Last Minutes Material on Criminal Law BY Judge Marlo Campanilla

UP, LAW CENTER, UST, UE, San Sebastian College, UM, CPRS, Magnificus Review, Power house

1.A recklessly drove his Toyota car hitting another Nissan car as a consequence
of which the Nissan car sustained damage, B died, and C suffered slight physical
injuries. What are the crimes committed? Following the view that culpa is just a mode
of committing a crime, the crimes committed are reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide, reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property, and reckless
imprudence resulting slight physical injuries. Since they are produced by a single
reckless act, the first two constitute a compound crime while the latter is separate for
being a light felony (People vs. Turla, G.R. No. L-26388, February 14, 1927; Gonzaga
vs. People, G.R. No. 195671, Jan. 21, 2015).Following the view that culpa is a crime,
single reckless act constitutes a single crime of reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide, damage to property and slight physical injuries (Ivler vs. Modesto-San
Pedro, G.R. No. 172716, November 17, 2010).

2. A committed illegal possession of dangerous drugs the penalty for which is

life imprisonment. Can the privilege mitigating circumstance of minority be
appreciated in his favor? Yes. Under the Dangerous Drugs Law, the provisions of RPC
shall not apply except in the case of minor offenders. Since A is a minor, life
imprisonment shall be converted into reclusion perpetua, which shall be reduced to
reclusion temporal because of the mitigating circumstance of minority (Asiatico vs.
People, G.R. No. 195005, September 12, 2011, Justice Velasco).

3. Under a single criminal impulse A, B, and C simultaneously fired their guns

at X, Y and Z killing all of them. Is the crime a compound crime? The rule that “several
acts committed under a single criminal impulse constitute a compound crime” is only
applicable if there is no conspiracy and it is impossible to determine the number of
death attributable to the accused(People vs. Lawas, L-7618-20, June 30, 1955). In this
case, there is implied conspiracy because the attacks were simultaneously made.
Since there is conspiracy where the number of death attributable to the accused need
not be determined, the single impulse rule, which is an exception rather than the
general rule, is not applicable (People vs. Elarcosa, G.R. No. 186539, June 29,
2010,Justice Velasco).

4. A appealed his conviction of frustrated homicide, a non-probationable crime.

The appellate court found that the crime is attempted homicide, which is
probationable. Can A apply for probation? Yes. Under Section 4 of PD 968 as amended
by RA No. 10707, when a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable
penalty is appealed or reviewed, and such judgment is modified through the
imposition of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall be allowed to apply for
probation based on the modified decision before such decision becomes final
(Colinares vs. People, G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011).

5. A entered a house through a window, stabbed an occupant thereof and took

the property therein. What is the crime committed? Since the elements of robbery by
using force upon thing and the elements of robbery by means of violence are present,
the crime committed is a complex one (People vs. Disney, G.R. No. L-41336, February
18, 1983; Fransdilla vs. People, GR No. 197562, April 20, 2015).

6. Mayor, treasurer and planning coordinator approved the overpayments in

favor of a private individual for the construction of public market. The public officers
caused undue injury to the government through manifest partiality and evident bad
faith in violation of Section 3 (e) of RA No. 3019. Is the private individual, who was
overpaid, also liable? Yes. Since there is conspiracy, the act of the public officers in
violating RA No. 3019 is imputable to the private individual although they are no
similarly situated in relation to the object of the crime (Santillano vs. People, G.R. Nos.
175045-46, March 03, 2010,Justice Velasco).

7. Is demand an element of estafa and malversation? No. Demand is only a

circumstantial evidence of misappropriation (Asejo vs. People, G.R. No. 157433, July
24, 2007, Justice Velasco). Thus demand is not necessary where there is direct
evidence of misappropriation (People vs. Arambulo, G.R. No. 186597, June 17, 2015;
Munib vs. People, G.R. Nos. 163957-58, April 07, 2009,Justice Velasco).
 Last Minutes Material on Criminal Law BY Judge Marlo Campanilla
UP, LAW CENTER, UST, UE, San Sebastian College, UM, CPRS, Magnificus Review, Power house

8. A, a contractor bought materials for constructing a building, which was

financed by a bank. A executed a trust agreement where he agreed to give to the bank
the proceeds of sale or return the unsold goods. A failed to pay the bank or return the
materials. Is A liable for estafa through misappropriation in relation to PD No. 115
(Trust Receipt Law). No. This is not covered by the trust receipt law since the bank is
aware that the materials will be used in constructing a building and its return is not
possible. This transaction becomes a mere loan, where the borrower is obligated to pay
the bank the amount spent for the purchase of the goods. The accused is not liable for
estafa because of the constitutional provision of non-imprisonment for nonpayment of
debts (Yang vs. People, G.R. No. 195117, August 14, 2013, Justice Velasco).

9. After the discoveryof illegal possession of lumber, A unlawfully took the truck
used to commit the crime from the authorities. What is the crime committed?A is not
liable as an accessory since he did not conceal the instrument of the crime for the
purpose of preventing the discovery thereof. Crime was already discovered when the
concealment was made. However, he is liable for obstruction of justice for concealing
the truck to impair its availability as evidence in the criminal proceeding for illegal
possession of lumber (Padiernos vs. People, G.R. No. 181111, August 17, 2015).

10. The information alleged that during a planned initiation rite, the accused
inflicted injuries upon the victim and as a consequence he died. However, the evidence
presented shows that the participation of the accused is inducing the victim to attend
the hazing. Can the accused be convicted of hazing? Yes. The "planned initiation rite"
as stated in the information included the act of inducing victim to attend it(Dungo vs.
People, supra; People vs. Bayabos, G.R. No. 171222, February 18, 2015).

11. MMDA officer is extorting money from a driver of a vehicle, who committed
trafficking violation along Edsa. The officer threatened the driver that he will
confiscate her driver’s license unless she will give him P500.00. However, MMDA
officer is not aware that his act of extorting money is being recorded by the driver. Is
the driver liable for violating the Anti-Wire Tapping Law.Yes. The recording of private
conversations without the consent of the parties contravenes the provisions of RA No.
4200. The law covers even those recorded by persons privy to the private
communications. The law is applicable even if the conversation being recorder pertains
to criminal extortion (Mamba vs. Garcia, A.M. No. MTJ-96-1110, June 25, 2001).

12. A security guard planted a bullet in the bag of an overseas worker at NAIA
and threatened to arrest him unless he produced P10,000. What are crimes
committed? The crimes committed are planting of evidence under RA No. 10591 and
attempted robbery. These crimes cannot be merged together to form a complex crime
since planting of evidence is punishable under special law.

13. Tulfo published libelous articles appearing on Remateagainst a custom

officer. The publisher and editor claimed that Tulfo was all alone in the publication
of Remate. Are the publisher and editor liable for libel. Yes. Under Article 360 of the
RPC, the publisher, and editor of newspaper, shall be responsible for the defamations
contained therein to the same extent as if he were the author thereof. The publisher
and editors cannot disclaim liability for libelous articles that appear on their paper by
simply saying they had no participation in the preparation of the same. It is not a
matter of whether or not they conspired in preparing and publishing the subject
articles, because the law simply so states that they are liable as if they were the
author (Tulfo vs. People, G.R. No. 161032, September 16, 2008, Justice Velasco).

14. X, a tabloid columnist, wrote an article describing Y, a public official, as

stupid, corrupt, and having amassed ill-gotten wealth. X relied on a source from Y's
own office who fed him the information. Did X commit libel? Yes. In the problem
given, it appears that “X” acted with actual malice when he imputed upon “Y” stupidity
and corruption. “X” made such defamatory statement was made with reckless
disregard of whether it was false or not. “X” as a columnist failed to verify the story
before publishing it pursuant to the standard stated in the case of People vs. Tulfo. “X”
 Last Minutes Material on Criminal Law BY Judge Marlo Campanilla
UP, LAW CENTER, UST, UE, San Sebastian College, UM, CPRS, Magnificus Review, Power house

is liable for libel since the article was libelous and inconsistent with good faith and
reasonable care. Hence, the answer is “A” (Tulfo vs. People, G.R. No. 161032,
September 16, 2008, Justice Velasco).

15. A by means of violence forced his wife to have sex. Is A liable for rape? Yes.
Husband can be held liable for marital rape. Article 266-A of RPC uses the term “man”
in defining rape without regard to the rapist’s legal relationship with his victim. Under
Article 266-C of RPC, in case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action. RA No. 8353 has eradicated the archaic notion that marital rape cannot exist
because a husband has absolute proprietary rights over his wife’s body and thus her
consent to every act of sexual intimacy with him is always obligatory or at least,
presumed (People vs. Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495, April 21, 2014).

16. A, a public officer failed to disclose his previous criminal conviction in PDS.
What is the crime committed? If the PDS is unsworn, the crime committed is
falsification (Sevilla vs. People, G.R. No. 194390, August 13, 2014). If the PDS is
sworn, the crime committed is perjury (People vs. Cruz, 108 Phil. 255).

17. A suddenly shot B, a biker, several times. Because of mistake of blow, a

student was also hit and suffered serious physical injuries. B died as a consequence.
A is liable for murder with the qualifying circumstance of treachery. A also liable for
serious physical injuries on the student on the basis of aberratio ictus principle.
Treachery will be appreciated even though one was killed because of aberratio ictus. But this
is not a compound crime since there is no showing that the victims were killed by single act
but several acts. When various victims expire from separate shots, such acts constitute
separate and distinct crimes (People vs. Adriano, G.R. No. 205228, July 15, 2015).

18. The video of the sexual intercourse of a lady Senator with her driver was uploaded
in the internet without her consent. Can this sex video be presented as evidence in a legislative
hearing? No. Since the publication of this video recording is a violation of the Anti-video
voyeurism law, it is not admissible in evidence.

19. A conducted a bust-bust operation. The pusher raised his hands to manifest his
intention to surrender but the police officer shot and killed him. The crime committed is
murder with the privilege mitigating circumstance of incomplete performance of duty.