penalty, thus, it is not proper


Death. in acquittal. However, the Court in acquitting the
accused may criticize his acts or conduct.
Afflictive penalties:
Reclusion perpetua, Penalties that are either principal or accessory.
Reclusion temporal, Perpetual or temporary absolute
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification, disqualification, perpetual or temporary special
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification, disqualification, and suspension may be principal or
Prision mayor. accessory penalties, because they formed in the 2
general classes.
Correctional penalties:
Prision correccional, DURATION OF EACH OF DIFFERENT PENALTIES
Arresto mayor,
Suspension, 1. Reclusion perpetua 20 years and 1 day
Destierro. to 40 years
2. Reclusion temporal 12 years and 1 day
to 20 years
Light penalties: 3. Prision mayor and temporary
Arresto menor, disqualification - 6 years and 1 day to 12 years
Public censure. except when disqualification is accessory penalty; in
which case its duration is that of the principal penalty
Penalties common to the three preceding 4. Prision correccional, suspension and
classes: destierro - 6 months and 1 day to 6 years except
Fine, and when suspension is an accessory penalty, in which case
Bond to keep the peace. its duration is that of the principal penalty.
5. Arresto Mayor - 1 month and 1 day to 6
ACCESSORY PENALTIES months
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification, 6. Arresto Menor 1 day to 30 days.
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be
voted for, the profession or calling.
Civil interdiction,
Indemnification,
Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of
the offense,
Payment of costs.
C. SPECIFIC PRINCIPAL AND
PRINCIPAL PENALTIES those expressly imposed by
the court in the judgment of conviction. ACCESSORY PENALTIES
ACCESSORY PENALTIES those that are deemed
included in the imposition of the principal penalties. CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Other classifications of penalties: REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7659


According to their divisibility: AN ACT TO IMPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY ON CERTAIN
1. Divisible HEINOUS CRIMES, AMENDING FOR THAT PURPOSE
- those that have fixed duration and are divisible THE REVISED PENAL LAWS, AS AMENDED, OTHER
into three periods. SPECIAL PENAL LAWS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
2. Indivisible
- those which have no fixed duration. Section 1. Declaration of Policy. - It is hereby declared
the policy of the State to foster and ensure not only
a. Death
obedience to its authority, but also to adopt such measures
b. Reclusion perpetua
as would effectively promote the maintenance of peace and
c. Perpetual absolute or special order, the protection of life, liberty and property, and the
disqualification promotion of the general welfare which are essential for the
d. Public censure enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy in
a just and humane society;
According to subject-matter
1. Corporal (death) Section 2. Article 114 of the Revised Penal Code, as
2. Deprivation of freedom amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:
(reclusion, prision, arresto)
3. Restriction of freedom (destierro) "Art. 114. Treason. - Any Filipino citizen who levies war
4. Deprivation of rights against the Philippines or adheres to her enemies giving
(disqualification and suspension) them aid or comfort within the Philippines or elsewhere,
5. Pecuniary (fine) shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death and shall
pay a fine not to exceed 100,000 pesos."
No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the
According to their gravity
testimony of two witnesses at least to the same overt act or
1. Capital on confession of the accused in open court.
2. Afflictive Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines, who
3. Correctional commits acts of treason as defined in paragraph 1 of this
4. Light

92
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

Article shall be punished by reclusion temporal to death and 6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
shall pay a fine not to exceed 100,000 pesos." augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging or
scoffing at his person or corpse."
Section 3. Section Three, Chapter One, Title One of
Book Two of the same Code is hereby amended to read as Section 7. Article 255 of the same Code is hereby
follows: amended to read as follows:
"Section Three. - Piracy and mutiny on the high seas or "Art. 255. Infanticide. - The penalty provided for
in the Philippine waters parricide in Article 246 and for murder in Article 248 shall be
Art. 122. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas imposed upon any person who shall kill any child less than
or in Philippine waters. - The penalty of reclusion perpetua three days of age.
shall be inflicted upon any person who, on the high seas, or If any crime penalized in this Article be committed by
in Philippine waters, shall attack or seize a vessel or, not the mother of the child for the purpose of concealing her
being a member of its complement nor a passenger, shall dishonor, she shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its
seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its medium and maximum periods, and if said crime be
equipment or passengers. committed for the same purpose by the maternal
The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of grandparents or either of them, the penalty shall be
mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters." reclusion temporal."
Art. 123. Qualified piracy. - The penalty of reclusion
perpetua to death shall be imposed upon those who commit Section 8. Article 267 of the same Code is hereby
any of the crimes referred to in the preceding article, under amended to read as follows:
any of the following circumstances:
1. Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or "Art. 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention. -
firing upon the same; Any private individual who shall kidnap or detain another, or
2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims in any other manner deprive him of his liberty, shall suffer
without means of saving themselves or; the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death:
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, 1. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted
homicide, physical injuries or rape." more than three days.
2. If it shall have been committed simulating
Section 4. There shall be incorporated after Article 211 public authority.
of the same Code a new article to read as follows: 3. If any serious physical injuries shall have been
inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained; or if
"Art. 211-A. Qualified Bribery. - If any public officer is threats to kill him shall have been made.
entrusted with law enforcement and he refrains from 4. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor,
arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a except when the accused is any of the parents, female or a
crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death in public officer.
consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present, he shall The penalty shall be death penalty where the
suffer the penalty for the offense which was not prosecuted. kidnapping or detention was committed for the purpose of
If it is the public officer who asks or demands such gift extorting ransom from the victim or any other person, even
or present, he shall suffer the penalty of death." if none of the circumstances above-mentioned were present
in the commission of the offense.
Section 5. The penalty of death for parricide under When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence
Article 246 of the same Code is hereby restored, so that it of the detention or is raped, or is subjected to torture or
shall read as follows: dehumanizing acts, the maximum penalty shall be imposed."

"Art. 246. Parricide. - Any person who shall kill his Section 9. Article 294 of the same Code is hereby
father, mother, or child, whether legitimate of illegitimate, amended to read as follows:
or any of his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse,
shall be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the "Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation
penalty of reclusion perpetua to death." of persons - Penalties. - Any person guilty of robbery with
the use of violence against or intimidation of any person
Section 6. Article 248 of the same Code is hereby shall suffer:
amended to read as follows: 1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by
reason or on occasion of the robbery, the crime of homicide
"Art. 248. Murder. - Any person who, not falling within shall have been committed, or when the robbery shall have
the provisions of Article 246 shall kill another, shall be guilty been accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or
of murder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua, to arson.
death if committed with any of the following attendant 2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium
circumstances: period to reclusion perpetua, when or if by reason or on
1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries
strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing means to penalized in subdivision I of Article 263 shall have been
weaken the defense or of means or persons to insure or inflicted.
afford impunity. 3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason
2. In consideration of a price, reward or promise. or on occasion of the robbery, any of the physical injuries
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, penalized in subdivision 2 of the article mentioned in the
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon next preceding paragraph, shall have been inflicted.
a railroad, fall of an airship, or by means of motor vehicles, 4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period
or with the use of any other means involving great waste to reclusion temporal in its medium period, if the violence or
and ruin. intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery
4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in shall have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for
the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a the commission of the crime, or when in the course of its
volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or other public execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any person
calamity. not responsible for its commission any of the physical
5. With evident premeditation. injuries covered by subdivisions 3 and 4 of said Article 263.
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum
period to prision mayor in its medium period in other cases."

93
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the


Section 10. Article 320 of the same Code is hereby crime of rape is committed with any of the following
amended to read as follows: attendant circumstances:
1. when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of
"Art. 320. Destructive Arson. - The penalty of reclusion age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent,
perpetua to death shall be imposed upon any person who guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the
shall burn: third civil degree, or the common-law-spouse of the parent
1. One (1) or more buildings or edifices, consequent to of the victim.
one single act of burning, or as a result of simultaneous 2. when the victim is under the custody of the
burnings, committed on several or different occasions. police or military authorities.
2. Any building of public or private ownership, devoted 3. when the rape is committed in full view of the
to the public in general or where people usually gather or husband, parent, any of the children or other relatives within
congregate for a definite purpose such as, but not limited to, the third degree of consanguinity.
official governmental function or business, private 4. when the victim is a religious or a child below
transaction, commerce, trade, workshop, meetings and seven (7) years old.
conferences, or merely incidental to a definite purpose such 5. when the offender knows that he is afflicted
as but not limited to hotels, motels, transient dwellings, with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) disease.
public conveyances or stops or terminals, regardless of 6. when committed by any member of the Armed
whether the offender had knowledge that there are persons Forces of the Philippines or the Philippine National Police or
in said building or edifice at the time it is set on fire and any law enforcement agency.
regardless also of whether the building is actually inhabited 7. when by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
or not. the victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation."
3. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or
airplane, devoted to transportation or conveyance, or for Section 12. Section 2 of Republic Act No. 7080
public use, entertainment or leisure. (An Act Defining and Penalizing the Crime of Plunder) is
4. Any building, factory, warehouse installation and any hereby amended to read as follows:
appurtenances thereto, which are devoted to the service of "Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder;
public utilities. Penalties. - Any public officer who, by himself or in
5. Any building the burning of which is for the purpose connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity
of concealing or destroying evidence of another violation of or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or other
law, or for the purpose of concealing bankruptcy or persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth
defrauding creditors or to collect from insurance. through a combination or series of overt criminal acts as
Irrespective of the application of the above enumerated described in Section 1 (d) hereof in the aggregate amount or
qualifying circumstances, the penalty of reclusion perpetua total value of at least Fifty million pesos (P50,000,000.00)
to death shall likewise be imposed when the arson is shall be guilty of the crime of plunder and shall be punished
perpetrated or committed by two (2) or more persons or by by reclusion perpetua to death. Any person who participated
a group of persons, regardless of whether their purpose is with the said public officer in the commission of an offense
merely to burn or destroy the building or the burning merely contributing to the crime of plunder shall likewise be
constitutes an overt act in the commission or another punished for such offense. In the imposition of penalties, the
violation of law. degree of participation and the attendance of mitigating and
The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall extenuating circumstances, as provided by the Revised Penal
also be imposed upon any person who shall burn: Code, shall be considered by the court. The court shall
1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military declare any and all ill-gotten wealth and their interests and
powder or fireworks factory, ordnance, storehouse, archives other incomes and assets including the properties and
or general museum of the Government. shares of stocks derived from the deposit or investment
2. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory thereof forfeited in favor of the State."
of inflammable or explosive materials.
If as a consequence of the commission of any of Section 13. Sections 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9, of Article II of
the acts penalized under this Article, death results, the Republic Act No. 6425, as amended, known as the
mandatory penalty of death shall be imposed." Dangerous Drugs Act 1972, are hereby amended to read as
follows:
Section 11. Article 335 of the same Code is hereby "Sec. 3. Importation of Prohibited Drugs. - The penalty of
amended to read as follows: reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from five
"Art. 335. When and how rape is committed. - hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be
Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman imposed upon any person who, unless authorized by law,
under any of the following circumstances: shall import or bring into the Philippines any prohibited drug.
1. By using force or intimidation;
2. When the woman is deprived of reason or "Sec. 4. Sale, Administration, Delivery, Distribution and
otherwise unconscious; and Transportation of Prohibited Drugs. - The penalty of
3. When the woman is under twelve years of age reclusion perpetua to death and a fine from five hundred
or is demented. thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed
The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion upon any person who, unless authorized by law, shall sell,
perpetua. administer, deliver, give away to another, distribute,
Whenever the crime of rape is committed with the dispatch in transit or transport any prohibited drug, or
use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the shall act as a broker in any of such transactions.
penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the contrary, if the victim of the offense is a minor, or
the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be death. should a prohibited drug involved in any offense under
When the rape is attempted or frustrated and a this Section be the proximate cause of the death of a
homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, victim thereof, the maximum penalty herein provided
the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. shall be imposed.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, a "Sec. 5. Maintenance of a Den, Dive or Resort for
homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death. Prohibited Drug Users. - The penalty of reclusion perpetua
to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand

94
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any Section 15. There shall be incorporated after
person or group of persons who shall maintain a den, dive Section 15 of Article III of Republic Act No. 6425, as
or resort where any prohibited drug is used in any form or amended, known as the Dangerous Drug Act of 1972, a
where such prohibited drugs in quantities specified in new section to read as follows:
Section 20, Paragraph 1 of this Act are found. "Sec. 15-a. Maintenance of a den, dive or resort for
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of regulated drug users. - The penalty of reclusion perpetua
this Act to the contrary, the maximum of the penalty shall to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand
be imposed in every case where a prohibited drug is pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any
administered, delivered or sold to a minor who is allowed person or group of persons who shall maintain a den, dive
to use the same in such place. or resort where any regulated drugs is used in any form,
Should a prohibited drug be the proximate cause of the or where such regulated drugs in quantities specified in
death of a person using the same in such den, dive or Section 20, paragraph 1 of this Act are found.
resort, the maximum penalty herein provided shall be Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of
imposed on the maintainer notwithstanding the provisions this Act to the contrary, the maximum penalty herein
of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary. provided shall be imposed in every case where a
"Sec. 7. Manufacture of Prohibited Drug. - The regulated drug is administered, delivered or sold to a
penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and fine ranging minor who is allowed to use the same in such place.
from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos Should a regulated drug be the proximate cause of
shall be imposed upon any person who, unless authorized the death of a person using the same in such den, dive or
by law, shall engage in the manufacture of any prohibited resort, the maximum penalty herein provided shall be
drug. imposed on the maintainer notwithstanding the provisions
"Sec. 8. Possession or Use of Prohibited Drugs. - of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary."
The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine
ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million Section 16. Section 16 of Article III of Republic
pesos shall be imposed upon any person who, unless Act No. 6425, as amended, known as the Dangerous
authorized by law, shall possess or use any prohibited Drugs Act of 1972, is amended to read as follows:
drug subject to the provisions of Section 20 hereof. "Sec. 16. Possession or Use of Regulated Drugs. -
"Sec. 9. Cultivation of Plants which are Sources of The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine
Prohibited Drugs. - The penalty of reclusion perpetua to ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million
death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall
pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any possess or use any regulated drug without the
person who shall plant, cultivate or culture any medium corresponding license or prescription, subject to the
Indian hemp, opium poppy (papaver somniferum), or any provisions of Section 20 hereof."
other plant which is or may hereafter be classified as
dangerous drug or from which any dangerous drug may Section 17. Section 20, Article IV of Republic Act
be manufactured or derived. No. 6425, as amended, known as the Dangerous Drugs
The land or portions hereof, and/or greenhouses Act of 1972, is hereby amended to read as follows:
on which any of said plants is cultivated or cultured shall Sec. 20. Application of Penalties, Confiscation and
be confiscated and escheated to the State, unless the Forfeiture of the Proceeds or Instruments of the Crime. -
owner thereof can prove that he did not know such The penalties for offenses under Section 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9
cultivation or culture despite the exercise of due diligence of Article II and Sections 14, 14-A, 15 and 16 of Article III
on his part. of this Act shall be applied if the dangerous drugs involved
If the land involved in is part of the public domain, is in any of the following quantities :
the maximum of the penalties herein provided shall be 1. 40 grams or more of opium;
imposed upon the offender." 2. 40 grams or more of morphine;
3. 200 grams or more of shabu or
Section 14. Sections 14, 14-A, and 15 of Article methylamphetamine hydrochloride;
III of Republic Act No. 6425, as amended, known as the 4. 40 grams or more of heroin;
Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, are hereby amended to 5. 750 grams or more of indian hemp or
read as follows: marijuana;
6. 50 grams or more of marijuana resin or
"Sec. 14. Importation of Regulated Drugs. - The penalty marijuana resin oil;
of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging from 7. 40 grams or more of cocaine or cocaine
five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be hydrochloride; or
imposed upon any person who, unless authorized by law, 8. In the case of other dangerous drugs, the
shall import or bring any regulated drug in the Philippines. quantity of which is far beyond therapeutic requirements,
"Sec. 14-A. Manufacture of Regulated Drugs. - The as determined and promulgated by the Dangerous Drugs
penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging Board, after public consultations/hearings conducted for
from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos the purpose.
shall be imposed upon any person who, unless authorized Otherwise, if the quantity involved is less than the
by law, shall engage in the manufacture of any regulated foregoing quantities, the penalty shall range from prision
drug. correccional to reclusion perpetua depending upon the
"Sec. 15. Sale, Administration, Dispensation, Delivery, quantity.
Transportation and Distribution of Regulated Drugs. - The Every penalty imposed for the unlawful
penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine ranging importation, sale, administration, delivery, transportation
from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos or manufacture of dangerous drugs, the cultivation of
shall be imposed upon any person who, unless authorized plants which are sources of dangerous drugs and the
by law, shall sell, dispense, deliver, transport or distribute possession of any opium pipe and other paraphernalia for
any regulated drug. dangerous drugs shall carry with it the confiscation and
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to forfeiture, in favor of the Government, of all the proceeds
the contrary, if the victim of the offense is a minor, or of the crime including but not limited to money and other
should a regulated drug involved in any offense under this obtained thereby and the instruments or tools with which
Section be the proximate cause of the death of a victim it was committed, unless they are the property of a third
thereof, the maximum penalty herein provided shall be person not liable for the offense, but those which are not
imposed." of lawful commerce shall be ordered destroyed without

95
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

delay. Dangerous drugs and plant sources of such drugs disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty, in
as well as the proceeds or instruments of the crime so which case, it shall be that of the principal penalty.
confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government shall Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro. -
be turned over to the Board for proper disposal without The duration of the penalties of prision correccional,
delay. suspension, and destierro shall be from six months and
Any apprehending or arresting officer who one day to six years, except when the suspension is
misappropriates or misapplies or fails to account for imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case, its
seized or confiscated dangerous drugs or plant-sources of duration shall be that of the principal penalty.
dangerous drugs or proceeds or instruments of the crime Arresto mayor. - The duration of the penalty of
as are herein defined shall after conviction be punished by arresto mayor shall be from one month and one day to six
the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death and a fine months.
ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million Arresto menor. - The duration of the penalty of
pesos." arresto menor shall be from one day to thirty days.
Bond to keep the peace. - The bond to keep the peace
Section 18. There shall be incorporated after shall be required to cover such period of time as the court
Section 20 of Republic Act No. 6425, as amended, known may determine."
as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, a new section to
read as follows: Section 22. Article 47 of the same Code is hereby
"Sec. 20-A. Plea-bargaining Provisions. - Any amended to read as follows:
person charged under any provision of this Act where the Art. 47. In what cases the death penalty shall not
imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua to death shall not be imposed; Automatic review of the Death Penalty
be allowed to avail of the provision on plea bargaining." Cases. - The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in
which it must be imposed under existing laws, except
Section 19. Section 24 of Republic Act No. 6425, when the guilty person is below eighteen (18) years of
as amended, known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, age at the time of the commission of the crime or is more
is hereby amended to read as follows : than seventy years of age or when upon appeal or
"Sec. 24. Penalties for Government Official and automatic review of the case by the Supreme Court, the
Employees and Officers and Members of Police Agencies required majority vote is not obtained for the imposition
and the Armed Forces, 'Planting' of Evidence. - The of the death penalty, in which cases the penalty shall be
maximum penalties provided for Section 3, 4(1), 5(1), 6, reclusion perpetua.
7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 of Article II and Sections 14, 14-A, In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by
15(1), 16 and 19 of Article III shall be imposed, if those the trial court, the records shall be forwarded to the
found guilty of any of the said offenses are government Supreme Court for automatic review and judgment by the
officials, employees or officers, including members of Court en banc, within twenty (20) days but not earlier
police agencies and the armed forces. than fifteen (15) days after promulgation of the judgment
Any such above government official, employee or or notice of denial of any motion for new trial or
officer who is found guilty of "planting" any dangerous reconsideration. The transcript shall also be forwarded
drugs punished in Sections 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 13 of Article within ten (10) days from the filing thereof by the
II and Sections 14, 14-A, 15 and 16 of Article III of this stenographic reporter."
Act in the person or in the immediate vicinity of another
as evidence to implicate the latter, shall suffer the same Section 23. Article 62 of the same Code, as
penalty as therein provided." amended, is hereby amended to read as follows :
"Art. 62. Effects of the attendance of mitigating or
Section 20. Sec. 14 of Republic Act No. 6539, as aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency. -
amended, known as the Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972, is Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and habitual
hereby amended to read as follows: delinquency shall be taken into account for the purpose of
"Sec. 14. Penalty for Carnapping. - Any person diminishing or increasing the penalty in conformity with
who is found guilty of carnapping, as this term is defined the following rules:
in Section Two of this Act, shall, irrespective of the value 1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves
of motor vehicle taken, be punished by imprisonment for constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which
not less than fourteen years and eight months and not are included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing
more than seventeen years and four months, when the the penalty therefor shall not be taken into account for
carnapping is committed without violence or intimidation the purpose of increasing the penalty.
of persons, or force upon things; and by imprisonment for 1(a). When in the commission of the crime,
not less than seventeen years and four months and not advantage was taken by the offender of his public
more than thirty years, when the carnapping is committed position, the penalty to be imposed shall be in its
by means of violence against or intimidation of any maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances.
person, or force upon things; and the penalty of reclusion The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the
perpetua to death shall be imposed when the owner, offense was committed by any group who belongs to an
driver or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed organized/syndicated crime group.
or raped in the course of the commission of the An organized/syndicated crime group means a
carnapping or on the occasion thereof." group of two or more persons collaborating, confederating
or mutually helping one another for purposes of gain in
Section 21. Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the commission of any crime.
as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any
"Art. 27. Reclusion perpetua. - The penalty of aggravating circumstances inherent in the crime to such a
reclusion perpetua shall be from twenty years and one degree that it must of necessity accompany the
day to forty years. commission thereof.
Reclusion temporal. - The penalty of reclusion temporal 3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which
shall be from twelve years and one day to twenty years. arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or from
Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. - his private relations with the offended party, or from any
The duration of the penalties of prision mayor and other personal cause, shall only serve to aggravate or
temporary disqualification shall be from six years and one mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and
day to twelve years, except when the penalty of accessories as to whom such circumstances are
attendant.

96
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

4. The circumstances which consist in the material hereof which are not affected thereby shall continue to be
execution of the act, or in the means employed to in full force and effect.
accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the
liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them Section 28. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15)
at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation days after its publication in two (2) national newspapers
therein. of general circulation. The publication shall not be later
5. Habitual delinquency shall have the following than seven (7) days after the approval hereof.
effects :
(a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be Approved: December 13, 1993
sentenced to the penalty provided by law for the last
crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods;
(b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall be REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8177
sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of AN ACT DESIGNATING DEATH BY LETHAL INJECTION
which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of AS THE METHOD OF CARRYING OUT CAPITAL
prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods; and PUNISHMENT, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLE
(c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the culprit 81 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE, AS AMENDED BY
shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last SECTION 24 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7659.
crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional
penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to SECTION 1. Article 81 of the Revised Penal Code,
reclusion temporal in its minimum period. as amended by Section 24 of Republic Act No. 7659 is
Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the hereby further amended to read as follows:
total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the
offender, in conformity herewith, shall in no case exceed "Art. 81. When and how the death penalty is to
30 years. be executed. The death sentence shall be executed with
For purposes of this article, a person shall be preference to any other penalty and shall consist in putting
deemed to be a habitual delinquent, if within a period of the person under the sentence to death by lethal injection.
ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of The death sentence shall be executed under the authority of
the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, the Director of the Bureau of Corrections, endeavoring so far
robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the person under
any of said crimes a third time or oftener. the sentence during the lethal injection as well as during the
proceedings prior to the execution.
Section 24. Article 81 of the same Code, as
amended, is hereby amended to read as follows : "The Director of the Bureau of Corrections shall take
"Art. 81. When and how the death penalty is to be steps to ensure that the lethal injection to be administered is
executed. - The death sentence shall be executed with sufficient to cause the instantaneous death of the convict.
preference to any other and shall consist in putting the
person under sentence to death by electrocution. The "Pursuant to this, all personnel involved in the
death sentence shall be executed under the authority of administration of lethal injection shall be trained prior to the
the Director of Prisons, endeavoring so far as possible to performance of such task.
mitigate the sufferings of the person under the sentence
during electrocution as well as during the proceedings "The authorized physician of the Bureau of
prior to the execution. Corrections, after thorough examination, shall officially make
If the person under sentence so desires, he shall be a pronouncement of the convict's death and shall certify
anaesthetized at the moment of the execution. thereto in the records of the Bureau of Corrections.
As soon as facilities are provided by the Bureau of
Prisons, the method of carrying out the sentence shall be The death sentence shall be carried out not earlier
changed to gas poisoning. than one (1) year nor later than eighteen (18) months after
The death sentence shall be carried out not later the judgment has become final and executory without
than one (1) year after the judgment has become final. prejudice to the exercise by the President of his executive
clemency powers at all times."
Section 25. Article 83 of the same Code is hereby
amended to read as follows: Sec. 2. Persons already sentenced by judgment,
"Art. 83. Suspension of the execution of the death which has become final and executory, who are waiting to
sentence. - The death sentence shall not be inflicted upon undergo the death penalty by electrocution or gas poisoning
a woman while she is pregnant or within one (1) year shall be under the coverage of the provisions of this Act
after delivery, nor upon any person over seventy years of upon its effectivity. Their sentences shall be automatically
age. In this last case, the death sentence shall be modified for this purpose.
commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the
accessory penalties provided in Article 40. Sec. 3. Implementing Rules. The Secretary of
In all cases where the death sentence has become final, Justice in coordination with the Secretary of Health and the
the records of the case shall be forwarded immediately by Bureau of Corrections shall, within thirty (30) days from the
the Supreme Court to the Office of the President for effectivity of this Act, promulgate the rules to implement its
possible exercise of the pardoning power." provisions.

Section 26. < modified or repealed hereby are Sec. 4. Repealing Clause. All laws,
Act this of provisions the with inconsistent thereof parts presidential decrees and issuances, executive orders, rules
regulations and rules orders, executive issuances, decrees and regulations or parts thereof inconsistent with the
presidential laws,> provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified
accordingly.
Section 27. If, for any reason or reasons, any
part of the provision of this Act shall be held to be Sec. 5. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect
unconstitutional or invalid, other parts or provisions fifteen (15) days after its publication in the Official Gazette
or in at least two (2) national newspapers of general

97
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

circulation, whichever comes earlier. Publication shall not be his cell. Mess utensils shall be made of plastic. After each
later than ten (10) days after the approval thereof. meal, said utensils shall be collected and accounted.
SECTION 9. Visitation. A death convict shall be
Approved: March 20, 1996 allowed to be visited by his immediate family and reputable
friends at regular intervals and during designated hours
subject to security procedures.
SECTION 10. List of Visitors. A list of persons who
RULES AND REGULATIONS TO IMPLEMENT may visit a death convict shall be compiled and maintained
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8177 by the prison authorities. The list may include the members
Pursuant to Section 3 of Republic Act No. 8177 of the convict's immediate family such as his parents, step
entitled "AN ACT DESIGNATING DEATH BY LETHAL parents, foster parents, brothers and sisters, wife or
INJECTION AS THE METHOD OF CARRYING OUT husband and children. The list may, upon the request of the
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE convict, include his grandparents, aunts, uncles, in-laws and
ARTICLE 81 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE, AS cousins. Other visitors may, after investigation, be included
AMENDED BY SECTION 24 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. in the list if it will assist in raising the morale of the convict.
7659", the undersigned, in coordination with the SECTION 11. Interviews of Convicts. Television,
Secretary of Health and the Director of Corrections, radio and other interviews by media of a death convict shall
hereby issues the following Rules to govern the not be allowed.
implementation of said Act: SECTION 12. Handling of Inmate Mail. The sending
and receiving of mail by a death convict shall be controlled
SECTION 1. Objectives. These Rules to prevent illicit communication. Mail shall be censored in
seek to ensure the orderly and humane execution of the accordance with existing prison rules.
death penalty by lethal injection. SECTION 13. Outside Movement. A death convict
SECTION 2. Definition of Terms. As may be allowed to leave his place of confinement only for
used in these Rules, unless the context otherwise requires diagnosis of a life-threatening situation or treatment of a
a. "Death Convict" or "Convict" shall refer to a prisoner serious ailment, if the diagnosis cannot be done or the
whose death penalty imposed by a Regional Trial Court is treatment provided in the prison hospital.
affirmed by the Supreme Court en banc; SECTION 14. Court Appearance. A death convict
b. "Lethal Injection" refers to sodium thiopenthotal, shall not be brought outside the penal institution where he is
pancuronium bromide, potassium chloride and such other confined for appearance or attendance in any court except
lethal substances as may be specified by the Director of when the Supreme Court authorizes, upon proper
Corrections that will be administered intravenously into the application, said outside movement. A judge who requires
body of a convict until said convict is pronounced dead; the appearance or attendance of a death convict in any
c. "Bureau" refers to the Bureau of Corrections; judicial proceeding shall conduct such proceeding within the
d. "Director" refers to the Director of the Bureau of premises of the penal institution where the convict is
Corrections; confined.
e. "Secretary" refers to the Secretary of the SECTION 15. How Lethal Injection is to be
Department of Justice; Administered. The execution of the death sentence by
SECTION 3. Principles. The following lethal injection shall be done under the authority of the
principles shall be observed in the implementation of these Director who shall endeavor to mitigate the sufferings of the
Rules: convict prior to and during the execution.
a. There shall be no discrimination in the treatment of a SECTION 16. Notification and Execution of the
death convict on account of race, color, religion, language, Sentence and Assistance to the Convict. The court shall
politics, nationality, social origin, property, birth or other designate a working day for the execution of the death
status. penalty but not the hour thereof. Such designation shall only
b. In the execution of a death penalty, the death be communicated to the convict after sunrise of the day of
convict shall be spared from unnecessary anxiety or distress. the execution, and the execution shall not take place until
c. The religious beliefs of the death convict shall be after the expiration of at least eight (8) hours following the
respected. notification, but before sunset. During the interval between
SECTION 4. Prison Services. Subject to the notification and execution, the convict shall, as far as
the availability of resources, a death convict shall enjoy the possible, be furnished such assistance as he may request in
following services and privileges to encourage and enhance order to be attended in his last moments by a priest or
his self-respect and dignity: minister of the religion he professes and to consult his
a. Medical and Dental; lawyers, as well as in order to make a will and confer with
b. Religious, Guidance and Counseling; members of his family or of persons in charge of the
c. Exercise; management of his business, of the administration of his
d. Visitation; and property, or of the care of his descendants.
e. Mail. SECTION 17. Suspension of the Execution of the
SECTION 5. Confinement. Whenever Death Sentence. Execution by lethal injection shall not be
practicable, the death convict shall be confined in an inflicted upon a woman within the three years next following
individual cell in a building that is exclusively assigned for the date of the sentence or while she is pregnant, nor upon
the use of death convicts. The convict shall be provided with any person over seventy (70) years of age. In this latter
a bunk, a steel/wooden bed or mat, a pillow or blanket and case, the death sentence shall be commuted to the penalty
mosquito net. of reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties provided
in Article 40 of the Revised Penal Code.
SECTION 6. Religious Services. Subject to SECTION 18. Place of Execution. The execution by
security conditions, a death convict may be visited by the lethal injection shall take place in the prison establishment
priest or minister of his faith and given such available and space thereat as may be designated by the Director.
religious materials which he may require. Said place shall be closed to public view.
SECTION 7. Exercise. A death convict shall be SECTION 19. Execution Procedure. Details of the
allowed to enjoy regular exercise periods under the procedure prior to, during and after administering the lethal
supervision of a guard. injection shall be set forth in a manual to be prepared by the
SECTION 8. Meal Services. Meals shall, whenever Director. The manual shall contain details of, among others,
practicable, be served individually to a death convict inside the sequence of events before and after the execution;
procedures in setting up the intravenous line; the

98
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

administration of the lethal drugs; the pronouncement of interdiction during thirty years following the date
death; and the removal of the intravenous system. sentence, unless such accessory penalties have been
Said manual shall be confidential and its distribution expressly remitted in the pardon.
shall be limited to authorized prison personnel.
SECTION 20. Quantity and Safekeeping of Drugs
Purchased. The exact quantities of the drugs needed for RPC, Art. 47. In what cases the death
an execution of a death penalty shall be purchased by the penalty shall not be imposed. The death penalty
Director pursuant to existing rules and regulations not shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be
earlier than ten (10) days before the scheduled date of imposed under existing laws, except in the following
execution. The drugs shall be kept securely at the office of cases:
the superintendent of the prison where the death sentence is 1. When the guilty person be more than seventy
to be executed. All unused drugs shall be inventoried and years of age.
disposed of properly under the direct supervision of the 2. When upon appeal or revision of the case by
Director. the Supreme court, all the members thereof are not
SECTION 21. Administering Lethal Drugs. The unanimous in their voting as to the propriety of the
injection of the lethal drugs to a death convict shall be made imposition of the death penalty. For the imposition of
by a person designated by the Director.
said penalty or for the confirmation of a judgment of the
SECTION 22. Identity of Person Administering
inferior court imposing the death sentence, the Supreme
Lethal Injection. The identity of the person who is
designated to administer the lethal injection shall be kept Court shall render its decision per curiam, which shall be
secret. signed by all justices of said court, unless some member
SECTION 23. Persons Who May Witness or members thereof shall have been disqualified from
Execution. The execution of a death convict shall be taking part in the consideration of the case, in which
witnessed only by the priest or minister assisting the even the unanimous vote and signature of only the
offender and by his lawyers, and by his relatives, not remaining justices shall be required.
exceeding six, if the convict so desires, by the physician and
the necessary personnel of the penal establishment, and by Majority vote of the SC is required for the
such persons as the Director may authorize. imposition of the death penalty.
A person below eighteen (18) years of age shall
The 1987 Constitution suspended the
not be allowed to witness an execution.
imposition of the death penalty but RA 7659 restored it.
SECTION 24. Expulsion of Witness. Any
person who makes unnecessary noise or displays rude or Death penalty is not imposed in the following
improper behavior during an execution shall be expelled cases:
from the lethal injection chamber. a. When the
SECTION 25. Non-Recording of Execution. guilty person is below 18 years of age at the
The Director shall not allow the visual, sound or other time of the commission of the crime.
recording of the actual execution by media or by any private b. When the
person or group. guilty person is more than 70 years of age.
SECTION 26. Disposition of Corpse of c. When upon
Convict. Unless claimed by his family, the corpse of a appeal or automatic review of the case by the
death convict shall, upon the completion of the legal SC, the vote of 8 members is not obtained for
proceedings subsequent to the execution, be turned over to the imposition of the death penalty.
an institution of learning or scientific research first applying
for it, for the purpose of study and investigation, provided
The death penalty is not excessive, unjust or cruel
that such institution shall take charge of the decent burial of
within the meaning of that word in the Constitution.
the remains. Otherwise, the Director shall order the burial of
the body of the convict at government expense, granting Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or
permission to be present thereat to the members of the lingering death.
family of the convict and the friends of the latter. In no case RA 296 providing that eight justices must concur
shall the burial of a death convict be held with pomp. in the imposition of death penalty is retroactive.
SECTION 27. Effectivity. These Rules Review by the SC of the death sentence is
shall take effect fifteen (15) days after publication in a absolutely necessary.
newspaper of general circulation. In what crimes is death penalty imposed:
APPROVED. 1. Treason
Adopted: April 28, 1997 2. Piracy
3. Qualified Piracy
4. Qualified bribery
1987 CONSTITUTION. Section 19. 5. Parricide
1. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, 6. Murder
degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall 7. Infanticide
death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling 8. Kidnapping and serious
reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress illegal detention
hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already 9. Robbery with homicide
imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. 10. Destructive arson
2. The employment of physical, psychological, or 11. Rape with homicide
degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee 12. Plunder
or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities 13. Certain violations of the
under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. Dangerous Drugs Act
14. Carnapping
RPC, Art. 40. Death; Its accessory penalties.
The death penalty, when it is not executed by reason RPC, Art. 81. When and how the death penalty is
of commutation or pardon shall carry with it that of to be executed. The death sentence shall be
perpetual absolute disqualification and that of civil executed with reference to any other and shall consist in

99
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

putting the person under sentence to death by his relatives, not exceeding six, if he so request, by the
electrocution. The death sentence shall be executed physician and the necessary personnel of the penal
under the authority of the Director of Prisons, establishment, and by such persons as the Director of
endeavoring so far as possible to mitigate the sufferings Prisons may authorize.
of the person under sentence during electrocution as
well as during the proceedings prior to the execution. The execution shall take place in the penitentiary or
If the person under sentence so desires, he shall be Bilibid in a space closed to the public view.
anaesthetized at the moment of the electrocution.
PERSONS WHO MAY WITNESS EXECUTION:
Death sentence shall be executed with preference to a. priests assisting the offender;
any other penalty. b. offenders lawyers;
Death sentence is executed by lethal injection. c. offenders relatives, not exceeding six, if so
The death sentence shall be carried out not earlier requested;
than 1 year nor later than 18 months after the judgment d. physician, and
becomes final and executory, without prejudice to the e. necessary personnel of penal establishment
exercise by the President of his executive clemency a person below 18 years of age may not be allowed
powers. to witness an execution.

Art. 82. Notification and execution of the RPC, Art. 85. Provisions relative to the corpse of
sentence and assistance to the culprit. The court the person executed and its burial. Unless claimed
shall designate a working day for the execution but not by his family, the corpse of the culprit shall, upon the
the hour thereof; and such designation shall not be completion of the legal proceedings subsequent to the
communicated to the offender before sunrise of said execution, be turned over to the institute of learning or
day, and the execution shall not take place until after scientific research first applying for it, for the purpose of
the expiration of at least eight hours following the study and investigation, provided that such institute
notification, but before sunset. During the interval shall take charge of the decent burial of the remains.
between the notification and the execution, the culprit Otherwise, the Director of Prisons shall order the burial
shall, in so far as possible, be furnished such assistance of the body of the culprit at government expense,
as he may request in order to be attended in his last granting permission to be present thereat to the
moments by priests or ministers of the religion he members of the family of the culprit and the friends of
professes and to consult lawyers, as well as in order to the latter. In no case shall the burial of the body of a
make a will and confer with members of his family or person sentenced to death be held with pomp.
persons in charge of the management of his business, of
the administration of his property, or of the care of his The burial of the body of a person sentenced to death
descendants. should not be held with pomp.
- The purpose of the law is to prevent anyone
A convict sentenced to death may make a will. from making a hero out of a criminal.

Art. 83. Suspension of the execution of People v. Echegaray


the death sentence. The death sentence shall not 257 SCRA 561 (1996)
be inflicted upon a woman within the three years next Facts: Echegaray was sentenced to death
following the date of the sentence or while she is penalty for raping his 10-yearold daughter. On appeal,
pregnant, nor upon any person over seventy years of the accused claimed that the penalty imposed by the
age. In this last case, the death sentence shall be court is erroneous under RA 7659 because he is neither
commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the a father, stepfather nor grandfather of Rodessa although
accessory penalties provided in Article 40. he was a confirmed lover of the Rodessas mother.
Held: Where the accused is a confirmed lover
Death sentence shall be suspended when the accused of the victims mother, he falls squarely within Sec. 11
is a: of RA 7659 under the term common-law spouse of the
a. Woman, while pregnant; parent of the victim. Also, the fact that the victim
b. Woman, within one year after delivery; referred to the accused as Papa is reason enough to
c. Person over 70 years of age; conclude that the accused is either the father or
d. Convict who becomes insane after final stepfather of the victim.
sentence of death has been pronounced.
Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice
Art. 47 provides for cases in which death penalty is 301 SCRA 96 (1999)
not to be imposed. On the other hand, Art. 83 provides Facts: Upon conviction of Echegaray in People
for suspension only of the execution of death sentence. v. Echegaray, the SC temporarily restrained the
RTC can suspend execution of death sentence. execution of its own decision. The respondents claim
The records of the case shall be forwarded to the that SC has no more jurisdiction over the case because
Office of the President, when the death sentence has judgment has become final and it cannot restrain the
become final, for possible exercise of the pardoning execution of its decision.
power. Held: The rule on finality of judgment cannot
divest the SC of its jurisdiction to execute and enforce
the same judgment. Notwithstanding the order of
Art. 84. Place of execution and persons
execution and the executory nature thereof on the date
who may witness the same. The execution shall
set, the date can be postponed. The power to control the
take place in the penitentiary of Bilibid in a space closed
execution of its decision is an essential aspect of
to the public view and shall be witnessed only by the
jurisdiction supervening events may change the
priests assisting the offender and by his lawyers, and by

100
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

circumstance of the parties and compel the courts to repeals all such statutory provisions requiring the
intervene and adjust the rights of the litigants to application of the death penalty, such effect necessarily
prevent unfairness. The SC did not restrain the extends to its relevance to the graduated scale of
effectivity of the law enacted by the Congress. It merely penalties under Article 71.
restrained the execution of its judgment to give The court cannot find basis to conclude that
reasonable time to check its fairness in light of Rep. Act No. 9346 intended to retain the operative
supervening events in Congress. effects of the death penalty in the graduation of the
other penalties in our penal laws. Munoz cannot enjoin
People v. Esparas us to adopt such conclusion. Rep. Act No. 9346 is not
260 SCRA 539 (1996) swaddled in the same restraints appreciated by Muoz
Facts: Esparas was charged with violation of on Section 19(1), Article III. The very Congress
RA 6425 as amended by RA 7259 for importing into the empowered by the Constitution to reinstate the
country 20kg of shabu. As the accused remains at large imposition of the death penalty once thought it best to
up to the present time, the issue that confronts the do so, through Rep. Act No. 7650. Within the same
Court is whether or not it will proceed to automatically realm of constitutional discretion, Congress has reversed
review her death sentence. itself. It must be asserted that today, the legal status of
Held: The reimposition of the death penalty the suppression of the death penalty in the Philippines
revived the procedure by which the Supreme Court has never been more secure than at any time in our
reviews death penalty cases pursuant to the Rules of political history as a nation.
Court it remains automatic and continues to be
mandatory and does not depend on the whims of the AFFLICTIVE PENALTIES
death convict and leaves the SC without any option. Any
court decision authorizing the State to take life must be
Art. 27. Reclusion perpetua. Any person
as error-free as possible. It is not only within the power
sentenced to any of the perpetual penalties shall be
of the SC but also it is its duty to review all death
pardoned after undergoing the penalty for thirty years,
penalty cases.
unless such person by reason of his conduct or some
Sec. 8 of Rule 124 of the Rules of Court which
other serious cause shall be considered by the Chief
authorizes the dismissal of an appeal when the appellant
Executive as unworthy of pardon.
jumps bail has no application to cases where the death
Reclusion temporal. The penalty of
penalty has been imposed.
reclusion temporal shall be from twelve years and one
day to twenty years.
People v. Munoz
Prision mayor and temporary
170 SCRA 107(1989)
disqualification. The duration of the penalties of
Facts: Of the 11 persons who were charged
prision mayor and temporary disqualification shall be
with murder, only 4 were identified and convicted. They
from six years and one day to twelve years, except
were held guilty for killing 3 persons.
when the penalty of disqualification is imposed as an
Held: The advocates of the Masangkay ruling
accessory penalty, in which case its duration shall be
argue that the Constitution abolished the death penalty
that of the principal penalty.
and thereby limited the penalty for murder to the
remaining periods, to wit, the minimum and the
medium. However, a reading of the Constitution will Art. 41. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion
readily show that there is really nothing therein which temporal; Their accessory penalties. The
expressly declares the abolition of death penalty. It penalties of reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal
merely states that the death penalty shall not be shall carry with them that of civil interdiction for life or
imposed unless for compelling reasons involving heinous during the period of the sentence as the case may be,
crimes the Congress hereafter provides for it and, if and that of perpetual absolute disqualification which the
already imposed, shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the
The Constitution does not change the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been
periods of the penalty prescribed by Art. 248 of the RPC, expressly remitted in the pardon.
except only in so far as it prohibits the imposition of the
death penalty and reduces it to reclusion perpetua. The Art. 42. Prision mayor; Its accessory
range of the medium and minimum penalties remains penalties. The penalty of prision mayor, shall carry
unchanged. The problem is an event is addressed not to with it that of temporary absolute disqualification and
this Court but to the Congress. that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of
suffrage which the offender shall suffer although
Abolition of the Death Penalty pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same
shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.
Republic Act No. 9346
RECLUSION PERPETUA
People v. Bon (2006)
Held: Yet in truth, there is no material Duration: 20 years and 1 day to 40 years
difference between imposition and application, for Accessory Penalties:
both terms embody the operation in law of the death a. Civil interdiction for life or during
penalty. Since Article 71 denominates death as an the period of the sentence as the case may be.
element in the graduated scale of penalties, there is no b. Perpetual Absolute
question that the operation of Article 71 involves the Disqualification which the offender shall suffer
actual application of the death penalty as a means of even though pardoned as to the principal
determining the extent which a persons liberty is to be penalty, unless the same shall have been
deprived. Since Rep. Act No. 9346 unequivocally bars expressly remitted in the pardon.
the application of the death penalty, as well as expressly

101
CRIMINAL LAW 1
REVIEW NOTES

People v. Gatward offenses penalized by


267 SCRA 785 (1997) special laws
Facts: The accused was convicted of violating Does not carry with it Carries with it accessory
the Dangerous Drugs Act for unlawfully importing into accessory penalties penalties
the Philippines heroin. The trial court sentenced the Does not appear to have Entails imprisonment for at
accused to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for 35 any definite extent or least 30 years after which
years of reclusion perpetua there being no aggravating duration the convict becomes
or mitigating circumstance shown to have attended in eligible for pardon
the commission of the crime. although the maximum
Held: As amended by RA 7659, the penalty of period shall in no case
reclusion perpetua is now accorded a defined duration exceed 40 years
ranging from 20 years and 1 day to 40 years. The Court
held that in spite of the amendment putting the duration RECLUSION TEMPORAL
of RP, it should remain as an indivisible penalty since
there was never an intent on the part of Congress to Duration: 12 years and 1 day to 20 years
reclassify it into a divisible penalty. The maximum Accessory Penalties:
duration of reclusion perpetua is not and has never been a. Civil interdiction for life or during the period of
30 years which is merely the number of ears which the the sentence as the case may be.
convict must serve in order to be eligible for pardon or b. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification which the
for the application of the 3-fold rule. offender shall suffer even though pardoned as
to the principal penalty, unless the same shall
People v. Ramirez have been expressly remitted in the pardon.
356 SCRA 595 (2001)
Facts: Baez invited Jojo to a drinking spree in PRISION MAYOR
a nearby store. They sat side by side a bench outside
the store while exchanging pleasantries and drink. Duration: 6 years and 1 day to 12 years
Ramirez suddenly came in front of them. Ramirez Accessory Penalties:
ordered beer then he calmly approached and stabbed a. Temporary Absolute Disqualification
Jojo which caused the latters death. The trial court b. Perpetual Special Disqualification from the
sentenced appellant "to suffer imprisonment of 40 years right to suffrage which the offender shall suffer
reclusion perpetua." although pardoned as to the principal penalty
Held: The SC disagrees with the trial court in unless the same shall have been expressly
sentencing appellant "to suffer imprisonment of forty remitted in the pardon.
(40) years reclusion perpetua." There was no
just