Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Criminal LAW BAR Exam Questions AND Answers 1989-2016
Criminal LAW BAR Exam Questions AND Answers 1989-2016
CRIMINAL
“Consider it pure joy
when you face trials of
many kinds, because
the testing of your faith
LAW BAR
produces endurance so
that you may be lacking
in nothing.”
JAMES 1 :2-4
EXAM
QUESTIONS
AND
ANSWERS
1989-2016
This work is a compilation of the ANSWERS TO
BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS by the
UP LAW complex, UST bar exam Q and A and
compiled bar exam questions of Siliman
University College of law and not an original
creation or formulation of the authors.
0
Page
Grounds for dismissal of cases; affidavit of Due process – Proper allegation of the
desistance; effect thereof (1993) ......... 12 offense charged (1997) ........................ 21
Aberratio Ictus in rel. to ART 48, 49, 13— ART 3 Mala in se and crimes mala
Characteristics of criminal law (1988) . 16 ART 3 Proof of motive; when not required
(2006) .................................................. 23
Characteristics of Philippine criminal law
(1998) ................................................. 17 ART 3 Theories; motive; criminal intent
(2004, 1996) ........................................ 23
Generality – Diplomatic Immunity
(2016) ................................................. 17 ART 3 How are felonies committed?
(2015) .................................................. 24
Generality – Diplomatic Immunity
CRIMINAL LIABILITY .............................. 24
1
(2014) ................................................. 17
Page
ART 4 (1) Criminal liability –when Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder
incurred (1994) ................................... 24 (1998) .................................................. 33
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder Art 6: Consummated theft (1998) ........ 38
(2009) ................................................. 30 Art 6: Theft; attempted; consummated
ART 4(2)- Impossible crime of murder (2000) .................................................. 39
(2009) ................................................. 30
LIGHT FELONIES .................................... 40
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of theft (2008) Art 7 Light Felonies in relation to Art 16
........................................................... 31 (1988) .................................................. 40
Art. 4 (2) Impossible crime of murder
CONSPIRACY ........................................... 41
(2004) ................................................. 31
ART. 8-[b] Wheel vs Circle and Chain
ART.4(2)- Impossible crime of murder (2016) .................................................. 41
(2004) ................................................. 31
Art. 8: Define conspiracy (2012) .......... 41
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crimes (2000) ..... 32
Art. 8: Conspiracy as a Felony vs as a
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder
2
(1994) ................................................. 33
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Art. 8: Implied conspiracy (2003) ........ 44 ART.8-- Conspiracy – Who are liable
(1997) .................................................. 54
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1988) .................... 44
Art. 8 Conspiracy and proposal in relation Art. 11: Defense Of Honor – When Not
relation to PENALTIES (2006) ............. 50 Art. 11: Defense Of Property (2003) ..... 59
Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal (2008) 50 Art. 11: Defense of a stranger (2002) ... 60
3
Page
Art. 12: Suspended sentence under The Art. 13: Voluntary surrender; plea of
Child and Youth Welfare Code; when not guilty (1997) ........................................ 75
Art. 12: Suspended sentence under The Art. 13: Voluntary surrender (1999) ..... 76
Child and Youth Welfare Code; when not
Art. 13: Voluntary surrender (2009) ..... 76
applicable (2003) ................................. 66
Art. 13: No intention to commit so grave
Art. 12: RA 9344) – When applicable
a wrong as that committed; intoxication
(2006) ................................................. 67
(2000) .................................................. 77
4
Art. 13: No intention to commit so grave Art. 14: Band, Nocturnity, Dwelling,
a wrong as that which was committed Uninhabitted Place (1996) ................... 85
(2001) ................................................. 77 Art. 14: Evident premeditation,
Art. 13: Immediate vindication of a grave treachery, night time and unlawful entry
offense to a descendant (2002) ............ 78 (1997) .................................................. 86
Art. 13: Lack of intention to commit so Art. 14: Aggravating circumstances ..... 86
grave a wrong as that committed Four Kinds; Generic vs Qualifying
(2005) ................................................. 78 (1999) .................................................. 86
Art. 13: Mitigating and Art; 14:
Art. 14: Explosive, Treachery (2008) ... 87
aggravating circumstances (1993) ....... 79
Art. 14: Dwelling, Nighttime (2009) ..... 88
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES ............. 79
Art. 14: Qualifying circumstance in rape
Art 14: Cruelty (1988) ......................... 79
cases (2004) ........................................ 88
Art. 14 Recidivism In relation to Art. 62
Art. 14: Qualifying Aggravating
Habitual Delinquency (2012) ............... 79
circumstances (2003) .......................... 89
Art. 14: Recidivism (2014) .................. 80
Art. 14: Special aggravating circumstance
Art. 14. Recidivist (2009) .................... 80 ........................................................... 89
Art. 14. Recidivism; In relation to Art. 62 Art. 14: Use of an unlicensed firearm in
habitual delinquency (2001) ................ 82 homicide or murder (2009) .................. 90
Art. 14 Recidivism And Art. 160. Quasi- Article 14 Treachery (1993) ................. 90
recidivism (1998) ................................ 82 PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES
Art. 14. Quasi recidivism – Art 160 (1991) .............................................................. 90
........................................................... 82 ART. 17- Principals By Direct
Art. 14 Treachery (2008) ..................... 83 Participation ....................................... 90
Art. 14: Treachery; when not considered ART. 17- Principals by direct
(1992) ................................................. 83 participation and co-principal by
indispensable cooperation (2000) ........ 91
Art. 14: Evident Premeditation,
Treachery (1991) ................................. 84 ART. 17 Principal by inducement;
Accessory (1987) ................................. 91
Art. 14: Nighttime (1994) .................... 84
ART. 17 Principal by inducement;
Art. 14: Cruelty; Relationship (1994) .. 85
5
ART. 19- Accessories (1989) ................ 98 Proscription on Death Penalty ........... 106
ART. 19- Accessories (2010) .............. 100 ART. 48 in rel ART. 296 (2016).......... 108
ART. 19- Accessories (2008) .............. 100 Art. 48. Complex Crimes In relation to
Art. 294 (1) Robbery with homicide; direct
PENALTIES............................................ 101
assault with multiple attempted homicide
ART 25- PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE
......................................................... 108
IMPOSED .......................................... 101
Art 48 Complex Crimes, Art 294 Robbery,
Duration and Effect of Penalties,
Art 249 Homicide, Art 320 Arson ...... 109
Imposition (1991).............................. 101
Art. 48: Complex crime of parricide with
Duration and Effect of Penalties,
unintentional abortion ...................... 110
Imposition (1997).............................. 102
6
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Art 48: Special Complex Crime In relation Art. 48 - Complex crime of attempted
to Art. 14: Qualifying Aggravating murder with homicide ....................... 117
Circumstance .................................... 111
Art. 48 – Complex crimes - Malversation
Art. 48 Special Complex crime of Robbery through falsification .......................... 118
with Rape .......................................... 111 Art 48 Special Complex Crimes - Robbery
Art. 48 Criminal law – Complex crimes - with homicide ................................... 118
Robbery with Homicide in relation to Art.
Art. 48: Special complex crime of Robbery
297 ................................................... 112
with homicide ................................... 118
Art. 48 – Continuing crimes in relation to Art. 48: Special complex crimes- Robbery
BP 22 ................................................ 112 with homicide ................................... 119
Art 48 - Complex crime; requirement of
Art. 48 Special Complex Crime In relation
two or more grave or less grave felonies as
to Art 267 Serious illegal detention with
a result of single act ......................... 113
homicide ........................................... 119
Art 48 – Complex crimes; when Art 48Special complex crime In relation
proper ............................................... 113 to Art. 266 - B rape through sexual assault
Art 48 –Complex crimes, what with homicide ................................... 120
constitutes, penalty .......................... 114
Art 48 Special Crime In relation to Art.
Art. 48 Complex crime; Special complex 266 - B - of rape with homicide,
crime; complex crime of coup d’etat with Penalties ........................................... 120
rebellion; complex crime of coup d'etat
Art. 48 Special Complex Crime In relation
with sedition ..................................... 114
to Art 267. Kidnapping for ransom with
Art. 48 Compound and complex homicide ........................................... 121
crimes ............................................... 115 Art 48 Special Complex Crime in relation
Art 48 Complex crime of estafa thru to Art. 304 Rape with homicide ........ 122
falsification of a commercial
Penalties – Disqualified offenders for
document .......................................... 116
parole; heinous crimes ...................... 122
Art. 48 – Complex crime; Special complex ART. 48--Delito continuado and
crime; Delito continuado .................. 116 continuing offense ............................ 123
Art. 48: Special complex crime of Robbery A. The differences between pardon and
with homicide ................................... 124 amnesty: ........................................... 154
a) Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery SPECIAL LAW- Pres. Decree Nos. 704 and
(P.D. 532) (i) Definition of terms (ii) 1058 - Fishing with the use of explosives;
Punishable acts ................................. 163 punishable acts ................................. 224
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER ....... 167 Special law. RA 9160: Anti-Money
Laundering Act .................................. 225
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC
Special Law. under Republic Act (RA) No.
INTERESTCRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC
9160, as amended (Anti- Money
INTEREST ............................................. 179
Laundering Act) ................................. 225
CRIMES COMITTED BY PUBLIC
OFFICERS ............................................ 185 Special penal law - Crimes relative to
opium and other prohibited drugs - Rep.
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS ................. 194
Act No. 9165, the Comprehensive
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 ............ 227
SECURITY AND SECURITY ..................... 209
Special law – Anti-Graft and Corrupt
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY .............. 211 Practices Act (RA 3019, as amended) –
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF Special penal law - Violation of Rep. Act
PERSONS.............................................. 214 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials and
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR .................... 214
Employees) ........................................ 231
QUASI-OFFENSES ................................ 220
Criminal law – Crimes committed by
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS.......................... 221
public officers - Indirect bribery; Special
SPECIAL LAW-R.A 9262 .................... 221 penal law - Republic Act No. 3019- .... 231
SPECIAL LAW– RA 6805; Instances of public officer - Republic Act No. 3019
SPECIAL LAW– PD 704 – punishable Special penal law - Violation of Rep. Act
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE --
Human Rights Violation (2008)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
than when the crimes are committed by was filed by the offended party or the
different acts and several criminal parents in the Fiscal’s Office.
resolutions. (People v. Comadre, 431
SCRA 366, 384 [2004}. However, Art. 48 The affidavit of desistance will only
shall be applied only when it would amount to the condonation of civil
bring about the imposition of a penalty liability but not criminal liability hence
lesser than the penalties imposable for the case should still proceed.
all the component crimes if prosecuted
separately instead of being complexed. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE –
Corpus delicti, Elements (2000)
FUNDAMENTAL PRINICIPLE —
Grounds for dismissal of cases; A. Define “corpus delicti". (2%) (2000
affidavit of desistance; effect thereof Bar Question)
(1993) B. What are the elements of "corpus
delicti"? (3%)
Ariel intimidated Rachel, a mental
retardate, with a bolo into having sexual SUGGESTED ANSWER:
intercourse with him. Rachel’s mother
immediately filed a complaint, supported by A. Corpus Delicti literally means
her sworn statement, before the City “the body or substance of the crime" or
Prosecutor’s Office, After the necessary the fact that a crime has been
preliminary investigation, an information committed, but does not include the
was signed by the prosecutor but did not identity of the person who committed it.
contain the signature of Rachel nor of her (People vs. Pascual, 44 OG 2789).
mother. Citing Art. 344 of the RPC
(prosecution of the crimes of rape, etc.), B. Elements of corpus delicti:
Ariel moves for the dismissal of the case.
Resolve with reasons. The actual commission by someone of
the particular crime charged. It is a
After the prosecution had rested its case, compound fact made up of two things:
Ariel presented a sworn affidavit of a.the existence of a certain act or result
desistance executed by Rachel and her forming the basis of the criminal
mother stating that they are no longer charge; and
interested in prosecuting the case and that
they have pardoned Ariel. b.the existence of a criminal agency as
the cause of the act or result
What effect would this affidavit of
desistance have on the criminal and civil The identity of the offender is not a
aspects of the case? Explain fully. necessary element of corpus delicti
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE
The case should not be dismissed. This Corpus delicti (2001)
is allowed by law (People vs. Horde, 125
12
SCRA 11). It is enough that a complaint At a birthday party in Bogo, Cebu, A got
Page
doubt.
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Aberatio ictus, error in personae and or less grave, since they are produced
praeter intentionem are the three ways by one single act, a complex crime will
by which a person may commit a felony result.
although the wrongful act done is
different from that which he intended. In the case of error in personae, the
offender shall be guilty of the crime
In aberratio ictus, there is a mistake in actually committed by him, but the
the blow meaning to say that the penalty to be imposed shall either be the
offender intending to cause an injury to penalty for the crime actually committed
one person actually inflicts it on another or that for the crime intended to be
because of lack of precision, as far for committed. Which ever is lower, but the
example when A, intending to kill B, same will be imposed in its maximum
fires his gun at the latter but because of period.
poor aim or lack of precision, he hits C
instead, who suffers serious physical In the case praeter intentionem, the
injury. offended, will incur criminal liability for
the felony actually committed by him,
In error in personae, there is a mistake but he will be entitled to the mitigating
in the identity of the victim, as for circumstance of not having intended to
instance, when A, intending to kill B, his commit so grave a wrong as that which
enemy lay in ambush for the latter to he committed.
pass along a dark alley. Because of the
darkness, A fired his gun at a person FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE in rel. to
passing by, thinking him to be B. It ART. 48, 49-
turned out that the person shot was C, Aberratio ictus and error in personae
A's father.
Distinguish aberratio ictus from error in
In praeter intentionem, the injurious personae. (1994 Bar Question)
result is greater than that intended by
the offender, the act exceeds the intent, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
as for instance, where A, without intent
to kill, strikes B with his fist at the back Aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow
of the head, causing B to fall down with occurs when a felonious act missed the
his head hitting the asphalt pavement, person against whom it was directed
resulting in the fracture of his head that and hit instead somebody who was not
caused his death. the intended victim. Error in personae,
or mistake in identity occurs when the
The presence of these circumstances felonious act was directed at the person
will alter the criminal liability of the intended, but who turned out to be
accused. Thus: somebody else. Aberratio ictus brings
about at least two (2) felonious
In aberratio ictus, two offenses are consequence. i.e the attempted felony
actually committed by the offender, that on the intended victim who was not hit
which he intended to commit and that and the felony on the unintended victim
14
which he actually committed. But if who was hit. A complex crime of the first
Page
these two offenses are both either grave form under Art. 48, RPC generally result.
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
committed shall be imposed but in the and the victim were Indonesians is not
Page
maximum period (Art. 49. RPC). tenable. Under the generality principle,
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
penal laws shall be obligatory upon all of a kind to disturb the peace of the
who live or sojourn in the Philippine country or the good order of the
territory (Article 14 of the Civil Code). territorial sea. The vessel is still within
The foreign characteristic of an offender the territorial waters of the Philippines
and offended party does not exclude when the crime was committed since
him from operation of penal laws the killing happened a few moments
(People v. Galacgac, C.A., 54 O.G. 1027). after the vessel left the port of Manila.
Under the Revised Penal Code, except Murder committed by Ando disturbs the
as provided in treaties and laws of peace of the Philippines; hence, he
preferential application, penal laws of could be prosecuted in Manila.
the Philippines shall have force and
effect within its territory. Here, since the FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE-
killing took place within the Philippine Characteristics of criminal law (1988)
territory, our penal laws applies and
Ando may be held criminally State the characteristics of criminal law and
responsible despite his being and explain each.
Indonesian citizen.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Likewise, the contention of Ando that he
could not be prosecuted in Manila The characteristics of criminal law are
because the vessel is a Malaysian- as follows:
registered ship is without merit. Under
the English Rule, which our jurisdiction 1. GENERALITY — That the law is
recognizes and follows, crimes binding upon all persons who reside to
committed aboard a vessel within the sojourn in the Philippines, irrespective
territorial waters of a country are triable of age, sex, color, creed, or personal
in the courts of such country except cricumtances.
when crimes merely affect things within
the vessel or when they only refer to the 2. TERRITORIALITY - That the law is
internal management thereof. Here, applicable to all crimes committed with
since the crime was committed within in the limits of Philippine territory,
the Philippine waters and neither which includes its atmosphere interiors
exception applies, Ando may be waters and maritime zone (Art. 2).
prosecuted in Manila.
3. PROSPECTIVITY — that the law
ADDITIONAL ANSWER: does not have any retroactive effect,
except if it favors the offender unless he
Under Section 27 of the Convention of is a habitual delinquent (Art. 22) or the
the Law of The Sea, the criminal law otherwise provides.
jurisdiction of the coastal State should
not be exercised on board a foreign ship Article 2 if the Revised Penal Code
passing through the territorial sea to however provides for the following
arrest any person or to conduct any exception: “Treaty stipulations or by a
investigation in connection with any law of preferential application”
16
After drinking one (1) case of San Miguel in the hometown of Abe in Calamba,
beer and taking two plates of “pulutan", Laguna.
Binoy, a Filipino seaman, stabbed to death
Sio My, a Singaporean seaman, aboard A. Can Abe be prosecuted for bigamy?
M/V “Princess of the Pacific", an overseas (1994 Bar Question)
vessel which was sailing in the South China
Sea. The vessel, although Panamanian B. If not, can he be prosecuted for any
registered, is owned by Lucio Sy, a rich other crime? (1994 Bar Question)
Filipino businessman. When M /V
“Princess of the Pacific" reached a SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Philippine Port at Cebu City, the Captain of
the vessel turned over the assailant Binoy A. No, Abe may not be prosecuted
to the Philippine authorities. An Information for bigamy since the bigamous marriage
for homicide was filed against Binoy in the was contracted or solemnized in
Regional Trial Court of Cebu City. He Singapore, hence such violation is not
moved to quash the Information for lack of one of those where the Revised Penal
jurisdiction. If you were the Judge, will you Code, under Art. 2 thereof, may be
grant the motion? Why? (5%) appplied extraterritorially. The general
rule on territoriality of criminal law
SUGGESTED ANSWER: governs the situation.
Yes, the Motion to Quash the B. Yes, Abe, together with Connie,
Information should be granted. The may be prosecuted for concubinage
Philippine court has no jurisdiction over under Art. 334 of the Revised Penal
the crime committed since it was Code for having cohabited as husband
committed on the high seas or outside and wife. But concubinage being a
of Philippine territory and on board a private crime requires the sworn
vessel not registered or licensed in the complaint of Liza, the offended spouse
Philippines (US vs. Fowler, 1 PhiL 614) in accordance with Rule 110 of the
Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure.
It is the registration of the vessel in
accordance with the laws of the As lawyer of Andrew, I will file a motion
Philippines, not the citizenship of her to quash the information on the ground
owner, which makes it a Philippine ship. of prescription. The crime of false
The vessel being registered in Panama, testimony under Art. 180 has prescribed
the laws of Panama govern while it is in because Paolo, the accused in the
the high seas. principal case, was acquitted on
January 10, 1987 and therefore the
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE--Application penalty prescribed for such crime is
of Philippine Criminal law – arresto mayor under Art. 180. par. 4.
Territoriality (1994) RPC.
Thereafter, Abe and Connie returned to the 3. RPC). But the case against Andrew
Page
Philippines and lived as husband and wife was filed only on June 18. 1994,
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
whereas the principal criminal case was Distinguish between ex post facto law
decided with finality on January 10, and bill of attainder (2015)
1987 and, thence the prescriptive period
of the crime commenced to run. From SUGGESTED ANSWER:
January 10, 1987 to June 18, 1994 is
more than five (5) years. Ex post facto law is any law which
makes an innocent act a crime after the
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE-- Application act was committed. It is a Latin phrase
of Philippine criminal law – which means “from something done
Territoriality principle (2008) afterwards.” It could also be a law which
aggravates a crime, or makes it greater
The inter-island vessel M/ V Viva Lines I, than when it was committed, or which
while cruising off Batanes, was forced to changes the punishment and inflicts a
seek shelter at the harbor of Kaoshiung, greater penalty than the law governing
Taiwan because of a strong typhoon. While the crime when committed. A bill of
anchored in said harbor, Max, Baldo and attainder is a law which inflicts
Bogart arrived in a speedboat, fired a punishment on a named individual or a
bazooka at the bow of the vessel, boarded group of individuals without judicial
it and divested the passengers of their trial.
money and jewelry. A passenger of M/ V
Viva Lines I, Dodong, took advantage of Ex post facto law pertains to the act
the confusion to settle an old grudge with while a bill of attainder pertains to a
another passenger, and killed him. After named individual or to members of a
their apprehension, all four were charged group.
with qualified piracy before a Philippine
court. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE
Ex Post Facto Law (2014)
Was Dodong correctly charged before the
Philippine court for qualified piracy? Congress passed a law reviving the Anti-
Explain. (3%) Subversion Law, making it a criminal
offense again for a person to join the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Communist Party of the Philippines.
Reporma, a former high-ranking member of
No, Dodong was not correctly charged the Communist Party, was charged under
with qualified piracy because the new law for his membership in the
committing piracy was never in his mind Communist Party when he was a student in
nor did he have any involvement in the the 80’s. He now challenges the charge
piracy committed. He merely took against him. What objections may he
advantage of the situation in killing the raise?
passenger. He should be charged with
murder since there was evident SUGGESTED ANSWER:
premeditation and intent to kill.
Reporma may raise the limitations
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE— imposed by the 1987 Constitution on the
19
accused. Under the Bill of Rights of the A. The limitations upon the power of
Constitution such is classified as an ex congress to enact penal laws are as
post facto law. It should be noted that follows:
when Congress decriminalized the
crime of subversion, under R.A. 7637, it 1. Congress cannot enact an ex
obliterated the felony and its effects post facto law.
upon Reporma. Consequently charging 2. Congress cannot enact a bill of
him now under the new law for his attainder.
previous membership in the Communist 3. Congress cannot provide for a
Party would be constitutionality cruel punishment.
impermissible.
However, other limitations may be
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE – considered like:
What are the constitutional provisions a. Congress cannot enact a law
limiting the power of Congress to enact which shall punish for a condition.
penal laws? (2012 BAR) Congress shall punish an act and not
the condition or status. (Robinson vs.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: California).
b. Congress should consider Article
The constitutional provisions limiting 21 of the Revised Penal Code which
the power of Congress to enact penal provides that “penalties that may be
laws are the following: imposed. No felony shall be punishable
1. The law must not be an ex post by any penalty not prescribed by law
facto law or it should not be given a prior to its commission.”
retroactive effect.
2. The law must not be a bill of B. There are none. The rule is,
attainder, meaning it cannot provide nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege,
punishment without judicial process. there is no crim if there is no law
3. The law must not impose cruel, punishing it.
unusual or degrading punishment.
4. No person shall be held to answer FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE—
for a criminal offense without due Constitutional limitations on the power
process of law. of Congress to enact penal laws (2013)
I would advise Senator Salcedo not to Yes, the contention of A is correct. The
file the said bill. First, the bill is information failed to allege that the
unconstitutional as it violates the equal undue lnjury to B and the government
protection clause of the Constitution. It was caused by the accused's manifest
will create economic inequality in our partiality, evident bad faith, or gross
criminal justice system. Rich prisoners inexcusable negligence, which are
will enjoy better amenities and necessary elements of the offense
privileges than those who are poor. charged, i.e., violation of Section 3(e) of
Second, the bill will defeat the purpose the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
of penalties in criminal law, which is to Act. The accused is employed in the
secure justice, retribution, and Office of the District Engineer of the
reformation. DPWH, which has nothing to do with the
determination and fixing of the price of
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE – the land expropriated, and for which
Due process – Proper allegation of the expropriated land the Government is
offense charged (1997) legally obligated to pay. There is no
allegation in the Information that the
A is charged with the crime defined in land was overpriced or that the payment
Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt of the amount was disadvantageous to
Practices Act in an information that reads: the Government. It appears that the
"That from 1 to 30 January 1995, in the charge was solely based on the accused
City of Pasig and within the jurisdiction of having followed up the payment for B's
this Honorable Court, the accused, being land which the Government has already
then employed in the Office of the District appropriated, and that the accused
Engineer, Department of Public Works and eventually withheld for himself from the
Highways and in the discharge of his price of the said land, the amount of
official administrative functions, did then P4.000.00 for his services. No violation
21
and there willfully and unlawfully work for of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and
Page
Aberratio ictus means mistake of blow. Crimes mala prohibita are distinguished
Under the principle of aberration ictus, from crimes mala insets follows, to wit:
a person is criminally responsible for
committing an intentional felony In crimes mala prohibita, the acts are
although the consequent victim is not by nature wrong, evil or bad. They
different from that intended due to are punished only because there is a
mistake of blow. This principle is based law prohibiting them for public good,
on the rule in Article 4 of the Revised and thus good faith or lack of criminal
Penal Code, which provides that intent in doing the prohibited act is not
criminal liability shall be incurred by any a defense.
person committing a felony (delito)
although the wrongful act done be In crimes mala in se, the acts are by
different from that which he intended. nature wrong, evil or bad, and so
generally condemned. The moral trait of
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE in rel. to Art the offender is involved; thus, good
48, 49, 13— faith or lack of criminal intent on the part
Aberratio Ictus vs Impossible Crime of the offender is a defense, unless the
(1993) crime is the result of criminal
negligence. Correspondingly,
Explain and illustrate the following: 1) modifying circumstances are
aberratio ictus, 2) impossible crime, and 3) considered in punishing the offender.
subordination of perjury.
ART 3 Motive (1999)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
When is motive relevant to prove a case?
1. Aberratio ictus - A fired a gun at When is it not necessary to be established?
his father to kill him but hit instead a Explain. (3%)
stranger.
2. Impossible crime - Killing a dead SUGGESTED ANSWER:
person.
3. Subordination of perjury - “Motive” is the moving power which
Procuring another to swear falsely and impels a person to do an act for a
testify under circumstances rendering definite result; while “intent” is the
him guilty of perjury. purpose for using a particular means to
bring about a desired result. Motive is
22
Motive is relevant to prove a case when ART 3 Proof of motive; when not
there is doubt as to the identity of the required (2006)
offender or when the act committed
gives rise to variant crimes and there is Motive is essential in the determination of
the need to determine the proper crime the commission of a crime and the liabilities
to be imputed to the offender. of the perpetrators. What are the instances
where proof of motive is not essential or
It is not necessary to prove motive when required to justify conviction of an
the offender is positively identified or accused? Give at least 3 instances. 5%
the criminal act did not give rise to
variant crimes. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ART 3 Mala in se; mala prohibita (1997) Proof of motive is not required –
May an act be malum in se and be, at the a. Where the offender is positively
same time, malum prohibitum? identified or
b. has admitted the commission of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the crime (People v. Yurong, 133 SCRA
26 (1984] citing People v. Realon, et. al.,
Yes, an act may be malum in se and 94 SCRA 422 [1980]);
malum prohibitum at the same time. In c. Where the crime committed is a
People v. Sunico, etaL, (CA 50 OG 5880) malum prohibitum; or
it was held that the omission or failure d. Where the crime is the product of
of election inspectors and poll clerks to culpa or criminal negligence.
include a voter's name in the registry list
of voters is wrong perse because it ART 3 Theories; motive; criminal intent
disenfranchises a voter of his right to (2004, 1996)
vote. In this regard it is considered as
malum in se. Since it is punished under A. What are the different schools of
a special law (Sec. 101 and 103, Revised thought or theories in Criminal Law and
Election Code), it is considered malum describe each briefly. (1996 Bar Question)
prohibitum.
B. To what theory does our Revised
ART 3 Criminal Intent (1988) Penal Code belong? (1996 Bar Question)
A. There are two schools of thought ART 3 How are felonies committed?
in Criminal Law, and these are (a) the (2015)
classical theory, which simply means
that the basis of criminal liabilities is SUGGESTED ANSWER:
human free will, and the purpose of the
penalty is retribution which must be Felonies are committed not only by
proportional to the gravity of the means of deceit (dolo) but also by
offense; and (b) the positivist theory, means of fault (culpa). There is deceit
which considers man as a social being when the act is performed with
and his acts are attributable not just to deliberate intent; and there is fault when
his will but to other forces of society. As the wrongful act results from
such, punishment is not the solution, as imprudence, negligence, lack of
he is not entirely to be blamed; law and foresight, or lack of skill (Article 3 of
jurisprudence should not be the Revised Penal Code).
yardstick in the imposition of sanction,
instead the underlying reasons would CRIMINAL LIABILITY
be inquired into.
fall on her baby. Had it not been for said During the robbery in a dwelling house, one
act of Rustom, which is undoubtedly of the culprits happened to fire his gun
felonious (at least slight coercion) there upward in the ceiling without meaning to kill
was no cause for Olive to fall over her anyone. The owner of the house who was
baby. In short, Rustom’s felonious act is hiding thereat was hit and killed as a result.
the cause of the evil caused. Any person
performing a felonious act is criminally The defense theorized that the killing was
liable for the direct, natural and logical a mere accident and was not perpetrated in
consequence thereof although different connection with, or for purposes of, the
from what he intended (Art. 4, par. 1. robbery.
RPC: People vs. Pugay, et aL, GR No.
74324, Nov. 18, 1988). Will you sustain the defense? Why? (4%)
Art. 4 Criminal Liability – Proximate Art 4 (1) What is the criminal liability of
Cause In relation to robbery with Carlos, if any? Explain. (4%) (2008)
homicide (1999)
25
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Carlos did not incur criminal liability (C7.S. os. Valdez. 41 Phil. 1497; People
because his act of firing at the rear vs. Apra. 27 SCRA 1037.)
wheel of the car to stop the vehicle and
prevent Paolo from taking away his ART.4 Criminal liability – when incurred
(Carlos') car is neither done with dolo (1997)
nor culpa. The act does not constitute a
crime; it is a reasonable exercise of his While the crew of a steamer prepared to
right to prevent or repel an actual raise anchor at the Pasig River, A,
unlawful physical invasion or evidently impatient with the progress of
usurpation of his property pursuant to work, began to use abusive language
Art. 429 of the Civil Code. against the men. B, one of the members of
the crew, remonstrated saying that they
ART.4--Criminal liability – when could work best if they were not insulted. A
incurred (1996) took B's attitude as a display of
insubordination and, rising in a rage,
Alexander, an escaped convict, ran amuck moved towards B wielding a big knife and
on board a Superlines Bus bound for threatening to stab B. At the instant when A
Manila from Bicol and killed ten (10) was only a few feet from B, the latter,
persons. Terrified by the incident, Carol apparently believing himself to be in great
and Benjamin who are passengers of the and immediate peril, threw himself into the
bus, jumped out of the window and while water, disappeared beneath the surface,
lying unconscious after hitting the and drowned.
pavement of the road, were ran over and
crushed to death by a fast moving Desert May A be held criminally liable for the death
Fox bus tailing the Superlines Bus. of B?
and in order to escape jumps into the passengers’jumping out of the train;
water, impelled by the instinct of self- hence their deaths.
preservation, the assailant is
responsible for the homicide in case Under Article 4, Revised Penal Code,
death results by drowning. any person committing a felony shall
incur criminal liability although the
ART.4--Criminal liability; when incurred wrongful act done be different from that
(2001) which he intended.
Luis Cruz was deeply hurt when his offer of In this case, the death of the three
love was rejected by his girlfriend Marivella passengers was the direct, natural and
one afternoon when he visited her. When logical consequence of Luis felonious
he left her house, he walked as if he was act which created an immediate sense
sleepwalking so much so that a teenage of danger in the minds of said
snatcher was able to grab his cellphone passengers who tried to avoid or
and flee without being chased by Luis. At escape from it by jumping out of the
the next LRT station, he boarded one of the train. (People vs. Arpa, 27 SCRA 1037;
coaches bound for Baclaran. While seated, U.S. vs. Valdez, 41 Phil. 497)
he happened to read a newspaper left on
the seat and noticed that the headlines ART.4--Criminal liability; when incurred
were about the sinking of the Super Ferry (2004)
while on its way to Cebu. He went over the
list of missing passengers who were On his way home from office, ZZ rode in a
presumed dead and came across the name jeepney. Subsequently, XX boarded the
of his grandfather who had raised him from same jeepney. Upon reaching a secluded
childhood after he was orphaned. He was spot in QC, XX pulled out a grenade from
shocked and his mind went blank for a few his bag and announced a hold-up. He told
minutes, after which he ran amuck and, ZZ to surrender his watch, wallet and
using his balisong, started stabbing at the cellphone. Fearing for his life, ZZ jumped
passengers who then scampered away, out of the vehicle. But as he fell, his head
with three of them jumping out of the train hit the pavement, causing his instant death.
and landing on the road below. All the three
passengers died later of their injuries at the Is XX liable for ZZs death? Explain briefly.
hospital. (5%)
passengers and such wrongful act was resulting in the latter's death. Stated
Page
direct, natural and logical consequence was arrested. The prosecutor considered
of XX’s felonious act which created an that the ransom note was never received
immediate sense of danger in the mind by Carla’s parents and filed a case of
of ZZ who tried to avoid such danger by “Impossible crime to commit kidnapping”
jumping out of the jeepney (.People v. against Enrique.
Arpat 27 SCRA 1037 [1969]). Is the prosecutor correct? If he is not
correct, can he instead file a case of grave
ART.4--Criminal liability; when incurred coercion?
(2008)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Francis and Joan were sweethearts, but
their parents had objected to their The Prosecutor is not correct. There is
relationship because they were first no “Impossible crime to commit
cousins. They forged a pact in writing to kidnapping”. First, an impossible crime
commit suicide. The agreement was to applies only to Crimes against Persons
shoot each other in the head which they and Crimes against Property under
did. Joan died. Due to medical assistance, Titles 8 and 10 of the RPC, respectively.
Francis survived. Is Francis criminally liable Kidnapping is a Crime against Personal
for the death of Joan? Explain. (5%) Liberty and Security under Title 9, RPC.
Second, even if the ransom note was not
SUGGESTED ANSWER: received by Carla’s parents, the crime of
kidnapping and serious illegal detention
Yes, Francis is criminally liable for for ransom is already consummated.
Joan's death. His act of shooting her, Under Article 267, RPC, Kidnapping for
although done pursuant to a solemn Ransom is committed “when the
pact, is nevertheless felonious and is kidnapping or detention is for the
the proximate cause of Joan's death purpose of extorting ransom from the
(Art. 4, par. 1, RPC). Moreover, the mere victim or any other person.” To
act of giving assistance to a suicide is a consummate the crime, it suffices that
crime (Art. 253, RPC) the purpose is to extort ransom; it is not
necessary that the ransom note be
received or that ransom be paid.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES
No, the Prosecutor cannot file a case of
Art 4 (2): Impossible crimes (2014) grave coercion because the crime
committed, as explained above, is
Carla, four (4) years old, was kidnapped by kidnapping for ransom.
Enrique, the tricycle driver engaged by her
parents to drive her to and from school ART 4(2) Impossible Crime (2014)
every day. Enrique wrote a ransom note
demanding that Carla’s parents pay him Puti detested Pula, his roommate, because
P500,000.00 ransom in exchange for her Pula was courting Ganda, whom Puti
liberty. However, before the ransom note fancied. One day, Puti decided to teach
could be received by Carla’s parents, Pula a lesson and went to a veterinarian
28
Enrique’s hideout was discovered by the (Vet) to ask for poison on the pretext that
Page
police. Carla was rescued while Enrique he was going to kill a sick pet, when
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
actually Puti was intending to poison Pula. where he can get poison, he approached
The Vet instantly gave Puti a non-toxic another classmate. Jerry to whom he
solution which, when mixed with Pula’s disclosed his evil plan. Because he himself
food, did not kill Pula. harbored resentment towards Jun, Jerry
gave Buddy a poison, which Buddy placed
(A) What crime, if any, did Puti commit? on Jun's food. However, Jun did not die
(B) Would your answer be the same if, because, unknown to both Buddy and
as a result of the mixture, Pula got an upset Jerry, the poison was actually powdered
stomach and had to be hospitalized for 10 milk.
days?
(A) What crime or crimes, if any, did
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Jerry and Buddy commit? [3%J (1998 Bar
Question)
(A) Puti committed the impossible (B) Suppose that, because of his severe
crime of murder. All the elements of an allergy to powdered milk, Jun had to be
impossible crime are present. Puti’s act hospitalized for 10 days for ingesting it.
of mixing a solution with Pula’s food Would your answer to the first question be
would have been murder, a crime the same? [2%] (1998 Bar Question)
against persons. The act was done evil
intent which is to kill Pula. However, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
crime was not accomplished because of
the employment of ineffectual means, (A) Jerry and Buddy are liable for the so-
i.e., the solution turned out to be non- called “impossible crime” because, with
toxic which would not kill Pula. And said intent to kill, they tried to poison Jun
act would not fall under any other and thus perpetrate murder, a crime
provision of the RPC. against persons. Jun was not poisoned
(B) No, my answer would not be the only because the would-be killers were
same. If as a result of the mixture, Pula unaware that what they mixed with the
got an upset stomach and had to be food of Jun was powdered milk, not
hospitalized for 10 days, the crime poison. In short, the act done with
committed by Puti is Less Serious criminal intent by Jerry and Buddy,
Physical Injuries. It is not an impossible would have constituted a crime against
crime because the last element of an persons were it not for the inherent
impossible requires that the act inefficacy of the means employed.
performed should not constitute a
violation of another provision of the Criminal liability is incurred by them
RPC. although no crime resulted, because
their act of trying to poison Jun is
criminal,
Art. 4 (2) Impossible Crime In relation to
Art. 265: Less serious physical injuries (B) No, the answer would not be the
(1998) same. Charlie would be, criminally liable
for less serious physical injuries
Buddy always resented his classmate, Jun. because his act of mixing the powder
29
One day. Buddy planned to kill Jun by with Brad's food was done with
Page
mixing poison in his lunch. Not knowing felonious intent and was the proximate
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
cause of Brad's illness for 10 days. It Charlie hated his classmate, Brad,
cannot constitute attempted murder, because the latter was assiduously
although done with intent to kill, courting Lily, Charlie's girlfriend. Charlie
because the means employed is went to a veterinarian and asked for some
inherently ineffectual to cause death poison on the pretext that it would be used
and the crime committed must be to kill a very sick, old dog. Actually, Charlie
directly linked to the means employed, intended to use the poison on Brad.
not to the intent. Liability for an
impossible crime can only arise from a The veterinarian mistakenly gave Charlie a
consummated act. non-toxic powder which, when mixed with
Brad's food, did not kill Brad.
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder
(2009) [a] Did Charlie commit any crime? If so;
what and why? If not, why not? (3%)
Charlie hated his classmate, Brad, [b] Would your answer be the same if
because the latter was assiduously Brad proved to be allergic to the powder,
courting Lily, Charlie's girlfriend. Charlie and after ingesting it with his food, fell ill
went to a veterinarian and asked for some and was hospitalized for ten (10) days?
poison on the pretext that it would be used Explain. (3%)
to kill a very sick, old dog. Actually, Charlie
intended to use the poison on Brad. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Lucas had been the stay-in houseboy of What criminal liability did OZ incur, If any?
spouses Nestor and Julia for five years. Explain briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar
One night, while Nestor and Julia were out Question)
having dinner, Lucas and his friend Pedro
gained entry into the masters' bedroom SUGGESTED ANSWER:
with the use of a false key.
OZ incurred criminal liability for an
They found Julia's jewelry box in one of the impossible crime of murder. Criminal
cabinets, which was unlocked. Lucas liability shall be incurred by any person
believed that Julia's jewelry was inside the performing an act which would be an
box. Unknown to Lucas and Pedro, the box offense against persons or property,
was empty. Pedro took the box and left the were it not for the inherent impossibility
bedroom with Lucas. They were shocked of its accomplishment or on account of
when they saw Nestor in the house pointing the employment of inadequate or
a gun at them. Nestor ordered them to stop ineffectual means (Art. 4, par. 2, RPC).
hand over the box. Pedro complied. It
turned out that Nestor had just arrived in In the problem given, the impossibility
time to see Lucas and Pedro leaving of accomplishing the crime of murder, a
masters' bedroom with the box. crime against persons, was due to the
employment of ineffectual means which
State with reasons, the crime or crimes, if OZ thought was poison. The law
any, Lucas and Pedro committed. (7%) imputes criminal liability to the offender
although no crime resulted, only to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: suppress his criminal propensity.
Lucas and Pedro may be held liable only ART.4(2)- Impossible crime of murder
for impossible crime of theft because (2004)
what they had in in in taking the jewelry
box was to take Julia's jewelry. OZ and YO were both courting their co-
However, it turned out to be empty. The employee, SUE. Because of their bitter
impossibility of committing the crime of rivalry, OZ decided to get rid of YO by
theft is factual or physical since there is poisoning him. OZ poured a substance into
no jewelry to steal inside the box. YO’s coffee thinking it was arsenic. It
turned out that the substance was white
Art. 4 (2) Impossible crime of murder sugar substitute known as Equal. Nothing
(2004) happened to YO after he drank the coffee.
31
OZ and YO were both courting their co- What criminal liability did OZ incur, If any?
Page
D liable for any crime? Explain. (3 would not constitute any other crime
Page
Although the facts involved are parallel On appeal to the Court of Appeals, all the
to the case of Intod vs. Court of Appeals accused ascribed to the trial court the sole
(215 SCRA 52). where it was ruled that error of finding them guilty of attempted
the liability of the offender was for an murder.
impossible crime, no hand grenade was
used in said case, which constitutes a If you were the ponente, how will you
more serious crime though different decide the appeal?
from what was intended.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. No, the prosecutor is not correct
in filing a case for “impossible crime to If I were the ponente, I will set aside the
commit kidnapping" against Enrique. judgment convicting the accused of
Impossible crimes are limited only to attempted murder and instead find them
acts which when performed would be a guilty of impossible crime under Art. 4,
crime against persons or property. par. 2, RPC, in relation to Art. 59, RPC.
Liability for impossible crime arises not
As kidnapping is a crime against only when the impossibility is legal, but
personal security and not against likewise when it is factual or physical
persons or property, Enrique could not impossibility, as in the case at bar.
have incurred an “impossible crime" to Elsa’s absence from the house is a
commit kidnapping. There is thus no physical impossibility which renders
impossible crime of kidnapping the crime intended inherently incapable
of accomplishment. To convict the
Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder accused of attempted murder would
(1994) make Art. 4, par. 2 practically useless as
all circumstances which prevented the
JP, Aries and Randal planned to kill Elsa, a consummation of the offense will be
resident of Barangay Pula, Laurel, treated as an incident independent of
Batangas. They asked the assistance of the actor’s will which is an element of
Ella, who is familiar with the place. attempted or frustrated felony (Intod vs.
CA, 215 SCRA 52).
On April 3, 1992, at about 10:00 in the
evening, JP, Aries and Randal, all armed Art. 4 (2): Impossible crime of murder
with automatic weapons, went to Barangay (1998)
Pula. Ella, being the guide, directed her
companions to the room in the house of Buddy always resented his classmate, Jun.
Elsa. Whereupon, JP, Aries and Randal One day. Buddy planned to kill Jun by
fired their guns at her room. Fortunately, mixing poison in his lunch. Not knowing
Elsa was not around as she attended a where he can get poison, he approached
prayer meeting that evening in another another classmate. Jerry to whom he
barangay in Laurel. disclosed his evil plan. Because he himself
harbored resentment towards Jun, Jerry
JP, et aL, were charged and convicted of gave Buddy a poison, which Buddy placed
attempted murder by the Regional Trial on Jun's food. However, Jun did not die
33
Jerry, the poison was actually powdered Is the prosecutor correct? If he is not
milk correct, can he instead file a case of grave
coercion?
What crime or crimes, if any, did Jerry and
Buddy commit? [3%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
peppered the room with bullets. C. Yes, A, B, C and D are liable for
Unsatisfied, A even threw a hand grenade destructive arson because of the
that totally destroyed X's room. However, destruction of the room of X with the use
unknown to the four culprits, X was not of an explosive, the hand grenade.
inside the room and nobody was hit or Liability for an impossible crime is to be
injured during the incident. Are A, B, C and imposed only if the act committed
D liable for any crime? Explain. (3%) (2000 would not constitute any other crime
Bar Question) under the Revised Penal Code.
Although the facts involved are parallel
D. Carla, 4 years old, was kidnapped to the case of Intod vs. Court of Appeals
by Enrique, the tricycle driver paid by her (215 SCRA 52). where it was ruled that
parents to bring and fetch her to and from the liability of the offender was for an
school. Enrique wrote a ransom note impossible crime, no hand grenade was
demanding * P500.000.00 from Carla's used in said case, which constitutes a
parents in exchange for Carla's freedom. more serious crime though different
Enrique sent the ransom note by mail. from what was intended.
However, before the ransom note was
received by Carla's parents, Enrique's D. No, the prosecutor is not correct
hideout was discovered by the police. Carla in filing a case for “impossible crime to
was rescued while Enrique was arrested commit kidnapping" against Enrique.
and incarcerated. Considering that the Impossible crimes are limited only to
ransom note was not received by Carla’s acts which when performed would be a
parents, the investigating prosecutor crime against persons or property.
merely filed a case of ’‘Impossible Crime to
Commit Kidnapping" against Enrique. Is As kidnapping is a crime against
the prosecutor correct? Why? (3%) personal security and not against
persons or property, Enrique could not
SUGGESTED ANSWER: have incurred an “impossible crime" to
commit kidnapping. There is thus no
A. An impossible crime is an act impossible crime of kidnapping
which would be an offense against
person or property, were if not for the ART.4-Impossible crime of theft (2008)
inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or on account of the Lucas had been the stay-in houseboy of
employment of inadequate or spouses Nestor and Julia for five years.
ineffectual means (Art. 4, par. 2, RPC). One night, while Nestor and Julia were out
having dinner, Lucas and his friend Pedro
B. No. An impossible crime is not gained entry into the masters' bedroom
really a crime. It is only so-called with the use of a false key.
because the act gives rise to criminal
liability. But actually, no felony is They found Julia's jewelry box in one of the
committed. The accused is to be cabinets, which was unlocked. Lucas
punished for his criminal tendency or believed that Julia's jewelry was inside the
propensity although no crime was box. Unknown to Lucas and Pedro, the box
35
committed. was empty. Pedro took the box and left the
Page
when they saw Nestor in the house pointing error of finding them guilty of attempted
a gun at them. Nestor ordered them to stop murder.
hand over the box. Pedro complied. It
turned out that Nestor had just arrived in If you were the ponente, how will you
time to see Lucas and Pedro leaving decide the appeal?
masters' bedroom with the box.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
State with reasons, the crime or crimes, if
any, Lucas and Pedro committed. (7%) If I were the ponente, I will set aside the
judgment convicting the accused of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: attempted murder and instead find them
guilty of impossible crime under Art. 4,
Lucas and Pedro may be held liable only par. 2, RPC, in relation to Art. 59, RPC.
for impossible crime of theft because Liability for impossible crime arises not
what they had in in in taking the jewelry only when the impossibility is legal, but
box was to take Julia's jewelry. likewise when it is factual or physical
However, it turned out to be empty. The impossibility, as in the case at bar.
impossibility of committing the crime of Elsa’s absence from the house is a
theft is factual or physical since there is physical impossibility which renders
no jewelry to steal inside the box. the crime intended inherently incapable
of accomplishment. To convict the
ART .4(2)- Impossible crime of murder accused of attempted murder would
(1994) make Art. 4, par. 2 practically useless as
all circumstances which prevented the
JP, Aries and Randal planned to kill Elsa, a consummation of the offense will be
resident of Barangay Pula, Laurel, treated as an incident independent of
Batangas. They asked the assistance of the actor’s will which is an element of
Ella, who is familiar with the place. attempted or frustrated felony (Intod vs.
CA, 215 SCRA 52).
On April 3, 1992, at about 10:00 in the
evening, JP, Aries and Randal, all armed ART.4(2) Impossible crime of murder;
with automatic weapons, went to Barangay less serious physical injuries (1998)
Pula. Ella, being the guide, directed her
companions to the room in the house of Buddy always resented his classmate, Jun.
Elsa. Whereupon, JP, Aries and Randal One day. Buddy planned to kill Jun by
fired their guns at her room. Fortunately, mixing poison in his lunch. Not knowing
Elsa was not around as she attended a where he can get poison, he approached
prayer meeting that evening in another another classmate. Jerry to whom he
barangay in Laurel. disclosed his evil plan. Because he himself
harbored resentment towards Jun, Jerry
JP, et aL, were charged and convicted of gave Buddy a poison, which Buddy placed
attempted murder by the Regional Trial on Jun's food. However, Jun did not die
Court at Tanauan, Batangas. because, unknown to both Buddy and
Jerry, the poison was actually powdered
36
Suppose that, because of his severe In the jewelry section of a big department
allergy to powdered milk, Jun had to be store, Julia snatched a couple of bracelets
hospitalized for 10 days for ingesting it. and put these in her purse. At the store's
Would your answer to the first question be exit, however, she was arrested by the
the same? [2%] guard after being radioed by the store
personnel who caught the act in the store's
SUGGESTED ANSWER: moving camera. Is the crime
consummated, frustrated, or attempted?
1. Jerry and Buddy are liable for the (5%)
so-called “impossible crime” because,
with intent to kill, they tried to poison SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Jun and thus perpetrate murder, a crime
against persons. Jun was not poisoned The crime is consummated theft
only because the would-be killers were because the taking of the bracelets was
unaware that what they mixed with the complete after Julia succeeded in
food of Jun was powdered milk, not putting them in her purse. Julia
poison. In short, the act done with acquired complete control of the
criminal intent by Jerry and Buddy, bracelets after putting them in her
would have constituted a crime against purse; hence, the taking with intent to
persons were it not for the inherent gain is complete and thus the crime is
inefficacy of the means employed. consummated.
CONSPIRACY
ART. 8-[b] Wheel vs Circle and Chain Art. 8: Conspiracy as a Felony vs as a
(2016) Manner (2012)
fatal wounds resulting in the death of the the victim and hence, liable collectively.
victim. The act of one is the act of all.
Rafael is not liable for slight physical Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit robbery
injuries as conspiracy was not present, (1996)
and there was no apparent intent to kill
when he inflicted the slight physical Jose, Domingo. Manolo, and Fernando,
injuries on the aim of the victim. armed with bolos, at about one o'clock in
the morning, robbed a house at a desolate
place where Danilo, his wife, and three
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1993) daughters were living. While the four were
in the process of ransacking Danilo’s
As a result of a misunderstanding during a house, Fernando, noticing that one of
meeting, Joe was mauled by Nestor, Jolan, Danilo’s daughters was trying to get away,
Reden and Arthur. He ran towards his ran after her and finally caught up with her
house but the four chased and caught him. in a thicket somewhat distant from the
Thereafter, they tied Joe’s hands at his house. Fernando, before bringing back the
back and attacked him. Nestor used a daughter to the house, raped her first.
knife; Jolan, a shovel; Arthur, his fists; and Thereafter, the four carted away the
Reden, a piece of wood. After killing Joe, belongings of Danilo and his family.
Reden ordered the digging of a grave to
bury Joe’s lifeless body. Thereafter, the What crime did Jose, Domingo. Manolo
four (4) left together. Convicted for the and Fernando commit? Explain.
killing of Joe,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Arthur now claims that his conviction is
erroneous as it was not he who inflicted the Jose, Domingo, and Manolo committed
fatal blow. Robbery, while Fernando committed
complex crime of Robbery with Rape.
Would you sustain his claim? Why? Conspiracy can be inferred from the
manner the offenders committed the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: robbery but the rape was committed by
Fernando at a place “distant from the
No. Arthur’s claim is without merit. The house” where the robbery was
42
alone should answer for the rape, foot to the house of F. B positioned himself
rendering him liable for the special at a distance as the group's lookout. C and
complex crime. [People vs. Cardurta et D stood guard outside the house. Before A
at, G.R. 108490. 22 June 1995) could enter the house, D left the scene
without the knowledge of the others. A
Art. 8: Conspiracy (1994) stealthily entered the house and stabbed F.
F ran to the street but was blocked by C,
At about 9:30 in the evening, while Dino forcing him to flee towards another
and Raffy were walking along Padre Faura direction. Immediately after A had stabbed
Street, Manila. Johnny hit them with a rock F. A also stabbed G who was visiting F.
injuring Dino at the back. Raffy approached Thereafter, A exited from the house and,
Dino but suddenly, Bobby, Steve, Danny together with B and C, returned to the
and Nonoy surrounded the duo. Then waiting taxicab and motored away.
Bobby stabbed Dino. Steve, Danny. Nonoy
and Johnny kept on hitting Dino and Raffy G died, F survived.
with rocks. As a result, Dino died.
Who are liable for the death of G and the
Bobby, Steve, Danny, Nonoy and Johnny physical injuries of F?
were charged with homicide.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Is there conspiracy in this case?
A alone should be held liable for the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: death of G. The object of the conspiracy
of A
Yes, there is conspiracy among the B, C, and D was to kill F only.
offenders, as manifested by their
concerted actions against the victims, Since B, C, and D did not know of the
demonstrating a common felonious stabbing of G by A, they cannot be held
purpose of assaulting the victims. The criminally therefor E. the driver, cannot
existence of the conspiracy can be be also held liable for the death of G
inferred or deduced from the manner since the former was completely
the offenders acted in commonly unaware of said killing.
attacking Dino and Raffy with rocks,
thereby demonstrating a unity of For the physical injuries of A, B and C,
criminal design to inflict harm on their should be held liable therefore. Even if it
victims. was only A who actually stabbed and
caused physical injuries to G, B and C
Art. 8: Criminal law – Conspiracy (1997) are nonetheless liable for conspiring
with A and for contributing positive acts
A had a grudge against F. Deciding to kill which led to the realization of a common
F, A and his friends, B, C, and D, armed criminal intent. B positioned himself as
themselves with knives and proceeded to a lookout, while C blocked F's escape.
the house of F, taking a taxicab for the D, however, although part of the
purpose. About 20 meters from their conspiracy, cannot be held liable
43
destination, the group alighted and after because he left the scene before A could
Page
instructing B, the driver, to wait, traveled on enter the house where the stabbing
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
occurred. Although he was earlier part concert in the commission of the crime,
of the conspiracy, he did not personally meaning that their acts are coordinated
participate in the execution of the crime or synchronized in a way indicative that
by acts which directly tended toward the they are pursuing a common criminal
same end (People vs. Tamaro. et al, 44 objective, they shall be deemed to be
Phil. 38). acting in conspiracy and their criminal
liability shall be collective, not
In the same breath, E, the driver, cannot individual.
be also held liable for the infliction of
physical injuries upon F because there The legal effects of an “implied
is no showing that he had knowledge of conspiracy” are:
the plan to kill F.
1. Not all those who are present at
Art. 8: Implied conspiracy (1998) the scene of the crime will be
considered conspirators;
What is the doctrine of implied conspiracy? 2. Only those who participated by
[3%] criminal acts in the commission of the
crime will be considered as
SUGGESTED ANSWER: coconspirators; and
3. Mere acquiescence to or approval
The doctrine of conspiracy holds two or of the commission of the crime, without
more persons participating in the any act of criminal participation, shall
commission of a crime collectively not render one criminally liable as
responsible and liable as co- coconspirator.
conspirators although absent any
agreement to that effect, when they act Art. 8: Conspiracy (1988)
in concert, demonstrating unity of
criminal intent and a common purpose In the course of funeral procession, a
or objective. The existence of a young mourner who was marching in front
conspiracy shall be inferred or deduced of the funeral hearse, momentarily stooped
from their criminal participation in down to tie her shoelaces which had
pursuing the crime and thus the act of become untied. The driver of the hearse,
one shall be deemed the act of all. who was driving at 5 miles an hour, was
then looking at the stores by the roadside
Art. 8: Implied conspiracy (2003) and did not see her. He continued to drive
on and ran over the girl. When the people
State the concept of “implied conspiracy” around shouted and gestured, he backed
and give its legal effects. up and ran over the girl a second time,
killing her.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If you were the-parent of the girl-victim,
(a) An “implied conspiracy” is one what crime would you charge, if you think a
which is only inferred or deduced from crime had been committed, and against
the manner the participants in the whom? Explain your answer briefly.
44
B. Jose and Pedro will also be liable What AA did was to stop a lawful
for conspiracy to commit sedition since defense, not greater evil, to allow BB
they are members of the conspiracy and CC achieve their criminal objective
where the act of one is the act of all. If of stabbing FT.
the soldiers did not agree to their
proposal, they would not incur any Art. 8: Conspiracy to commit robbery
criminal liability because there is no (2005)
pro-posal to commit sedition.
Jose employed Mario as gardener and
Art. 8: Act of one is the act of all (2004) Henry as cook. They learned that Jose won
P5, 000,000.00 in the-lotto, and decided to
A. BB and CC, both armed with knives, rob him. Mario positioned himself about 30
attacked FT. The victim’s son, ST, upon meters away from Jose's house and acted
seeing the attack, drew his gun but was as lookout. For his part. Henry
prevented from shooting the attackers by surreptitiously gained entry into the house
AA, who grappled with him for possession and killed Jose who was then having his
of the gun. FT died from knife wounds. AA, dinner. Henry found the P5,000,000.00 and
BB and CC were charged with murder. took it. Henry then took a can of gasoline
from the garage and burned the house to
In his defense, AA invoked the justifying conceal the acts.
circumstance of avoidance of greater evil Mario and Henry fled, but were arrested
or injury, contending that by preventing ST around 200 meters away from the house by
from shooting BB and CC, he merely alert barangay tanods. The tanods
avoided a greater evil. recovered the P500,000.00.
Will AA’s defense prosper? Reason briefly. Mario and Henry were charged with and
(5%) convicted of robbery with homicide, with
the aggravating circumstances of arson,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: dwelling, and nighttime.
A. No, AA’s defense will not prosper Mario moved to reconsider the decision
because obviously there was a maintaining that he was not at the scene of
conspiracy among BB, CC and AA, such the crime and was not aware that Henry
that the principle that when there is a killed the victim; hence, he was guilty only
conspiracy, the act of one is the act of of robber, as an accomplice. Mario also
all, shall govern. claimed that he conspired with Hemy to
commit robbery but not to kill Jose. Henry,
The act of ST, the victim’s son, appears likewise, moved to reconsider the decision,
to be a legitimate defense of relatives; asserting that he is liable only for attempted
hence, justified as a defense of his robbery with homicide with no aggravating
father against the unlawful aggression circumstance; dwelling is not aggravating
by BB and CC. ST’s act to defend his in attempted robbery with homicide; and
father’s life, cannot be regarded as an nighttime is not aggravating because the
evil inasmuch as it is, in the eyes of the house of Jose was lighted at the time he
46
Resolve with reasons the respective giving rise to the special complex crime
motions of Mario and Henry. (7%) of robbery with homicide. Since Henry
alone committed the killing of Jose a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: fact unknown to Mario, Henry alone
should be convicted for said crime.
The motion of Mario contending that he Dwelling, although not aggravating in
should be liable only as an accomplice robbery with force upon things where
is without merit. There was conspiracy the circumstance is inherent, is
to commit the robbery between him and aggravating in robbery with violence
Henry. Thus, the act of one is the act of against or with intimidation of persons.
all. Since the conspiracy was only to
commit robbery, Mario should be liable The burning of the house or arson
only for robbery as a co-principal, not accompanying the robbery is only a
for the composite crime of robbery with component of the robbery under Article
homicide. 294 (1), Revised Penal Code. Such
burning does not constitute a separate
Mario, being 30 meters away from the crime from robbery with homicide.
victim's house, could not have known
what Henry was doing inside the Nighttime is aggravating, applying the
victim’s (Jose's) house, so much so that subjective test, unless the house of
he was not in a position to stop the Jose was indeed well-lighted during the
same. Mario, therefore, cannot properly commission of the crime.
be made answerable for what Henry did
inside Jose's house which was not Art. 8: Conspiracy; Special complex
agreed upon. Applying the subjective crime of robbery with serious physical
test to his participation as a co- injuries (1992)
conspirator to the robbery, Mario’s
criminal liability should be aggravated Efren, Greggy and Hilario, wearing fatigues
by nighttime but not by dwelling or and carrying unlicensed firearms, barged
arson. into the residence of Amulfo Dilat at Scout
Lazcano St. (Before making their entrance,
Henry's motion to reconsider the they gave instructions to their companion
decision is, likewise, without merit and Sakay to stand watch outside). Once
should be denied. He is criminally liable inside, they announced that they were
for robbery with homicide. His members of the Philippine National Police
contention that he is only liable for (PNP) on an official mission. Inside the
attempted robbery with homicide is not master bedroom, they demanded from
correct because the unlawful taking of Luningning, the wife of Amulfo, cash and
the P500,000.00 is deemed complete jewelries. After receiving the jewelries but
from the moment he gained control of before the money could be handed to them,
the money even if he had no opportunity they heard their companion Sakay
to dispose of the same. shouting: “Pulis! Pulis!" Panic-stricken,
Efren shot Amulfo who was seriously
The killing of Jose, having been injured. Greggy and Hilarto picked up the
47
committed on the occasion of a robbery, jewelry box whose contents spilled all over
Page
becomes a component of the robbery, the floor as they rushed out. Before they
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
could make good their escape, however, What crime or crimes did XA, YB and ZC
the police blocked their way, one of them commit, and what is the criminal liability of
clutching Sakay by the collar. They were each? Explain briefly. (5%)
forthwith brought to the Police
Headquarters nearby. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Discuss the individual and collective B. The crime committed by XA, YB and
criminal liabilities of Efren, Greggy, ZC is the composite crime of Robbery
Hilario and Sakay. with Rape, a single, indivisible offense
under Art. 294(1) of the Revised Penal
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Code.
put the money in the bag, and ran outside Jervis and Marlon asked their friend,
to look for B. The latter was nowhere in Jonathan, to help them rob a bank. Jervis
sight. Unknown to him, B had already left and Marlon went inside the bank, but were
the place. What was the participation and unable to get any money from the vault
corresponding criminal liability of each, if because the same was protected by a
any? Reasons. time-delay mechanism. They contented
themselves with the customers' cellphones
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and a total of P5,000 in cash. After they
dashed out of the bank and rushed into the
There was an expressed conspiracy car, Jonathan pulled the car out of the curb,
between A and B to kill C and take the hitting a pedestrian which resulted in the
latter’s money. The planned killing and latter's death.
taking of the money appears to be
intimately related as component crimes,
hence a special complex crime of What crime or crimes did Jervis, Marlon
robbery with homicide. The conspiracy and Jonathan commit? Explain your
being expressed, not just implied, A and answer.
B are bound as co-conspirators after
they have planned and agreed on the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sequence of their attack even before
they committed the crime. Therefore, Jervis and Marlon committed the crime
the principle in law that when there is a of robbery, while Jonathan committed
conspiracy, the act of one is the act of the special complex crime of robbery
all, already governs them, in fact, A and with homicide.
B were already in the store to carry out
their criminal plan. Jervis and Marlon are criminally liable
for the robbery only, because that was
That B ran out of the store and fled upon the crime conspired upon and actually
hearing the sirens of the police car, is committed by them, assuming that the
not spontaneous desistance but flight taking of the cellphones and the cash
to evade apprehension. It would be from the bank's customers was effected
different if B then tried to stop A from with intimidation. They will not incur
continuing with the commission of the liability for the death of the pedestrian
crime; he did not. So the act of A in because they have nothing to do with it.
pursuing the commission of the crime Only Jonathan will incur liability for the
which both he and B designed, planned, death of the pedestrian, aside from the
and commenced to commit, would also robbery, because he alone brought
be the act of B because of their about such death. Although the death
expressed conspiracy. Both are liable caused was not intentional but
for the composite crime of robbery with accidental, it shall be a component of
homicide. the special complex crime of robbery
with homicide because it was
committed in the course of the
Art. 8 Conspiracy and proposal in commission of the robbery.
relation to Special complex crime of
49
Eman, a vagrant, found a bag containing the happening from a window and did
identification cards and a diamond ring nothing to stop the rape.
along Roxas Blvd.
Is B as criminally liable as A for robbery
Knowing that it was not his, he went to the with rape? Explain. (4%) (1999 Bar
nearest police station to seek help in Question)
finding the owner of the bag. At the precinct
P01 Melvin attended to him. In the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
investigation Eman proposed to P01
Melvin, "in case you don't find the owner Yes, B is as criminally liable as A for the
let's just pawn the ring and split the composite crime of robbery with rape
proceeds fifty-fifty (50/50)." P01 Melvin under Art. 294 (1). Although the
then went straight to the pawnshop and conspiracy of A and B was only to rob,
pawned the ring for P50,000. Eman never B was present when the rape was being
saw P01 Melvin again. committed which gave rise to a
composite crime, a single indivisible
a) What is the criminal liability of Eman, if offense of robbery with rape. B would
any? Explain. (3%) not have been liable had he endeavored
to prevent the commission of the rape.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: But since he did not when he could have
done so, he in effect acquiesced with
a) Eman has no criminal liability, the rape as a component of the robbery
unless he received part of the proceeds and so he is also liable for robbery with
of the pawned ring. The facts do not rape.
state that Eman received any part of the
P50,000.00 proceeds of the ring ART.8-Define conspiracy. (2012)
pledged. The facts state that after
turning over the bag to P01 Melvin, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Eman never saw P01 Melvin again. The
proposal Eman made to P01 Melvin is Conspiracy exists when two or more
not a crime as to bring about criminal persons come to an agreement
liability. concerning the commission of a felony
and decide to commit it.
Art. 8 Conspiracy In relation to Art. 294
robbery with rape (1999) ART.8--Distinguish by way of illustration
conspiracy as a felony from conspiracy as
Two young men, A and B, conspired to rob a manner of incurring liability in relation to
a residential house of things of value. They the crimes of rebellion and murder.
succeeded in the commission of their
original plan to simply rob. A, however, was Conspiracy to commit rebellion – if “A”
sexually aroused when he saw the lady and “B” conspired to overthrow the
owner of the house and so, raped her. government, conspiracy is punishable.
Conspiracy to commit rebellion is a
The lady victim testified that B did not in any felony. Rebellion – if they committed
51
way participate in the rape but B watched rebellion, they are equally liable for the
Page
At about 9:30 in the evening, while Dino forcing him to flee towards another
and Raffy were walking along Padre Faura direction. Immediately after A had stabbed
Street, Manila. Johnny hit them with a rock F. A also stabbed G who was visiting F.
injuring Dino at the back. Raffy approached Thereafter, A exited from the house and,
Dino but suddenly, Bobby, Steve, Danny together with B and C, returned to the
and Nonoy surrounded the duo. Then waiting taxicab and motored away.
Bobby stabbed Dino. Steve, Danny. Nonoy
and Johnny kept on hitting Dino and Raffy G died, F survived.
with rocks. As a result, Dino died.
Who are liable for the death of G and the
Bobby, Steve, Danny, Nonoy and Johnny physical injuries of F?
were charged with homicide.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Is there conspiracy in this case?
A alone should be held liable for the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: death of G. The object of the conspiracy
of A B, C, and D was to kill F only
Yes, there is conspiracy among the
offenders, as manifested by their Since B, C, and D did not know of the
concerted actions against the victims, stabbing of G by A, they cannot be held
demonstrating a common felonious criminally therefor E. the driver, cannot
purpose of assaulting the victims. The be also held liable for the death of G
existence of the conspiracy can be since the former was completely
inferred or deduced from themannerthe unaware of said killing.
offenders acted in commonly attacking
Dino and Raffy with rocks, thereby For the physical injuries of A, B and C,
demonstrating a unity of criminal should be held liable therefore. Even if it
design to inflict harm on their victims. was only A who actually stabbed and
caused physical injuries to G, B and C
ART.8-- Conspiracy – Who are liable are nonetheless liable for conspiring
(1997) with A and for contributing positive acts
which led to the realization of a common
A had a grudge against F. Deciding to kill criminal intent. B positioned himself as
F, A and his friends, B, C, and D, armed a lookout, while C blocked F's escape.
themselves with knives and proceeded to D, however, although part of the
the house of F, taking a taxicab for the conspiracy, cannot be held liable
purpose. About 20 meters from their because he left the scene before A could
destination, the group alighted and after enter the house where the stabbing
instructing B, the driver, to wait, traveled on occurred. Although he was earlier part
foot to the house of F. B positioned himself of the conspiracy, he did not personally
at a distance as the group's lookout. C and participate in the execution of the crime
D stood guard outside the house. Before A by acts which directly tended toward the
could enter the house, D left the scene same end (People vs. Tamaro. et al, 44
without the knowledge of the others. A Phil. 38).
54
In the same breath, E, the driver, cannot acting in conspiracy and their criminal
be also held liable for the infliction of liability shall be collective, not
physical injuries upon F because there individual.
is no showing that he had knowledge of
the plan to kill F. The legal effects of an “implied
conspiracy” are:
ART.8- Conspiracy - Implied conspiracy Not all those who are present at the
(1998) scene of the crime will be considered
conspirators;
What is the doctrine of implied conspiracy? 1. Only those who participated by
[3%] (Distinguish between recidivism and criminal acts in the commission of the
quasi-recidivism. (2%) crime will be considered as
coconspirators; and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 2. Mere acquiescence to or approval
of the commission of the crime, without
The doctrine of conspiracy holds two or any act of criminal participation, shall
more persons participating in the not render one criminally liable as
commission of a crime collectively coconspirator.
responsible and liable as co-
conspirators although absent any Art. 8: Proposal (1996)
agreement to that effect, when they act
in concert, demonstrating unity of Edgardo induced his friend Vicente, in
criminal intent and a common purpose consideration of money, to kidnap a girl he
or objective. The existence of a is courting so that he may succeed in
conspiracy shall be inferred or deduced raping her and eventually making her
from their criminal participation in accede to marry him. Vicente asked for
pursuing the crime and thus the act of more money which Edgardo failed to put
one shall be deemed the act of all. up. Angered because Edgardo did not put
up the money he required, he reported.
ART.8- “Implied conspiracy” (2003) Edgardo to the police.
State the concept of “implied conspiracy” May Edgardo be charged with attempted
and give its legal effects. kidnapping? Explain.
(a) An “implied conspiracy” is one No, Edgardo may not be charged with
which is only inferred or deduced from attempted kidnapping inasmuch as no
the manner the participants in the overt act to kidnap or restrain the liberty
commission of crime carried out its of the girl had been commenced. At
execution. Where the offenders acted in most, what Edgardo has done in the
concert in the commission of the crime, premises was a proposal to Vicente to
meaning that their acts are coordinated kidnap the girl, which is only a
or synchronized in a way indicative that preparatory act and not an overt act. The
55
objective, they shall be deemed to be with the commission of overt act, not
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
escaping from jail and ordered the latter to Explain your answer.
Page
nor culpa. The act does not constitute a as he turned to leave. Only then did Osang
realize that the man was not her husband.
Page
the wall and stabbed Julio to death. When did." Not recognizing the voice, it dawned
tried for homicide, Osang claimed defense upon Lina that the man was not Tito, her
of honor. Should the claim be sustained? husband. Furious. Una took out Tito's gun
Why? (5%) and shot the man. Charged with homicide
Una denies culpability on the ground of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: defense of honor. Is her claim tenable?
15%.
No, Osang's claim of defense of honor
should not be sustained because the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
aggression on her honor had ceased
when she stabbed the aggressor. In No, Lina's claim that she acted in
defense of rights under paragraph 1, defense of honor, is not tenable
Art. 11 of the RPC, it is required inter alia because the unlawful aggression on her
that there be (1) unlawful aggression, honor had already ceased. Defense of
and (2) reasonable necessity of the honor as included in self-defense, must
means employed to prevent or repel it. have been done to prevent or repel an
The unlawful aggression must be unlawful aggression. There is no
continuing when the aggressor was defense to speak of where the unlawful
injured or disabled by the person aggression no longer exists.
making a defense.
Art. 11: Defense Of Property (2003)
But if the aggression that was begun by
the injured or disabled party already The accused lived with his family in a
ceased to exist when the accused neighborhood that often was the scene of
attacked him, as in the case at bar, the frequent robberies. At one time, past
attack made is a retaliation, and not a midnight, the accused went downstairs with
defense. Paragraph 1, Article 11 of the a loaded gun to investigate he thought
Code does not govern. were footsteps of an uninvited guest. After
seeing what appeared to him an armed
Hence, Osang's act of stabbing Julio to stranger looking around and out to rob the
death after the sexual intercourse was house, he fired his gun seriously injuring
finished, is not defense of honor but an the man. When the lights were turned on,
immediate vindication of a grave the unfortunate victim turned out to be a
offense committed against her, which is brotherin-law on his way to the kitchen to
only mitigating. get some light snacks. The accused was
indicted for serious physical injuries.
Art. 11: Defense Of Honor; When Should the accused, given the
Untenable (1998) circumstances, be convicted or acquitted?
Why?
One night, Lina, a young married woman,
was sound asleep in her bedroom when SUGGESTED ANSWER:
she felt a man on top of her. Thinking it was
her husband Tito, who came home a day The accused should be convicted because,
early from his business trip, Una let him even assuming the facts to be true in his
59
have sex with her. After the act, the man belief, his act of shooting a burglar when
Page
person is not justified. Defense of property incidents, Ms. A suffered a deep stab
or property right does not justify the act of wound on her tummy that required a
firing a gun at a burglar unless the life and prolonged stay in the hospital. Due to the
limb of the accused is already in imminent beatings and verbal abuses committed
and immediate danger. Although the against her, she consulted a psychologist
accused acted out of a misapprehension of several times, as she was slowly beginning
the facts, he is not absolved from criminal to lose her mind. One night, when Mr. B
liability. arrived dead drunk, he suddenly stabbed
Ms. A several times while shouting
Art. 11: Defense of a stranger (2002) invectives against her. Defending herself
from the attack, Ms. A grappled for the
A chanced upon three men who were possession of a knife and she succeeded.
attacking B with fist blows. C, one of the She then stabbed Mr. B several times
men, was about to stab B with a knife. Not which caused his instantaneous death.
knowing that B was actually the aggressor Medico-Legal Report showed that the
because he had earlier challenged the husband suffered three (3) stab wounds.
three men to a fight, A shot C as the latter Can Ms. A validly put up a defense?
was about to stab B. May A invoke the Explain.
defense of a stranger as a justifying
circumstance in his favor? Why? (2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Ms. A had been married to Mr. B for 10 Art. 11: Battered Woman Syndrome
years. Since their marriage, Mr. B had been (2015)
jobless and a drunkard, preferring to stay
with his "barkadas" until the wee hours of Dion and Talia were spouses. Dion always
the morning. Ms. A was the breadwinner came home drunk since he lost his job a
and attended to the needs of their three (3) couple of months ago. Talia had gotten
growing children. Many times, when Mr. B used to the verbal abuse from Dion. One
was drunk, he would beat Ms. A and their night, in addition to the usual verbal abuse,
60
three (3) children, and shout invectives Dion beat up Talia. The next morning, Dion
Page
against them. In fact, in one of the beating saw the injury that he had inflicted upon
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
assuming that Talia killed Dion after being "Battered Woman Syndrome"? (3%)
Page
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Art. 12: Insanity (1991)
63
A raped X. In the process, X resisted and crime committed and the acts done by the
slapped A Angered. A grabbed a stone and accused in the commission of the crime
hit X. She was dying when A consummated hardly reconciles with insanity of the
the sexual attack. A psychiatrist from the offender, as rape presupposes evident
National Center for Mental Health testified premeditation.
that he conducted physical, mental and
psychological examinations on A and found The sentence of “life imprisonment" is not a
him to be suffering from a mental disorder correct imposition of penalty for the rape: it
classified under organic mental disorder should be reclusion perpetua, the technical
with psychosis. A's father testified that A designation of the penalty for the crime
was playful but cruel to his brothers and under the Revised Penal Code. It is not
sisters, stole his mother’s jewelry which he correct to use the term “life imprisonment”
sold for low sums, wandered naked because the accessory penalties to
sometimes, and oftentimes did not come reclusion perpetua does not follow the
home for extended periods of time. The penalty of “life imprisonment".
prosecution on the other hand, presented Furthermore, in reclusion perpetua the
an array of witnesses to prove A that was duration is stated to be for 30 years.
lucid before and after the crime was
committed and that he acted with Art. 12: Insanity (2010)
discernment. After trial, the court convicted
the accused and sentenced him to “life While he was on a 2-year scholarship
imprisonment" considering that under the abroad, Romeo was having an affair with
Constitution death penalty could no longer his maid Dulcinea. Realizing that the affair
be imposed. was going nowhere, Dulcinea told Romeo
that she was going back to the province to
Given the conflicting testimonies as to marry her childhood sweetheart. Clouded
sanity of the accused, was the trial court by anger and jealousy, Romeo strangled
correct in ruling out insanity as an Dulcinea to death while she was sleeping
exempting circumstances in this case? Is in the maid’s quarters.
the sentence of “life imprisonment” a
correct imposition of penalty? The following day, Romeo was found
catatonic inside the maid’s quarters. He
SUGGESTED ANSWER: was brought to the National Center for
Mental health (NCMH) where he was
Yes, the court is correct in ruling out diagnosed to be mentally unstable.
insanity as an exempting circumstance.
While there was testimony that A was Charged with murder, Romeo pleaded
suffering from a mental disorder, the insanity as a defense.
testimony of A’s father disclosed that A had
lucid intervals. Because what is presumed Will Romeo’s defense prosper? Explain.
is sanity, not insanity, it is to be presumed (2%)
that A was sane when he committed the
crime. Consequently, evidence being SUGGESTED ANSWER:
wanting that A is completely deprived of
64
reason at the moment of committing the No, Romeo’s defense of insanity will not
Page
crime, he should be liable. Besides, the prosper because, even assuming that
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Romeo was “insane” when diagnosed after from criminal liability under Art. 12, par. 7,
he committed the crime, insanity as a as his failure to report can be considered
defense to the commission of a crime must as due to “insuperable cause", as this
have existed and proven to be existing at involves the sanctity and inviolability of a
the precise moment when the crime was confession.
being committed. The facts of the case
indicate that Romeo committed the crime Conspiracy to commit rebellion results in
with discernment. criminal liability to the co-conspirators, but
not to a person who learned of such and did
What is the effect of the diagnosis of the not report to the proper authorities (US vs.
NCMH on the case (2%) Vergara, 3 Phil. 432; People vs. Atienza, 56
Phil. 353).
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Art. 12: Exempting Circumstance-
The effect of the diagnosis made by NCMH Suspended sentence under The Child
is possibly a suspension of the proceedings and Youth Welfare Code; when not
against Romeo and his commitment to applicable (2013)
appropriate institution for treatment until he
could already understand the proceedings. Michael was 17 years old when he was
charged for violation of Sec. 5 of R.A. 9165
Art.12:Insuperable cause (1994) (illegal sale of prohibited drug). By the time
he was convicted and sentenced, he was
VC, JG, GG and JG conspired to overthrow already 21 years old. The court sentenced
the Philippine Government. VG was him to suffer an indeterminate penalty of
recognized as the titular head of the imprisonment of six (6) years and one (1)
conspiracy. Several meetings were held day of prision mayor, as minimum, to
and the plan was finalized. JJ, bothered by seventeen (17) years and four (4) months
his conscience, confessed to Father of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and a
Abraham that he, VG, JG and GG have fine of P500,000. Michael applied for
conspired to overthrow the government. probation but his application was denied
Father Abraham did not report this because the probation law does not apply
information to the proper authorities. to drug offenders under R.A. 9165. Michael
then sought the suspension of his sentence
Did Father Abraham commit a crime? If so, under R.A. 9344 or the Juvenile Justice
what crime was committed? and Youth Welfare Code. Can Michael
What is his criminal liability? avail of the suspension of his sentence
provided under this law?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Father Abraham did not commit a
crime because the conspiracy involved is The benefits of a suspended sentence can
one to commit rebellion, not a conspiracy to no longer apply to Michael. The suspension
commit treason which makes a person of sentence lasts only until the law reaches
criminally liable under Art. 116, RPC. And the maximum age and thus, could no
65
even assuming that it will fall as misprision longer be considered a child for purposes
Page
Rod was 14 and Ronnie was 17. The (a) Can juvenile offenders, who are
money and other articles looted from the recidivists, validly ask for suspension of
store of Mang Pandoy were later found in sentence? Explain.
the houses of Victor and Ricky.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Are the minors Rod and Ronnie entitled to
suspended sentence under The Child and a. No, A is not entitled to a suspension
66
sentence. For purposes of suspension of satisfying their lust, Job ordered Nonoy to
sentence, the offender’s age at the time of push Dang down a ravine, resulting in her
promulgation of the sentence is the one death. Lyn ran away but Job and Nonoy
considered, not his age when he committed chased her and pushed her inside the van.
the crime. So although A was below 18 Then the duo drove away. Lyn was never
years old when he committed the crime, but seen again.
he was already 23 years old when
sentenced, he is no longer eligible for Will Nonoy’s minority exculpate him? 2.5%
suspension of the sentence.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b. Yes, so long as the offender is still a
minor at the time of the promulgation of the Nonoy’s minority will exculpate him under
sentence. The law establishing Family Rep. Act 9344, referred to as the “Juvenile
Courts, Rep. Act 8369, provides to this Justice and Welfare Act of 2006”, if he was
effect: that if the minor is found guilty, the 15 years old or less: otherwise he will be
court should promulgate the sentence and criminally and civilly liable considering that
ascertain any civil liability which the he acted with discernment when he also
accused may have incurred. However, the raped the victims. At most, his minority will
sentence shall be suspended without the be appreciated as privileged mitigating
need of application pursuant to PD 603, circumstance.
otherwise known as the “Child and Youth
Welfare Code” (RA 8369, Sec. 5a). It is Art 12: Persons exempt from criminal
under PD 603 that an application for liability In relation to Art 332 (2008)
suspension of the sentence is required and
thereunder it is one of the conditions for Dennis leased his apartment to Myla for
suspension of sentence that the offender P10,000 a month. Myla failed to pay the
be a first time convict: rent for 3 months. Gabriel, the son of
this has been displaced by RA 8369. Dennis, prepared a demand letter falsely
alleging that his father had authorized him
Art. 12: RA 9344) – When applicable to collect the unpaid rentals. Myla paid the
(2006) unpaid rentals to Gabriel who kept the
payment.
Dang was a beauty queen in a university.
Job, a rich classmate, was so enamored Can Gabriel invoke his relationship with
with her that he persistently wooed and Dennis to avoid criminal liability? Explain.
pursued her. Dang, being in love with (3%)
another man, rejected him. This angered
Job. Sometime in September 2003, while SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Dang and her sister Lyn were on their way
home, Job and his minor friend Nonoy If Gabriel would be made criminally liable
grabbed them and pushed them inside a for falsification of a private document, he
white van. They brought them in an cannot invoke his relationship with Dennis,
abandoned warehouse where they forced his father, to avoid criminal liability because
them to dance naked. Thereafter, they Art. 332 of the Revised Penal Code
67
brought them to a hill in a nearby barangay provides exemption from criminal liability in
Page
where they took turns raping them. After crimes against property only for theft,
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
swindling or malicious mischief but not for upon the prosecution to prove that the
falsification of documents. accused acted with discernment.
If he would be made criminally liable for The presumption is that such minor acted
swindling, he can invoke his relationship without discernment and this is
with Dennis because this crime cannot be strengthened by the fact that Katreena only
complexed with falsification of a private reacted with a ballpen which she must be
document. The charge could, therefore, using in class at the time, and only to stop
stand alone. The exemption in Art. 332 will Pomping’s vexatious act of repeatedly
obtain. pulling her ponytail. In other words, the
injury was accidental.
Art 12: Minority;
In relation to Art 13: Mitigating The attendant circumstances which may be
circumstances (2000) considered are:
While they were standing in line awaiting 1. Minority of the accused as an exempting
their vaccination at the school clinic, circumstance under Article 12, paragraph
Pomping repeatedly pulled the ponytail of 3, Rev. Penal Code, where she shall be
Katreena, his 11 years, 2 months and 13 exempt from criminal liability, unless it was
days old classmate in Grade 5 at the proved that she acted with discernment
Sampaloc Elementary School. Irritated, She is however civilly liable;
Katreena turned around and swung at
Pomping with a ballpen. The top of the If found criminally liable, the minority of the
ballpen hit the right eye of Pomping which accused as a privileged mitigating
bled profusely. Realizing what she had circumstance. A discretionary penalty
caused, Katreena immediately helped lower by at least two (2) degrees than that
Pomping. When investigated, she freely prescribed for the crime committed shall be
admitted to the school principal that she imposed in accordance with Article 68,
was responsible for the injury to Pomping's paragraph 1, Rev. Penal Code. The
eye. After the incident, she executed a sentence, however, should automatically
statement admitting her culpability. Due to be suspended in accordance with Section
the injury, Pomping lost his right eye. 5(a) of Rep. Act No. 8369otherwise known
as the “Family Courts Act of 1997";
Discuss the attendant circumstances and
effects thereof. (2%) Also if found criminally liable, the ordinary
mitigating circumstance of not intending to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commit so grave a wrong as that
committed, under Article 13, paragraph 3,
Katreena is not criminally liable although Rev. Penal Code; and
she is civilly liable. Being a minor less than
fifteen (15) years old although over nine (9) The ordinary mitigating circumstance of
years of age, she is generally exempt from sufficient provocation on the part of the
criminal liability. The exception is where the offended party immediately preceded the
prosecution proved that the act was act.
68
(i) Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of Discuss fully the criminal liability of Victor,
2006 (R.A. No. 9344); also refer to Ricky, Rod and Ronnie.
Child and Youth Welfare Code (P.D. 603,
as amended) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Definition of child in conflict with the
law All are liable for the special complex crime
(b) Minimum age of criminal of robbery with homicide. The acts of Ricky
responsibility in stabbing Mang Pandoy to death, of Rod
(c) Determination of age in boxing the salesgirl to prevent her from
(d) Exemption from criminal liability helping Mang Pandoy, of Ronnie in chasing
(e) Treatment of child below age of the salesgirl to prevent her in seeking help,
responsibility of Victor in scooping up money from the
(f) Status offenses under Sec. 57 of cash box, and of Ricky and Victor in
R.A. No. 9344 dashing to the street and announcing the
Offenses not applicable to children under escape, are all indicative of conspiracy.
Sec. 58 of R.A. No. 9344
The rule is settled that when homicide
Art. 12 Minority In relation to robbery takes place as a consequence or on the
with homicide (1995) occasion of a robbery, all those who took
part in the robbery are guilty as principals
Victor, Ricky, Rod and Ronnie went to the of the crime of robbery with homicide,
store of Mang Pandoy. Victor and Ricky unless the accused tried to prevent the
entered the store while Rod and Ronnie killing {People vs. BaeUo, 224 SCRA 218).
posted themselves at the door. After
ordering beer Ricky complained that he Although Rod is only 14 years old, his act
was shortchanged although Mang Pandoy of boxing Lucy to prevent her from helping
vehemently denied it. Mang Pandoy is a clear sign of
discernment, thus he cannot invoke
Suddenly Ricky whipped out a knife as he exemption from criminal liability.
announced “Hold-up ito!" and stabbed
Mang Pandoy to death. Rod boxed the
store’s salesgirl Lucy to prevent her from ART. 12 Warrantless arrest;
helping Mang Pandoy. When Lucy ran out entrapment; in relation to prohibited
of the store to seek help from people next drugs (1992)
door she was chased by Ronnie. As soon
as Ricky had stabbed Mang Pandoy, Victor Members of the Narcotics Command, upon
scooped up the money from the cash box. learning from an informer that Tee Moy,
Then Victor and Ricky dashed to the street notorious drug lord was plying his trade and
and shouted, “Tumakbo na kayo!” selling methamphetamine hydrocholide
(popularly known as shabu) in a motel at
Rod was 14 and Ronnie was 17. The Bambang St, planned a buy-bust operation
money and other articles looted from the to capture him. Camotes was to enter the
store of Mang Pandoy were later found in lobby of the motel where Tee Mqy hangs
the houses of Victor and Ricky. around and pose as buyer. The moment
69
to his companions deployed near the motel If you were the prosecutor, how would you
entrance. traverse the above arguments of counsel
for the accused? Take up each number
So Camotes, upon espying Tee Moy near separately.
the registration desk, approached the
latter. When asked if he would like a SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“score”, he answered in the affirmative. He
was then handed a matchbox with the a. There is no need for a warrant of
assurance that it contained the drug, for arrest, as this falls under the instances of
which he gave a P100.00 marked bill. Upon warrantless airest sanctioned by law,
giving the pre-arranged signal, the where a public officer or private individual
NARCOM agents rushed inside and may arrest a person if, in his personal
arrested Tee Moy. presence, the person arrested is actually
committing, is about to commit, or has just
In the course of time, Tee Moy was committed a crime.
prosecuted for the crimes of possession
and sale of prohibited drugs under the b. This is a pure case of entrapment as
Dangerous Drugs Act. During the trial, his Tee Moy has already decided to commit a
counsel interposed the following defenses: crime and the agents of persons in
authority merely devised ways and means
a) The arrest, having been effected to entrap him. There was no inducement of
without a warrant of arrest, was violative of Tee Moy as the latter precisely decided to
Tee Moy’s constitutional rights. make a “score” or sale. No pressure or
b) Accused was the victim of a frame- investigation was applied on him.
up instigated by the law enforcement c. Failure to present the informer is not
officers, such that he was practically forced fatal to the cause of the prosecution as the
to sell his goods to a total stranger which testimony of the latter will be merely
was abnormal and unrealistic for one in the corroborative to the testimony of the other
kind of business he is in. witnesses who were eye-witnesses to the
c) The prosecution deliberately failed commission of the crime. There are
to present the informer as a witness so that sufficient evidence to convict the accused
he could have been subjected to cross- beyond reasonable doubt.
examination by the counsel for the d. While as a general rule the offense
accused. of possession is integrated in selling
d) Tee Moy cannot be prosecuted for prohibited drugs, in this case, I will argue
the separate offenses of possession and that, the quantity of the drugs confiscated
sale of prohibited drugs but of only one from Tee Moy was so large that it cannot
criminal offense. be deemed absorbed in the crime of
e) Tee Moy was made to sign a “pushing”. Besides, I will contend that the
Confiscation Receipt at NARCOM matchbox with shabu inside, was not the
headquarters which has been admitted as only evidence taken from the accused.
evidence against him, thus violating his
constitutional right against self- The Confiscation Receipt signed by Tee
incrimination. Moy was merely presented as part of the
70
conviction of the accused. Again, the mall. After fifteen minutes, Juan
overwhelming evidence are presented that returned with ten sticks of marijuana
inevitably supports conviction cigarettes which he gave to SP02 Mercado
who thereupon placed Juan under arrest
ART. 12--Entrapment and instigation and charged him with violation of The
(1990) Dangerous Drugs Law by selling marijuana
cigarettes.
Rodolfo is an informer who told the police
authorities that Aldo is a drug pusher. Is Juan guilty of any ofense punishable
Policeman Taba then posed as a buyer and under The Dangerous Drugs Act?
persuaded Aldo to sell marijuana worth Discuss fully.
P10.00 to the former. Aldo agreed. He
delivered the goods and so was SUGGESTED ANSWER:
apprehended with the marked money. He
is now prosecuted for violation of the A. In instigation, the instigator
Dangerous Drugs Act. practically induces the prospective
accused into commission of the offense
Aldo’s defense is that he1 was the victim of and himself becomes co-principal. In
an instigation of the police who persuaded entrapment, ways and means are resorted
him to sell the goods to him. Decide the to for the purpose of trapping and capturing
case with reasons. the lawbreaker while executing his criminal
plan,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. Juan cannot be charged of any
Aldo’s defense in untenable as what offense punishable under The Dangerous
happened here was entrapment. With or Drugs Act Although Juan is a suspected
without the act of Policemen Taba, Aldo drug pusher, he cannot be charged on the
would have went on selling the marijuana basis of a mere suspicion. By providing the
to another buyer. The finding, it must be money with which to buy marijuana
noted, was that Aldo was continously cigarettes, SP02 Mercado practically
engaged in the act of pushing drugs. induced and prodded Juan to commit the
(People v. Tia, 51 O.G. 1863). offense of illegal possession of marijuana.
Set against the facts instigation is a valid
ART.12 Entrapment and instigation; defense available to Juan.
illustration of instigation (1995)
ART.12 Entrapment and instigation
A. Distinguished entrapment from
instigation. Discuss fully. Distinguish fully between entrapment and
instigation in Criminal Law. Exemplify each.
B. Suspecting that Juan was a drug
pusher, SP02 Mercado, leader of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Narcom team, gave Juan a P 100-bill and
asked him to buy some marijuana In entrapment -
cigarettes. Desirous of pleasing SP02 a. the criminal design originates from
71
Mercado, Juan went inside the shopping and is already in the mind of the lawbreaker
Page
mall while the officer waited at the comer of even before entrapment;
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
they should be proved beyond reasonable Privileged mitigating circumstances are not
doubt subject to the offset rule.
accompanied by several policemen, went visit the police station to make inquiries. On
to Hilario’s house. his way, he met a policeman who
immediately served upon him the warrant
Hilario, upon seeing the approaching for his arrest. During the trial, in the course
policemen, came down from his house to of the presentation of the prosecution’s
meet them and voluntarily went with them evidence. Jeprox withdrew his plea of not
to the Police Station to be investigated in guilty and entered a plea of guilty.
connection with the killing. When Can he invoke the mitigating
eventually charged with and convicted of circumstances of voluntary surrender and
homicide, Hilario, on appeal, faulted the plea of guilty? Explain.
trial court for not appreciating in his favor
the mitigating circumstance of voluntary SUGGESTED ANSWER:
surrender. Is he entitled to such a
mitigating circumstance? Explain. Jeprox is not entitled to the mitigating
circumstance of voluntary surrender as his
SUGGESTED ANSWER: going to the police station was only for the
purpose of verification of the news that he
Yes, Hilario is entitled to the mitigating is wanted by the authorities. In order to be
circumstance of voluntary surrender. The mitigating, surrender must be spontaneous
crux of the issue is whether the fact that and that he acknowledges his guilt.
Hilario went home after the incident, but
came down and met the police officers and Neither is plea of guilty a mitigating
went with them is considered “voluntary circumstances because it was qualified
surrender." plea; besides. Art. 13, par. 7 provides that
confession of guilt must be done before the
The voluntariness of surrender is tested if prosecution had started to present
the same is spontaneous showing the evidence.
intent of the accused to submit himself
unconditionally to the authorities. This must Art. 13: Voluntary surrender; plea of
be either (a) because he acknowledges his guilty (1997)
guilt, or (b) because he wishes to save
them the trouble and expenses necessarily After killing the victim, the accused
incurred in his search and capture. (Reyes’ absconded. He succeeded in eluding the
Commentaries, p. 303). Thus, the act of the police until he surfaced and surrendered to
accused in hiding after commission of the the authorities about two years later.
crime, but voluntarily went with the Charged with murder, he pleaded not guilty
policemen who had gone to his hiding but, after the prosecution had presented
place to investigate, was held to be two witnesses implicating him to the crime,
mitigating circumstance.[People vs. Dayrit, he changed his plea to that of guilty.
cited in Reyes’ Commentaries, p. 299)
Should the mitigating circumstances of
Art. 13: Voluntary surrender and plea of voluntary surrender and plea of guilty be
guilty; when not considered (1992) considered in favor of the accused?
75
False. Voluntary surrender may not be of his house. When Jepoy came out, Jonas
appreciated in cases of criminal negligence immediately shot him with Jaja’s .45 caliber
under Art. 365 since in such cases, the gun but missed his target. Instead, the
courts are authorized to impose a penalty bullet hit Jepoy's five year old son who was
without considering Art. 62 regarding following behind him, killing the boy
mitigating and aggravating circumstances. instantaneously.If you were Jonas' and
Jaja’s lawyer, what possible defenses
would you set up in favor of your clients?
Art. 13: No intention to commit so grave Explain. (2%)
a wrong as that committed; intoxication
(2000) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Despite the massive advertising campaign If I were Jonas' and Jaja's lawyer, I will use
in media against firecrackers and gun-firing the following defenses:
during the New Year's celebrations. Jonas
and Jaja bought ten boxes of super lolo and (1) That the accused had no intention to
pla-pla in Bocaue, Bulacan. Before commit so grave a wrong as that committed
midnight of December 31,1999, Jonas and as they merely intended to frighten Jepoy;
Jaja started their celebration by having a
drinking spree at Jona's place by exploding (2) That Jonas committed the crime in a
their high-powered firecrackers in their state of intoxication thereby impairing his
neighborhood. In the course of their will power or capacity to understand the
conversation, Jonas confided to Jaja that wrongfulness of his act. Non-intentional
he has been keeping a long-time grudge intoxication is a mitigating circumstance
against his neighbor Jepoy in view of the [People us. Forttch, 281 SCRA 600 [1997]:
tatter's refusal to lend him some money. Art 15, RFC).
While under the influence of liquor, Jonas
started throwing lighted super lolos inside Art. 13: No intention to commit so grave
Jepoy's fence to irritate him and the same a wrong as that which was committed
exploded inside the tatter's yard. Upon (2001)
knowing that the throwing of the super lolo
was deliberate, Jepoy became furious and Maryjane had two suitors - Felipe and
sternly warned Jonas to stop his malicious Cesar. She did not openly show her
act or he would get what he wanted. A preference but on two occasions, accepted
heated argument between Jonas and Cesar’s invitation to concerts by Regine
Jepoy ensued but Jaja tried to calm down and Pops. Felipe was a working student
his friend. At midnight, Jonas convinced and could only ask Mary to see a movie
Jaja to lend him his .45 caliber pistol so that which was declined. Felipe felt insulted and
he could use it to knock down Jepoy and to made plans to get even with Cesar by
end his arrogance. Jonas thought that after scaring him off somehow. One day, he
all, explosions were everywhere and entered Cesar’s room in their boarding
nobody would know who shot Jepoy. After house and placed a rubber snake which
Jaja lent his firearm to Jonas, the latter appeared to be real in Cesar’s backpack.
again started started throwing lighted super Because Cesar had a weak heart, he
77
lolos and pla-plas at Jepoy’s yard in order suffered a heart attack upon opening his
Page
to provoke him so that he would come out backpack and seeing the snake. Cesar
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
When Felipe intruded into Cesar’s room Belle saw Gaston stealing the prized cock
without the letter's consent and took liberty of a neighbor and reported him to the
with the letter's backpack where he placed police. Thereafter, Gaston, while driving a
the rubber snake, Felipe was already car saw Belle crossing the street. Incensed
committing a felony. And any act done by that Belle had reported him, Gaston
him while committing a felony is no less decided to scare her by trying to make it
wrongful, considering that they were part of appear that he was about to run her over.
"plans to get even with Cesar1'. He rewed the engine of his car and drove
towards her but he applied the brakes.
Felipe's claim that he intended only "to play Since the road was slippery at that time, the
a practical joke on Cesar" does not vehicle skidded and hit Belle causing her
persuade, considering that they are not death.
friends but in fact rivals in courting
Maryjane. This case is parallel to the case What is the liability of Gaston? Why? (4%)
of People vs. Pugay, et al.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Art. 13: Immediate vindication of a
grave offense to a descendant (2002) Gaston is criminally liable for homicide in
doing the felonious act which caused
When A arrived home, he found B raping Belle’s death, although the penalty therefor
his daughter. Upon seeing A, B ran away. shall be mitigated by lack of intention to
A took his gun and shot B, killing him. commit so grave a wrong as that committed
Charged with homicide, A claimed he acted (Art. 13 (3), RPC). The act, having been
78
correct? If not, can A claim the benefit of and being the proximate cause of Belle’s
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
death, brings about criminal liability Cadevida, et al, G.R. No. L-94528, March
although the wrong done was different from 1. 1993).
what was intended (Art. 4, [1], RPC). b) The aggravating circumstance of
motor vehicle under paragraph 20 of Article
Art. 13: Mitigating and Art; 14: 14 of the Code, all the accused having used
aggravating circumstances (1993) a motorized tricyle;
c) Treachery should be aggravating
B, who is blind in one eye, conspired with against all of the accused including M who
M, a sixteen year old boy, with C, who had acted as a lookout because all of them
been previously convicted of Serious were present when X was shot (Article 62.
Physical Injuries, and with R, whose sister paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code). X
was raped by X a day before, to kill the was sleeping when shot to death.
latter. B, C and R were armed with .38
caliber revolvers, while M carried no AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
weapon and acted only as a look out. They
proceeded to the house of X riding in a Art 14: Cruelty (1988)
motorized tricycle. Thereupon, C, on
instruction of B to give X no chance, shot X The robbers killed a mother and her baby,
who was then sleeping. Indicted for then threw the body of the baby outside the
Homicide, as the information alleges no window. Can the aggravating
qualifying circumstance, specify the circumstances of “cruelty” be considered in
mitigating and aggravating circumstances this case?
present, and explain in whose favor, and
against whom, must they be considered. Reasons. (1988 Bar Question)
(a) Cruelty cannot be considered in this
SUGGESTED ANSWER: case because the aggravating
circumstance of cruelty requires
1. Mitigating circumstances: deliberates prolongation of the suffering of
a) B is entitled to the mitigating the victim. In this case, the baby was dead
circumstance under paragraph 8 of Article already so that there is no more
13 of the Revised Penal Code; prolongation to speak of.
b) M is entitled to the privileged
mitigating circumstances of minority under Art. 14 Recidivism In relation to Art. 62
Article Habitual Delinquency (2012)
68 of the Revised Penal Code;
c) Vindication of a grave offense in Who is a habitual delinquent? Distinguish
favor of R because his sister was raped by habitual delinquency from recidivism as to
X a day before the shooting, and even if the crimes committed, the period of time
there was an interval of one (1) day the crimes are committed, the number of
between the rape and the killing. crimes committed and their effects in
relation to the penalty to be imposed on a
2. Aggravating circumstances: convict.
a) The aggravating circumstance of
recidivism under paragraph 9. Article 14 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
79
one year thereafter, convicted of homicide, c. Both the first and second offenses
is a recidivist. are embraced in the same title of the Code;
and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: d. The offender is convicted of the new
offense (Art. 14, par. 9 RPC).
True. Rape is now a crime against persons
and, like the crime of homicide, is At the time of his trial for homicide, Andres
embraced in the same Title of the Revised was not previously convicted by final
Penal Code under which Amado had been judgment of another crime embraced in the
previously convicted by final judgment. The same title of the Revised Penal Code.
absolute pardon granted him for rape, only Adultery, which is his only previous
excused him from serving the sentence for conviction by final judgment is a crime
rape but did not erase the effects of the against chastity, and therefore is not
conviction therefore unless expressly embraced in the same title of the Code as
remitted by the pardon. homicide, which is a crime against person.
of adultery, but the penalty for adultery convictions by final judgment for theft and
(prison correctional) is lighter than then again convicted for Robbery With
penalty for homicide (reclusion-temporal). Homicide. And the crimes specified as
Consequently, there is no aggravating basis for habitual delinquency includes,
circumstance of habituality or reiteracion. inter alia, theft and robbery.
crimes, is correctly considered because the one who slapped his (Simeon's) son the
Page
Juan had already three (3) previous year previous. Vicente (father of
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Constancio) shouted at Constancio and his syndicate, arrived at Antonio's home and
other son, Bien- venido, telling them to run hurled a grenade into an open window of
away. When Bienvenido passed by Rafael the bedroom where Antonio, his wife and
Marco (brother of Simeon), Rafael stabbed their three year-old daughter were
him. Bienvenido parried the blow but fell sleeping. All three of them were killed
down, his feet entangled with some vines. instantly when the grenade exploded.
While Bienvenido was lying on the ground,
Rafael continued to stab him, inflicting State, with reasons, the crime or crimes
slight injuries on the shoulder of that had been committed as well as the
Bienvenido, after which Rafael stood up. At aggravating circumstances, if any,
that moment, Dulcisimo Beltran (no relation attendant thereto. (7%)
to the Marco brothers), came out of
nowhere and, together with Simeon, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
stabbed Bienvenido. Both of them inflicted
fatal wounds resulting in the death of the Roger & Mauro conspired to commit the
victim. crime of murder qualified by treachery, with
the use of means involving great waste and
Supposing Dulcisimo is a convict out on ruin. In this case, Mauro is liable as a
parole, will the aggravating circumstances principal by direct participation by using a
of quasi-recidivism be appreciated against grenade and hurled into an open window of
him? the victim‟s bedroom. Killing the victims
while they were sleeping and in no position
SUGGESTED ANSWER: to defend themselves, is a treacherous act
(People v. Aguilar, 88 Phil 693, 1951).
No, because quasi-recidivism under Art. The following are the aggravating
160, RPC occurs when the accused circumstances:
commits a felony while serving or about to 1. Sec. 3, R.A. 8294 – when a person
serve sentence (or if he escapes from commits any of the crime under the RPC or
prison). A parolee who commits a felony special laws with the use of explosive, etc.
cannot be a quasi-recidivist. and alike incendiary devices which resulted
in the death of any person.
Art. 14 Treachery (2008) 2. Art. 23, R.A. 7659 –
organized/syndicated crime group.
Roger, the leader of a crime syndicate in
Malate, Manila, demanded the payment by Art. 14: Treachery; when not considered
Antonio, the owner of a motel in that area, (1992)
of P10,000 a month as “protection money".
With the monthly payments, Roger As Sergio, Yoyong, Zoilo and Warlilo
assured, the syndicate would provide engaged in a drinking spree at Heartthrob
protection to Antonio, his business, and his Disco, Special Police Officer 3 (SPO 3)
employees. Should Antonio refuse, Roger Manolo Yabang suddenly approached
warned, the motel owner would either be them, aimed his revolver at Sergio whom
killed or his establishment destroyed. he recognized as a wanted killer and fatally
Antonio refused to pay the protection shot the latter. Whereupon, Yoyong.Zoilo
83
money. Days later, at around 3:00 in the and Warlito ganged up on Yabang. Warlito,
Page
using his own pistol, shot and wounded the prosecution, without objection from the
Yabang. de officio counsel for the accused, proved
evident premeditation. It likewise
B. Was there conspiracy and treachery? successfully proved the qualifying and the
Explain. generic aggravating circumstances alleged
in the information.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. For the purpose of determining the
The acts of Yoyong, Zoilo and Warlito are appropriate penalty to be imposed upon the
justified under pars. 1 and 2 of Article 11, accused, may the court take into account
RPG, that is, self-defense or defense of a evident premeditation and the other
stranger, as they have reason to suspect generic aggravating circumstances?
that Yabang might not be satisfied in killing
Sergio ONLY, the three being friends and B. Supposing that treachery was not
companions of the victim. Hence, they are proved, may evident premeditation, which
entitled to protect their own lives and limbs was duly proved, be considered as the
from the unlawful aggression of Yabang. qualifying circumstances?
Alternatively they have the justified right to
defend a stranger (Sergio) whose life at C. If the prosecution failed to prove
that moment might still be saved by treachery and did not offer any evidence to
ganging up on Yabang to prevent the latter prove evident premeditation, does acquittal
from any further attack by the latter. In of the accused follow?
either case reasonable necessity of the
means employed and lack of sufficient SUGGESTED ANSWER:
provocation are present.
A. Yes, as far as evident premeditation is
In turn, is yabang criminally liable for the concerned, but only as a generic a
death of Sergio? gravating circumstance.
In an information for Murder against A. B, C. No, but liability will only be for homicide,
and C, the prosecution alleges Treachery as there is no circumstances to qualify
as the qualifying circumstance and the it to murder.
following generic aggravating
circumstances: (1) noctumity, (2) abuse of Art. 14: Nighttime (1994)
84
Bobby, Steve, Danny, Nonoy and Johnny Relationship, because the offended party
were charged with homicide. is a descendant (daughter) of the offender
and considering that the crime is one
Can the court appreciate the aggravating against chastity.
circumstances of nighttime and band?
Art. 14: Band, Nocturnity, Dwelling,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Uninhabitted Place (1996)
present in this case? (1994 Bar Question) ii) Nocturnity because evidently the
Page
Would you say that the killing was attended A. Name the four (4) kinds of
by the qualifying or aggravating aggravating circumstances and state their
circumstances of evident premeditation, effect on the penalty of crimes and nature
treachery, nighttime and unlawful entry? thereof. (3%)
B. Distinguish generic aggravating
SUGGESTED ANSWER: circumstance from qualifying aggravating
circumstance.
Evident premeditation cannot be
considered against the accused because SUGGESTED ANSWER:
he resolved to kill the victim 'later in the
night" and there was no sufficient lapse of A. The four (4) kinds of aggravating
time between the determination and circumstances are:
execution, to allow his conscience to
86
assured, the syndicate would provide the Heinous Crimes Law (Sec. 23 R.A.
Page
7659), amending for this purpose Art. 62(1) picklocks is equivalent to force upon things
of the Revised Penal Code. in robbery with force upon things.
Art. 14: Dwelling, Nighttime (2009) Art. 14: Qualifying circumstance in rape
cases (2004)
Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the
same boarding house, occupying different GV was convicted of raping TC, his niece,
rooms. One late evening, when everyone in and he was sentenced to death. It was
the house was asleep, Wenceslao entered alleged in the information that the victim
Loretta's room with the use of a picklock. was a minor below seven years old, and
Then, with force and violence, Wenceslao her mother testified that she was only six
ravished Loretta. After he had satisfied his years and ten months old, which her aunt
lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death corroborated on the witness stand. The
and, before leaving the room, took her information also alleged that the accused
jewelry. was the victim’s uncle, a fact proved by the
prosecution.
[b] Discuss the applicability of the relevant
aggravating circumstances of dwelling, On automatic review before the Supreme
nocturnity and the use of the picklock to Court, accused- appellant contends that
enter the room of the victim. (3%) capital punishment could not be imposed
on him because of the inadequacy of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: charges and the insufficiency of the
evidence to prove all the elements of the
Dwelling is aggravating because the crimes heinous crime of rape beyond reasonable
were committed in the privacy of Loretta's doubt.
room which in law is considered as her
dwelling. It is well settled that "dwelling" Is appellant’s contention correct? Reason
includes a room in a boarding house being briefly. (5%)
occupied by the offended party where she
enjoys privacy, peace of mind and sanctity SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of an abode.
Yes, appellant's contention is correct
Nocturnity or nighttime is also aggravating insofar as the age of the victim is
because although it was not purposely or concerned. The age of the victim raped has
especially sought for by Wenceslao, not been proved beyond reasonable doubt
nighttime was obviously taken advantaged to constitute the crime as qualified rape and
of by him in committing the other crimes. deserving of the death penalty. The
Under the objective test, nocturnity is guidelines in appreciating age as a
aggravating when taken advantaged of by qualifying circumstance in rape cases have
the offender during the commission of the not been met, to wit:
crime thus facilitating the same. The use of
a picklock to enter the room of the victim is 1. The primary evidence of the age of
not an aggravating circumstance under Art. the victim is her birth certificate;
14 of the Code but punished as a crime by 2. In the absence of the birth
88
itself where the offender has no lawful certificate, age of the victim may be proven
Page
heavier penalty;
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Art. 14: Use of an unlicensed firearm in rendered the victim defenseless and
homicide or murder (2009) without any chance to retaliate, by tying his
hands at his back before attacking him.
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the Treachery exists at least in the second and
statement is true, or FALSE if the final stage of the attack, after the offenders
statement is false. Explain your answer in caught up with the victim.
not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR
[c] The use of an unlicensed firearm in FELONIES
homicide is considered a generic
aggravating circumstance which can be ART. 17- Principals By Direct
offset by an ordinary mitigating Participation
circumstance.
Mr. Red was drinking with his buddies, Mr.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: White and Mr. Blue when he saw Mr. Green
with his former girlfriend, Ms. Yellow.
False. Offsetting may not take place Already drunk, Mr. Red declared in a loud
because the use of an unlicensed firearm voice that if he could not have Ms. Yellow,
in homicide or murder is a specific no one can. He then proceeded to the
aggravating circumstance provided for by men’s room but told Mr. White and Mr. Blue
Rep. Act No. 8294. It is not one of the to take care of Mr. Green. Mr. Blue and Mr.
generic aggravating circumstances under White asked Mr. Red what he meant but
Art.14 of the Revised Penal Code (People Mr. Red simply said, "You already know
v. Avecilla, 351 SCRA 635 [20011). what I want," and then left. Mr. Blue and Mr.
White proceeded to kill Mr. Green and hurt
Article 14 Treachery (1993) Ms. Yellow. (2014 BAR)
by treachery because the offenders, taking Red cannot be held criminally liable as
Page
statement that Mr. Blue and Mr. White are sternly warned Jonas to stop his malicious
to take care of Mr. Green was not made act or he would get what he wanted. A
directly with the intention of procuring the heated argument between Jonas and
commission of the crime. There is no Jepoy ensued but Jaja tried to calm down
showing that the words uttered by him may his friend. At midnight, Jonas convinced
be considered as so efficacious and Jaja to lend him his .45 caliber pistol so that
powerful so as to amount to physical or he could use it to knock down Jepoy and to
moral coercion (People v. Assad, G.R. No. end his arrogance. Jonas thought that after
L-33673, February 24, 1931). Neither is all, explosions were everywhere and
there evidence to show that Mr. Red has an nobody would know who shot Jepoy. After
ascendancy or influence over Mr. White Jaja lent his firearm to Jonas, the latter
and Mr. Blue (People v. Abarri, F.R. No. again started started throwing lighted super
90815, March 1, 1995). lolos and pla-plas at Jepoy’s yard in order
to provoke him so that he would come out
B. Mr. Blue and Mr. White are liable as of his house. When Jepoy came out, Jonas
principals by direct participation for the immediately shot him with Jaja’s .45 caliber
crime of physical injuries for hurting Ms. gun but missed his target. Instead, the
Yellow to the extent of the injuries inflicted. bullet hit Jepoy's five year old son who was
Having no participation in the attack upon following behind him, killing the boy
Ms. Yellow, Mr. Red would have no instantaneously.
criminal liability therefor.
If you were the judge, how would you
ART. 17- Principals by direct decide the case? Explain. (1%)
participation and co-principal by
indispensable cooperation (2000) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Despite the massive advertising campaign I would convict Jonas as principal by direct
in media against firecrackers and gun-firing participation and Jaja as co-principal by
during the New Year's celebrations. Jonas indispensable cooperation for the complex
and Jaja bought ten boxes of super lolo and crime of murder with homicide. Jaja should
pla-pla in Bocaue, Bulacan. Before be held liable as co-principal and not only
midnight of December 31,1999, Jonas and as an accomplice because he knew of
Jaja started their celebration by having a Jonas' criminal design even before he lent
drinking spree at Jona's place by exploding his firearm to Jonas and still he concurred
their high-powered firecrackers in their in that criminal design by providing the
neighborhood. In the course of their firearm.
conversation, Jonas confided to Jaja that
he has been keeping a long-time grudge ART. 17 Principal by inducement;
against his neighbor Jepoy in view of the Accessory (1987)
tatter's refusal to lend him some money.
While under the influence of liquor, Jonas Juan had a land dispute with Pedro for a
started throwing lighted super lolos inside number of years. As Juan was earning
Jepoy's fence to irritate him and the same down his house, he saw his brother,
exploded inside the tatter's yard. Upon Rodolfo attack Pedro with a bolo from
91
knowing that the throwing of the super lolo behind. Rodolfo was about to hit Pedro a
Page
was deliberate, Jepoy became furious and second time while the latter was prostrate
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
and took the valuables from the rooms and co-principal with Dalmacio for the killing of
drawers that wer likewise left unlocked. Nel Pedro? Give your reasons.
and Ben are liable as principals by direct
participation while Ardo and Gorio are SUGGESTED ANSWER:
principals by indispensable cooperation
because they have concurred in the Mario is a principal by inducement. By
criminal resolution and cooperated by promising to give P50,000.00 to Dalmacio,
performing another act as lookout and which is an agreement for a consideration
driver of a getaway car, respectively, which for the purpose of avenging his brother's
were indispensable for the commission of death the inducement was made directly
the crime (Art. 17, RPC). with the intention of procuring the
commission of the crime. Furthermore, the
Nel, however, is also liable for the separate facts show that Dalmacio has no personal
crime of Homicide for the death of Fermin. reason to kill Pedro except the inducement,
The killing of Fermin was a separate act which is therefore the determining cause
and was not a necessary means for for the commission of the crime by
committing Theft (Art. 48, RPC) because Dalmacio.
the latter crime was already consummated.
Nel killed Fermin for a different reason Mario's change of mind and heart at the last
perhaps because of his anger that Fermin minute, which did not, after all, prevent the
was in possession of his bag and wallet and consummation of the crime, because it was
appeared to be using his smart phone to too late, does not alter the course of his
contact the police. criminal liability as a co-principal by
inducement. Desistance from carrying out
ART. 17 Principal by inducement; a criminal design is no defense if such
Accessory (1989) desistance has not actually and
successfully prevented the commission of
Mario, a law student, wanted to avenge the the crime.
death of his brother, Jose, in the hands of
Pedro and his gang. So, Mario talked to ART. 17 Principal by inducement;
Dalmacio, known tough guy, to kill Pedro Accessory (2002)
by promising him P50,000 to be paid after
he had accomplished the killing. Dalmacio A asked B to kill C because of a grave
agreed. Since Pedro was to appear in court injustice done to A by C. A promised B a
the following day at 9:00 a.m. at the city hall reward. B was willing to kill C, not so much
to attend the hearing involving the death of because of the reward promised to him but
Jose, Mario told Dalmacio to carry out the because he also had his own long-standing
plan at that exact time in the court room, to grudge against C, who had wronged him in
which Dalmacio assented. At 8:50 a.m., the past. If C is killed by B, would A be liable
Mario went to see Captain Malonso of the as a principal by inducement? (5%)
Police Department and told him that
Dalmacio would kill Pedro at 9:00 a.m. at SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the city hall. He asked Captain Malonso to No. A would not be liable as a principal by
prevent it and so the latter rushed to the city inducement because the reward he
93
hall but arrived at 9:05 a.m. when Dalmacio promised S is not the sole impelling reason
Page
had already killed Pedro. Is Mario liable as which made B to kill C. To bring about
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
The crimes committed in this case are as Vincent by indispensable cooperation for
Page
follows:
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
making the false Order that enabled execution of the crime without participating
Vincent to evade service of his sentence; as a principal, by prior or simultaneous
acts; whereas a conspirator participates in
Edwin, the jail guard who escorted the the commission of a crime as a co-
prisoners in getting out of jail, committed principal.
the crimes of – 2. An accomplice incurs criminal
liability in an individual capacity by his act
1. Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners, alone of cooperating in the execution of the
specifically conniving with or consenting to crime; while a conspirator incurs criminal
Evasion for leaving unguarded the liability not only for his individual acts in the
prisoners escorted by him and provide execution of the crime but also for the acts
them an opportunity to escape (Art. 223, of the other participants in the commission
RPC); of the crime collectively. The acts of the
2. Direct Bribery for receiving the other participants in the execution of the
P50,000.00 as consideration for leaving the crime are considered also as acts of a
prisoners unguarded and allowing them the conspirator for purposes of collective
opportunity to escape (Art. 210, RPC); criminal responsibility.
3. An accomplice participates in the
The jail warden did not commit nor incur a execution of a crime when the criminal
crime there being no showing that he was design or plan is already in place; whereas
aware of what his subordinates had done a conspirator participates in the adoption or
nor of any negligence on his part that would making of the criminal design.
amount to infidelity in the custody of 4. An accomplice is subjected to a
prisoners. penalty one degree lower than that of a
principal; whereas a conspirator incurs the
ACCOMPLICES penalty of a principal.
5. As to Requisites
ART. 18- Who is an accomplice? (2012) Accomplice
A: Accomplices are those persons who, not (1) Community of criminal design; that is,
being the principal, cooperate in the knowing the criminal design of the principal
execution of the offense by previous or by direct participation, he concurs with the
simultaneous acts (Art. 18, RPC). latter in his purpose;
(2) the performance of the previous or
ART. 18 Accomplice vs Conspirator: simultaneous acts that are not
Distinctions (2007, 2012) indispensible to the commission of the
crime
Distinguish between an accomplice and a
conspirator. Conspirator
(1) that the agreement concerned the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commission of a crime;
(2) that two or more persons come to an
The distinctions between an accomplice agreement;
and a conspirator are: (3) that the execution of the felony was
95
decided upon.
1. An accomplice incurs criminal
Page
Juan and Arturo devised a plan to murder Art. 19. Accessories And Art. 20
Joel. In a narrow alley near Joel's house, Accessories who are exempt; In relation
Juan will hide behind the big lamppost and to Composite crime of rape with
shoot Joel where the latter passes through homicide; theft (1998)
on his way to work. Arturo will come from
the other end of the alley and King went to the house of Laura who was
simultaneously shoot Joel from behind. On alone. Laura offered him a drink and after
the appointed day, Arturo was consuming three bottles of beer. King
apprehended by the authorities before made advances to her and with force and
reaching the alley. When Juan shot Joel as violence, ravished her. Then King killed
planned, he was unaware that Arturo was Laura and took her jewelry.
arrested earlier. Discuss the criminal
liability of Arturo, if any. 15% Doming, King's adopted brother, learned
about the incident. He went to Laura's
SUGGESTED ANSWER: house, hid her body, cleaned everything
and washed the bloodstains inside the
Arturo, being one of the two who devised room.
the plan to murder Joel, thereby becomes
a co-principal by direct conspiracy. What is Later, King gave Jose, his legitimate
needed only is an overt act and both will brother, one piece of jewelry belonging to
incur criminal liability. Arturo's liability as a Laura. Jose knew that the jewelry was
conspirator arose from his participation in taken from Laura but nonetheless he sold it
jointly devising the criminal plan with Juan, for P2.000.
to kill Jose. And it was pursuant to that
conspiracy that Juan killed Joel. The What crime or crimes did King, Doming and
conspiracy here is actual, not by inference Jose commit? Discuss their criminal
only. The overt act was done pursuant to liabilities. (10%
that conspiracy whereof Arturo is co-
conspirator. There being a conspiracy, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
act of one is the act of all. Arturo, therefore,
should be liable as a co-conspirator but the King committed the composite crime of
penalty on him may be that of an Rape with homicide as a single indivisible
accomplice only (People vs. Nierra, 96 offense, not a complex crime, and Theft.
SCRA1; People vs. Medrano, 114 SCRA The taking of Laura's jewelry when she is
335) because he was not able to actually already dead is only theft.
participate in the shooting of Joel, having
been apprehended before reaching the Doming's acts, having been done with
place where the crime was committed. knowledge of the commission of the crime
and obviously to conceal the body of the
crime to prevent its discovery, makes him
an accessory to the crime of rape with
96
Code, being an adopted brother of the “knowledge “under the law is not
principal. synonymous with suspicion. Mere
suspicion that the crime has been
Jose incurs criminal liability either as an committed is not sufficient. Even if he can
accessory to the crime of theft committed be considered as an accessory under Art.
by King, or as fence. Although he is a 19(2) of RPC, Abelardo is not liable, being
legitimate brother of King, the exemption the brother of Modesto under Art. 20, RPC.
under Article 20 does not include the
participation he did, because he profited ART 19- Accessories (2009)
from the effects of such theft by selling the
jewelry knowing that the same was taken Ponciano borrowed Ruben's gun, saying
from Laura. Or Jose may be prosecuted for that he would use it to kill Freddie. Because
fencing under the Anti-Fencing Law of Ruben also resented Freddie, he readily
1979 (PD No. 1612) since the jewelry was lent his gun, but told Ponciano: "0,
the proceeds of theft and with intent to gain, pagkabaril mo kay Freddie, isauli mo
he received it from King and sold it. kaagad, ha." Later, Ponciano killed
Freddie, but used a knife because he did
ART 19- Accessories (2013) not want Freddie's neighbors to hear the
gunshot.
Modesto and Abelardo are brothers.
Sometime in August 1998 while Abelardo A. What, if any, is the liability of
was in his office, Modesto, together with Ruben? Explain. (3%)
two other men in police uniform, came with
two heavy bags. Modesto asked Abelardo B. Would your answer be the same if,
to keep the two bags in his vault until he instead of Freddie, it was Manuel, a relative
comes back to get them. When Abelardo of Ruben, who was killed by Ponciano
later examined the two bags, he saw using Ruben's gun? Explain. (3%)
bundles of money that, in his rough count,
could not be less than P5 Million. He kept SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the money inside the vault and soon he
heard the news that a gang that included A. Ruben's liability is that of an
Modesto had been engaged in bank accomplice only because he merely
robberies. Abelardo, unsure of what to do cooperated in Ponciano's determination to
under the circumstances, kept quiet about kill Freddie. Such cooperation is not
the two bags in his vault. Soon after, the indispensable to the killing, as in fact the
police captured, and secured a confession killing was carried out without the use of
from, Modesto who admitted that their loot Ruben's gun. Neither may Ruben be
had been deposited with Abelardo. What is regarded as a co-conspirator since he was
Abelardo's liability? not a participant in the decisionmaking of
Ponciano to kill Freddie; he merely
SUGGESTED ANSWER cooperated in carrying out the criminal plan
which was already in place (Art. 18, RPC).
Abelardo is not criminally liable. To be
criminally liable as an accessory under Art. B. No. The answer would not be the
97
19, such person must have knowledge of same because Ruben lent his gun
Page
the commission of the crime. The term purposely for the killing of Freddie only, not
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
for any other killing. Ponciano's using day, Juanito went to the NBI and told the
Ruben's gun in killing a person other than NBI what Ricardo narrated him. The NBI
Freddie is beyond Ruben's criminal intent alerted ABC Insurance Company, which
and willing involvement. Only Ponciano will immediately denied the daim for payment
answer for the crime against Manuel. of insurance and filed a complaint for
attempted estafa through arson against
It has been ruled that when the owner of Sing Hua and Ricardo.
the gun knew that it would be used to kill a
particular person, but the offender used it A. Did Juanito commit any crime?
to kill another person, the owner of the gun B. Would the situation be different if at
is not an accomplice as to the killing of the the time Ricardo secured the professional
other person. While there was community services of Juanito, ABC Insurance
of design to kill Freddie between Ponciano Company had already paid Sing Hua the
and Ruben, there was none with respect to insurance and the latter had in turn paid
the killing of Manuel. Ricardo 10% thereof?
Ricardo secured the services of Atty. A. Juanito did not commit any crime.
Juanito to defend him in an arson case By telling Ricardo that he could not give him
pending in court. Juanito asked his client professional advice or services, after being
what actually happened. Ricardo informed informed that the owner of the department
his lawyer that Sing Hua, owner of a store hired him to bum the store because it
department store, hired him to bum the was losing heavily and wanted to get the
store because Sing Hua was losing heavily insurance on the store, and that he was
and wanted to get the insurance on the paid already P5,000 with a promise of an
store. Ricardo said that Sing Hua paid him additional 10% of the proceeds of the
P5,000.00, and promised an additional PI0,000,000 fire insurance once collected
10% of the proceeds of the PI0,000,000.00 from the insurance company, Atty. Juanito
lire insurance once this was collected from complied with his obligation as a lawyer to
the insurance company. He further said report to the authorities whatever
that Sing Hna’s claim for payment of the fire knowledge he has regarding the
insurance was still pending and its approval commission of a crime.
depended on the outcome of the arson
case. This meant that the ABC Insurance B. Juanito will be liable as an
Company would pay the claim should accessory because by accepting 10% of
Ricardo be acquitted in the arson case. the insurance proceeds even in payment of
Then he would also get the 10% share of the professional services, he profited or
the fire insurance proceeds. He told lawyer assisted the principal, Ricardo, to profit
Juanito that by depending him in the arson from the proceeds of the commission of the
case, the latter would be helping collect the crime.
10% which would amount of
P1,000,000.00. After hearing Ricardo’s ART. 19- Accessories (1989)
story, Atty. Juanito told him he could not
98
further give him professional advice or Emilio and Andres were walking home from
Page
services and so Ricardo left That same the farm at 8:00 o’clock in the evening
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
when they met Asiong whom Emilio causal or other connection between the act
suspected as the one who stole his fighting of killing and the act of taking the money.
cock two (2) days before; Emilio confronted 3. Andres is liable as an accessory in
Asiong and after a heated discussion, a the homicide case because he had no
bolo fight between the two (2) ensued. participation either as co-principal or
Asiong sustained fatal wounds and died. accomplice in the killing of Asiong who died
Emilio asked Andres to help him carry the solely because of the wounds inflicted on
body of Asiong and bury it behind the him in his bolo-fight with Emilio, the
bushes. After burying Asiong, Emilio picked principal. However, when Andres agreed to
up the jute bag Asiong was then holding help Emilio carry the body of Asiong and
and found inside P600 which Emilio and bury it behind the bushes, thus concealing
Andres divided each getting P300. A week or destroying the body of the crime (corpus
after the investigation by the police, a delicti) to prevent its discovery, he became
complaint was filed in the Office of an accessory to the crime of homicide (Art.
Provincial Fiscal against Emilio and Andres 19, RPC).
for robbery with homicide with the
aggravating circumstances of nighttime With respect to the taking of the P600.00
and uninhabited place. If you were the which Emilio and Andres divided between
fiscal, what information or information will themselves, they committed the crime of
you file against Emilio and Andres? What theft as co-principals. Theft because with
are their respective criminal liabilities? intent to gain but without violence against
or intimidation of persons no force upon
SUGGESTED ANSWER: things, they took personal property of
another without the latter’s consent. They
If I were the fiscal, I would file two separate acted with unity of purposes and intention,
informations against Emilio and Andres, thus making them co-principals by direct
one for homicide with Emilio as principal participation.
and Andres as accessory, and another for
theft against both Emilio and Andres as ART. 19- Accessories (2004)
principals. This is so because of the
following reasons: B. DCB, the daughter of MCB, stole the
earrings of XYZ, a stranger. MCB pawned
1. The killing of Asiong by Emilio is the earrings with TBI Pawnshop as a
homicide. It is not attended by any pledge for P500 loan. During the trial, MCB
qualifying circumstance of murder. It was a raised the defense that being the mother of
killing at the spur of the moment, in the DCB, she cannot be held liable as an
course of a bolo fight, as an aftermath of a accessory.
heated discussion.
2. Neither was the killing by reason of Will MCB’s defense prosper? Reason
or on the occasion of a robbery. There was briefly. (5%)
no intention of either Emilio or Andres to
rob Asiong either prior to or in the course of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the killing. The taking of Asiong’s P600.00
was only an AFTERTHOUGHT, after the B. No, MCB’s defense will not prosper
99
killing was already perpetrated. There is no because the exemption from criminal
Page
relationship with the principal does not Mancolo revealed to his friend Domeng his
cover accessories who themselves profited desire to kill Cece. He likewise confided to
from or assisted the offender to profit by the Domeng his desire to borrow his revolver.
effects or proceeds of the crime. This non- Domeng lent it. Manolo shot Cece in Manila
exemption of an accessory, though related with Domeng's revolver. As his gun was
to the principal of the crime, is expressly used in the killing, Domeng asked Mayor
provided in Art. 20 of the Revised Penal Tan to help him escape. The mayor gave
Code. Domeng P5,000 and told him to proceed to
Mindanao to hide. Domeng went to
ART. 19- Accessories (2010) Mindanao. The mayor was later charged as
an accessory to Cece's murder.
Immediately after murdering Bob, Jake
went to his mother to seek refuge. His a) Can he be held liable for the charge?
mother told him to hide in the maid's Explain. (4%) (2008 Bar Question)
quarters until she finds a better place for
him to hide. After two days, Jake SUGGESTED ANSWER:
transferred to his aunt's house. A week
later, Jake was apprehended by the police. a) Giving Domeng the benefit of a milder
Can Jake's mother and aunt be made criminal responsibility of an accomplice, not
criminally liable as accessories to the crime of a co-principal by indispensable
of murder? Explain. (3%) cooperation of Manolo, Mayor Tan could
not be liable as an accessory to Cece's
SUGGESTED ANSWER: murder. To incur criminal liability of an
accessory for helping or assisting in the
Obviously, Jake's mother was aware of her escape of an offender, he must be a
son's having committed a felony, such that principal of the crime committed. Unless
her act of harboring and concealing him Domeng would be considered as a co-
renders her liable as an accessory. But principal by indispensable cooperation in
being an ascendant of Jake, she is exempt the commission of the murder, the Mayor,
from criminal liability by express provision by assisting him to escape, would be an
of Article 20 of the Revised Penal Code. accessory to the felony.
with Domeng's revolver. As his gun was A principal penalty is defined as that
used in the killing, Domeng asked Mayor provided for a felony and which is imposed
Tan to help him escape. The mayor gave by court expressly upon conviction.
Domeng P5,000 and told him to proceed to An accessory penalty is defined as that
Mindanao to hide. Domeng went to deemed included in the imposition of the
Mindanao. The mayor was later charged as principal penalty.
an accessory to Cece's murder.
B. Censure may not be included in a
Can he be held liable for any other sentence of acquittal, because a censure is
offense? Explain fully. (3%) a penalty. Censure is repugnant and is
essentially inconsistent and contrary to an
SUGGESTED ANSWER: acquittal (People vs. Abellera, 69 Phil.
623.)
b) Although the Mayor may not be held
liable as an accessory to the killing of Cece, C. At present, no offense may be
he may be held liable for obstruction of punished with the death penalty in our
justice under Presidential Decree No. 1829 jurisdiction at present. The 1987
for assisting Domeng, who was involved in Constitution has abolished the death
the commission of a crime, to escape from penalty and the abolition affects even those
Manila to Mindanao. who has already been sentenced to death
penalty. Therefore, unless Congress
PENALTIES enacts a law, no offense may be punished
ART 25- PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE with the death penalty at present. But until
IMPOSED today, Congress has not yet passed a law
to this effect.
A. State the two classes of penalties
under the revised Penal Code. Define Duration and Effect of Penalties,
each. (1988 Bar Question) Imposition (1991)
B. May censure be included in a
sentence of acquittal? Why or why not? Imagine that you are a Judge trying a case,
(1988 Bar Question) and based on the evidence presented and
C. What offenses, if any, may be the applicable law, you have decided on
punished with the death penalty in our the guilt of two (2) accused. Indicate the
jurisdiction at present? Explain. (1988 Bar five (5) steps you would follow to determine
Question) the exact penalty to be imposed. Stated
differently, what are the factors you must
SUGGESTED ANSWER: consider to arrive at the correct penalty?
(1991 Bar Question)
A. The two classes of penalties under
Article 25 of the Revise Penal Code are as SUGGESTED ANSWER:
follows:
1. Determine the crime committed;
Principal 2. Stage of execution and degree of
101
Accessory participation;
3. Determine the penalty;
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
A and B pleaded guilty to the crime of The proper penalty is ANY RANGE
parricide. The court found three mitigating WITHIN prision correccional (six (6)
circumstances, namely, plea of guilty, lack months and one (1) day to six (6) years) as
of instruction and lack of intent to commit MINIMUM, to ANY RANGE within prision
so grave a wrong as that committed. The mayor maximum (ten (10) years and one
prescribed penalty for parricide is reclusion (1) day to twelve (12) years) as MAXIMUM.
perpetua to death. This is in accordance with People vs.
Gonzales, 73 Phil. 549. where it was ruled
Impose the proper principal penalty. (1997 that for the purpose of determining the
Bar Question) penalty next lower in degree, the penalty
that should be considered as a starting
SUGGESTED ANSWER: point is the whole of prision mayor, it being
the penalty prescribed by law, and not
The proper penalty is reclusion perpetua. prision mayor in its maximum period, which
Even if there are two or more mitigating is only the penalty actually applied because
circumstances, a court cannot lower the of Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
penalty by one degree (Art. 63. par. 3, The penalty next lower in degree therefor is
Revised Penal Code; People vs. prision correctional and it is within the
Formigones, 87 Phil. 685). In U.S. vs. range of this penalty that the minimum
Relador, 60 Phil. 593, where the crime should be taken.
committed was parricide with the two (2)
mitigating circumstances of illiteracy and Duration and Effect of Penalties,
lack of intention to commit so grave a Imposition (1997)
wrong, and with no aggravating
circumstance, the Supreme Court held that Assume In the preceding problem that
the proper penalty to be imposed is there were two mitigating circumstances
reclusion perpetua. and no aggravating circumstance. Impose
the proper prison penalty. (1997 Bar
Duration and Effect of Penalties, Question)
Imposition (1997)
A was convicted of the complex crime of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
death through falsification of public
document. Since the amount involved did There being two (2) mitigating
not exceed P200.00, the penalty circumstances without any aggravating
prescribed by law for estafa is arresto circumstance, the proper prison penalty is
102
mayor in its medium and maximum arresto mayor (in any of Its periods, le.
periods. The penalty prescribed by law for ranging from one (1) month and one (1) day
Page
correctional in its maximum period four (4) accused who is insolvent and unable to pay
years, two (2) months, and one (1) day to the fine, shall serve the subsidiary
six (6) years as MAXIMUM. Under Art. 64, imprisonment.
par. 5 of the Revised Penal Code, when a b) The judge may not validly impose an
penalty contains three periods, each one of alternative penalty. Although the law may
which forms a period In accordance with prescribe an alternative penalty for a crime,
Article 76 and 77 of the same Code, and it does not mean that the court may impose
there are two or more mitigating the alternative penalties at the same time.
circumstances and no aggravating The sentence must be definite, otherwise
circumstances, the penalty next lower in the judgment cannot attain finality.
degree should be Imposed. For purposes
of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Civil Indemnity
penalty next lower In degree should be The accused was found guilty of 10 counts
determined without regard as to whether of rape for having carnal knowledge with
the basic penalty provided by the Revised the same woman. In addition to the penalty
Penal Code should be applied In its of imprisonment, he was ordered to pay
maximum or minimum period as indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 for
circumstances modifying liability may each count. On appeal, the accused
require. The penalty next lower In degree questions the award of civil indemnity for
to priskm correctional Therefore, as each count, considering that the victim is
previously stated, the minimum should be the same woman.
within the range of arresto mayor and the
maximum is within the range of prision How would you rule on the contention of the
correccional maltnits maximum period. accused? Explain. (3%) (2005 Bar
Question)
Alternative Penalty
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
E and M are convicted of a penal law that
imposes a penalty of fine or imprisonment The contention of the accused is without
or both fine and imprisonment. The judge merit. Each count of rape is a violation of
sentenced them to pay the fine, jointly and the person of the victim and thus gives rise
severally, with subsidiary imprisonment in to corresponding criminal and civil
case of insolvency. liabilities. The trial court is correct in
imposing a penalty for each rape and
a) Is the penalty proper? Explain. awarding corresponding civil indemnity for
b) May the judge impose an alternative each count even though the victim is the
penalty of fine or imprisonment? Explain. same woman. Rape is not a continued
(4%) (2005 Bar Question) crime.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal
Page
RPC)
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
ART 47- CASES WHEREIN THE DEATH date of the sentence, (b) while she is
PENALTY SHALL NOT BE IMPOSED pregnant, (c) upon a person over 70 years
old (Art. 83 RPC), or (d) upon a convict who
(Note: no longer of any force or effect becomes insane after final sentence (Art.
because of the substantive provisions 79. RPC).
thereof being inconsistent with RA 9346) C. When the convict reaches the age of
70 years the death sentence is commuted
What are the instances when the death to reclusion perpetua (Art. 83, RPC).
penalty could not be imposed, although it
should otherwise ordinarily be meted out? Death Penalty
(1997 Bar Question)
The death penalty cannot be inflicted under
ANSWER: which of the following circumstances:
1. When the guilty party is below 18 1. When the guilty person is at least 18
years of age at the time of the commission years of age at the time of the commission
of the crime or when the offender is more of the crime.
than 70 years of age. 2. When the guilty person is more than
2. When upon appeal or automatic 70 years of age.
review of the case by the Supreme Court, 3. When, upon appeal to or automatic
the required majorityvoteisnot obtained for review by the Supreme Court, the required
the imposition of the penalty, in which case majority for the imposition of the death
the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua. penalty is not obtained.
4. When the person is convicted of a
Proscription on Death Penalty capital crime but before execution
A. When was the constitutional becomes insane.
proscription against the imposition of the 5. When the accused is a woman while
death penalty lifted? (1995 Bar Question) she is pregnant or within one year after
B. When is the execution of the death delivery.
penalty suspended under the Revised
Penal Code? (1995 Bar Question) Explain your answer or choice briefly. (5%)
C. When is the death penalty (2004 Bar Question)
commuted under the same Code? (1995
Bar Question) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In circumstance no. I when the guilty reward of P50,000.00 each once the job is
person is at least 18 years of age at the done.
time of the commission of the crime, the
death penalty can be imposed since the At midnight, A, with the fully armed X, Y and
offender is already of legal age when he Z, forcibly opened the door and gained
committed the crime. entrance to the house of C and D. C put up
a struggle before he was subdued by A's
Circumstance no. 3 no longer operates, group. They boarded C and D in a van and
considering the decision of the Supreme brought the two to a small hut in a farm
Court in People vs. Etfren Mateo (G.R. outside Metro Manila. Both hands of C and
147678-87, July 7, 2004) providing an D were tied. With the help of X, Y and Z, A
intermediate review for such cases where raped D in front of C. X, Y and Z then took
the penalty imposed is death, reclusion turns in raping D, and subjected C to torture
perpetua or life imprisonment before they until he was black and blue and bleeding
are elevated to the Supreme Court. profusely from several stab wounds. A and
his group set the hut on fire before leaving,
In circumtances nos. 4 & 5, the death killing both C and D. X, Y and Z were paid
penalty can be imposed if prescribed by the their reward. Bothered by his conscience,
law violated although its execution shall be A surrendered the next day to the police,
suspended when the convict becomes admitting the crimes he committed.
insane before it could be executed and
while he is insane. As the RTC judge, decide what crime or
crimes were committed by A, X, Y and Z,
Likewise, the death penalty can be and what mitigating and aggravating
imposed upon a woman but its execution circumstances will be applied in imposing
shall be suspended during her pregnancy the penalty. Explain. (5%)
and for one year after her delivery.
A, X, Y and Z are liable for two
counts of kidnapping with murder qualified
by means of fire, since C and D were killed
ART.48- Special Complex Crime (2016) in the course of the detention. In a special
complex crime of kidnapping with murder,
A, an OFW, worked in Kuwait for several it is immaterial that other crimes were
years as a chief accountant, religiously committed such as multiple rapes and
sending to his wife, B, 80% of all his arson. Since multiple rapes and arson are
earnings. After his stint abroad, he was committed by reason or on occasion of
shocked to know that B became the kidnapping, they shall be integrated into
paramour of a married man, C, and that all one and indivisible felony of kidnapping
the monies he sent to B were given by her with murder (People v. Larranaga, 138874-
to C. To avenge his honor, A hired X, Y and 75, 31 January 2004).
Z and told them to kidnap C and his wife,
D, so that he can inflict injuries on C to The mitigating circumstances of
make him suffer, and humiliate him in front passion and voluntary surrender can be
107
of fire, and treachery can be appreciated however, for rape under Art. 296 since they
against A, X, Y and Z. were not present when the victim was
raped and thus, they had no opportunity to
prevent the same. They are only liable for
robbery by band (People v. Anticamaray,
ART. 48 in rel ART. 296 (2016) GR No. 178771, 8 June 2011).
Pedro, Pablito, Juan and Julio, all armed [b] Suppose, after the robbery, the four took
with bolos, robbed the house where turns in raping the three daughters inside
Antonio, his wife, and three (3) daughters the house, and, to prevent identification,
were residing. While the four were killed the whole family just before they left.
ransacking Antonio's house, Julio noticed What crime or crimes, if any, did the four
that one of Antonio's daughters was trying malefactors commit? (2.5%) ( 2016 BAR)
to escape. He chased and caught up with
her at a thicket somewhat distant from the They are liable for a special complex
house, but before bringing her back, raped crime of robbery with homicide. In this
her. special complex crime, it is immaterial that
several persons are killed. It is also
[a] What crime or crimes, if any, did Pedro, immaterial that aside from the homicides,
Pablito, Juan and Julio commit? Explain. rapes are committed by reason or on the
(2.5%) occasion of the crime. Since homicides are
committed by or on the occasion of the
Julio is liable for special complex crime of robbery, the multiple rapes shall be
robbery with rape since he raped the integrated into one and indivisible felony of
daughter of Antonio on occasion or by robbery with homicide (People v. Diu, GR
reason of robbery. Even if the place of No. 201449, 3 April 2013).
robbery is different from that of rape, the
crime is still robbery with rape since what is Art. 48. Complex Crimes In relation to
important is the direct connection between Art. 294 (1) Robbery with homicide;
the two crimes (People v. Canastre, GR direct assault with multiple attempted
No. L-2055, 24 December 1948). Rape homicide
was not separated by distance and time
from the robbery. While Alfredo, Braulio, Ciriaco, and
'Domingo were robbing a bank, policemen
Pedro, Pablito and Juan are liable for arrived. A firefight ensued between the
robbery by band. There is band in this case bank robbers and the responding
since more than three armed malefactors policemen, and one of the policemen was
took part in the commission of robbery. killed.
Under Art. 296 of the RPC, any member of
a band, who is present at the commission What crime or crimes, if any, had been
of a robbery by the band, shall be punished committed? Explain. (3%) (2009 Bar
as principal of any of the assaults Question)
committed by the band unless it be shown
108
The crimes committed are Robbery with death. Then he remembered his losses. He
homicide (Art. 294(1], RPC), a single rifled through the pockets of his victims and
indivisible offense, and Direct Assault with got back all the money he lost. He then ran
Multiple Attempted Homicide, a complex away but not before burning the cottage to
crime (Art. 48, Art. 148 and Art. 249, RPC; hide his misdeed. The following day police
People v. Gayrama, 60 Phil. 796 (1934]). investigators found among the debris the
charred bodies of Jason, Manuel, Dave
Robbery with Homicide was committed and the caretaker of the resort.
because one of the responding policemen
was killed by reason or on occasion of the After preliminary investigation, the
robbery being committed. The complex Provincial Prosecutor charged Harry with
crime of Direct Assault with Multiple the complex crime of arson with quadruple
Attempted Homicide was committed in homicide and robbery.
respect of the offender's firing guns at the
responding policemen who are agents of Was Harry properly charged? Discuss fully.
person in authority performing their duty (1995 Bar Question)
when fired at to frustrate such
performance. (People vs. Ladjaalam, G.R. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Nos. 136149-51, Sept 19, 2000)
No, Harry was not properly charged. Harry
should have been charged with three
Art 48 Complex Crimes, Art 294 (3) separate crimes, namely: murder, theft
Robbery, Art 249 Homicide, Art 320 and arson.
Arson
Harry killed Jason, Manuel and Dave with
Criminal law – Felonies - Complex crime of evident premeditation, as there was
arson with quadruple homicide and considerable lapse of time before he
robbery; improper charge of offense decided to commit the crime and the actual
commission of the crime. In addition, Harry
Harry, an overseas contract worker, arrived employed means which weakened the
from Saudi Arabia with considerable defense of Jason, Manuel and Dave. Harry
savings. Knowing him to be “loaded", his gave them the liquor to drink until they were
friends Jason, Manuel and Dave invited drunk and fell asleep. This gave Harry the
him to poker session at a rented beach opportunity to cany out his plan of murder
cottage. When he was losing almost all his with impunity.
money which to him was his savings of a
lifetime, he discovered that he was being The taking of the money from the victims
cheated by his friends. Angered by the was a mere afterthought of the killings.
betrayal he decided to take revenge on the Hence, Harry committed the separate
three cheats. crime of theft and not the complex crime of
robbery with homicide. Although theft was
Harry ordered several bottles of Tanduay committed against dead persons, it is still
Rhum and gave them to his companions to legally possible as the offended party are
109
drink, as they did, until they all fell asleep. the estates of the victims.
When Harry saw his companions already
Page
In burning the cottage to hide his misdeed. 257, RPC. Inasmuch as the single act of
Harry became liable for another separate Aldrich produced two grave or less grave
crime, arson. This act of burning was not felonies, he falls under Art 48, RPC, i.e. a
necessary for the consummation of the two complex crime [People vs. Salufrancia, 159
(2) previous offenses he committed. The SCRA 401).
fact that the caretaker died from the blaze
did not qualify Harry’s crime into a complex Art. 48: Complex crime of Murder,
crime of arson with homicide for there is no qualified by explosion, with direct
such crime. assault
Hence, Harry was improperly charged with Two (2) Philippine National Police (PNP)
the complex crime of arson with quadruple officers, X and Y, on board on motorboat
homicide and robbery. Harry should have with Z, a civilian as motorman, arrested A
been charged with three (3) separate and B who were in a banca, for dynamite
crimes, murder, theft and arson. fishing. The latter’s banca was towed
towards the municipality. On the way, the
Art. 48: Complex crime of parricide with PNP motorboat was intercepted by a third
unintentional abortion banca whose occupants, C, D. and E, tried
to negotiate for the release of A and B and
Aldrich was dismissed from his job by his their banca. The PNP officers refused and
employer. Upon reaching home, his instead shouted at C, D, and E that they are
pregnant wife, Carmi, nagged him about all under arrest. Thereupon, C, D, and E
money for her medicines. Depressed by his simultaneously threw dynamite sticks at the
dismissal and angered by the nagging of PNP motorboats. The first explosion killed
his wife, Aldrich struck Carmi with his fist. X. A and B also reacted by throwing
She fell to the ground. As a result, she and dynamite at the PNP motorboat: its
her unborn baby died. explosion killed Y and Z.
What crime was committed by Aldrich? What crime or crimes did A, B, C, D and E
(1994 Bar Question) commit? (1991 Bar Question)
Aldrich committed the crime of parricide C, D and E are liable for the complex crime
with unintentional abortion. When Aldrich of Murder, qualified by explosion, with
struck his wife, Carmi with his fist, he direct assault for the death of X. A and B
committed the crime of maltreatment under are liable for the complex crime of Murder
Art. 266, par. 3 of the Revised Penal Code. Qualified by explosion as to death of Y, and
Since Carmi died because of the felonious simple Murder qualified by explosion for the
act of Aldrich, he is criminally liable of death of Z.
parricide under Art. 246, RPC in relation to
Art. 4, par. 1 of the same Code. Since the No crime of direct assault can be filed
unborn baby of Carmi died in the process, insofar as the death of Z is concerned, he
110
This, of course, assumes that there is no the house was unknown to Diego, the
conspiracy among A, B, C, D and E, resulting crime is under PD No. 1613,
otherwise all would have the same criminal because the death resulted from the arson.
liability as the act of one becomes the act If by reason or on the occasion of the arson,
of all. death results, the offense is the special
complex or arson with homicide (Sec. 5,
Art 48: Special Complex Crime In PD 1613, which expressly repealed Art.
relation to Art. 14: Qualifying 320 and consequently the ruling case
Aggravating Circumstance therein, People v. Paterno (L-2665, March
6, 1950).
Diego and Pablo were both farmers
residing in Barangay Damayan. On one If Diego knew that Mario was inside the
occasion, Diego called Pablo to come house when he set it on fire, the crime
down from his house in order to ask him committed, instead of arson, would be
why he got his (Diego’s) plow without MURDER, with fire as the qualifying
permission. One word led to another. circumstance.
Diego, in a fit of anger, unsheathed his bolo
and hacked Pablo to death. Pablo’s 9-year Art. 48 Special Complex crime of
old son, Mario, who was inside the house, Robbery with Rape
saw the killing of his father. Afraid that he
might also be killed by Diego, Mario After raping the complainant in her house,
covered himself with a blanket and hid in a the accused struck a match to smoke a
comer of the house. To conceal the killing cigarette before departing from the scene.
of Pablo, Diego brought Pablo’s body The brief light from the match allowed him
inside the house and burned it. Mario was to notice a watch in her wrist. He demanded
also burned to death. that she hand over the watch. When she
What crime or crimes did Diego commit? refused, he forcibly grabbed it from her.
(1989 Bar Question) The accused was charged with and
convicted of the special complex crime of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: robbery with rape.
Diego committed two crimes (1) homicide Was the court correct? (1997 Bar
for the death of Pablo and (2) the special Question)
complex crime of arson with homicide as
provided in PD 1613 for the burning of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
house and the death of Mario.
No, the court erred in convicting the
The hacking of Pablo to death is homicide, accused of the special complex crime of
the killing not being attended by any of the robbery with rape. The accused should
qualifying circumstances of murder. It was instead be held liable for two (2) separate
killing in the course of a quarrel. crimes of robbery and rape, since the
primary intent or objective of the accused
The burning of the house to conceal the was only to rape the complainant, and his
111
killing of Pablo is a separate crime. Were it commission of the robbery was merely an
not for the death of Mario, this separate afterthought. The robbery must precede
Page
offense would have been arson. But inside the rape, in order to give rise to the special
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
complex crime for which the court Art. 48 – Continuing crimes in relation to
convicted the accused. BP 22
Art. 48 Criminal law – Complex crimes - Angelo devised a Ponzi Scheme in which
Robbery with Homicide in relation to 500 persons were deceived into investing
Art. 297 their money upon a promise of a capital
return of 25%, computed monthly, and
Jose, Domingo. Manolo, and Fernando, guaranteed by post-dated checks. During
armed with bolos, at about one o'clock in the first two months following the
the morning, robbed a house at a desolate investment, the investors received their
place where Danilo, his wife, and three profits, but thereafter, Angelo vanished.
daughters were living. While the four were
in the process of ransacking Danilo’s Angelo was charged with 500 counts of
house, Fernando, noticing that one of estafa and 2,000 counts of violation of
Danilo’s daughters was trying to get away, Batas Pambansa (BP) 22. In his motion to
ran after her and finally caught up with her quash, Angelo contends that he committed
in a thicket somewhat distant from the a continued crime, or delito continuado,
house. Fernando, before bringing back the hence, he committed only one count of
daughter to the house, raped her first. estafa and one count of violation of BP 22.
Thereafter, the four carted away the [a] What is delito continuado? (1%)
belongings of Danilo and his family. (2009 Bar Question)
his drawing separate checks payable to latter a check in the said amount. The
each payee is a separate criminal following day, Pedro deposited the check,
resolution, as they must be of different but it was returned dishonored because it
amounts and of different dates. He acted was drawn against a closed account.
with separate fraudulent intent against Notwithstanding written demands, Jose
each swindling victim and had distinct failed to make good said check. Atty.
criminal intent in drawing and issuing each Saavedra, counsel for Pedro, filed two
check. It cannot be maintained that his acts complaints against Jose with the Office of
are the product of one criminal resolution the Provincial Fiscal, one for estafa under
only. Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code and
another for violation of Batas Pambansa
Art 48 - Complex crime; requirement of Big. 22. Atty. San Pascual, counsel for
two or more grave or less grave felonies Jose, claimed that if his client was at all
as a result of single act liable, he could only be liable for violation of
Batas Pambansa Big. 22 and not for estafa
Rodolfo, a policeman, was cleaning his under Article 315 of the Revised Penal
service pistol inside his house when it fell Code because one precludes the other and
from his hand and fired. The bullet hit a because Batas Pambansa Big. 22 is more
neighbor on the stomach and a second favorable to the accused as it carries a
neighbor on the leg. The injuries sustained lighter penalty. The investigating fiscal, on
by the two neighbors required thirty-five his resolution, stated that only one crime
(35) days and nine (9) days of medical was committed, namely, the complex crime
attendance, respectively. The investigating of estafa under Article 315 of the Revised
fiscal later filed an information for frustrated Penal Code and violation of Batas
homicide and slight physical injuries Pambansa Big. 22 because the single act
through reckless imprudence against of issuing the bouncing check constitutes
Rodolfo. Is the charge correct? Explain. two offenses, one under Article 315 of the
(1989 Bar Question) Revised Penal Code and another under
Batas Pambansa Big. 22.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If you were the Provincial Fiscal asked to
The charge is not correct. review the matter, how would you resolve
it? (1987 Bar Question)
One single act of accidental shooting
cannot give rise to two felonies. One of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
which is intentional and the other negligent.
Frustrated homicide presupposes intent to The resolution of the investigating fiscal is
kill. The facts do not show any intent to kill erroneous. There is no complex crime of
on the part of Rodolfo. At most, he was estafa under Article 315 of the Revised
careless, and therefore only negligent. Penal Code and the violation of BP 22. A
complex crime refers only to felonies which
Art 48 – Complex crimes; when proper are punished in the Revised Penal Code.
Batas 22 which punishes the offense of
113
Jose purchased roofing materials worth issuing a worthless check is a special law.
P20,000.00 from PY & Sons Construction The contention of Atty. San Pascuai,
Page
Company owned by Pedro, and paid the counsel of Jose that his client should be
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
liable only for Batas 22 and for estafa under 2. What constitutes a complex crime?
the Revised Penal Code because one How many crimes maybe involved in a
precludes the other and because Batas 22 complex crime? What is the penalty
is more favorable to the accused as it therefor? (4%) (1999 Bar Question)
carries a lighter penalty cannot also be
sustained. Batas 22 specifically provides SUGGESTED ANSWER:
that liability under said act is without
prejudice to any liability for estafa under the 1. The decision of the trial judge is not
Revised Penal Code. The check issued by correct. When the offender made use of an
Jose in payment of roofing materials from automatic firearm, the acts committed are
PY and Sons was worthless. Said bouncing determined by the number of bullets
check having been issued in payment of a discharged inasmuch as the firearm being
simultaneous obligation constitutes estafa automatic, the offender need only press the
under the Revised Penal Code and also the trigger once and it would fire continually.
offense punished under Batas 22. There is For each death caused by a distinct and
no identity of offenses. Damage is not an separate bullet, the accused incurs distinct
element of the offense punished in Batas criminal liability. Hence, it is not the act of
22 whereas in estafa damage is an pressing the trigger which should be
element. Estafa is an act mala in se in considered as producing the several
which requires intent as an element while felonies, but the number of bullets which
the offense punished in Batas 22 is an act actually produced them.
mala prohibita where intent is not an
element. 2. A complex crime is constituted when
a single act caused two or more grave or
Art 48 –Complex crimes, what less grave felonies or when an offense is
constitutes, penalty committed as a necessary means to
commit another offense (Art. 48, RPC).
1. A, actuated by malice and with the
use of a fully automatic M-14 submachine At least two (2) crimes are involved in a
gun, shot a group of persons who were complex crime; either two or more grave or
seated in a cockpit with one burst of less grave felonies resulted from a single
successive, continuous, automatic fire. act, or an offense is committed as a
Four (4) persons were killed thereby, each necessary means for committing another.
having hit by different bullets coming from
the submachine gun of A. Four (4) cases of The penalty for the more serious crime
murder were filed against A. The trial court shall be imposed and in its maximum
ruled that there was only one crime period. (Art. 48, RPC)
committed by A for the reason that, since A
performed only one act, he having pressed Art. 48 Complex crime; Special complex
the trigger of his gun only once, the crime crime; complex crime of coup d’etat
committed was murder. Consequently, the with rebellion; complex crime of coup
trial judge sentenced A to just one penalty d'etat with sedition
of reclusion perpetua. Was the decision of
114
the trial judge correct? Explain. (4%) (1999 A. Distinguish between an ordinary
Bar Question) complex crime and a special complex
Page
A special complex crime, on the other C. Yes, coup d’etat can be complexed
hand, is made up of two or more crimes with sedition because the two crimes are
which are considered only as components essentially different and distinctly punished
of a single indivisible offense being under the Revised Penal Code. Sedition
punished in one provision of the Revised may not be directed against the
Penal Code. Government or non-political in objective,
whereas coup d’etat is always political in
As to penalties - objective as it is directed against the
Government and led by persons or public
In ordinary complex crime, the penalty for officer holding public office belonging to the
the most serious crime shall be imposed military or national police. Art. 48 of the
and in its maximum period. Code may apply under the conditions
therein provided.
In special complex crime, only one penalty
is specifically prescribed for all the Art. 48 Compound and complex crimes
component crimes which are regarded as
one indivisible offense. The component Distinguish clearly but briefly: (10%) (2004
crimes are not regarded as distinct crimes Bar Question)
and so the penalty for the most serious Between compound and complex crimes
115
crime is not the penalty to be imposed nor as concepts in the Penal Code.
in its maximum period. It is the penalty
Page
purchased the television set, the crime of regarded as impelled by a single, indivisible
swindling or estafa was perpetrated thru criminal resolution; hence, punished as one
Page
Art. 48 – Complex crimes - Malversation daughter working in the United States. With
through falsification the intention of robbing B of those dollars,
A entered B’s house at midnight, armed
Roger and Jessie, Municipal Mayor and with a knife which he used to gain entry,
Treasurer, respectively, of San Rafael, and began quietly searching the drawers,
Leyte, caused the disbursement of public shelves, and other likely receptacles of the
funds allocated for their local development cash. While doing that, B awoke, rushed
programs for 2008. Records show that the out from the bedroom, and grappled with A
amount of P2-million was purportedly used for the possession of the knife which A was
as financial assistance for a rice production then holding. After stabbing B to death, A
livelihood project. Upon investigation, turned over B’s pillow and found the latter’s
however, it was found that Roger and wallet underneath the pillow, which was
Jessie falsified the disbursement vouchers bulging with the dollar bills he was looking
and supporting documents in order to make for A took the bills and left the house.' What
it appear that qualified recipients who, in crime or crimes were committed? (2003
fact, are non-existent individuals, received Bar Question)
the money.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Roger and Jessie are charged with
malversation through falsification. Discuss The crime committed is robbery with
the propriety of the charge filed against homicide, a composite crime. This is so
Roger and Jessie. Explain. (4%) (2009 Bar because A’s primordial criminal intent is to
Question) commit a robbery and in the course of the
robbery, the killing of B took place. Both the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: robbery and the killing were consummated,
thus giving rise to the special complex
The charge of malversation through crime of robbery with homicide. The
falsification is not correct because the primary criminal intent being to commit a
falsifications of several documents were robbery, any killing on the “occasion” of the
not necessary means to obtain the money robbery, though not by reason thereof, is
that were malversed. The falsifications considered a component of the crime of
were committed to cover up or hide the robbery with homicide as a single
malversation and therefore, should be indivisible offense.
separately treated from malversation. The
given facts state that Roger and Jessie Art. 48: Special complex crime of
falsified disbursement vouchers and Robbery with homicide
supporting documents "in order to make it
appear" that qualified recipients received A, B, C and D all armed, robbed a bank,
the money. Art. 48, RPC on complex and when they were about to get out of the
crimes is not applicable. bank, policemen came and ordered them to
surrender but they fired on the police
Art 48 Special Complex Crimes - officers who fired back and shot it out with
Robbery with homicide them.
118
A learned two days ago that B had received A. Suppose a bank employee was
Page
dollar bills amounting to $10,000 from his killed and the bullet which killed him came
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
from the firearm of the police officers, with Art. 48: Special complex crimes-
what crime shall you charge A, B, C and D? Robbery with homicide
[3%] (1998 Bar Question)
Christopher, John, Richard, and Luke are
B. Suppose it was robber D who was fraternity brothers. To protect themselves
killed by the policemen and the prosecutor from rival fraternities, they all carry guns
charged A. B and C with Robbery and wherever they go. One night, after
Homicide. They demurred arguing that they attending a party, they boarded a taxicab,
(A, B and C were not the ones who killed held the driver at gunpoint and took the
robber D, hence, the charge should only be latter's earnings.
Robbery. How would you resolve their
argument? (2%) (1998 Bar Question) What crime, if any, did the four commit if
they killed the driver? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
homicide, not two crimes. P5.000.00 as ransom for the release of his
son. Martin did not pay the ransom.
Page
If Sherly were a minor when she died, PENALTIES: What penalties should be
would your answer be the same? imposed on them? 2.5% (2006 Bar
Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question) Question)
If Sherly were a minor when she died, the Job and Nonoy each committed two (2)
crimes of homicide and child abuse in counts of the special complex crime of rape
violation of Rep. Act 7610 (Special with homicide under Art. 266-B for the
Protection of Children against abuse, rapes respectively committed on Dang and
120
exploitation, discrimination and for other on Lyn. Their felonious acts of grabbing
purposes), are committed by Jet Matulis, and pushing the victims inside their van
Page
provided Sherly is not less than 12 years and later forcing them to dance naked may
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
only be appreciated as part of the violence Luke was entrusted to Emil and Louie, the
and lewd desires attending the rape, and fishpond caretakers, asking them to hide
are therefore absorbed by the rape. Luke in their shack because he was
running from the NBI. The trio then left in
Although, there is no indication that the Mario’s car for Manila where they called up
same culprits killed Lyn who was never Luke’s family and threatened them to kill
seen again, it is reasonable to assume from Luke unless they give a ransom within 24
what the culprits did to Dang, and from the hours. Unknown to them, because of a
acts of violence they employed on Lyn, that leak, the kidnapping was announced over
they are answerable also for the presumed the radio and TV. Emil and Louie heard the
death of Lyn whom the culprits took with broadcast and panicked, especially when
them by force and was never seen again. the announcer stated that there is a shoot-
Hence, the rape committed against her is to-kill order for the kidnappers. Emil and
attended by homicide giving rise to the Louie took Luke to the seashore of Dagat-
special complex crime of rape with dagatan where they smashed his head with
homicide also. It would be different if Lyn a shovel and buried him in the sand.
was not subjected to physical violence. However, they were seen by a barangay
(R.A. 7659) kagawad who arrested them and brought
them to the police station. Upon
Although the penalty for the crime of rape interrogation they confessed and pointed to
with homicide was death at the time the Jaime, Andy, Jimmy and Mario as those
accused committed them, and the law responsible for the kidnapping. Later, the 4
(Rep. Act No. 9346) prohibiting the were arrested and charged.
imposition of the death penalty took effect
only this year (2006), said new law should What crime or crimes did the 6 suspects
be given retroactive effect because it is commit? 5% (2006 Bar Question)
favorable to the culprits who are not
habitual delinquents and there being no SUGGESTED ANSWER:
provision of law to the contrary. Hence,
reclusion perpetua for each count of rape Jaime, Andy and Jimmy committed the
with homicide. The accessory penalty special complex crime of kidnapping for
under Art. 40 of the Revised Penal Code ransom with homicide because their
will not follow because RA 9346 purpose was to kill Luke when they seized
him.
Art. 48 Special Complex Crime In
relation to Art 267. Kidnapping for Mario, the taxi driver, does not incur
ransom with homicide criminal liability for the acts of Jaime, Andy
and Jimmy because he had no participation
Jaime, Andy and Jimmy, laborers in the therein.
noodles in the noodles factory of Luke Tan,
agreed to kill him due to his arrogance and Emil and Louie should be liable only for
miserliness. One afternoon, they seized murder for killing Luke in a defenseless
him and loaded him in a taxi driven by position, but not for keeping Luke since it
121
Mario. They told Mario they will only teach was not their intention to detain him.
Luke a lesson in Christian humility. Mario
Page
Art 48 Special Complex Crime in relation No, the answer will be different. In that
to Art. 304 Rape with homicide case, the crimes committed would be four
separate crimes of (1) rape (2) frustrated
Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the homicide or 'murder (3) theft and (4)
same boarding house, occupying different unlawful possession and use of picklocks
rooms. One late evening, when everyone in under Art. 304, RPC. The special complex
the house was asleep, Wenceslao entered crime of rape with homicide is constituted
Loretta's room with the use of a picklock. only when both the rape and the killing are
Then, with force and violence, Wenceslao consummated; when one or both of them
ravished Loretta. After he had satisfied his are not consummated, they are to be
lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death charged and punished separately. In any
and, before leaving the room, took her event, the possession of the picklock
jewelry. "without lawful cause", more so its use in
an unlawful entry is punished as a crime by
[a] What crime or crimes, if any, did itself.
Wenceslao commit? Explain. (4%)
(2009 Bar Question) Penalties – Disqualified offenders for
parole; heinous crimes
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Because of the barbarity and the
Wenceslao committed the following crimes: hideousness of the acts committed by the
(1) the special complex crime of rape with suspects/ respondents in cutting off their
homicide (2) theft and (3) unlawful victims’ appendages, stuffing their torsos,
possession of picklocks and similar tools legs, body parts into oil drums and bullet-
under Art. 304, RPC. His act of having riddled vehicles and later on burying these
carnal knowledge of Loretta against her will oil drums, vehicles with the use of
and with the use of force and violence backhoes and other earthmoving
constituted rape, plus the killing of Loretta machinery, the Commission on Human
by reason or on the occasion of the rape, Rights (CHR) investigating team
gave rise to the special complex crime of recommended to the panel of public
rape with homicide. Since the taking of the prosecutors that all respondents be
jewelry was an afterthought as it was done charged with violation of the Heinous
only when he was about to leave the room Crimes Law. The prosecution panel agreed
and when Loretta was already dead, the with the CHR. As the chief prosecutor
same constitutes theft. His possession and tasked with approving the filing of the
use ofthe picklock "without lawful cause" is information, how will you pass upon the
by itself punishable under Art. 304, RPC. recommendation? Explain? (5%) (2010 Bar
Question)
[c] Would your answer to [a] be the same if,
despite the serious stab wounds she SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sustained, Loretta survived? Explain. (3%)
(2009 Bar Question) The CHR is correct in describing the crimes
committed as “heinous crimes”, as defined
122
provision, and impelled by a single criminal Aberratio ictus (mistake in the blow) could
impulse (People vs, Ledesma, 73 SCRA not be used as a defense as it is not an
Page
under the principle of Art. 4, RPC. which homicide, which is a single, indivisible
makes a person criminally liable for all the offense.
natural and logical consequences of his
felonious act. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Art. 48: Special complex crime of 2. The argument raised by A. B and C is not
Robbery with homicide correct because their liability is not only for
Robbery but for the special complex crime
A, B, C and D all armed, robbed a bank, of Robbery with homicide. But the facts
and when they were about to get out of the stated impresses that separate crimes of
bank, policemen came and ordered them to Robbery “and" Homicide were charged,
surrender but they fired on the police which is not correct. What was committed
officers who fired back and shot it out with was a single indivisible offense of Robbery
them. with homicide, not two crimes.
Suppose a bank employee was killed and Art. 48: Special complex crimes- Robbery
the bullet which killed him came from the with homicide
firearm of the police officers, with what
crime shall you charge A, B, C and D? [3%] Christopher, John, Richard, and Luke are
(1998 Bar Question) fraternity brothers. To protect themselves
from rival fraternities, they all carry guns
Suppose it was robber D who was killed by wherever they go. One night, after
the policemen and the prosecutor charged attending a party, they boarded a taxicab,
A. B and C with Robbery and Homicide. held the driver at gunpoint and took the
They demurred arguing that they (A, B and latter's earnings.
C were not the ones who killed robber D,
hence, the charge should only be Robbery. What crime, if any, did the four commit if
How would you resolve their argument? they killed the driver? Explain.
(2%) (1998 Bar Question) (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
A, B. C and D should be charged with the No, the crime becomes robbery with
crime of robbery with homicide because the homicide and all the fraternity brothers are
death of the bank employee was brought liable. The existence of a band shall be
about by the acts of said offenders on the appreciated only as generic aggravating
occasion of the robbery. They shot it out circumstance. Also, if the firearms used
with the policeman, thereby causing such were unlicensed, the same would only be
death by reason or on the occasion of a taken as generic aggravating circumstance
robbery; hence, the composite crime of as provided by the Rep. Act No. 8294
robbery with homicide. (People v. Bolinget, G.R. Nos. 137949-52,
December 11, 2003).
The argument is valid, considering that a
124
separate charge for Homicide was filed. It Art. 6 (consummated carnapping) Art. 249;
would be different if the charge filed was for Art. 263; Homicide, Serious Physical
Page
Injuries and Damage to property resulting guilty of vagrancy and imprisoned for ten
from reckless imprudence. (10) days of arresto menor and fined fifty
pesos (P50.00). Is he eligible for
probation? Why? (3%) (2002 Bar Question)
Dodoy, possessing only a student driver's
permit, found a parked car with the key left
in the ignition, he proceeded to drive it
away, intending to sell it. Just then Ting, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
owner of the car, arrived. Failing to make
Dodoy stop. Ting boarded a taxi and No, he is not eligible. The benefits of the
pursued Dodoy, who in his haste to Probation Law (PD 968, as amended) does
escape, and because of his inexperience, not extend to those sentenced to serve a
violently collided with a jeepney full of maximum term of imprisonment of more
passengers. The jeepney overturned and than six years (Sec. 9a).
was wrecked. One passenger was killed:
the leg of the other passenger was crushed It is of no moment that in his previous
and had to be amputated. The car of Ting conviction A was given a penalty of only ten
was damaged to the tune of P20.000.00. (10) days of arresto mayor and a fine of
P50.00.
What offense or offenses may Dodoy be
charged with? Discuss. (1993 Bar
Question) Special law – Probation law – Period;
termination
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(1) Maganda was charged with violation of
Consummated carnnaping. Homicide, Bouncing Checks Law (BP 22) punishable
Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to by imprisonment of not less than 30 days
property resulting from reckless but not more than 1 year or a fine of not less
imprudence. than but not more than double the amount
of the check, which fine shall not exceed
Please take note that with respect to P200.000.00, or both. The court convicted
Espiritu Case, taking hold of the object is her of the crime and sentenced her to pay
enough to consummate the crime: although a fine of P50,000.00 with subsidiary
in the Dino case, it is still frustrated imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to
because there is inability to dispose freely pay the private complainant the amount of
the object. the check. Maganda was unable to pay the
Criminal law – Execution and service – fine but filed a petition for probation. The
Probation Law (PD 968, as amended); court granted the petition subject to the
Disqualified offenders condition, among others, that she should
not change her residence without the
1. A was charged with homicide. After trial, court’s prior approval.
he was found guilty and sentenced to six
years and one (1) day in prision mayor, as 1. What is the proper period of
125
How is the Indeterminate Sentence Law imprisonment of from five (5) to ten (10)
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
the minimum shall not be less than the the offense is imprisonment of not less than
minimum prescribed by the same. five (5) years but not more than ten (10)
Page
plea of guilty. In the imposition of the proper Jose is charged with bigamy. The Revised
penalty, should the Indeterminate Penal Code prescribes the penalty of
Sentence Law be applied? If you were the prision mayor for this offense. The
judge trying the case, what penalty would information filed against Jose alleged one
you impose on Andres? (1989 Bar aggravating cir-cumstance. Upon being
Question) arraigned, he entered the plea of guilty and
invoked the additional mitigating
SUGGESTED ANSWER: circumstance of voluntary surrender which
the trial fiscal admitted. If you were the
The Indeterminate Sentence Law should judge trying the case, from what range of
be applied in this case. By express the prescribed penalty would you
provision of said law (section 1) it is determine the proper penalty (to constitute
applicable to offenses punished by special the maximum term of an indeterminate
laws. The indeter-minate sentence in such sentence) to be imposed on Jose? (1989
cases shall consist of a maximum term Bar Question)
which shall not exceed the maximum fixed
by the special law and a minimum term SUGGESTED ANSWER:
which shall not be less than the minimum
term pescribed by the same. I would take the maximum term of the
indeterminate sentence from the range of
If I were the judge trying the case, I would prision mayor in its minimum period. This is
impose a penalty consisting of any duration so because while there are two ordinary
not less than 5 years as minimum term and mitigating circumstances present, one of
any duration not more than 10 years as them is offset by an aggravating
maximum term. It could be five years and 1 circumstance. Consequently, it is as if the
day to 7 years; 7 years, six months and 1 crime is attended by only one ordinary
day to 9 years; or any other sentence circumstance and this will result in the
where the minimum term is not less than 5 imposition of the minimum period of the
years and the maximum term not more penalty prescribed by law.
than 10 years.
The presence of two or more ordinary
The plea of guilty cannot be considered as mitigating circumstances will give rise to a
a mitigating circumstance in this case. The privileged mitigating circumstance only if
imposition of the indeterminate penalty in a there is no aggravating circumstance
special law rests upon the discretion of the present and the penalty prescribed by law
court. Also, the pleas of guilty as a is divisible. In this case, while the penalty of
mitigating circumstance under the Revised prision mayor is divisible, and while there
Penal Code is appre-ciated only in a are two ordinary mitigating circumstances
divisible penalty. It cannot be applied to a present, there is an aggravating
penalty which is not divisible into periods of circumstance. This precludes the reduction
fixed duration, like the penalty provided in of the penalty by one degree lower
special laws. inasmuch as the two ordinary mitigating
circumstances cannot be considered as a
128
QUESTION:
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
When would the Indeterminate Sentence Carlos is not entitled to avail of the
Law be inapplicable? (2003 Bar Question) Indeterminate Sentence Law because
Section 2 of said law specifically
SUGGESTED ANSWER: disqualifies and disallows application
thereof to persons sentenced to life
The Indeterminate Sentence Law is not imprisonment.
applicable to:
1. those persons convicted of offenses QUESTION:
punished with death penalty or
lifeimprisonment or reclusion perpetua; Macky, a security guard, arrived home late
129
intercourse. Macky pulled out his service If so, how will you apply it? (1994 Bar
gun and shot and killed Ken. Macky was Question)
charged with murder for the death of Ken.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The court found that Ken died under If I were the judge, I will apply the
exceptional circumstances and exonerated provisions of the Indeterminate Sentence
Macky of murder but sentenced him to Law, as the last sentence of Section I Act
destierro, conformably with Article 247 of 4103, specifically provides the application
the Revised Penal Code. The court also thereof for violations of special laws.
ordered Macky to pay indemnity to the
heirs of the victim in the amount of Under the same provision, the minimum
P50,000. must not be less than the minimum
provided therein (six years and one day)
While serving his sentence, Macky entered and the maximum shall not be more than
the prohibited area and had a pot session the maximum provided therein, i.e. twelve
with Ivy, (Joy's sister). Is Macky entitled to years. (People vs. Rosalind Reyes, 186
an indeterminate sentence in case he is SCRA 184)
found guilty of use of prohibited
substances? Explain your answer. (2007 Special law - Indeterminate Sentence Law
Bar Question) – Application on the imposed sentence
b) A prison term of 6 months as by law and the minimum shall not be less
minimum, to 11 months, as maximum may than the minimum penalty prescribed by
not be imposed by the court because the the same. I have the discretion to impose
Indeterminate Sentence Law does not the penalty within the said minimum and
apply when the penalty imposed as maximum.
maximum of the sentence is imprisonment
which does not exceed one (1) year. Special law - Indeterminate Sentence Law
Obviously the Indeterminate Sentence Law – Application on the imposed sentence
has been applied where the sentence
imposed reflects a minimum and a [a] In a conviction for homicide, the trial
maximum. court appreciated two (2) mitigating
c) The court may not validly impose a circumstances and one (1) aggravating
straight penalty of two years because the circumstance. Homicide under Article 249
Indeterminate Sentence Law requires the of the Revised Penal Code is punishable by
court to set a minimum and a maximum of reclusion temporal, an imprisonment term
the sentence where the imprisonment to be of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to
imposed already exceeds one (1) year, twenty (20) years. Applying the
unless the offender is disqualified from the Indeterminate Sentence Law, determine
benefits of the said Law. the appropriate penalty to be imposed.
Explain. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
If I were the Judge, I will impose an No. My answer will not be the same
indeterminate sentence, the maximum of because violations of Rep. Act 9165 are
Page
which shall not exceed the maximum fixed mala prohibita in which mitigating and
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
For crimes punished under the Revised The imposition of penalty for the crime of
Penal Code, the maximum term of the homicide, which is penalized by
indeterminate sentence shall be the imprisonment exceeding one (1) year and
penalty properly imposable under the same is divisible, is covered by the Indeterminate
Code after considering the attending Sentence Law. The said law requires that
mitigating and/or aggravating the sentence in this case should reflect a
circumstances according to Art. 64 of said minimum term for purposes of parole, and
Code. The minimum term of the same a maximum term fixing the limit of the
sentence shall be fixed within the range of imprisonment. Imposing a straight penalty
the penalty next lower in degree to that is incorrect.
prescribed for the crime under the said
Code.
(R.A. No. 4103, as amended) – Penalty Roman visited Wendy at her condo to invite
imposable for the crime of homicide her to dinner, but Wendy turned him down
Page
unlocked. Roman attempted to follow, but order of probation directed him to pay in
appeared to have second thoughts; he installment, at the rate of P1,000.00 a
simply went back to Wendy's condo, let month, the damages awarded to the
himself in, and waited for her return. On offended party. Jose was able to pay only
Wendy's arrival later that evening, Roman three (3) monthly installments. Because of
grabbed her from behind and, with a knife such failure, the offended party filed a
in hand, forced her to undress. Wendy had motion for the execution of the civil aspect
no choice but to comply. Roman then tied of the decision.
Wendy's hands to her bed and sexually
assaulted her five (5) times that night. Is the order directing the payment of the
Roman was charged with, and was damages in installment valid? Did it not
convicted of, five (5) counts of rape, but the modify the decision after it had become
judge did not impose the penalty of final? (1991 Bar Question)
reclusion perpetua for each count. Instead,
the judge sentenced Roman to 40 years of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
imprisonment on the basis of the three-fold
rule. Was the judge correct? (2013 BAR) Yes, the order directing payment in
installment is proper. It did not modify the
Answer: final decision but only in the manner of its
execution. (Similarly situated in the case of
No, the three-fold rule is applicable only in Agustin vs. Court of Appeals).
connection with the service of the sentence
not in the imposition of the proper Should the motion for execution be
penalties. The court must impose all granted? (1991 Bar Question)
penalties for all the crimes for which the
accused have been found guilty. Thus, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
court should not make a computation in it
decision and sentence the accused to not Execution should be granted as the
more than the threefold of the most severe decision is final and executory, following
of the penalties imposable. The the dissenting opinion of Justice I. Cruz in
computation under the threefold rule is for said case.
the prison authorities to make.
ART 78-88 – EXECUTION OF PENALTIES
– Simultaneous service of penalties
Criminal law – Penalties - Execution of the
civil aspect of the decision. What are the penalties that may be served
simultaneously? (2007 Bar Question)
Jose Lopez was convicted for the crime of
serious physical injuries and, taking into SUGGESTED ANSWER:
account two (2) mitigating circumstances,
was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of The penalties that may be served
four (4) months and twenty (20) days, and simultaneously are imprisonment/ destierro
to indemnify the victim in the amount of and:
133
Public Order. Under Section 9 of the (D) No, because his previous sentence
Probation Law, PD 968 as amended, of more than 6 years disqualified him so
Page
that he can no longer avail of probation as Special law – Probation law - Legal effect
an alternative remedy. of application for probation on the judgment
(E) None of the above. of conviction
Juancho owns a small piggery in Malolos, Johnny Gitara was convicted of the crime
Bulacan. One Saturday afternoon, he of estafa by the Regional Trial Court of
discovered that all his pigs had died. Manila. He was imposed the indeterminate
Suspecting that one of his neighbours had penalty of imprisonment of 3 years, 2
poisoned the pigs, Juancho went home, months and 1 day as minimum and six
took his rifle, went around the years as maximum, both of prision
neighbourhood, and fired his rifle in the air correccional and was ordered to imdemnify
while shouting, "makakatikim sa akin ang the offended party in the amount of
naglason ng mga baboy ko." Barangay P3.000.00. He filed an application for
officials requested police assistance and probation upon the promulgation of the
Juancho was apprehended. Juancho was judgment.
charged with and convicted of the crime of
alarms and scandals. Juancho did not What is the legal effect of his application for
appeal his conviction. probation on the judgment of conviction?
Is Juancho qualified for probation? (2013 Does said application interrupt the running
BAR) of the period of appeal? (1992 Bar
(A) Yes, because the penalty for alarms Question)
and scandals is less than six (6) years.
(B) Yes, because Juancho did not SUGGESTED ANSWER:
appeal his conviction.
(C) No, because the crime of alarms The filing of the application for probation is
and scandals carries with it a fine ofP200. considered as a waiver of the right of the
(D) No, because the crime of alarms accused to appeal; the decision has
and scandals affects public order. (E) become final. In view of the finality of the
None of the above. decision there is no period of appeal to
** In 2013 when this exam was given, the speak of.
correct answer was “D” because Alarms
and Scandal is a Crime against Public
Order. Under Section 9 of the Probation Special law – Probation law – Purpose of
Law, PD 968 as amended, probation shall probation law
not extend to those offenders convicted of
any crime against the national security and “A” was charged with theft and upon
the public order. arraignment, pleaded guilty to the charge.
However, The Probation Law has been He was detained for failure to post bail.
recently amended by RA 10707, which was After “two (2) months, a decision was
approved last Nov. 26, 2015. Under RA rendered, sentencing “A” to an
10707, those “offenders convicted of any indeterminate sentence of six (6) months
crime against the public order” have been and one (1) day as a minimum, to one (1)
excluded from the list of disqualified year and one (1) month as maximum, and
135
issued a Commitment Order addressed to prison terms, the totality of the prison terms
the Provincial Jail Warden. On January 28, should not be taken into account for the
1985, “A applied for probation but his purposes of determining the eligibility of the
application was denied on the ground that accused for the probation. The law uses
the sentence of conviction became final the word "maximum term", and not total
and executory on term. It is enough that each of the prison
terms does not exceed six years. The
January 16, 1985, when “A” commence to number of offenses is immaterial for as
serve his sentence, a) Is “A” eligible for long as the penalties imposed, when taken
probation? b) What is the purpose of the individually and separately, are within the
probation law? (1989 Bar Question) probationable period.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Special law –Execution and service –
Probation Law (PD 968, as amended);
The purposes of the Probation Law are: grant of probation, manner and conditions
1. to promote the correction and
rehabilitation of an offender by providing May a probationer appeal from the decision
him with individualized treatment; revoking the grant of probation or modifying
2. to provide an opportunity for the the terms and conditions thereof? (2%)
reformation of a penitent offender which (2002 Bar Question)
might be less probable if he were to serve
a prison sentence; and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
3. to prevent the commission of
offenses. No. Under Section 4 of the Probation Law,
as amended, an order granting or denying
Special law - Probation Law of 1976 - Grant probation is not appealable.
of probation
Special law – Probation law – improper
The accused was found guilty of grave oral denial thereof
defamation in sixteen (16) Informations
which were tried jointly and was sentenced Boyet Mar was charged with consented
in one decision to suffer in each case a abduction by a 17-year old complainant.
prison term of one (1) year and one (1) day The accused made wedding arrangements
to one (1) year and eight (8) months of with the girl, but her parents insisted on the
prision correccional. Within the period to prosecution of the case. To avoid further
appeal, he filed an application for probation embarrassment of a court trial for him and
under the Probation Law of 1976, as the girl, the accused entered a plea of
amended. Could he possibly qualify for guilty. He then filed a petition for probation
probation? (1997 Bar Question) before serving sentence, but the court
denied the petition on the ground that “it
SUGGESTED ANSWER: would be better for the accused to serve
sentence so that he would reform himself
136
Yes. In Francisco vs. Court of Appeals, 243 and avoid the scandal in the community
SCRA 384, the Supreme Court held that in that would be caused by the grant of the
Page
sentence does not bar him from availing charged in May 2007. Since Republic Act
himself of the benefits of the Probation 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of
Law. 2006) was already in effect, Joe moved to
avail of the process of intervention or
It is true that under the new Rules on diversion.
Criminal Procedure it is provided that a
judgment in a criminal case becomes final [e] Suppose Joe was convicted of
after the lapse of the period for perfecting attempted murder with a special
an appeal, or when the sentence has been aggravating circumstance and was denied
partially or totally satisfied or served, or the suspension of sentence, would he be
accused has applied for probation (Sec. 7, eligible for probation under Presidential
Rule 120). But Section 9 of the same Rule Decree (PD) 968, considering that the
provides that “nothing in this Rule shall be death penalty is imposable for the
construed as affecting any existing consummated felony? Explain. (2%) (2009
provision in the law governing suspension Bar Question)
of sentence, probation or parole.”
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The probation law does not speak of filing
an application for probation BEFORE Yes. He would be eligible for probation
judgment has become final. It only speaks because the penalty imposable on Joe will
of filing the application WITHIN THE not exceed 6 years imprisonment.
PERIOD FOR PERFECTING AN APPEAL. Even if it would be considered that the
There is nothing in the Probation Law that crime committed was punishable by death,
bars an accused who has commenced to the penalty as far as Joe is concerned can
serve his sentence from filing an only be reclusion perpetua because Rep.
application for probation provided he does Act 9344 forbids the imposition of the
so WITHIN THE PERIOD FOR capital punishment upon offenders
PERFECTING AN APPEAL. thereunder.
The murder being attempted only, the
What the Probation Law provides is that no prescribed penalty is two degree lower than
application for probation shall be reclusion perpetua; hence, prision mayor.
entertained or granted if the defendant has Because Joe was 17 years old when he
perfected an appeal from the judgment or committed the crime, the penalty of prision
conviction. It does not say that no mayor should be lowered further by one
application shall be entertained if the degree because his minority is a privileged
judgment has become final because the mitigating circumstance; hence, prision
convict has commenced to serve his correccional or imprisonment within the
sentence. range of six months and 1 day to 6 years is
the imposable.
Special law – Probation law – Eligibility for
probation Special law – Probation Law – Disqualified
offenders
Joe was 17 years old when he committed
138
homicide in 2005. The crime is punishable Carlos was charged and convicted of
by reclusion temporal. After two years in murder. He was sentenced to life
Page
1. Juanito is not entitled to probation How will you rule on his application?
because the law, as amended, requires the Discuss fully. (1995 Bar Question)
140
with Rep. Act 9344, otherwise known as Secretary of Justice, 301 SCRA 96
the "Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of [19991).
Page
Since the crime committed is Homicide and Assuming a judgment of conviction and
the penalty therefor is reclusion temporal, after considering the attendant
the MAXIMUM sentence under the circumstances, what penalty should the
Indeterminate Sentence Law should be the judge impose? (2013 BAR)
minimum of the penalty, which is 12 years
and 1 day to 14 years and 8 months. The ANSWER
MINIMUM penalty will thus be the penalty
next lower in degree, which is prision Bruno should be sentenced to an
mayor in its full extent (6 years and 1 day indeterminate sentence penalty of arresto
to 12 years). mayor in any of its period to prision
correccional in its medium period as
Ergo, the proper penalty would be 6 years maximum. Bruno was entitled to two
and 1 day, as minimum, to 12 years and 1 privileged mitigating circumstances of
day, as maximum. I believe that because of incomplete self-defense and the presence
the remaining mitigating circumstances of at least two ordinary mitigating
after the off-setting it would be very logical circumstances (voluntary surrender and
to impose the minimum of the MINIMUM plea of guilt) without any aggravating
sentence under the ISL and the minimum circumstance under Art. 69 and 64(5) of the
of the MAXIMUM sentence. RPC respectively, which lowers the
prescribed penalty for homicide which is
reclusion temporal to prision correccional.
144
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Torrecampo, G.R. No. 139033, December crime or crimes would you charge B?
18, 2002). Explain.
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
If you were the counsel of B. what would which is in the name of his wife
be your defense? Discuss. and children? Reason out.
The crime committed is estafa thru A. Andy will not be criminally liable
falsification of public document. because Section 6 of RA 7080 provides
that the crime punishable under this Act
My defense will be prescription because shall prescribe in twenty years and the
the crime was committed in 1964 and problem asked whether Andy can still be
almost twenty nine years had already charged with the crime of plunder after 20
elapsed since then. Even if we take years.
Falsification and Estafa individually, they
have already prescribed. It is to be noted B. Yes, because Section 6 provides
that when it comes to discovery, the fact that recovery of properties unlawfully
that the crime was discovered in 1964 will acquired by public officers from them or
be of no moment because the offended their nominees or transferees shall not be
party is considered to have constructive barred by prescription, laches or estoppel.
notice on the forgery after the Deed of Sale
where his signature had been falsified was (1995 Bar Question)
registered in the office of the Register of Joe and Marcy were married in Batanes
Deeds (Cabral vs. Pu.no, 70 SCRA 606) in 1955. After two years, Joe left Marcy
(1993 Bar Question) and settled in Mindanao where he later
Through kickbacks, percentages or met and married Linda on 12 June 1960.
commissions and other fraudulent The second marriage was registered in
schemes/conveyances and taking the civil registry of Davao City three
advantage of his position, Andy, a days after its celebration. On 10 October
former mayor of a suburban town, 1975 Marcy who remained in Batanes
acquired assets amounting to P10 discovered the marriage of Joe to Linda.
billion which is grossly On 1 March 1976 Marcy filed a complaint
disproportionate to his lawful income. for bigamy against Joe.
Due to his influence and connections
and despite knowledge by the The crime of bigamy prescribed in
authorities of his ill-gotten wealth, he fifteen years computed from the day the
was charged with the crime of plunder crime is discovered by the offended
only after twenty (20) years from his party, the authorities or their agents.
defeat in the last elections he Joe raised the defense of prescription of
participated in. the crime, more than fifteen years
having elapsed from the celebration of
A. May Andy still be held criminally the bigamous marriage up to the filing
liable? Why? of Marcy’s complaint. He contended that
the registration of his second marriage
B. Can the State still recover the in the civil registry of Davao City was
146
upon Marcy.
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
the defense was waived by the failure of Mina carry the dead body of Ara, place it
A to raise it in a motion to quash. inside the trunk of her car and drive
Page
found. Mina spread the news in the Manila. The case was subsequently filed
neighborhood that Ara went to live with with the City Fiscal of Manila but it was
her grandparents in Ormoc City. For dismissed on the ground that the crime
fear of his life, Albert did not tell anyone, had already prescribed. The law
even his parents and relatives, about provides that the crime of concubinage
what he witnessed. Twenty and a half prescribes in ten (10) years.
(20 & 1/2) years after the incident, and
right after his graduation in Was the dismissal by the fiscal correct?
Criminology, Albert reported the crime Explain. (5%)
to NBI authorities. The crime of
homicide prescribes in 20 years. Can SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the state still prosecute Mina for the
death of Ara despite the lapse of 20 & 1/2 No, the Fiscals dismissal of the case on
years? Explain. (5%) alleged prescription is not correct. The filing
of the complaint with the Municipal Trial
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Court, although only for preliminary
investigation, interrupted and suspended
Yes, the State can still prosecute Mina for the period of prescription in as much as the
the death of Ara despite the lapse of 20 & jurisdiction of a court in a criminal case is
1/2 years. Under Article 91. RPC, the determined by the allegations in the
period of prescription commences to run complaint or information, not by the result
from the day on which the crime is of proof. (People vs. Galano, 75 SCRA
discovered by the offended party, the 193)
authorities or their agents. In the case at
bar, the commission of the crime was (2004 Bar Question)
known only to Albert, who was not the OW is a private person engaged in cattle
offended party nor an authority or an agent ranching. One night, he saw AM stabbed
of an authority. It was discovered by the CV treacherously, then throw the dead
NBI authorities only when Albert revealed man’s body into a ravine. For 25 years,
to them the commission of the crime. CVs body was never seen nor found;
Hence, the period of prescription of and OW told no one what he had
20years for homicide commenced to run witnessed.
only from the time Albert revealed the same
to the NBI authorities. Yesterday after consulting the parish
priest, OW decided to tell the authorities
(2001 Bar Question) what he witnessed, and revealed that
On June 1, 1988, a complaint for AM had killed CV 25 years ago.
concubinage committed in February
1987 was filed against Roberto in the Can AM be prosecuted for murder
Municipal Trial Court of Tanza, Cavite despite the lapse of 25 years? Reason
for purposes of preliminary briefly. (5%)
investigation. For various reasons, it
was only on July 3, 1998 when the Judge SUGGESTED ANSWER:
148
since the crime was committed in despite the lapse of 25 years, because the
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
crime has not yet prescribed and legally, its offended party, the authorities or their
prescriptive period has not even agents: in this case, from January 2, 1970
commenced to run. when it was made known to the police
authorities until January 6, 1980, when
The period of prescription of a crime shall Baldo was arrested and charged. The
commence to run only from the day on killing committed, whether it be homicide or
which the crime has been discovered by murder, is punishable by an afflictive
the offended party, the authorities or their penalty which prescribes in twenty (20)
agents (Art. 91, Revised Penal Code). OW, years, whereas only around ten (10) years
a private person who saw the killing but had lapsed from January 2, 1970 (when the
never disclosed it, is not the offended party authorities discovered the commission of
nor has the crime been discovered by the the crime) to January 6, 1920 (when the
authorities or their agents. accused was charged in court).
on which the crime is discovered by the from the day on which the crime was
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
discovered by the offended party, the prescriptive period had lapsed. Hence the
authorities or their agents (Art 91, RPC). crime has not yet prescribed
If an accused acquitted, it does not On the other hand, if it were Alma who died
necessarily follow that no civil liability pending appeal of her conviction, her
arising from the acts complained of may be criminal liability shall be extinguished and
awarded in the same judgment except: If therewith the civil liability under the
there is an express waiver of the liability; Revised Penal Code (Art. 89, par. 1, RPC).
and if there is a reservation of file a However, the claim for civil indemnity may
separate civil action (Rule 107; Padilla vs. be instituted under the Civil Code (Art.
CA People vs. Jalandoni). 1157) if predicated on a source of
obligation other than delict, such as law,
contracts, quasi-contracts and quasidelicts
ART. 89--Extinguishment of criminal (People vs. Bayotas 236 SCRA 239, G.R.
liability; civil liability 152007, September 2, 1994).
For defrauding Loma, Alma was charged b. Exceptions to the rule that acquittal from
before the Municipal Trial Court of Malolos, a criminal case extinguishes civil liability,
Bulacan. After a protracted trial, Alma was are:
convicted. While the case was pending
appeal in the Regional Trial Court of the 1. When the civil action is based on
same province, Loma who was then obligations not arising from the act
suffering from breast cancer, died. Alma complained of as a felony;
manifested to the court that with Loma's 2. When acquittal is based on
death, her (Alma's) criminal and civil reasonable doubt or acquittal is on the
liabilities are now extinguished. Is Alma’s ground that guilt has not been proven
contention correct? What if it were Alma beyond reasonable doubt (Art. 29, New
who died, would it affect her criminal and Civil Code);
civil liabilities? Explain. (3%) (2000 Bar 3. Acquittal due to an exempting
Question) circumstance, like insanity;
4. Where the court states in its
a. Name at least two exceptions to the judgment that the case merely involves a
general rule that in case of acquittal of the civil obligation;
accused in a criminal case, his civil liability 5. Where there was a proper
is likewise extinguished. (2%) (2000 Bar reservation forthe filing of a separate civil
Question) action;
6. In cases of independent civil actions
SUGGESTED ANSWER: provided for in Arts. 31,32,33 and 34 of the
New Civil Code;
No. Alma's contention is not correct. The 7. When the judgment of acquittal
death of the offended party does not includes a declaration that the fact from
extinguish the criminal liability of the which the civil liability might arise did not
offender, because the offense is committed exist (Saplera vs. CA. 314 SCRA370);
against the State (People vs. Misola, 87 8. Where the civil liability is not derived
Phil. 830, 833). Hence, it follows that the or based on the criminal act of which the
civil liability of Alma based on the offense accused is acquitted (Saplera vs. CA, 314
151
Under Art. 89. RPC and jurisprudence ART. 89 Criminal law – Modification and
(People vs. Jose. 71 SCRA 273, People vs. extinction of criminal liability – Pardon
Alison. 44 SCRA 523; etc.) death of the and Amnesty
accused pending appeal extinguishes his
criminal and civil liabilities. Civil liability TRY was sentenced to death by final
includes pecuniary liabilities, such as fine. judgment. But subsequently he was
Hence, the same, together with the granted pardon by the President. The
disqualification and the costs are pardon was silent on the perpetual
extinguished. disqualification of TRY to hold any public
office.
ART.89--Criminal and civil liability;
when extinguished After his pardon, TRY ran for office as
Mayor of APP, his hometown. His
AX was convicted of reckless imprudence opponent sought to disqualify him. TRY
resulting in homicide. The trial court contended he is not disqualified because
sentenced him to a prison term as well as he was already pardoned by the President
to pay P150.000 as civil indemnity and unconditionally.
damages. While his appeal was pending,
AX met a fatal accident. He left a young Is TRY’S contention correct? Reason
widow, 2 children, and a million-peso briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar Question)
estate. What is the effect, if any, of his
death on his criminal as well as civil SUGGESTED ANSWER:
liability? Explain briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar
153
Claiming that she should not be made to from confinement. He claims that the
pay P5,000.00, Linda appealed to the amnesty extends to the offense of evasion
Office of the President. of Service of Sentence. As judge, will you
grant the petition? Discuss fully. (4%)
The Office of the President dismissed the (2009 Bar Question)
appeal and held that acquittal, not absolute
pardon, is the only ground for SUGGESTED ANSWER:
reinstatement to one's former position and
that the absolute pardon does not exempt Yes, I will grant the petition because the
the culprit from payment of civil liability. sentence that was evaded proceeded from
the crime of Rebellion which has been
IS Linda entitled to reinstatement? (1994 obliterated by the grant of amnesty to the
Bar Question) offender (Art. 89 [3], RPC).
BAR)
Antero then filed a petition for habeas
Page
a) What advice will you give Adamos? and abolishes and puts into oblivion the
Explain. offense itself, it so overlooks and
obliterates the offense with which he is
Answer: charged, so that the person released by
amnesty stands before the law precisely as
If I were the counsel of Senator Adamos, I though he had committed no offense
will give him the advice that he cannot run (Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, G.R. No. L-
in the Senatorial race since the terms of the 1278, January 21, 1949).
pardon has not expressly restored his right
to hold public office or remitted the CIVIL LIABILITY
accessory penalty of perpetual absolute
ART. 103--Execution of the employer’s
disqualification. Under Article 36 of the
subsidiary liability
Revised Penal Code, a pardon shall not
work the restoration of the right to hold
Juan Cruz, driver of a cargo truck owned
public office unless such right be expressly
and operated by VICMICO a sugar central,
restored by terms of the pardon. Under
while driving recklessly caused Jorge Abad
Article 41, the penalty of reclusion perpetua
to fall from the truck resulting in injuries
shall carry with it perpetual absolute
which caused his death. Juan Cruz was
disqualification which the offender shall
convicted of homicide thru reckless
suffer even though pardoned as to the
imprudence and was ordered to pay the
principal penalty, unless the same shall
heirs of the deceased Ahad P12,000.00.
have been expressly remitted in the pardon
The respondent judge issued an order
(Risos-Vidal v. Lim, G.R. No. 206666,
granting a motion for execution of the civil
January 21, 2015).
service liability of the accused Juan Cruz,
but the return of the Sheriff showed that the
b) Assuming that what Adamos
accused was insolvent. Petitioners, heirs of
committed was heading a rebellion for
the deceased Abad, now filed a motion for
which he was imposed the same penalty of
execution of the employers subsidiary
reclusion perpetua, and what he received
liability under Art. 103 of the Revised Penal
was amnesty from the government, will
Code. Respondent judge denied the
your answer be the same? Explain.
motion, stating that the employer
VICMICO, not having been notified that his
Answer:
driver was facmg a criminal charge, a
separate action had to be filed. Hence, a
If Senator Adamos was convicted of
petition for mandamus was filed.
rebellion and he received amnesty, I will
give him the advice that he can run in the
Decide the case. (1988 Bar Question)
Senatorial race. Under Article 89 of the
Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
totally extinguished by amnesty, which
completely extinguishes the penalty and all
Mandamus will lie. There is no need for a
its effects. Thus, the amnesty extinguishes
separate civil action because the driver
not only the principal penalty of reclusion
was convicted (Martinez vs. Barredo). All
157
Article 103 of the Revised Penal Code (that since his liability is not primary but only
there is employer-employee relationship, subsidiary in case his
that the employer is engaged in an industry employee cannot pay, he need not be
and that the driver is insolvent). impleaded in the in the criminal case. It
suffices that he was duly notified of the
Art. 103--Civil liability – Subsidiary motion for issuance of a subsidiary writ of
liability of the employer execution and thus given the opportunity to
be heard.
Guy, while driving a passenger jeepney
owned and operated by Max, bumped Art. 104-Civil liability -Restitution;
Demy, a pedestrian crossing the street. reparation
Demy sustained injuries, which required
medical attendance for three months. Guy Allan, the Municipal Treasurer of the
was charged with reckless imprudence Municipality of Gerona, was in a hurry to
resulting to physical injuries. Convicted by return to his office after a day-long official
the Metropolitan Trial Court, Guy was conference. He alighted from the
sentenced to suffer a straight penalty of government car which was officially
three months of arresto mayor and ordered assigned to him, leaving the ignition key
to indemnify Demy in the sum of P5.000 and the car unlocked, and rushed to his
and to pay PI,000 as attorney's fees. office. Jules, a bystander, drove off with the
car and later sold the same to his brother,
Upon finality of the decision, a writ of Danny for P20.000.00, although the car
execution was served upon Guy, but was was worth P800,000.00. What, if any, are
returned unsatisfied due to his insolvency. their respective civil liabilities? Explain.
Demy moved for a subsidiary writ of (5%) (2005 Bar Question)
execution against Max. The latter opposed
the motion on the ground that the decision SUGGESTED ANSWER:
made no mention of his subsidiary liability
and that he was not impleaded in the case. Allan, Jules and Danny are all civilly liable
for restitution of the car to the government,
How will you resolve the motion? [5%] or if no longer possible, reparation of the
(1998 Bar Question) damages caused by payment of the
replacement cost of the car minus
SUGGESTED ANSWER: allowance for depreciation, and to
indemnify consequential damages.
The motion is to be granted. Max as an Criminal law –Civil liability - Indemnity
employer of Guy and engaged in an
industry (transportation business) where Macky, a security guard, arrived home late
said employee is utilized, is subsidiarily one night after rendering overtime. He was
civilly liable under Article 103 of the shocked to see Joy, his wife, and Ken, his
Revised Penal Code. Even though the best friend, in the act of having sexual
decision made no mention of his subsidiary intercourse. Macky pulled out his service
liability, the law violated (Revised Penal gun and shot and killed Ken. Macky was
158
Code) itself mandates for such liability and charged with murder for the death of Ken.
Max is deemed to know it because
Page
What kind of damages may the trial court Can the family of the victim still recover civil
159
If A’s family can prove the negligence of B B. Under the facts given, would the
by preponderance of evidence, the civil bank be entitled to the return of the money?
action for damages against B will prosper Why? (1987 Bar Question)
based on quasi-delict. Whoever by act or
omission causes damage to another, there SUGGESTED ANSWER:
being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay
for the damage done. Such fault or A. As legal counsel, I would advise
negligence, about pre-existing contractual Armando to file a civil action for the
relation between the parties, is called a recovery of his car against its legal
quasi-delict (Art. 2176, CC). This is entirely custodian. The car was stolen and
separate and distinct from civil liability therefore it belonged to Armando, an
arising from negligence under the Penal innocent party, who has not participated in
Code (Arts. 31, 2176. 2177, CC). the commission of the robbery by Jose,
Pedro and Juan. The car, is therefore, not
Civil action for recovery of property not subject to confiscation.
subject to confiscation; jurisdiction
B. The motion of the bank lawyer for
Jose. Pedro and Juan, robbed ABC Bank the modification of the judgment with the
of P200,000.00 and using a stolen car, prayer that the money be ordered returned
immediately proceeded to Quezon City. to the bank must be denied. The judgment
The police recovered the money and the is already final and so the court has no
car. After the trial, during which the bank more “jurisdiction” over the case (People
lawyer intervened as private prosecutor, vs. Velez 15 SCRA 26).
the court convicted Jose, Pedro and Juan
of robbery and ordered the forfeiture of the (2015 BAR)
money (P200,000.00) and the car in favor The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found
of the government as proceeds and Tiburcio guilty of frustrated homicide and
instrument of the crime, respectively. The sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty
bank lawyer received copy of the judgment, of four years and one day of prision
but did not do anything. Jose, Pedro and correccional as minimum, to eight years of
Juan did not appeal the judgment, and prision mayor as maximum, and ordered
160
began service of sentence. Two months him to pay actual damages in the amount
later, realizing that the court did not order of P25,000.00. Tiburcio appealed to the
Page
the return of the money to the bank, the Court of Appeals which sustained his
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
complex crime regardless of the number of that can be tried anywhere because it is a
victims (People v. Siyoh, GR No. L-57292, crime against the Law of Nations.
Page
18 February 1986).
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
a) Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway was not stated in the facts given that the 10
Robbery (P.D. 532) (i) Definition men previously attempted similar robberies
of terms (ii) Punishable acts by them to establish “indiscriminate”
commission thereof (Filoteo Jr. v.
A postal van containing mail matters, Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 79543, October
including checks and treasury warrants, 16, 1993).
was hijacked along a national highway by
ten (10) men, two (2) of whom were armed. b. If you were the defense counsel,
They used force, violence and intimidation what are the elements of the crime of
against three (3) postal employees who highway robbery that the prosecution
were occupants of the van, resulting in the should prove to sustain a conviction?
unlawful taking and transportation of the
entire van and its contents. (2012 BAR) Answer:
a. If you were the public prosecutor, Under Section 2 of P.D. 532, highway
would you charge the ten (10) men who robbery is defined as “the seizure of any
hijacked the postal van with violation of person for ransom, extortion or other
Presidential Decree No. 532, otherwise unlawful purposes, or the taking away of
known as the Anti-Piracy and Anti - the property of another by means of
Highway Robbery Law of 1974? Explain violence against or intimidation of person or
your answer. force upon things or other unlawful means,
committed by any person on any Philippine
Answer: highway.” Hence, the elements of highway
robbery are:
No, I would not charge the 10 men with the 1. intent to gain;
crime of highway robbery. The mere fact 2. unlawful taking of the property of
that the offense charged was committed on another;
a highway would not be the determinant for 3. violence against or intimidation of
the application of P.D. 532. If a motor any person;
vehicle, either stationary or moving on a 4. committed on a Philippine highway
highway, is forcibly taken at gun point by 5. indiscrimate victim;
the accused who happened to take a fancy
thereto, the location of the vehicle at the To obtain a conviction for highway robbery,
time of the unlawful taking would not the prosecution must prove that the
necessarily put the offense within the ambit accused were organized for the purpose of
of P.D. 532. In this case, the crime committing robbery indiscriminately. If the
committed is violation of the Anti- purpose is only particular robbery, the
Carnapping Act of 1972 (People v. Puno, crime is only robbery, or robbery in band if
G.R. No. 97471, February 17, 1993). there are at least four armed participants.
Moreover, there is no showing that the 10 (See People v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 104461,
men were a band of outlaws organized for February 23, 1996)
the purpose of depredation upon the
persons and properties of innocent and ART.122, 123--Crimes against National
163
defenseless inhabitants who travel from Security and Law of Nations – Piracy;
one place to another. What was shown is Qualified piracy
Page
DOMICILE (Art. 128, RPC). There are The differences between violation of
three ways by which a public officer or domicile and trespass to dwelling are:
employee may commit this crime, namely:
The offender in violation of domicile is a
a. By entering any dwelling against the public officer acting under color of
will of the owner. The door having been authority; in trespass to dwelling, the
opened by Maria, although Alberto, offender is a private person or public officer
Bernardo and Carlos barged inside the acting in a private capacity.
house before Maria could utter a word, they
did not enter against Maria’s will, there Violation of domicile is committed in 3
being no opposition or prohibition against different ways: (1) by entering the dwelling
entrance whether express or implied. of another against the will of the latter; (2)
Without the consent is not against the will searching papers and other effects inside
(People vs. Sane, CA 40 OG Supp 5, 113). the dwelling without the previous consent
b. By searching papers or other effects of the owner; or (3) refusing to leave the
found therein without the previous consent premises which he entered surreptitiously,
of such owner. Maria had objected to the after being required to leave the premises.
search for the fighting cock inside her
dwelling, but despite said objection, the Trespass to dwelling is committed only in
policemen searched the house. This one way; that is, by entering the dwelling of
makes them criminally liable for the second another against the express or implied will
way of committing the crime of VIOLATING of the latter.
OF DOMICILE.
c. By refusing to leave the premises, TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
after having surreptitiously entered said statement is true, or FALSE if the
dwelling and after having been required to statement is false. Explain your answer in
leave the same. Although the policemen not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
were ordered to leave the house, they did (2009 Bar Question)
not enter it surreptitiously, meaning
clandestinely or secretly. [e] A policeman who, without a judicial
order, enters a private house over the
Insofar as Carlos is concerned, not being a owner's opposition is guilty of trespass to
public officer or employee, he cannot dwelling.
commit the crime of VIOLATION OF
DOMICILE. He is not guilty of trespass to SUGGESTED ANSWER:
dwelling, either because he did not enter
the dwelling AGAINST THE WILL of the False. The crime committed by the
owner, which is the essential element of policeman in this case is violation of
Trespass. domicile because the official duties of a
policeman carry with it an authority to make
What is the difference between violation of searches and seizure upon judicial order.
domicile and trespass to dwelling? He is therefore acting under color of his
(2%) (2002 Bar Question) official authority (Art. 128, RPC).
165
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ART. 124 Criminal law – Crimes against Arrest by a peace officer or by a private
the Fundamental Law of the State – person is lawful –
Arbitrary detention
a. when in his presence, the person to
What are the 3 ways of committing be arrested has committed, is
arbitrary detention? Explain each. 2.5% actually committing, or is attempting to
(2006 Bar Question) commit an offense;
b. when an offense has just been
166
What are the legal grounds for detention? committed and he has probable, cause to
2.5% (2006 Bar Question) believe based on personal knowledge of
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
a judge when he was attacked. He has chairmen are also deemed persons in
retired (71 yrs. old) from his position as a authority. (Article 152, RPC)
person in authority when he was attacked.
Hence, the attack on him cannot be Agents of persons in authority are persons
regarded as against a person in authority who by direct provision of law or by election
anymore. or by appointment by competent authority,
are charged with maintenance of public
Would your answer be the same if the order, the protection and security of life and
reason for the attack was that when Judge property, such as barrio councilman, barrio
Lorenzo was still a practicing lawyer ten policeman, barangay leader and any
years ago, he prosecuted Rigoberto and person who comes to the aid of persons in
succeeded in sending him to jail for one authority (Art.. 152, RPC).
year? Explain your answer. (3%) (2009 Bar In applying the provisions of Articles 148
Question) and 151 of the Rev Penal Code, teachers,
professors and persons charged with the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: supervision of public or duly recognized
private schools, colleges and universities,
Yes. Rigoberto is guilty of Direct Assault and lawyers in the actual performance of
because the employment of violence was their professional duties or on the occasion
by reason of an actual performance of a on such performance, shall be deemed
duty by the offended party acting as a persons in authority. (P.D. No. 299, and
practicing lawyer. Lawyers are considered Batas Pambansa Big. 873).
persons in authority by virtue of Batas
Pambansa Big. 873, which states that Service of Sentence; Delivery of Prisoners
lawyers in the actual performance of their from Jail; Falsification of Public Document
professional duties or on the occasion of
such performance shall be deemed Art 156: Delivering Prisoners from Jail; Art
persons in authority. But the crime having 157: Evasion of Service of Sentence; 171:
been committed 10 years ago, may have Falsification by public officer, employee, or
already prescribed because it is punishable notary or ecclesiastical officer; 210: Direct
by a correctional penalty. Bribery; 223: Coniving with or consenting to
ART 152. PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND evasion
AGENTS OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY
in jail for a drug charge. After receiving signature of the judge in the in the falsified
P500,000.00, Loko forged the signature of order of release.
the judge on the order of release and
accompanied Filthy to the detention center. The guard is liable of:
At the jail, Loko gave the guard (1) Direct Bribery, Article 210, RPC,
P10,000.00 to open the gate and let Takas because he agreed to open the gate and let
out. Takas out in consideration of P10,000.00.
What crime or crimes did Filthy, Loko, and (2) Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners,
the guard commit? (2014 BAR) Article 223, RPC, because he, as the
custodian of Takas, connived or consented
ANSWER: to his escape by opening the gate.
(3) Delivery of Prisoners from Jail, circumstances and was sentenced by the
Article 156, RPC, because he assisted in Regional Trial Court of Dagupan City to
Page
suffer the penalty of destierro during which other patients, decided to allow the
he was not to enter the city. prisoner to be taken by his followers. What
crime, if any, was committed by A’s
While serving sentence, Manny went to followers? Why? (3%) (2002 Bar Question)
Dagupan City to visit his mother. Later, he
was arrested in Manila. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. Did Manny commit any crime? [3%]
(1998 Bar Question) A’s followers shall be liable as principals in
2. If so, where should he be the crime of delivery of prisoner from jail
prosecuted? [2%] (1998 Bar Question) (Art 156, Revised Penal Code).
A. A, a detention prisoner, was taken to a If you were the prosecutor called to institute
hospital for emergency medical treatment. a criminal action against Pablo, with what
His followers, all of whom were armed, crime or crimes would you charge him?
went to the hospital to take him away or Explain. (1993 Bar
170
used to escape. By accepting gifts from aid of a person in authority, Miss Reyes
Brusco, who was part of the syndicate to (Celig v. People, G.R. No. 173150, July 28,
Page
2010).
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
DIRECT ASSAULT against Edgardo. This A. What, if any, are the respective
is so because any person who shall make criminal liability of X, Y and Z? (6%) (2001
use of force or intimidation upon any Bar Question)
person coming to the aid of the authorities
or their agents on occasion of the B. Would your answer be the same if B
commission of the crime of DIRECT were a barangay tanod only? (4%) (2001
ASSAULT, is criminally liable for the crime Bar Question)
of INDIRECT ASSAULT. However, if Emilio
is guilty only of RESISTANCE or SUGGESTED ANSWER:
disobedience as against Edgardo; then his
crime against Florencio would only be A. X is liable for Direct Assault only,
slight physical injuries. assuming the physical injuries inflicted on
B, the Barangay Chairman, to be only slight
A, a teacher at Mapa High School, having and hence, would be absorbed in the direct
gotten mad at X, one of his pupils, because assault. A Barangay Chairman is a person
of the latter’s throwing paper clips at his in authority (Art. 152, RPC) and in this
classmates, twisted his right ear. X went case, was performing his duty of
out of the classroom crying and proceeded maintaining peace and order when
home located at the back of the school. He attacked.
reported to his parents Y and Z what A had T is liable for the complex crimes of Direct
done to him. Y and Z immediately Assault with Less Serious Physical Injuries
proceeded to the school building and for the fistblow on A, the teacher, which
because they were running and talking in caused the latter to fall down. For purposes
loud voices, they were seen by the of the crimes in Arts. 148 and 151 of the
barangay chairman, B, who followed them Revised Penal Code, a.teacher is
as he suspected that an untoward incident considered a person in authority, and
might happen. Upon seeing A inside the having been attacked by Y by reason of his
classroom, X pointed him out to his father, performance of official duty, direct assault
Y, who administered a fist blow' on A, is committed with the resulting less serious
causing him to fail down. When Y was physical injuries completed.
about to kick A, B rushed towards Y and Z, the mother of X and wife of Y may only
pinned both of the latter’s arms. Seeing his be liable as an accomplice to the complex
father being held by B, X went near and crimes of direct assault with less serious
punched B on the face, which caused him physical injuries committed by Y. Her
to lose his grip on Y. Throughout this participation should not be considered as
incident, Z shouted words of that of a coprincipal, since her reactions
encouragement at Y, her husband, and were only incited by her relationship to X
also threatened to slap A. Some security and Y, as the mother of X and the wife of
guards of the school arrived, intervened Y.
and surrounded X,
B. If B were a Barangay Tanod only,
Y and Z so that they could be investigated the act of X of laying hand on him, being an
in the principal’s office. Before leaving, Z agent of a person in authority only, would
173
passed near A and threw a small flower pot constitute the crime of Resistance and
at him but it was deflected by B. Disobedience under Article 151, since X, a
Page
as having acted out of contempt for Captain, was invited to deliver a speech to
authority but more of helping his father get start the dance. While A was delivering his
free from the grip of B. Laying hand on an speech, B, one of the guests, went to the
agent of a person in authority is not ipso middle of the dance floor making obscene
facto direct assault, while it would always dance movements, brandishing a knife and
be direct assault if done to a person in challenging everyone present to a fight. A
authority in defiance to the latter is exercise approached B and admonished him to
of authority. keep quiet and not to disturb the dance and
peace of the occasion. B, instead of
Jose was charged with slight physical heeding the advice of A, stabbed the latter
injuries before a Municipal Trial Judge. He at his back twice when A turned his back to
listened attentively as the Judge read the proceed to the microphone to continue his
sentence. When the Judge reached the speech. A fell to the ground and died. At the
dispositive portion and pronounced Jose time of the incident A was not armed. What
guilty, the latter was enraged, got hold of an crime was committed? Explain. (2%) (2000
ashtray, and threw it at the Judge hitting Bar Question)
him in the eye. As his defense lawyer Pedro
attempted to restrain him, Jose boxed him
and knocked him down. The judge became SUGGESTED ANSWER:
blind in one eye as a consequence.
C. Persons in authority are persons
What crime or crimes did Jose commit? directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as
(1987 Bar Question) an individual or as a member of some court
or government corporation, board, or
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commission. Barrio captains and barangay
chairmen are also deemed persons in
Jose is liable for Qualified Direct Assault authority. (Article 152, RPC)
with Serious Physical Injuries. The
throwing of the ashtray at the Judge hitting Agents of persons in authority are persons
him in the eye is laying of hands on the who by direct provision of law or by election
Judge who is a person in authority while in or by appointment by competent authority,
the performance of duties. Jose is also are charged with maintenance of public
liable for qualified direct assault when he order, the protection and security of life and
boxed his defense lawyer, knocking him property, such as barrio councilman, barrio
down while in the act of restraining him. policeman, barangay leader and any
Under Batas 873 a lawyer is considered a person who comes to the aid of persons in
person in authority if assaulted while in the authority (Art.. 152, RPC).
performance of duties. In applying the provisions of Articles 148
and 151 of the Rev Penal Code, teachers,
professors and persons charged with the
A. Who are deemed to be persons in supervision of public or duly recognized
authority and agents of persons in private schools, colleges and universities,
authority? (3%) (2000 Bar Question) and lawyers in the actual performance of
174
persons in authority. (P.D. No. 299, and and all other acts committed in the further
Batas Pambansa Big. 873). of this purpose are absorbed by rebellion.
The complex crime of direct assault with The armed group committed the crime of
murder was committed. A, as a Barangay kidnapping and serious illegal detention in
Captain, is a person in authority and was violation of Aticle 267 of the Revised Penal
acting in an official capacity when he tried Code which provides that “kidnapping and
to maintain peace and order during the serious illegal detention.— Any private
public dance in the Barangay, by individual who shall kidnap another, or in
admonishing B to keep quiet and not to any other manner deprive him of his liberty,
disturb the dance and peace of the shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
occasion. When B, instead of heeding A's perpetua to death...”
advice, attacked the latter, B acted in
contempt and lawless defiance of authority ART.134-Rebellion- Jacinto, who is an
constituting the crime of direct assault, NPA commander, was apprehended with
which characterized the stabbing of A And unlicensed firearms and explosives. He
since A was stabbed at the back when he was accordingly charged with illegal
was not in a position to defend himself nor possession of said firearms and
retaliate, there was treachery in the explosives. He now questions the filing of
stabbing. Hence, the death caused by such the charges on the ground that they are
stabbing was murder and having been deemed absorbed in a separate charge of
committed with direct assault a complex rebellion filed against him. Decide the
crime of direct assault with murder was issue. (1990 Bar Question)
committed by B.
Suppose Ka Jacinto, using one of the
unlicensed firearms, shot and killed his
ART. 134 Criminal law – Crimes against neighbor in an altercation. May the charge
public order - Rebellion of murder and illegal possession of
firearms be deemed absorbed in the
An armed group, avowed to overthrow the separate charge of rebellion filed against
duly constituted authorities, captured five him? Resolve the matter with reasons.
officers and five members of the armed (1990 Bar Question)
forces and held them in their mountain lair
for seventy-five days and then voluntarily SUGGESTED ANSWER:
released them in consideration of the
promise of medical treatment to be given to The charge of illegal possession of
some of their comrades who were under firearms and explosives is deemed
detention by the authorities. absorbed in the crime of rebellion, such
possession being a necessary means for
What crime or crimes had been the perpetration of the latter crime. [EUas
committed? Reasons. (1988 Bar Question) v. Rodriguez, 107 Phil. 659).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The charges here could not be absorbed
175
If I were the prosecutor, I would charge Unlike rebellion which requires a public
Joselito and Vicente for the crime of murder uprising, coup d’etat may be carried out
as the purpose of the killing was because singly or simultaneously and the principal
of his “corrupt practices”, which does not offenders must be members of the military,
appear to be politically motivated. There is national police or public officer, with or
176
no indication as to how the killing would without civilian support. The criminal
promote or further the objective of the New objective need not be to overthrow the
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
existing government but only to destabilize are they guilty of? (3%) (2002 Bar
the existing government Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
How is the crime of coup d’etat committed?
[3%] (1998 Bar Question) The perpetrators, being persons belonging
to the Armed Forces, would be guilty of the
Supposing a public school teacher crime of coup d’etat, under Article 134-A of
participated in a coup d’etat using an the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
unlicensed firearm. What crime or crimes because their attack was against vital
did he commit? [2%] (1998 Bar Question) military installations which are essential to
the continued possession and exercise of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: governmental powers, and their purpose is
to seize power by taking over such
The crime of coup d'etat is committed by a installations.
swift attack, accompanied by violence,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth If the attack is quelled but the leader is
against the duly constituted authorities of unknown, who shall be deemed the leader
the Republic of the Philippines, military thereof? (2%) (2002 Bar Question)
camps and installations, communication
networks, public utilities and facilities SUGGESTED ANSWER:
needed for the exercise and continued
possession of power, carried out singly or The leader being unknown, any person
simultaneously anywhere in the Philippines who in fact directed the others, spoke for
by persons belonging to the military or them, signed receipts and other documents
police or holding public office, with or issued in their name, or performed similar
without civilian support or participation, for acts, on behalf of the group shall be
the purpose of seizing or diminishing state deemed the leader of said coup d'etat (Art
power. (Art. 134-A, RPC). 135, R.P.C.)
threat against a vital military installation for offices, held hostage the Chief of Staff of
the purpose of seizing power and taking LOGCOM and other officers, killed three
Page
over such installation, what crime or crimes (3) pro-Govemment soldiers, inverted the
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Philippine flag, barricaded all entrances coup d'etat public uprising is not necessary.
and exits to the camp, and announced The essence of the crime is a swift attack,
complete control of the camp. Because of accompanied by violence, intimidation,
the superiority of the proGovemment threat, strategy or stealth, directed against
forces, Col. Amparo and his troops duly constituted authorities of the
surrendered at 7:00 o’clock in the morning Government, or any military camp or
of that day. installation, communication networks,
public utilities or facilities needed for the
a) Did Col. Amparo and his troops commit exercise and continued possession of
the crime of coup d'etat (Article 134-A, government power;
Revised Penal Code or of rebellion? (1991
Bar Question) OBJECTIVE OR PURPOSE:
In rebellion, the purpose is to remove from
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the allegiance of the Philippines, the whole
or any part or the Philippines or any military
a) Under the facts stated, the crime or naval camps, deprive the Chief
committed would be coup d’etat (Republic Executive or Congress from performing
Act No. 6988 incorporating Art. 134-A). their functions. In coup d'etat the objective
is to seize or diminish state powers.
However, since the law was not yet PARTICIPATION
effective as of October 25, 1990, as the
effectivity thereof (Section 8) is upon its In rebellion, any person. In coup d'etat any
approval (which is October 24, 1990) and person belonging to the
publication in at least two (2) newspapers military or police or holding public office,
of general circulation, the felony committed with or without civilian participation.
would be rebellion.
Comment:
ART. 142 Criminal law – Crimes against
If the answer given is coup d’etat public order – Inciting to sedition
substantial credit should be given as the
tenor of the question seems to indicate that What are the different acts of inciting to
coup d’etat as a felony was already sedition? (2007 Bar Question)
existing.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b) Distinguish rebellion from coup
d'etat (1991 Bar Question) The different acts which constitute the
crime of inciting to sedition are:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. Inciting others through speeches,
b) Rebellion distinguished from coup writings, banners and other media of
d’etat: representation to commit acts which
constitute sedition;
178
taking up arms against the Government. In Government of the Philippines or any of its
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
duly constituted authorities, which tend to testimony was filed against Andrew. As his
disturb or obstruct the performance of lawyer, what legal step will you take? (1994
official functions, or which tend to incite Bar Question)
others to cabal and meet for unlawful
purposes; SUGGESTED ANSWER:
3. Inciting through the same media of
representation rebellious conspiracies Yes. For one to be criminally liable under
or riots; Art. 181. RPC, it is not necessary that the
4. Stirring people to go against lawful criminal case where Andrew testified is
authorities, or disturb the peace and public terminated first. It is not even required of
order of the community or of the the prosecution to prove which of the two
Government; or statements of the witness is false and to
5. Knowingly concealing any of the prove the statement to be false by evidence
aforestated evil practices (Art. 142, Rev. other than the contradictory statements
Penal Code). (People vs. Arazola, 13 Court of
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC Art. 169 and Art 315.
Art 169: How forgery is committed; Art 315:
INTERESTCRIMES AGAINST Swindling(estafa)
PUBLIC INTEREST Upon opening a letter containing 17 money
orders, the mail carrier forged the
ART.181-Crimes against public interest – signatures of the payees on the money
False testimony; when incurred; when orders and encashed them. What crime or
prescribed crimes did the mail carrier commit? Explain
briefly. (6%) (2008 Bar Question)
Paolo was charged with homicide before
the Regional Trial Court of Manila. Andrew,
a prosecution witness, testified that he saw SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Paolo shoot Abby during their heated
argument. While the case is still pending, The mail carrier's act of forging the
the City Hall of Manila burned down and the signatures of the payees of said money
entire records of the case were destroyed. orders constitutes falsification of
Later, the records were reconstituted. commercial documents. It was made to
Andrew was again called to the witness appear that the payees signed them when
stand. This time he testified that his first in fact they did not. When the mail carrier
testimony was false and the truth was he encashed the money orders, he defrauded
was abroad when the crime took place. and caused damage to the remitters who
gave the cash. The mail carrier further
The judge immediately ordered the incurred the crime of estafa through
prosecution of Andrew for giving a false falsification of commercial documents.
testimony favorable to the defendant in a
criminal case.
Criminal law – Crimes against public
A. Will the case against Andrew interest – Falsification of private document
179
Art 172: Falsification by private individuals The mail carrier's act of forging the
and use of falsified documents; Art 308: signatures of the payees of said money
Who are liable for theft orders constitutes falsification of
commercial documents. It was made to
Fe is the manager of a rice mill in Bulacan. appear that the payees signed them when
In order to support a gambling debt, Fe in fact they did not. When the mail carrier
made it appear that the rice mill was encashed the money orders, he defrauded
earning less than it actually was by writing and caused damage to the remitters who
in a "talaan" or ledger a figure lower than gave the cash. The mail carrier further
what was collected and paid by their incurred the crime of estafa through
customers. Fe then pocketed the falsification of commercial documents.
difference. What crime/s did Fe commit, if
any? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar Art. 171. Falsification by public officer,
Question) employee ; or notary or ecclesiastical
officer
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Erwin and Bea approached Mayor Abral
The crimes committed by Fe are theft and and requested him to solemnize their
falsification of private document because marriage. Mayor Abral agreed. Erwin and
Fe’s possession of the proceeds of the rice Bea went to Mayor Abral's office on the day
mill was only physical, not juridical, of the ceremony, but Mayor Abral was not
possession, and having committed the there. When Erwin and Bea inquired where
crimes with grave abuse of confidence, it is Mayor Abral was, his chief of staff Donato
qualified theft. The falsification is a informed them that the Mayor was
separate crime from the theft because it campaigning for the coming elections.
was not committed as a necessary means Donato told them that the Mayor authorized
to commit the theft but resorted to only to him to solemnize the marriage and that
hide or conceal the unlawful taking. Mayor Abral would just sign the documents
when he arrived. Donato thereafter
Criminal law – Crimes against public solemnized the marriage and later turned
interest - Falsification of commercial over the documents to Mayor Abral for his
documents signature. In the marriage contract, it was
stated that the marriage was solemnized by
Art. 169: How forgery is committed; Art Mayor Abral. What crime(s) did Mayor
315: swindling Abral and Donato commit? Explain. (2015
Upon opening a letter containing 17 money BAR)
orders, the mail carrier forged the
signatures of the payees on the money Answer:
orders and encashed them. What crime or
crimes did the mail carrier commit? Explain Mayor Abral is liable for falsification of
briefly. (6%) (2008 Bar Question) public document by a public officer under
Article 171. Making an untruthful statement
by stating in a marriage contract, a public
180
Art. 171. Falsification by public officer, Dennis leased his apartment to Myla for
employee ; or notary or ecclesiastical P10,000 a month. Myla failed to pay the
officer rent for 3 months. Gabriel, the son of
Dennis, prepared a demand letter falsely
alleging that his father had authorized him
Andrea signed her deceased husband’s to collect the unpaid rentals. Myla paid the
name in endorsing his three treasury unpaid rentals to Gabriel who kept the
warrants which were delivered to her payment.
directly by the district supervisor who knew
that her husband had already died, and she a) Did Gabriel commit a crime? Explain.
used the proceeds to pay for the expenses (4%) (2008 Bar Question)
of her husband’s last illness and his burial.
She knew that her husband had SUGGESTED ANSWER:
accumulated vacation and sick leaves the
money value of which exceeded that value Yes. Gabriel committed a crime; it was
of the three treasury warrants, so that the either the crime of falsification of a private
government suffered no damage. Andrea’s document (if damage or at least intent to
appeal is based on her claim of absence of cause damage could be proved) or the
criminal intent and of good faith. crime of swindling only. It could not be both
falsification and swindling or a complex
Should she be found guilty of falsification? crime of estafa through falsification since
Discuss briefly. the document falsified is a private
document. The two crimes cannot go
SUGGESTED ANSWER: together.
ART. 172 Criminal law – Crimes against
181
b) B should be charged for the crime of superimposition mentioned is the one who
falsification of a private document, since will be benefited by the alterations thus
Page
made” and that “he alone could have the B. No. Possession of false treasury or
motive for making such alterations”. bank note alone without an intent to use it,
is not punishable. But the circumstances of
Was the conviction of the accused proper such possession may indicate intent to
although the conviction was premised utter, sufficient to consummate the crime of
merely on the aforesaid ratiocination? illegal possession of false notes.
Explain your answer. (3%) (1999 Bar
Question) C. Yes. Knowledge that the note is
counterfeit and intent to use it may be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: shown by the conduct of the accused. So,
possession of 100 false bills reveal: (a)
A. Forging or forgery is committed by knowledge that the bills are fake; and (b)
giving to a treasury or bank note or any intent to utter the same.
instrument payable to bearer or to order the
appearance of a true and genuine D. Yes, the conviction is proper
document; or by erasing, substituting, because there is a presumption in law that
counterfeiting, or altering by any means the the possessor and user of a falsified
figures, letters, words or signs contained document is the one who falsified the
therein. same.
Falsification, on the other hand, is
committed by: Mr. Gray opened a savings account with
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any Bank A with an initial deposit of
handwriting, signature or rubric; P50,000.00. A few days later, he deposited
2. Causing it to appear that persons a check for P200,000.00 drawn from Bank
have participated in any act or proceeding B and endorsed by Mr. White. Ten days
when they did not in fact so participate; later, Mr. Gray withdrew the P200,000.00
3. Attributing to persons who have from his account. Mr. White later
participated in an act or proceeding complained to Bank B when the amount of
statements other than those in fact made P200,000.00 was later debited to his
by them account, as he did not issue the check and
4. Making untruthful statements in a his signature thereon was forged. Mr. Gray
narration of facts; subsequently deposited another check
5. Altering true dates; signed by Mr. White for P200,000.00,
6. Making any alteration or which amount he later withdrew. Upon
intercalation in a genuine document which receiving the amount, Mr. Gray was
changes its meaning; arrested by agents of the National Bureau
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a of Investigation (NBI). Mr. Gray was
document purporting to be a copy of an convicted of estafa and attempted estafa,
original document when no such original both through the use of commercial
exists, or including in such copy a documents. (2014 BAR)
statement contrary to, or different from, that
of the genuine original; or (A) Mr. Gray claims as defense that,
8. Intercalating any instrument or note except for Mr. White’s claim of forgery,
183
relative to the issuance thereof in a there was no evidence showing that he was
protocol, registry, or official book. the author of the forgery and Mr. White did
Page
check (attempted estafa). Rule on the against Oscar? Explain. (1989 Bar
defense of Mr. Gray. Question)
(B) Mr. Gray claims that he was
entrapped illegally because there was no SUGGESTED ANSWER:
showing that the second check was a
forgery and, therefore, his withdrawal The proper charge against Oscar is
based on the second check was a legal act. Falsification of a Private Document. This is
Is Mr. Gray correct? so for the following reasons:
sold them and kept the proceeds without its own element of damage.
therefrom. If you were the investigating
Page
If the private document in the case was three minutes and provide them with an
falsified, not to induce the offended party to opportunity to escape. Thus, Willy and
part with something of value but to cover up Vincent were able to escape.
or conceal a defraudation previously made,
then the crime committed would be What crime or crimes, if any, had been
ESTAFA. The falsification would be committed by the Branch Clerk of court,
absorbed in said offense, the element of Edwin, and the jail warden? Explain your
damage in one being the same as that answer. (5%) (2009 Bar Question)
required in the other.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of jail in the company of an armed escort, 2. Direct Bribery for receiving the
Edwin. Chito also gave Edwin P50,000.00 P50,000.00 as consideration for leaving the
Page
prisoners unguarded and allowing them the Direct bribery was committed by Patrick
opportunity to escape (Art. 210, RPC); when, for a consideration of P500.000.00,
he committed a violation ofPD 1829 by
The jail warden did not commit nor incur a destroying the drugs which were evidence
crime there being no showing that he was entrusted to him in his official capacity.
aware of what his subordinates had done
nor of any negligence on his part that would Indirect bribery is not committed, because
amount to infidelity in the custody of he received the P500,000.00 as a
prisoners. consideration for destroying the evidence
Art. 210: Direct Bribery; Anti-Graft and against the offender, which was under his
Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019), and official custody as a public officer. The
Obstruction of Justice under Section 1(b) of money was not delivered to him simply as
PD 1829. a gift or present by reason of his public
office.
During a PNP buy-bust operation, Cao Patrick also violated Section 3(e), R.A.
Shih was arrested for selling 20 grams of 3019 causing undue injury to the
methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) government through evident bad faith,
to a poseur-buyer. Cao Shih, through an giving unwarranted benefit to the offender
intermediary, paid Patrick, the Evidence by destroying evidence of a crime.
Custodian of the PNP Forensic Chemistry
Section, the Evidence Custodian of the Obstruction of justice under Section 1 (b) of
PNP Forensic Chemistry Section, the P.D. 1829 is committed by destroying
amount of P500.000.00 in consideration for evidence intended to be used in official
the destruction by Patrick of the drug. proceedings in criminal case.
Patrick managed to destroy the drug. a) The Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. No. 9165) (i)
State with reasons whether Patrick Punishable acts
committed the following crimes: (ii) Who are liable (iii) Attempt or
conspiracy, effect on liability (iv) Immunity
Direct bribery; from prosecution and punishment (v)
Indirect bribery; Custody and disposition of confiscated,
Section 3(e) of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft seized and/or surrendered dangerous
and Corrupt Practices Act); drugs (Section 21, R.A. No. 9165)
Obstruction of Justice under PD
1829; (7%) (2005 Bar Question) Criminal law - Crimes committed by public
officers – Direct bribery; indirect bribery;
SUGGESTED ANSWER: corruption of Public Officials
3019), and Obstruction of Justice under the case of Ejectment filed by Mrs. Maria
Section 1(b) of PD 1829. Estrada vs. Luis Ablan. The judgment
Page
lawyer’s office where he was given the charged simultaneously or successively for
necessary amounts constituting the sheriffs the crime of direct bribery under Art. 210 of
fees and expenses for execution in the total the Revised Penal Code, because two
amount of P550.00, aside from P2.000.00 crimes are essentially different and are
in consideration of prompt enforcement of penalized under distinct legal philosophies.
the writ from Estrada and her lawyer. The Whereas violation of Sec. (b) of R.A. 3019
writ was successfully enforced. is a malum prohibitum, the crime under Art.
210 of the Code is a malum in se.
a) Art. 210 What crime, if any, did the
sheriff commit? (3%) (2001 Bar Question)
Art 211-A: Qualified Bribery
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Charina, Clerk of Court of an RTC Branch,
a) The sheriff committed the crime of promised the plaintiff in a case pending
Direct Bribery under the second paragraph before the court that she would convince
of Article 210, Revised Penal Code, since the Presiding Judge to decide the case in
the P2,000.00 was received by him "in plaintiff's favor. In consideration therefor,
consideration" of the prompt enforcement the plaintiff gave Charina P20,000.00.
of the writ of execution which is an official
duty of the sheriff to do. Charina was charged with violation of
Section 3 (b) of Republic Act No. 3019,
Criminal law – Crimes committed by public prohibiting any public officer from directly or
officers - direct bribery; Special penal law - indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
Republic Act No. 3019 present, percentage, or benefit in
connection with any contract or transaction
Art 210: Direct Bribery x x x wherein the public officer, in his official
capacity, has to intervene under the law.
May a public officer charged under Section
3(b) of Republic Act No. 3019 [“directly or While the case was being tried, the
indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, Ombudsman filed another information
present, share, percentage or benefit, for against Charina for Indirect Bribery under
himself of for any other person, in the Revised Penal Code. Charina
connection with any contract or transaction demurred to the second information,
between the government and any other claiming that she can no longer be charged
party, wherein the public officer in his under the Revised Penal Code having
official capacity has to intervene under the been charged for the same act under R.A.
law”] also be simultaneously or 3019.
successively charged with direct bribery
under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Is Charina correct? Explain. (3%) (2009
Code? Explain. (4%) (2010 Bar Question) Bar Question)
Yes, a public officer charges under Sec. 3 No, Charina is not correct. Although the
(b) of Rep. Act 3019 (Anti-Graft and charge for violation of Rep. Act No. 3019
Page
Corrupt Practices Act) may also be and the charge for Indirect Bribery (Art.
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
211, RPC) arose from the same act, the dereliction of duty committed in violation of
elements of the violation charged under Art. 208 of the Revised Penal Code, should
Rep. Act No. 3019 are not the same as the be refrain from prosecuting an offender
felony charged for Indirect Bribery under who has committed a crime punishable by
the Rev. Penal Code (Mejia v. Pamaran, reclusion perpetua and / or death in
160 SCRA 457 [1988]). Hence, the crimes consideration of any offer, promise, gift or
charged are separate and distinct from present.
each other, with different penalties. The
two charges do not constitute a ground for Meanwhile, a police officer who refrains
a motion to dismiss or motion to quash, as from arresting such offender for the same
there is no jeopardy against the accused. consideration above stated, may be
prosecuted for this felony since he is a
Art 211-A. Qualified Bribery public officer entrusted with law
enforcement.
What is the crime of qualified bribery?
(2%) (2010 Bar Question) a) Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
(R.A. No. 3019, as amended) (i) Coverage
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (ii) Punishable acts (iii) Exceptions
On the other hand, a public prosecutor may Penal Code for the same act under R.A.
be prosecuted for this crime in respect of 3019. Is he correct?
Page
the functions of his office. (crime committed Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation
by the Mayor) (FDIC), another government-owned and
controlled corporation. In 1995, after the
PNB management unearthed many
irregularities and violations of the bank's
Art. 217: Malversation of Public Funds and rules and regulations, dela Renta was
Property found to have manipulated certain
accounts involving trust funds and time
Allan, the Municipal Treasurer of the deposits of depositors. After investigation.
Municipality of Gerona, was in a hurry to he was charged with malversation of public
return to his office after a day-long official funds before the Sandiganbayan. He filed
conference. He alighted from the a motion to dismiss contending he was no
government car which was officially longer an employee of the PNB but of the
assigned to him, leaving the ignition key PDIC.
and the car unlocked, and rushed to his
office. Jules, a bystander, drove off with the Is dela Renta's contention tenable? 2.5%
car and later sold the same to his brother, (2006 Bar Question)
Danny for P20.000.00, although the car
was worth P800,000.00. 1. After his arraignment, the
prosecution filed a motion for his
A. What is the crime committed by Allan? suspension pendente lite, to which he filed
Explain. (2005 Bar Question) an opposition claiming that he can no
longer be suspended as he is no longer an
SUGGESTED ANSWER: employee of the PNB but that of the PDIC.
Allan committed the crime of malversation 2. Explain whether he may or may not be
by abandonment or negligence in leaving suspended. 2.5% (2006 Bar
the government car assigned to him for his Question)
official use and for which he was
accountable, with the ignition key in the car SUGGESTED ANSWER:
unlocked.
1. No, dela Renta's contention is not
tenable for these reasons:
institution, hired Henry dela Renta, a CPA, office is not a ground for extinguishing
as Regional Bank Auditor. In 1992, he criminal liability under Art. 89 of the
Page
resigned and was employed by the Revised Penal Code, for any crime
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
committed while the offender was satisfy the judgment against him in favor of
connected with the office; and ABC Corporation, a government-owned or
controlled corporation with an original
3. The crime of malversation was charter. However, the representative of the
discovered only in 1995 and so, the corporation failed to attend the auction
prescriptive period of the crime only sale. Gonzalo, the winning bidder,
commenced to run from then. Obviously, purchased the property for P100,000 which
the amount misappropriated exceeds he paid to Eliseo. Instead of remitting the
P200.00 and so the prescribed penalty is amount to the Clerk of Court as ex-officio
within the range of prision mayor already. Provincial Sheriff, Eliseo lent the amount to
Crimes punishable by prision mayor Myrna, his officemate, who promised to
prescribes in 15 years. From 1995 to the repay the amount within two months, with
present is only around 11 years. Hence the interest thereon. However, Myrna reneged
crime can still be prosecuted. on her promise. Despite demands of ABC
Corporation, Eliseo failed to remit the said
amount.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
State with reasons, the crime or crimes, if
2. The accused may be validly any, committed by Eliseo. (4%) (2008 Bar
suspended from office in PDIC because Question)
PDIC is a government-owned and
controlled corporation; hence a public SUGGESTED ANSWER:
office. When the Information charges the
accused with acts of fraud involving The crime committed by Eliseo is
Government funds, the suspension of the malversation since he is a public officer
accused pendente lite assumes a who received the amount in his official
mandatory character and the court may capacity; thus he is accountable for it.
order the suspension of the accused
regardless of whether the prosecution files Art 217: Malversation of Public Funds and
a motion for the preventive suspension of Property
the accused, or the motion is filed by the
counsel of the government agency Would your answer to the first question be
concerned, with or without the conformity of the same if ABC Corporation were a private
the public prosecutor (Robles et al., v. corporation? Explain. (3%) (2008 Bar
Layosa et al., 436 SCRA 337 12 Aug 04). Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Criminal law – Crimes committed by public The crime would still be malversation even
officers - Malversation if ABC Corporation, in whose favor the
judgment was rendered, were a private
Art 217: Malversation of Public Funds and corporation. This is because the
Property P100,000.00 came from the sale of
191
execution sale of the property of Andres to property was in custodia legis. Although not
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
strictly public property, it has become public officer; b) that he applies public
impressed with the character of public funds or property under his administration
property when Eliseo, in his official to some public use; and c) that the public
capacity, conducted the execution sale and use for which such funds or property were
received it proceeds. As long as Eliseo has applied is different from the purpose for
not accounted for and turned over the which they were originally appropriated by
proceeds officially, he is not relieved of his law or ordinance. The funds for the feeding
official accountability. program are not specifically appropriated
for the beneficiaries of the shelter
assistance program in X Municipality’s
Art 220. Illegal Use of Public Funds or annual budget. Mayor Maawain ought to
Property use the boxes of food earmarked
particularly for the feeding program, which
A typhoon destroyed the houses of many of would cater only to the malnourished
the inhabitants of X Municipality. among his constituents who needed the
Thereafter, X Municipality operated a resources for proper nourishment.
shelter assistance program whereby
construction materials were provided to the b) Art 220. May Mayor Maawain invoke
calamity victims, and the beneficiaries the defense of good faith and that he had
provided the labor. The construction was no evil intent when he approved the
partially done when the beneficiaries transfer of the boxes of food from the
stopped helping with the construction for feeding program to the shelter assistance
the reason that they needed to earn income program? Explain.
to provide food for their families. When
informed of the situation, Mayor Maawain Answer:
approved the withdrawal of ten boxes of
food from X Municipality's feeding program, No. Mayor Maawain cannot invoke good
which were given to the families of the faith when he approved the transfer of the
beneficiaries of the shelter assistance boxes of food from the feeding program to
program. The appropriations for the funds the Shelter Assistance program. “Criminal
pertaining to the shelter assistance intent is not an element of technical
program and those for the feeding program malversation. The law punishes the act of
were separate items on X Municipality's diverting public property earmarked by law
annual budget. (2015 BAR) or ordinance for a particular purpose to
another public purpose. The offense is
a) Art 220. What crime did Mayor mala prohibita, meaning that the prohibited
Maawain commit? Explain. act is not inherently immoral but becomes
a criminal offense because positive law
Answer: forbids its commission based on
considerations of public policy, order and
Mayor Maawain committed the crime of convenience. It is the commission of an act
Illegal use of public funds or property as defined by the law, and not the character
punishable under Article 220 of the RPC. or effect thereof that determines whether or
192
This offense is also known as Technical not the provision has been violated. Hence,
Malversation. The crime has 3 elements: malice or criminal intent is completely
Page
irrelevant”. (Ysidoro v. People, G.R. No. properties being under levy, are in custodia
192330, 14 November 2012). legis and thus impressed with the character
of public property, misappropriation of
which constitutes the crime of malversation
although said properties belonged to a
private individual (Art. 222, RPC).
Criminal law - Crimes committed by public
officers - Malversation of public property Juan Santos misappropriated such
properties when, in breach of trust, he
Art. 222: Officers included in malversion of applied them to his own private use and
public funds or property benefit. His allegation that he only
borrowed such properties is a lame excuse,
Accused Juan Santos, a deputy sheriff in a devoid of merit as there is no one from
Regional Trial Court, levied on the personal whom he borrowed the same. The fact that
properties of a defendant in a civil case it was only "after due and diligent sleuthing
before said court, pursuant to a writ of by the police detectives assigned to the
execution duly issued by the court. Among case", that the missing items were found in
the properties levied upon and deposited the house of Santos, negates his
inside the "evidence room" of the Clerk of pretension.
Court for Multiple KIC Salas were a
refrigerator, a stock of cassette tapes, a
dining table set of chairs and several Art. 222: Officers included in malversion of
lampshades. Upon the defendant’s paying public funds or property
off the judgment creditor, he tried to claim
his properties but found out that several
items were missing, such as the cassette Alex Reyes, together with Jose Santos,
tapes, chairs and lampshades. After due were former warehousemen of the Rustan
and diligent sleuthing by the police Department Store. In 1986, the PCGG
detectives assigned to the case, these sequestered the assets, fund and
missing items were found in the house of properties of the owners-incorporators of
accused Santos, who reasoned out that he the store, alleging that they constitute “ill-
only borrowed them temporarily. gotten wealth" of the Marcos family. Upon
their application, Reyes and Santos were
If you were the fiscal/prosecutor, what appointed as fiscal agents of the
would be the nature of the information to be sequestered firm and they were given
filed against the accused? Why? (5%) custody and possession of the sequestered
(2001 Bar Question) building and its contents, including various
vehicles used in the firm's operations. After
SUGGESTED ANSWER: a few months, an inventory was conducted
and it was discovered that two (2) delivery
If I were the fiscal/prosecutor, I would file vans were missing. After demand was
an Information for Malversation against made upon them, Reyes and Santos failed
Juan Santos for the cassette tapes, chairs to give any satisfactory explanation why the
193
and lampshades which he, as deputy vans were missing or to turn them over to
sheriff, levied upon and thus under his the PCGG; hence, they were charged with
Page
trial, the two accused claimed that they are B started hitting A with his fists, A suddenly
not public accountable officers and, if any complained of severe chest pains. B,
crime was committed, it should only be realizing that A was indeed in serious
Estafa under Art. 315, par. 1(b) of the trouble, immediately brought her to the
Revised Penal Code. hospital. Despite efforts to alleviate A’s
pains, she died of heart attack. It turned out
What is the proper offense committed? that she had been suffering from a lingering
State the reason(s) for your answer. (5%) heart ailment. What crime, if any, could B
(2001 Bar Question) be held guilty of? (2003 Bar Question)
The proper offense committed was B could be held liable for parricide because
Malversation of public property, not estafa, his act of hitting his wife with fist blows and
considering that Reyes and Santos, upon therewith inflicting physical injuries on her,
their application, were constituted as fiscal is felonious. A person committing a
agents" of the sequestered firm and were felonious act incurs criminal liability
"given custody and possession" of the although the wrongful consequence is
sequestered properties, including the different from what he intended (Art. 4, par.
delivery vans which later they could not 1, Revised Penal Code).
account for. They were thus made the
depositary and administrator of properties Although A died of heart attack, the said
deposited by public authority and hence, by attack was generated by B’s felonious act
the duties of their office/position, they are of hitting her with his fists. Such felonious
accountable for such properties. Such act was the immediate cause of the heart
properties, having been sequestered by the attack, having materially contributed to and
Government through the PCGG, are in hastened A’s death. Even though B may
custodia Iegis and therefore impressed have acted without intent to kill his wife,
with the character of public property, even lack of such intent is of no moment when
though the properties belong to a private the victim dies. However, B may be given
individual (Art. 222, RPC). the mitigating circumstance of having acted
without intention to commit so grave a
The failure of Reyes and Santos to give any wrong as that committed (Art. 13, par. 3,
satisfactory explanation why the vans were Revised Penal Code).
missing, is prima facie evidence that they
had put the same to their personal use. Art. 246: Parricide
The conduct of wife A aroused the ire of her Enraged, Procopio grabbed a knife nearby
husband B. Incensed with anger almost and stabbed Bionci, who died.
beyond his control, B could not help but
Page
(2015 BAR)
inflict physical injuries on A. Moments after
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
November 1990, upon his arrival from stranger, the defense of lawful exercise of
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Pedro Orsal and the wife of accused Juan Juan Santos cannot be held guilty' of
Santos started having illicit relations while homicide for the death of Pedro Orsal.
the accused was in Manila reviewing for Instead, Juan is liable for violation of Article
the 1983 Bar Examinations and his wife 247 “Death inflicted under exceptional
was left behind in Davao City. In the circumstances because there was one
morning of July 15, 1984, the accused went continuous act. (People vs. Abarca).
to the bus station in Davao City to go to
Cagayan de Oro City to fetch his daughter, With regards to the two bystanders, Juan
but after he failed to catch the first trip in Santos committed the crime of serious
the morning, and because the 2:00 o’clock physical injuries inflicted under exceptional
bus had engine trouble and could not circumstances. (Art. 247 Revised Penal
leave, the accused, afer passing the Code; People vs. Abarca).
residence of his father, went home and
arrive at his residence at around six o’clock Art 247: Exceptional circumstances
in the afternoon. Upon reaching his home,
the accused found his wife Laura, and A and B are husband and wife. A is
Pedro Orsal in the act of sexual employed as a security guard at Landmark,
intercourse. When the wife and Pedro his shift being from 11 :00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
Orsal noticed the accused, the wife pushed One night, he felt sick and cold, hence, he
her paramour who got his revolver. The decided to go home around midnight after
accused, who has then peeping above the getting permission from his duty officer.
built in cabinet in their room, jumped down Upon reaching the front yard of his home,
and ran away. He went to the house of his he noticed that the light in the master
PC soldier-friend, and neighbor, got his bedroom was on and that the bedroom
(soldier’s) M-16 rifle and immediately, it window was open. Approaching the front
was almost 6:30 p.m. then, went back to his door, he was surprised to hear sighs and
house. Not finding his wife there, he went giggles inside the bedroom. He opened the
to the hangout of Pedro Orsal and found door very carefully and peeped inside
the latter playing mahjong there. The where he saw his wife B having sexual
accused fired at Pedro three times with his intercourse with their neighbor C. A rushed
rifle, hit him and two bystanders. Pedro inside and grabbed C but the latter
196
died instantaneously of wounds in the managed to wrest himself free and jumped
head, trunk, and abdomen. The two out of the window. A followed suit and
Page
furious struggle, managed also to strangle death of Benjie. Pete contended that he
him to death. A then rushed back to his acted in defense of his honor and that,
bedroom where his wife B was cowering therefore, he should be acquitted of the
under the bed covers. Still enraged, A hit B crime.
with fist blows and rendered her
unconscious. The police arrived after being The court found that Benjie died under
summoned by their neighbors and arrested exceptional circumstances and exonerated
A who was detained, inquested and Pete of the crime, but sentenced him to
charged for the death of C and serious destierro, conformably with Article 247 of
physical injuries of B. the Revised Penal Code. The court also
ordered Pete to pay indemnity to the heirs
Is A liable for C’s death? Why? (5%) (2001 of the victim in the amount of P50,000.00.
Bar Question)
Is A liable for B's injuries? Why? (5%) Is the defense of Pete meritorious?
(2001 Bar Question) Explain.
Under Article 247 of the Revised Penal
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Code, is destierro a penalty? Explain.
Did the court correctly order Pete to pay
Yes, A is liable for C's death but under the indemnity despite his exoneration under
exceptional circumstances in Article 247 of Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code?
the Revised Penal Code, where only Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question)
destierro is prescribed. Article 247 governs
since A surprised his wife B in the act of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
having sexual intercourse with C, and the
killing of C was "immediately thereafter" as The defense of Pete lacks merit. He could
the discovery, escape, pursuit arid killing of not have acted in defense of honor,
C form one continuous act. (U.S. vs. because there was no unlawful aggression
Vargas, 2 Phil. 194) against him. At most, what Benjie did could
Likewise, A is liable for the serious physical be regarded only as sufficient provocation
injuries he inflicted on his wife B but under to Pete. The Court correctly ruled that
the same exceptional circumstances in Benjie’s killing was done under the
Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code, for exceptional circumstances provided for in
the same reasons. Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code.
Destierro is one of the principal penalties
under Article 25 of the Revised Penal
Criminal law – Crimes against persons – Code, but under the exceptional
Death inflicted under exceptional circumstances provided for in Article 247 of
circumstances the Code, destierro is not intended as a
penalty but a means to remove the
Pete, a security guard, arrived home late accused from the vicinity, for his protection
one night after rendering overtime. He was against possible reprisal from the family or
shocked to see Flor, his wife, and Benjie, relatives of the other spouse or those of the
his best friend, completely naked having paramour or mistress. (People v. Coricort
197
Pete was charged with murder for the indemnity, because the legal consequence
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Juan had a land dispute with Pedro for a Although Pedro died five days later, since
number of years. As Juan was earning the blood purchased which would have
down his house, he saw his brother, saved him did not arrive on time, Rodolfo is
Rodolfo attack Pedro with a bolo from still liable for the death of Pedro as that is
behind. Rodolfo was about to hit Pedro a the direct, natural and logical result of the
second time while the latter was prostrate wound inflicted by him.
on the ground, when Carling, Pedro’s son,
shouted, “I’ll kill you.” This distracted Juan, the brother of Rodolfo, has no
Rodolfo who then turned ter Carling. criminal liability. What he shouted to
Rodolfo and Carling fought with their bolos. Rodolfo “Kill them both, they are our
While the two were fighting, Juan shouted enemies,” when Rodolfo and Carling were
to his brother Rodolfo: “Kill them both, they fighting, was not the only reason why
are our enemies.” Calling suffered a Carling was killed; and hence, he cannot
number of wounds and died on the spot, be a principal by inducement. The doctrine
Pedro who was in serious condition was is to be a principal by inducement, the
rushed to the hospital. inducement must be the only reason why
He died five days later for loss of blood the crime is committed. (People vs. Kiichi
because the blood purchased from Manila et. al. 61 Phil. 609)
which could have saved him, according to
the doctor, did not arrive on time, Jose, Art. 248: Murder
father of Juan and Rodolfo, told his sons to
hide in Manila and he gave them money for Boy Bala was a notorious gang leader who
the purpose. When the police investigators had previously killed a policeman. The
saw Jose, he told the police investigators Chief of Police ordered his vice squad
that Juan and Rodolfo went to Mindanao. headed by Captain Aniceto, to arrest Boy
Bala and shoud he resist arrest, to shoot
What crimes, if any, did (a) Rodolfo, (b) and kill him. Acting upon an informer's tip,
Juan and Jose commit? Explain your Aniceto and two (2) of his trusted men went
answer and state whether the acts to the Corinthian nightclub where they saw
committed are accompanied by Boy Bala dancing with a hostess. Without
circumstances affecting criminal liability. any warning, Aniceto shot Boy Bala who
(1987 Bar Question) slumped on the dance floor. As Aniceto
aimed another shot at Boy Bala, the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: brother of the latter, Pedro, who was
seated at a table nearby, got hold of a table
198
Rodolfo committed murder regarding the knife and stabbed Aniceto killing him
killing of Pedro since Pedro was attacked instantly. The Chief of Police filed a
Page
from behind. The killing was attended by homicide case against Pedro for the death
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
of Aniceto. On the other hand, Pedro filed Aniceto is a police officer and Boy Bala is
a complaint for murder against the Chief of notorious gangster. By shooting Boy Bala
Police for the death of Boy Bala alleging without warning instead of attempting to
that the issuance of the shoot-to-kill order arrest him first, Aniceto became an
was illegal and the Chief of Police was unlawful agressor.
liable as a principal by inducement. How
tenable are the respective claims of the There was reasonable necessity of the
Chief of Police and Pedro? Explain. (1989 means employed by Pedro to prevent or
Bar Question) repel unlawful aggression. The use of a
knife against a gun for defense is
reasonable.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Assuming that Boy Bala had provoked that
The charge for murder against the Chief of attack on his person by Aniceto because of
Police for the death of Boy Bala is not his having earlier killed a policeman, it does
tenable. Although, the Chief of Police is the not appear that Pedro, the one making the
superior on Captain Aniceto who shot Boy defense had taken any part in said
Bala in cold blood, he cannot be held provocation.
accountable for the act of Aniceto. His
order was specific; to arrest Boy Bala and
should he resist arrest, to shoot and kill
him. Aniceto did not act in compliance with Art.248: Murder; Art 263: Serious Physical
this order. He shot Boy Bala without Injuries
warning, without even attempting to make
an arrest. Consequently, it could not be Mang Jose, a septuagenarian, was walking
said that the killing of Bala by Aniceto was with his ten- year old grandson along
induced by the Chief of Police so as to Paseo de Roxas and decided to cross at
make the latter criminally liable as a co- the intersection of Makati Avenue but both
principal by inducement. The liability for the were hit by a speeding CKV Honda van and
death of Bala is individual and not were sent sprawling on the pavement, a
collective. meter apart. The driver, a Chinese mestizo
stopped his car after hitting the two victims
On the other hand, the charge of homicide but then reversed his gears and ran over
against Pedro for the stabbing of Aniceto is Mang Jose’s prostrate body anew and third
likewise not tenable. time by advancing his car forward. The
grandson suffered broken legs only and
Pedro acted in legitimate defense of survived but Mang Jose suffered multiple
relative, he being the brother of Boy Bala. fractures and broken ribs, causing his
All the requisites of this justifying instant death. The driver was arrested and
circumstance are present. Thus: charged with Murder for the death of Mang
Jose and Serious Physical Injuries through
There was unlawful aggression. At the Reckless Imprudence with respect to the
time that Pedro stabbed Aniceto, the latter grandson.
199
part of the healing ritual were charged with liable for attempted homicide because he
murder and convicted by the lower court. If inflicted said injury with the use of a firearm
Page
you were the appellate court Justice, would which is a lethal weapon. Intent to kill is
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
inherent in the use of a firearm. (Araneta, Criminal law – Crimes against persons –
Jr. v. Court of Appeals. 187 SCRA 123 Abortion; infanticide
[1990])
Art. 255: Infanticide
Art. 251: Death caused in a tumultuous Ana has been a bar girl/GRO at a beer
affray house for more than 2 years. She fell in
love with Oniok, the bartender, who
A, B and C are members of SFC Fraternity. impregnated her. But Ana did not inform
While eating in a seaside restaurant, they him about her condition and instead, went
were attacked by X, Y and Z members of a to Cebu to conceal her shame.
rival fraternity. A rumble ensued in which
the above-named members of the two However, her parents drove her away. So,
fraternities assaulted each other in she returned to Manila and stayed with
confused and tumultuous manner resulting Oniok in his boarding house. Upon learning
in the death of A. As it cannot be of her pregnancy, already in an advanced
ascertained who actually killed A, the state, Oniok tried to persuade her to
members of the two fraternities who took undergo an abortion, but she refused.
part in the rumble were charged for death Because of their constant and bitter
caused in a tumultuous affray. Will the quarrels, she suffered birth pangs and
charge prosper? Explain. (4%) (2010 Bar gave birth prematurely to a live baby girl
Question) while Oniok was at his place of work. Upon
coming home and learning what happened,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: he prevailed upon Ana to conceal her
dishonor. Hence, they placed the infant in
No, the charge of death caused in a a shoe box and threw it into a nearby creek.
tumultuous affray will not prosper. In death However, an inquisitive neighbor saw them
caused by tumultuous affray under Art. 251 and with the help of others, retrieved the
of the Revised Penal Code, it is essential infant who was already dead from
that the persons involved did not compose drowning. The incident was reported to the
groups organized for the common purpose police who arrested Ana and Oniok. The 2
of assaulting and attacking each other were charged with parricide under Article
reciprocally. 246 of the Revised Penal Code. After trial,
they were convicted of the crime charged.
In this case, there is no tumultuous affray
since the participants in the rumble belong Was the conviction correct? 5% (2006 Bar
to organized fraternities. The killer of A, a Question)
member of SFC Fraternity could not be any
other but member of the rival fraternity.
Conspiracy is therefore present among the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
attackers from the rival fraternity and thus
rules out the idea of an affray. The liability The conviction for parricide was correct if
of the attackers should be collective for the the infant was already three (3) days old or
crime of homicide or murder as the case more when killed because Ana and Oniok
203
may be. are the parents of the child. But if the child
was less than 3 days old when killed, the
Page
and they should be convicted for Will your answers to (a) and (b) be the
infanticide, not parricide. same if before the incident Gavino and
Alma were legally separated? Explain.
(1995 Bar Question)
A complaint for rape was filed by the victim No. A husband cannot be charged with the
against her father. When the victim was rape of his wife because of the matrimonial
about to finish her testimony, she and her consent which she gave when she
aunt (her closest relative) executed assumed the marriage relation, and the law
separate affidavits of desistance wherein will not permit her to retract in order to
they stated that they are forgiving the charge her husband with the offense (Sate
accused. The judge dismissed the case. Is vs. Haines, 11 La. Ann. 731 So. 372; 441
the dismissal proper? (1991 Bar Question) RA 837).
Yes. He may be guilty of serious physical
SUGGESTED ANSWER: injuries. This offense is specially
mentioned in Art. 263 (4), paragraph 2
No, the dismissal of the case is not proper. which imposes a higher penalty for the
While the affidavit of desistance executed crime of physical injuries in cases where
by the victim amounts to a pardon, the the offense shall have been committed
same does not extinguish criminal liability. against any of the persons enumerated in
In the crime of rape and other private Art 246 (the crime of parricide). C. No. my
crimes, pardon by the offended party only answer will not be the same.
bars prosecution if given before the
institution of the criminal action. After the C. If Gavino, and Alma were legally
criminal action had been instituted, such separated at the time of the incident, then
pardon only waives the civil liability but not Gavino could be held liable for rape.
the criminal liability of the offender.
A legal separation is a separation of the
Art 266-A: Rape; Art 263: Serious Physical spouses from bed and board [U.S. vs.
Injuries Johnson 27 Phil. 477, cited in II Reyes,
RPC, p. 853, 1981 edition).
Gavino boxed his wife Alma for refusing to In the crime of rape, any crime resulting
sleep with him. He then violently threw her from the infliction of physical injuries
on the floor and forced her to have sexual suffered by the victim on the occasion of
intercourse with him. As a result Alma the rape, is absorbed by the crime of rape.
suffered serious physical injuries. The injuries suffered by the victim may,
however, be considered in determining the
Can Gavino be charged with rape? Explain. proper penalty which shall be imposed on
(1995 Bar Question) the offender. Serious physical injuries
Can Gavino be charged with serious cannot be absorbed in rape; it can be so if
204
aircon ventilation but did not bother asking “when the offender’s penis is inserted into
Roger why. Suddenly. Flordeluna felt dizzy his mouth or anal orifice.”
Page
Hazing, as defined by law, is an initiation If Sherly were a minor when she died,
rite or practice as a prerequisite for would your answer be the same?
admission into membership In a fraternity, Explain. (5%) (2005 Bar Question)
sorority or organization by placing the
recruit, neophyte or applicant in some SUGGESTED ANSWER:
embarrassing or humiliating situations
such as forcing him to do menial, silly, If Sherly were a minor when she died, the
foolish and similar tasks or activities or crimes of homicide and child abuse in
otherwise subjecting him to physical or violation of Rep. Act 7610 (Special
psychological suffering or injury. Protection of Children against abuse,
exploitation, discrimination and for other
A. What does the law require before purposes), are committed by Jet Matulis,
initiation rites may be performed? (3%) provided Sherly is not less than 12 years
(2002 Bar Question) old. If Sherly was less than 12 years old
then, the crime committed by Matulis is
SUGGESTED ANSWER: rape (through sexual assault) with
Homicide, a special complex crime under
Section 2 of Rep. Act No. 8049 (Anti- Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code.
Hazing Law) requires that before hazing or
initiation rites may be performed, notice to Special law – Special Protection of
the school authorities or head of Children against Child abuse, Exploitation
organizations shall be given seven (7) days and Discrimination Act – RA 7610; “Child
before the conduct of such rites. The trafficking”
written notice shall indicate (a) the period
of the initiation activities, not exceeding A childless couple, A and B, wanted to
three (3) days; (b) the names of those to be have a child they could call their own. C, an
subjected to such activities, and (c) an unwed mother, sold her newborn baby to
undertaking that no physical violence shall them. Thereafter, A and B caused their
be employed by anybody during such names to be stated in the birth certificate of
initiation rites. the child as his parents. This was done in
connivance with the doctor who assisted in
Special law - Child abuse; Special the delivery of C. What are the criminal
206
Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, liabilities, if any, of the couple A and B, C
Exploitation and Discrimination (RA 7610, and the doctor? (2002 Bar Question)
Page
as amended)
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
S. A, with lewd designs, took a 13-year old The retired colonel may be charged with
girl to a nipa hut in his farm and there had child abuse, in violation of Rep. Act 7610,
sexual intercourse with her. The girl did not a law providing special protection against
offer any resistance because she was child abuse, exploitation, and
infatuated with the man, who was good discrimination.
looking and belonged to a rich and
prominent family in the town. What crime, if One of the acts of child abuse or
any, was committed by A? Why? (2%) exploitation penalized under Article VI of
(2002 Bar Question) RA 7610 is that of keeping company of a
minor who is ten (10) years or more
SUGGESTED ANSWER: younger than the offender in a hotel, motel,
beer house, disco joint, pension house,
A committed "Child Abuse” under Rep. Act cabaret, sauna or massage parlor, beach
No. 7610. As defined in said law, "child resort, and similar places. Considering that
abuse” includes sexual abuse or any act Lt Col. Agaton is a retiree pursuant to a
which debases, degrades or demeans the compulsory retirement, while the child he
intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a kept company within a private room in the
human being, whose age is below eighteen beach resort, is only 14 years old, there
(18) years. must be an age difference of more than 10
years between them. This fact plus the
circumstance that Lt. Col. Agaton stayed
Special penal law – RA 7610 - Child abuse with the child, a girl, in one room at such
or exploitation, punishable acts beach resort for two nights, and thereafter
he gave her PI,000.00 “for her services",
Sometime in December, 1992, retired Lt. constitutes the very evil punished, among
Col. Agaton, celebrating the first year of his other acts, in said law.
compulsory retirement from the Armed
Forces of the Philippines, had in his The possible defenses Lt. Col. Agaton may
company a fourteen (14) year-old girl interpose are that the child is related to him
207
whose parents were killed by the Mt. by affinity, or by consanguinity within the
Pinatubo eruption and being totally fourth degree, or by a bond recognized in
Page
orphaned has been living or fending for law, or local customs and traditions, or that
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
few moments after she left. The demand for SUGGESTED ANSWER
ransom is only a part of the diabolic No. Art. 247 of the Revised Penal
scheme of the defendant to murder the Code is not applicable.
child, to conceal his body and then demand Under the Revised Penal Code, for
money before the discovery of the cadaver Art. 247 to apply, the offender must catch
(People v. Lora, supra). his or her spouse in the act of committing
sexual intercourse with another person. In
Fely is not liable for murder as People of the Philippines v. Marciano
principal or accomplice. Since Fely did not Gonzales (G.R. No. 46310, 31 October
participate in the actual killing of the child, 1939), the Supreme Court held that to avail
she can only be held liable for murder as of the privilege under Art. 247, the accused
principal or accomplice on the basis of should surprise his wife in the “very act of
conspiracy or community of design. But in sexual intercourse”. Sexual intercourse
this case, there is neither conspiracy nor generally presupposes the penetration of
community of design to commit murder the man’s sexual organ into that of a
since her criminal intention pertains to woman’s.
kidnapping for ransom. Moreover, her In this case, the paramour was of
participation of demanding ransom for the the same gender as the erring spouse. As
release of the child is not connected to such, there is legally, no sexual intercourse
murder. Neither is Fely liable for kidnapping to speak of, hence, Art. 247 is not
for ransom. Her criminal mind to assist Lina applicable.
in committing kidnapping for ransom is not
constitutive of a felony. Mens rea without b] Is Felipa liable for adultery for having
actus reus is not a crime. sexual relations with Alma? (2.5%)
applicable in this case given that the implants in different parts of her body. She
paramour was of the same gender as the changed her name to Angelina and was a
Page
erring spouse? (2.5%) (2016 BAR) finalist in the Miss Gay International. She
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
came back to the Philippines and while she October 5, 2011; People v. Larranaga,
was walking outside her home, she was 138874-75, February 3, 2004).
abducted by Max and Razzy who took her Max is liable for kidnapping with
to a house in the province. She was then homicide as an accomplice since he
placed in a room and Razzy forced her to concurred in the criminal design of Razzy
have sex with him at knife's point. After the in depriving Angelino his liberty and
act, it dawned upon Razzy that Angelina is supplied the former material aid in an
actually a male. Incensed, Razzy called efficacious way by helping him beat the
Max to help him beat Angelina. The latter.
beatings that Angelina received eventually
caused her death. What crime or crimes, if ART. 267 - KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS
any, were committed? Explain. (5%) (2016 ILLEGAL DETENTION; RELEASE OF
BAR) VICTIM, NOT ABSOLUTORY
SUGGESTED ANSWER
B. DAN, a private individual, kidnapped
Razzy is liable for kidnapping with CHU, a minor. On the second day, DAN
homicide. Abducting Angelino is not released CHU even before any criminal
forcible abduction since the victim in this information was filed against him. At the
crime must be a woman. Gender trial of his case, DAN raised the defense
reassignment will not make him a woman that he did not incur any criminal liability
within the meaning of Art. 342 of the RPC. since he released the child before the lapse
There is no showing, moreover, that at the of the 3-day period and before criminal
time of abduction is committed with lewd proceedings for kidnapping were instituted.
design; hence, his abduction constitutes
illegal detention. Since Angelino was killed Will DAN’S defense prosper? Reason
in the course of the detention, the crime briefly. (5%) (2004 Bar Question)
constitutes kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with homicide under Art. 267. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Having sexual intercourse with B. No. DAN's defense will not prosper.
Angelino is not rape through sexual Voluntary release by the offender of the
intercourse since the victim in this crime offended party in kidnapping is not
must be a woman. This act is not rape absolutory. Besides, such release is
through sexual assault either, Razzy did irrelevant and immaterial in this case
not insert his penis into the anal orifice or because the victim being a minor, the crime
mouth of Angelino or an instrument or committed is kidnapping and serious illegal
object into the latter’s anal orifice or genital detention under Art. 267, Revised Penal
orifice, hence this act constitutes acts of Code, to which such circumstance does not
lasciviousness under Art. 336. Since the apply. The circumstance may be
acts of lasciviousness is committed by appreciated only in the crime of Slight
reason or on occasion of kidnapping, it will Illegal Detention in Art. 268 Asistio v. San
be integrated into one and indivisible felony Diego 10 SCRA 673 [1964D]
of kidnapping with homicide (People v. De
210
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Braulio shall be prosecuted for acts of of the privilege under Art. 247, the accused
lasciviousness under the RPC but the should surprise his wife in the “very act of
penalty imposable is that prescribed by RA sexual intercourse”. Sexual intercourse
No. 7610 (Amployo v. People, GR No. generally presupposes the penetration of
157718, 26 April 2005). Under Sec. 5 (b) of the man’s sexual organ into that of a
RA No. 7610, when the victim (child woman’s.
subjected to sexual abuse) is under 12
years of age, the perpetrators shall be In this case, the paramour was of
prosecuted (for acts of lasciviousness) the same gender as the erring spouse. As
under Art. 336 of the RPC, provided, that such, there is legally, no sexual intercourse
the penalty for lascivious conduct when the to speak of, hence, Art. 247 is not
victim is under 12 years of age shall be applicable.
reclusion temporal in its medium period.
b] Is Felipa liable for adultery for having
ART.247 and 333--Jojo and Felipa are sexual relations with Alma? (2.5%) (2016
husband and wife. Believing that his work BAR)
as a lawyer is sufficient to provide for the
needs of their family, Jojo convinced Felipa SUGGESTED ANSWER
to be a stay at- home mom and care for
their children. One day, Jojo arrived home No. Under Article 333 of the Revised
earlier than usual and caught Felipa in the Penal Code, adultery is committed by any
act of having sexual intercourse with their married woman who shall have sexual
female nanny, Alma, in their matrimonial intercourse with a “man” not her husband,
bed. In a fit of rage, Jojo retrieved his Thus, Felipa in having homosexual
revolver from inside the bedroom cabinet intercourse with Alma, a “woman”, is not
and shot Alma, immediately killing her. committing adultery.
1939), the Supreme Court held that to avail bayad ng taxpayer at ang para sa RP ay
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
10% lang. Kaya ang baba ng collection ng reckless disregard of whether the same
RDO niya. Masyadong magnanakaw si X were false or not (Erwin Tulfo v. People,
at dapat tanggalin itong bundat na bundat GR No. 161032, 16 September 2008).
na buwaya na ito at napakalaki na ng A, president of the publishing
kurakot." company, B, managing editor, and C, writer
of the defamatory articles, are all liable for
A, B and C were charged with libel before libel. Under Art. 360 of the RPC, the
the RTC of Manila. The three (3) publisher, and editor of newspaper, shall
defendants argued that the article is within be responsible for the defamation
the ambit of qualified privileged contained therein to the same extent. The
communication; that there is no malice in law makes the publisher and editor liable
law and in fact; and, that defamatory for libel as if they were the author (Tulfo v.
comments on the acts of public officials People, supra).
which are related to the discharge of their
official duties do not constitute libel. ART.355-Crimes against honor - libel by
theatrical exhibition
Was the crime of libel committed? If so, are
A, B, and C all liable for the crime? Explain. In the course of proceeding during a so-
(5%) (2016 BAR) called “public hearing held before a crowd
in a place open to the public, the leaders of
the meeting “tried” certain public officials
Yes. The crime of libel is committed. and thereafter “sentenced” them to “death
Fair comment on acts of public officers by assassination or ambuscades.”
related to the discharge of their duties is a
qualified privileged communication, hence, Are the leaders criminally liable? Decide
the accused can still be held liable for libel the case. (1988 Bar Question)
if actual malice is shown. In fair comment,
actual malice can be established by SUGGESTED ANSWER:
showing that comment was made with
knowledge that it was false or with reckless The leaders are criminally liable for the
disregard of whether it was false or not crime of libel by theatrical exhibition. Article
(Guingguing v. the Honorable Court of 355 of the Revised Penal Code provides:
Appeals, GR No. 128959, 30 September “libel by means of writing or similar
2005). Journalists bear the burden of means.— A libel committed by means of
writing responsibly when practicing their writing, printing lithography, engraving,
profession, even when writing about public radio, phornographs, painting, theatrical
figures or matters of public interest. The exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or
report made by C describing a lawyer in the any similar means, shall be punished by
Bureau of Customs as corrupt cannot be prision correctional
considered as “fair” and “true” since he did
not do research before making his ART.358-Crimes against honor - slander or
allegations, and it has been shown that slight defamation
these allegations were baseless. The
215
articles are not “fair and true reports,” but A. Romeo Cunanan, publisher of the
merely wild accusations. He has written Baguio Daily, was sued by Pedro Aguas for
Page
and published the subject articles with libel for the public publication of his picture
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Libel or slander
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
What crime or crimes did Cindee commit? Angelina’s website is fake and that
Explain. (3%) (2005 Bar Question) Angelina is known to sell counterfeit items.
Angelina wants to file a case against
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Bettina. She seeks your advice. What
advice will you give her? (4%) (2010 Bar
Cindee committed libel. Defamation made Question)
in a television program is penalized as libel
under Art. 355 of the Revised Penal Code. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Televison falls under “similar means" in the
enumeration as “radio phonograph, I will advise Angelina to file a criminal case
theatrical exhibition, cinematographic of libel against Bettina because the
exhibition, or any similar means" in said imputations made by Bettina is libelous.
Article. [People v. Casten, et al.t CJL G.R. Whether the imputation of a defect, status,
No. 07924 - CR., Dec. 13, 1974) or condition is real or imaginary, if it publicly
tends to discredit, dishonor or place in
ART.355-Crimes against honor – Proof of contempt or ridicule a particular person
truth in the crime of libel who is identified, the imputation is
presumed by law to be malicious and thus
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the penalized as libel under Art 355 of the
statement is true, or FALSE if the Revised Penal Code.
statement is false. Explain your answer in
not more than two (2) sentences. (5%) Moreover, if Bettina is engaged in similar
(2009 Bar Question) line of trade, her statement against the
goods sold by Angelina may constitute a
In the crime of libel, truth is an absolute violation of the law on Unfair Competition
defense. (Rep. Act No. 8291.)
posted pictures of the goods she sells in (Lando's) integrity is doubtful he should not
her exclusive boutique. Bettina posted a be elected. May Marco also be held liable
Page
for grave oral defamation? State your offended party. The individual defamed or
reasons. (1990 Bar Question) slandered was not singled out (People vs.
Uy Tioco, 32 Phil. 624).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ART.353-Crimes against honor – Libel;
Marco cannot file a case for grave oral publication in the newspapers; broadcast
defamation. If at all, he may file a case for over the radio
light slander. In the case of People v.
Laroga (40 O.G. 123), it was held that A was nominated Secretary of a
defamation in a political meeting, when Department in the Executive Branch of the
feelings are running high and people could government. His nomination was thereafter
not think clearly, only amount to light submitted to the Commission on
slander. Appointments for confirmation. While the
Commission was considering the
No, Marco cannot be held liable for grave nomination, a group of concerned citizens
oral defamation considering that Lando caused to be published in the newspapers
was merely stating what appears in a public a full-page statement objecting to A's
record, referring to the exercise of a legal appointment. They alleged that A was a
right to file suit. Moreover, his statement drug dependent, that he had several
against Marco pertains to a person who is mistresses, and that he was corrupt, having
running for public office wherein a wider accepted bribes or favors from parties
latitude is given. transacting business in his previous office,
and therefore he was unfit for the position
ART.358-Crimes against honor - Oral to which he had been nominated. As a
defamation or slander result of the publication, the nomination
was not confirmed by the Commission on
Because of a pendency of a labor dispute, Appointments. The official sued the
two (2) belligerent labor unions had a concerned citizens and the newspapers for
confrontation in a picket line during which libel and damages on account of his non-
the President and the Secretary of one confirmation. How will you decide the
union shouted to the members and officers case? (3%) (2002 Bar Question)
of the rival union composed of men and
women, the following: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Mga supot, mga walang bayag, mga kabit I will acquit the concerned citizens and the
ng Intsik, mga tuta, mga segunda mano." newspapers Involved, from the crime of
libel, because obviously they made the
Are the President and the Secretary of said denunciation out of a moral or social duty
union liable for oral defamation/slander? and thus there is absence of malice.
Explain.
Since A was a candidate for a very
SUGGESTED ANSWER: important public position of a Department
Secretary, his moral, mental and physical
218
No. The President and the Secretary of the fitness for the public trust in such position
Union are not liable for oral defamation or becomes a public concern as the interest of
Page
slander because there is no identity of the the public is at stake. It is pursuant to such
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
concern that the denunciation was made; Office a complaint for slander by deed
hence, bereft of malice. against Maria. After preliminary
investigation, the Fiscal forgot all about the
If defamatory imputations are made not by case until the 179th day, which was a
publication in the newspapers but by Saturday, from the commission of the
broadcast over the radio, do they constitute crime. Since the following day was a
libel? Why? (2%) (2002 Bar Question) Sunday, the fiscal filed the information in
court on Monday, the 181st day from the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: commission of the crime. After trial, the
Judge convicted Maria. She engaged
Yes, because libel may be committed by another lawyer who on appeal asserted
radio broadcast Article 355 of the Revised that the crime of slander by deed had
Penal Code punishes libel committed by prescribed because it was filed in court one
means, among others, of radio broadcast, day after the six-month period of
Inasmuch as the broadcast made by radio prescription under Art. 90 of the Revised
is public and may be defamatory. Penal Code. The Fiscal argued that since
ART.358-Crimes against honor - Slander the 180th day fell on a Sunday, he could file
the information the following Monday. He
Distinguish clearly but briefly: (10%) (2004 also said that, in any event, Maria waived
Bar Question) Between oral defamation the defense of prescription because she
and criminal conversation. did not raise it during the trial of case.
people because she suspected that Lydia 1362; People vs. Castro 95 Phil 462).
was flirting with her boyfriend. The
following day, Lydia filed with the Fiscal’s
Page
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
However, the physical injuries resulting they may have overdone the "healing ritual"
from the discharge of the firearm betrays a they conducted on the victim's body,
Page
lack of precaution in a situation where the causing the latter's death, although the
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
intent to kill was absent, the accused may along smoothly. However, on the fifth year
be held criminally liable for Reckless onwards, they would often quarrel when
Imprudence Resulting in Homicide. Romeo comes home drunk. The quarrels
became increasingly violent, marked by
ART. 365-Criminal negligence – Reckless quiet periods when Julia would leave the
imprudence resulting in homicide conjugal dwelling. During these times of
quiet, Romeo would "court" Julia with
Olimpio caught a cold and was running a flowers and chocolate and convince her to
fever. His doctor prescribed paracetamol. return home, telling her that he could not
Olimpio went to a drug store with the live without her; or Romeo would ask Julia
prescription, and the pharmacist sold him to forgive him, which she did, believing that
three (3) tablets. Upon arriving home, he if she humbled herself, Romeo would
took a tablet. One hour later, he had a change. After a month of marital bliss,
seizure and died. The autopsy showed that Romeo would return to his drinking habit
the tablet he had taken was not and the quarrel would start again, verbally
paracetamol but a pill to which he was at first, until it would escalate to physical
allergic. The pharmacist was charged with violence.
murder. Is the charge proper? If not, what
should it be? Explain. (6%) (2008 Bar One night, Romeo came home drunk and
Question) went straight to bed. Fearing the onset of
another violent fight, Julia stabbed Romeo
SUGGESTED ANSWER: while he was asleep. A week later, their
neighbors discovered Romeo's rotting
The pharmacist committed a serious corpse on the marital bed. Julia and the
mistake. But the mistake could not children were nowhere to be found. Julia
characterize the death as murder because was charged with parricide. She asserted
the specific intent to kill the victim was "battered woman's syndrome" as her
absent. The pharmacist could not be liable defense.
for murder.
[a] Explain the "cycle of violence."
The pharmacist should be charged instead (2.5%)(2016 BAR)
with reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide (Art. 365, RPC) because The battered woman syndrome is
Olimpio's death was the result of the characterized by the so-called “cycle of
pharmacist's serious negligence or violence,” which has three phases: (1) the
imprudence as there is no specific intent to tension building phase; (2) the acute
kill and no requisite qualifying battering incident; and (3) the tranquil,
circumstance. loving (or, at least, nonviolent) phase.
Dimas was shabu so that the conviction elected public official who shall be required
should be affirmed. to sign the copies of the inventory and be
given a copy thereof and within twenty-four
[a] What is the "chain of custody" (24) hours upon such confiscation, the drug
requirement in drug offenses? (2.5%) shall be submitted to the PDEA Forensic
(2016 BAR) Laboratory for examination.
[b] Rule on the contention of the State.
(2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
SUGGESTED ANSWER
To establish the chain of custody,
the prosecution must show the movements The contention of the State is
of the dangerous drugs from its meritorious. Macario, the policeman failed
confiscation up to its presentation in court. to comply with Sec. 21 of RA No. 9165
The purpose of establishing the chain of since the inventory and photograph of the
custody is to ensure the integrity of the drugs was only made in the presence of
corpus delicti (People v. Magat, GR No. barangay tanod and the same was not
179939, 29 September 2008). The submitted to the PNP Crime Laboratory
following links that must be established in within 24 hours. The rule is settled that
the chain of custody in a buy-bust situation failure to strictly comply with Sec. 21(1),
are: first, the seizure and marking, if Article II of RA No. 9165 does not
practicable, of the illegal drug recovered necessarily render an accused’s arrest
from the accused by the apprehending illegal or the items seized or confiscated
officer; second, the turnover of the illegal from him inadmissible. The most important
drug seized by the apprehending officer to factor is the preservation of the integrity
the investigating officer; third, the turnover and evidentiary value of the seized item.
by the investigating officer of the illegal Moreover, the issue of non-compliance
drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory with Sec. 21 of RA No. 9165 cannot be
examination; and fourth, the turnover and raised for the first time on appeal (People
submission of the marked illegal drug v. Badilla, GR No. 218578, August 31,
seized from the forensic chemist to the 2016).
court (People v. Kamad, GR No. 174198,
29 January 2010).
SPECIAL LAW– RA 6805; Instances of
To establish the first link in the chain legal use of an alias by a Filipino citizen
of custody, and that is the seizure of the
drug from the accused, the prosecution When can a Filipino citizen residing in this
must comply with Sec. 21 of RA No. 9165, country use an alias legally? Give 3
which requires that the apprehending instances. 2.5% (2006 Bar Question)
officer after the confiscation of drug must
immediately physically inventory and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
photograph the same in the presence of the
accused or the person from whom such Yes, an alias may be legally used -
223
from the media and the DOJ, and any other entertainment field;
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
SPECIAL LAW– Act Defining Certain statement is false. Explain your answer in
Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
Under Custodial Investigation (RA 7438) (2009 Bar Question)
– Rights which can be violated
[e] For a person who transacts an
Upon complaint of Baby, NBI agent Cesar instrument representing the proceeds of a
invited estafador to the NBI headquarters covered unlawful activity to be liable under
where Cesar showed to Estafador the the Anti-Money Laundering Act (R.A. 9160,
sworn complaint of Baby for estafa. He as amended), it must be shown that he has
thereafter began questioning Estafador knowledge of the identities of the culprits
who told him that he (Estafador) is willing to involved in the commission of the predicate
submit to an Investigation since he has crimes.
nothing to hide. Thereupon, Cesar got a
typewriter and took down the statement of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Estafador without informing the latter that
he has a right to remain silent and to secure False. There is nothing in the law which
the services of a lawyer. After the requires that the accused must know the
statement was signed by Estafador, his identities of the culprits involved in the
fiancee, Fadora, came and asked Cesar to commission of the predicate crimes. To
allow her to confer with Estafador but establish liability under RA 9160, it is
Cesar refused saying that after all. Fadora sufficient that proceeds of an unlawful
is not a lawyer, and that Estafador activity are transacted, making them
voluntarily gave his statement. appear to have originated from legitimate
sources.
If you were the lawyer of Estafador, with
what crime would you charge the NBI
agent? Explain. .(1993 Bar Question) Special Law. under Republic Act (RA)
No. 9160, as amended (Anti- Money
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Laundering Act)
Violation of RA 7438, defining rights of There being probable cause to believe that
persons arrested. certain deposits and investments in a bank
are related to an unlawful activity of
1. Failure to inform him of his right to smuggling by Alessandro as defined under
counsel and to remain silent (Sec. 4, par. Republic Act (RA) No. 9160, as amended
1); and (Anti- Money Laundering Act) an
2. Prevent an immediate member of application for an order to allow inquiry into
his family which includes fiancee, to confer his deposit was filed with the Regional Trial
with Estafador (Sec. 4(b) Court.
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the Pass upon the correctness of the court’s
Page
statement is true, or FALSE if the order. Explain. (3%) (2010 Bar Question)
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
Indirect bribery is not committed, because Should the Judge allow MNO’s plea to the
he received the P500,000.00 as a lesser offense? Explain briefly. (5%)
consideration for destroying the evidence (2004 Bar Question)
against the offender, which was under his
official custody as a public officer. The SUGGESTED ANSWER:
money was not delivered to him simply as
a gift or present by reason of his public No, the Judge should not allow MNO’s plea
office. to a lesser offense, because
pleabargaining in prosecutions of drug-
Patrick also violated Section 3(e), R.A. related cases is no longer allowed by Rep.
3019 causing undue injury to the Act No. 9165, the Comprehensive
government through evident bad faith, Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, regardless
giving unwarranted benefit to the offender of the imposable penalty.
by destroying evidence of a crime.
Obstruction of justice under Section 1 (b) of Obie Juan is suspected to have in his
P.D. 1829 is committed by destroying possession an unspecified amount of
227
arrest following the discovery of 100 grams Ong arrived at the airport, the group
of the said dangerous drug in his arrested him and seized his attache case.
possession. He was subjected to a drug Upon inspection inside the Immigration
test and was found positive for the use of holding area, the attache case yielded 5
marijuana, another dangerous drug. He plastic bags of heroin weighing 500 grams.
was subsequently charged with two crimes: Chief Inspector Gamboa took the attache
Violation of Section 11, Article II of RA 9165 case and boarded him in an unmarked car
for the possession of “shabu" and violation driven by P03 Pepito Lorbes. On the way to
of Section 15, Article II of RA 9165 for the Camp Crame and upon nearing White
use of marijuana. Plains comer Edsa. Chief Inspector
Gamboa ordered P03 Lorbes to stop the
A. Are the charges proper? Explain. car. They brought out the drugs from the
B. So as not to be sentenced to death, case in the trunk and got 3 plastic sacks of
Obie Juan offers to plead guilty to a lesser heroin. They then told Ong to alight from
offense. Can he do so? Why? (5%) (2005 the car. Ong left with the 2 remaining plastic
Bar Question) sacks of heroin. Chief Inspector Gamboa
advised him to keep silent and go home
SUGGESTED ANSWER: which the latter did. Unknown to them, an
NBI team of agents had been following
A. The charge of possession of shabu them and witnessed the transaction. They
is proper as the mere possession of such arrested Chief Inspector Gamboa and P03
drug is punishable, but the charge of use of Lorbes. Meanwhile, another NBI team
marijuana is not proper as Section 15 of followed
Rep. Act 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Ong and likewise arrested him. All of them
Drugs Act of 2002) expressly excludes were later charged
penalties for “use” of dangerous drugs
when the person tested is also found to What are their respective criminal
have in possession such quantity of any liabilities? 5% (2006 Bar Question)
dangerous drug" provided for in Section 11
of such Act. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. No, because Section 23 of R.A. The two police officers are criminally liable
9165 expressly provides that "Any person for violation of Sec. 27, R.A. 9165 of the
charged under any provision of this Act same law for misappropriation and failure
regardless of the imposable penalty shall to account for the confiscated or seized
not be allowed to avail of the provision on dangerous drugs.
plea-bargaining. ” For this reason, Obie
Juan cannot be allowed to plead guilty to a On the other hand, Dante Ong is criminally
lesser offense. liable for the illegal importation or bringing
into the Philippines of the dangerous drugs.
(Article 11, Sec. 4, RA 9165)
After receiving a reliable information that
Dante Ong, a notorious drug smuggler,
228
was arriving on PAL Flight No. PR181, After receiving a reliable information that
PNP Chief Inspector Samuel Gamboa Dante Ong, a notorious drug smuggler,
Page
formed a group of anti-drug agents. When was arriving on PAL Flight No. PR181,
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
PNP Chief Inspector Samuel Gamboa order to prevent the arrest, prosecution and
formed a group of anti-drug agents. When conviction of the violator.
Ong arrived at the airport, the group
arrested him and seized his attache case.
Upon inspection inside the Immigration Tuburcio asked Anastacio to join their
holding area, the attache case yielded 5 group for a "session". Thinking that it was
plastic bags of heroin weighing 500 grams. for a mahjong session Anastacio agreed.
Chief Inspector Gamboa took the attache Upon reaching Tiburcio's house, Anastacic
case and boarded him in an unmarked car discovered that it was actually a shabu
driven by P03 Pepito Lorbes. On the way to session. At that precise time, the place was
Camp Crame and upon nearing White raided by the police, and Anastacio was
Plains comer Edsa. Chief Inspector among those arrested.
Gamboa ordered P03 Lorbes to stop the
car. They brought out the drugs from the What crime can Anastacio be charged with,
case in the trunk and got 3 plastic sacks of if any? Explain your answer.
heroin. They then told Ong to alight from (2007 Bar Question)
the car. Ong left with the 2 remaining plastic
sacks of heroin. Chief Inspector Gamboa SUGGESTED ANSWER:
advised him to keep silent and go home
which the latter did. Unknown to them, an Anastacio may not be charged of any
NBI team of agents had been following crime.
them and witnessed the transaction. They
arrested Chief Inspector Gamboa and P03 Sec. 7 of Rep. Act. 9165 on the
Lorbes. Meanwhile, another NBI team Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs of 2002
followed punishes employees and visitors of a den,
Ong and likewise arrested him. All of them dive or resort where dangerous drugs are
were later charged used in any form. But for a visitor of such
place to commit the crime, it is a requisite
What are their respective criminal that he "is aware of the nature of the place
liabilities? 5% (2006 Bar Question) as such and shall knowingly visit the
same." These requisites are absent in the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: facts given.
of any person whom he knows or believes, Act) before the Sandiganbayan, the Office
has violated the Dangerous Drugs Law, in of the Special Prosecutor filed a Motion to
Page
not punishable, but the accused be alleged that the decision was erroneous
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
because the crime was not consummated amounts he deposited were proceeds from
but was only at an attempted stage, and his jueteng operations.
that in fact the Government did not suffer
any undue injury. What crime/s were committed? Who are
criminally liable? Explain. (6%)(2005 Bar
A. Is the contention of both accused Question)
correct? Explain.(3%) (2000 Bar Question)
B. Art. 315: Assuming that the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
attempted or frustrated stage of the
violation charged is not punishable, may 4. Corruption of public officials under
the accused be nevertheless convicted for Article 212 of the Revised Penal Code for
an offense punished by the Revised Penal having given the amounts that were
Code under the facts of the case? Explain. deposited in an account which he opened
(3%) (2000 Bar Question) in the Mayor’s name for no reason but the
public position or office held by the Mayor;
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (crime committed by Don Gabito)
A. Yes, the contention of the accused 5. Indirect Bribery for accepting such
that the crime was not consummated is moneys deposited in his account by using
correct. R.A. 3019 is a special law them when they were given to him for no
punishing acts mala prohibita. As a rule, other reason except for his public position
attempted violation of a special law is not as a Mayor. (crime committed by the
punished. Actual injury is required. Mayor)
B. Yes, both are liable for attempted
estafa thru falsification of commercial 6. Violation of Rep. Act 6713 (Code of
documents, a complex crime. They tried to Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
defraud the Government with the use of Officials and Employees) for receiving such
false commercial and public documents. gift from someone who may be affected by
Damage is not necessary. the functions of his office. (crime committed
by the Mayor)
Special penal law - Violation of Rep. Act
6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Criminal law – Crimes committed by
Standards for Public Officials and public officers - Indirect bribery; Special
Employees) penal law - Republic Act No. 3019-
and for all other municipal projects. It was case pending before the court that she
subsequently discovered that Don Gabito would convince the Presiding Judge to
Page
was actually a jueteng operator and the decide the case in plaintiff's favor. In
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
consideration therefor, the plaintiff gave programs for 2008. Records show that the
Charina P20,000.00. amount of P2-million was purportedly used
as financial assistance for a rice production
Charina was charged with violation of livelihood project. Upon investigation,
Section 3 (b) of Republic Act No. 3019, however, it was found that Roger and
prohibiting any public officer from directly or Jessie falsified the disbursement vouchers
indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, and supporting documents in order to make
present, percentage, or benefit in it appear that qualified recipients who, in
connection with any contract or transaction fact, are non-existent individuals, received
x x x wherein the public officer, in his official the money.
capacity, has to intervene under the law.
Roger and Jessie are charged with
While the case was being tried, the violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. 3019 for
Ombudsman filed another information causing undue injury to the government.
against Charina for Indirect Bribery under Discuss the propriety of the charge filed
the Revised Penal Code. Charina against Roger and Jessie. Explain. (4%)
demurred to the second information, (2009 Bar Question)
claiming that she can no longer be charged
under the Revised Penal Code having SUGGESTED ANSWER:
been charged for the same act under R.A.
3019. They should be charged of violation of
Section 3(e) of Rep. Act 3019 for the
Is Charina correct? Explain. (3%) (2009 breach of public trust and undue injury
Bar Question) caused to the Government. The violation is
a crime malum prohibitum.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Charina is not correct. Although the Criminal law – Crimes committed by
charge for violation of Rep. Act No. 3019 public officers - direct bribery; Special
and the charge for Indirect Bribery (Art. penal law - Republic Act No. 3019
211, RPC) arose from the same act, the
elements of the violation charged under RA 3019: May a public officer charged
Rep. Act No. 3019 are not the same as the under Section 3(b) of Republic Act No.
felony charged for Indirect Bribery under 3019 [“directly or indirectly requesting or
the Rev. Penal Code (Mejia v. Pamaran, receiving any gift, present, share,
160 SCRA 457 [1988]). Hence, the crimes percentage or benefit, for himself of for any
charged are separate and distinct from other person, in connection with any
each other, with different penalties. The contract or transaction between the
two charges do not constitute a ground for government and any other party, wherein
a motion to dismiss or motion to quash, as the public officer in his official capacity has
there is no jeopardy against the accused. to intervene under the law”] also be
simultaneously or successively charged
Roger and Jessie, Municipal Mayor and with direct bribery under Article 210 of the
232
Treasurer, respectively, of San Rafael, Revised Penal Code? Explain. (4%) (2010
Leyte, caused the disbursement of public Bar Question)
Page
such gift does not appear to be included the public officer in his official capacity has
among the punishable acts under Rep. Act to intervene under the law. “
Page
Being the assistant public high school 2. Indirect Bribery for accepting such
principal, it is her duty to intervene in the moneys deposited in his account by using
release of salary differentials and per diem them when they were given to him for no
of classroom teachers under her. Her act of other reason except for his public position
doing so, made a request for a share or as a Mayor. (crime committed by the
benefit therefor constitutes graft or corrupt Mayor)
practice under Sec 3(b) of Rep. Act No.
3019. Considering that the acts prohibited 3. Violation of Rep. Act 6713 (Code of
or punished under this law are mala Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
prohibita, and thus punishable thereunder, Officials and Employees) for receiving such
whether done with criminal intent or not. gift from someone who may be affected by
the functions of his office. (crime committed
Special penal law - Violation of Rep. Act by the Mayor)
6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials and Special penal law– Violation of Code of
Employees) Conduct and Ethical Standards for
Public Officials (RA 6713) - Requesting
Don Gabito, a philanthropist, offered to donations of gifts
fund several projects of the Mayor. He
opened an account in the Mayor’s name Commissioner Marian Torres of the Bureau
and regularly deposited various amounts of Internal Revenue (BIR) wrote solicitation
ranging from P500,000.00 to PI Million. letters addressed to the Filipino-Chinese
From this account, the Mayor withdrew and Chamber of Commerce and Industry and to
used the money for constructing feeder certain CEOs of various multinational
roads, barangay clinics, repairing schools corporations requesting donations of gifts
and for all other municipal projects. It was for her office Christmas party. She used the
subsequently discovered that Don Gabito Bureau's official stationery. The response
was actually a jueteng operator and the was prompt and overwhelming so much so
amounts he deposited were proceeds from that Commissioner Torres' office was
his jueteng operations. overcrowded with rice cookers, radio sets,
freezers, electric stoves and toasters. Her
What crime/s were committed? Who are staff also received several envelopes
criminally liable? Explain. containing cash money for the employees'
(6%)(2005 Bar Question) Christmas luncheon.
(crime committed by Don Gabito) impropriety. She violated Sec. 7(d) of Rep.
Act 6713 otherwise known as the “Code of
Page
Officials and Employees”. Sec. 7(d) the crime of illegal possession of firearms
mandates that public officials and and ammunition. What the law requires is
employees shall not solicit or accept merely possession, which includes not only
directly or indirectly any gift, favor, actual physical possession but also
entertainment, loan or anything of constructive possession where the firearm
monetary value from any person in the and explosive are subject to one’s control
course of£ her official duties or any and management. [People us. De Grecia,
transaction which may be affected by the 233 SCRA 716; U.S. vs. Juan, 23 Phil, 105;
functions of their office. People vs. Soyag, 110 Phil. 565).
Ownership is not an essential element of scale when there are three or more
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
On the other hand, Jeff's application for conflict with the law on the basis of his/her
probation cannot also be entertained or social, cultural, economic, psychological or
Page
to formal court proceedings. This process unlawfully acquired? Explain your answer.
governs when the child is over 15 years old (1990 Bar Question)
but below 18 at the time of the commission
of the crime and he acted with discernment. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. Joe is entitled to diversion. Being only I would interpose the defense of
17 years old at the time he committed the prescription as the right to file a petition for
crime of homicide, he is treated as a child forfeiture under Republic Act No. 1379
in conflict with the law under RA 9344 Section 2 prescribes in four (4) years from
the date of resignation.
[b] Suppose Joe's motion for intervention or
diversion was denied, and he was Property which may still be considered as
convicted two (2) years later when Joe was unlawfully acquired, though not in the name
already 21 years old, should the judge of Maloling at the time of filing of the petition
apply the suspension of sentence? Explain. for forfeiture, shall include:
(2%) (2009 Bar Question)
1. Property unlawfully acquired by the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: respondent but its ownership concealed by
being recorded in the name of, or held by,
No. The judge should not suspend the respondent’s spouse, ascendants,
sentence anymore because Joe was descendants, relatives or any other person;
already 21 years old. Suspension of and
sentence is availing under Rep. Act 9344
only until a child reaches the maximum age 2. Property unlawfully acquired by the
of twenty-one (21) years. respondent, but transferred by him to
another person/s. (R-A. 1379 Section 1(b)).
Prescription for violation of special laws Special law - Highway Robbery under
- Petition for forfeiture under Republic Presidential Decree No. 532
Act No. 1379
a) Distinguish Highway Robbery under
Maloling is a public official who resigned Presidential Decree No. 532 from Robbery
from the service on February 1, 1984. On committed on a highway. (3%) (2000 Bar
February 15, 1990, the Solicitor General Question)
filed a petition in court for the forfeiture of
the property of Maloling which was b) A, B, C, D and E were in a
allegedly unlawfully acquired. beerhouse along MacArthur Highway
having a drinking spree. At about 1 o’clock
If you were the counsel of Maloling, what in the morning, they decided to leave and
defense or defenses would you interpose? so asked for the bill. They pooled their
Explain your answer. (1990 Bar Question) money together but they were still short of
P2.Q00.00. E then orchestrated a plan
Besides property unlawfully acquired whereby A, B, C and D would go out, flag a
237
found to be in the name of Maloling, what taxicab and rob the taxi driver of all his
are the other properties not in his name money while E would wait for them in the
Page
robbery in public highways and against Chan, in his defense, claimed that he
persons travelling thereat; whereas should not be charged as a principal but
Page
ordinary Robbery In public highways is only only as an accessory after the fact under
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
P.D. 532, otherwise known as the Anti- "Chain of custody" requirement in drug
Piracy and AntiHighway Robbery Act of offenses refers to the duly recorded,
1972. authorized movement and custody of
seized dangerous drugs, controlled
Is the contention of Sgt. Chan valid and chemicals, plant sources of dangerous
tenable? Explain. (5%) (2001 Bar drugs, and laboratory equipment for
Question) dangerous drugs from the time of
confiscation/seizure thereof from the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: offender, to its turn-over and receipt in the
forensic laboratory for examination, to its
No, the contention of Sgt. Chan is not valid safekeeping and eventual
or tenable because by express provision of presentation/offer in court as evidence of
P.D. 532, Section 4, a person who the criminal violation, and for destruction.
knowingly and in any manner, aids or (Dangerous Drugs Board Regulation No.1
protects highway robbers/brigands, such Series of 2002)
as giving them information about the
movement of police officers or acquires or Its rationale is to preserve the authenticity
receives property taken by brigands, or of the corpus delicti or body of the crime by
who directly or indirectly abets the rendering it improbable that the original
commission of highway item seized/confiscated in the violation has
robbeiy/brigandage, shall be considered as been exchanged or substituted with
accomplice of the principal offenders and another or tampered with or contaminated.
punished in accordance with the rules in It is a method of authenticating the
the Revised Penal Code. evidence as would support a finding
beyond reasonable doubt that the matter is
Special penal law - The Comprehensive what the prosecution claims it to be.
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. No.
9165) – Chain of custody Failure to observe the "chain of custody"
requirement renders the evidence
Following his arrest after a valid buy-bust questionable, not trustworthy and
operation, Tommy was convicted of insufficient to prove the corpus delicti
violation of Section 5, Republic Act 9165. beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, Tommy
On appeal, Tommy questioned the would be acquitted on reasonable doubt.
admissibility of the evidence because the
police officers who conducted the buybust The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency
operation failed to observe the requisite (PDEA) had intelligence reports about the
"chain of custody" of the evidence drug pushing activities of Rado, but could
confiscated and/or seized from him. not arresthim for lack of concrete evidence.
SP03 Relio, a PDEA team leader,
What is the "chain of custody" requirement approached Emilo and requested him to
in drug offenses? What is its rationale? act as poseur-buyer of shabu and transact
What is the effect of failure to observe the with Rado. Emilo refused, saying that he
requirement? (3%) (2009 Bar Question) had completely been rehabilitated and did
239
he could help capture Rado because he crime. In a buy-bust operation, the idea to
used to be his customer. SP03 Relio then commit a crime originates from the
gave Emilo the marked money to be used offender, without anybody inducing or
in buying shabu from Rado. The operation prodding him to commit the offense.
proceeded. After Emilo handed the marked Second, the immunity does not extend to
money to Rado in exchange for the sachets violators of Section 5 of RA 9165 or the sale
of shabu weighing 50 grams, and upon of shabu (sec. 33, RA 9165). Lastly, he was
receiving the pre-arranged signal from the offender of the crime and apparently
Ernilo, SP03 Relio and his team members the most guilty of the offense.
barged in and arrested Rado and Ernilo,
who were both charged with violation of ART.220 in rel to RA 3019
R.A. 9165, otherwise known as the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act Governor A was given the amount of PIO
of2002. (2015 BAR) million by the Department of Agriculture for
the purpose of buying seedlings to be
a) What defense, if any, may Ernilo distributed to the farmers. Supposedly
invoke to free himself from criminal liability? intending to modernize the farming industry
Explain. in his province, Governor A bought farm
equipment through direct purchase from
Answer: XY Enterprise, owned by his kumpare B,
Ernilo may invoke Section 33, Art. II of RA the alleged exclusive distributor of the said
9165 or the “Comprehensive Drugs Act of equipment. Upon inquiry, the Ombudsman
2002”. He may have violated Section 11 of discovered that B has a pending patent
RA 9165 for possession of shabu but he is application for the said farm equipment.
immune from prosecution and punishment Moreover, the equipment purchased turned
because of his role as the poseur-buyer in out to be overpriced. What crime or crimes,
the entrapment operation. There was if any, were committed by Governor A?
virtually instigation. He is exempted from Explain. (5%)(2016 BAR)
prosecution or punishment because the
information obtained from him by the PDEA
agents, who had no direct and concrete SUGGESTED ANSWER
evidence of Rado’s drug-pushing activities, Governor A committed the crimes
led to the whereabouts, identity and arrest of: (1) Technical Malversation; and (2)
of Rado. So long as the information and Violation of Sections 3(e) and (g) of
testimony given are pleaded and proven, Republic Act No. 3019.
Emililo cannot be prosecuted for violation Governor A committed the crime of
of RA 9165. illegal use of public funds or property
punishable under Art. 220 of the Revised
b) May Rado adopt as his own Emilo's Penal Code. This offense is also known as
defense? Explain. technical malversation. The crime has
three elementsL: a) that the offender is an
Answer: accountable public officer; b) that he
No. First, an entrapment operation is a applies public funds or property under his
240
law offenders in the act of committing a property had been applied is different from
CRIMINAL LAW BAR EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS up to 2016
the purpose for which they were originally The act committed by Governor is
appropriated by law or ordinance (Ysidora also in violation of Sec. 3 (g) of RA No.
v. People. G.R. No. 192330, 14 November 3019 for entering a contract on behalf of the
2012). government which is manifestly and
The amount of P 10M granted by the grossly disadvantageous to the same.
Department of Agriculture to Governor A, SPECIAL LAW- P.D 1612
an accountable public officer, is specifically
appropriated for the purpose of buying Ofelia, engaged in the purchase and sale
seedlings to be distributed to the farmers. of jewelry, was charged with violation of PD
Instead, Governor A applied the amount to 1612, otherwise known as the Anti-Fencing
acquire modern farm equipment through Law, for having been found in possession
direct purchase from XY Enterprise owned of recently stolen jewelry valued at Pl
by his kumpare. The law punishes the act 00,000.00 at her jewelry shop. Her defense
of diverting public funds earmarked by law is that she merely bought the same from
or ordinance for a specific public purpose Antonia and produced a receipt covering
to another public purpose, hence, the the sale. She presented other receipts
liability for technical malversation. given to her by Antonia representing
Governor A can also be held liable previous transactions. Convicted of the
for Violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. 3019 charge, Ofelia appealed, arguing that her
or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, acquisition of the jewelries resulted from a
which has the following elements: (1) the legal transaction and that the prosecution
accused is a public officer discharging failed to prove that she knew or should
administrative, judicial or official functions; have known that the pieces of jewelry
(2) he must have acted with manifest which she bought from Antonia were
partiality, evident bad faith or gross proceeds of the crime of theft.
inexcusable negligence; and (3) his action
caused any undue injury to any party, [a] What is a "fence" under PD 1612?
including the government, or gave any (2.5%) (2016 BAR)
private party unwarranted benefits,
advantage or preference in the discharge SUGGESTED ANSWER
of his functions.
Fencing is the act of any person
The facts show that the first element who, with intent to gain for himself or for
is present. The second element is likewise another, shall buy, receive, possess, keep,
present because, “through manifest acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall
partiality” in favoring his kumpare, buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in
Governor A did not hold a public bidding any article, item, object or anything of value
and directly purchased the farm equipment which he knows, or should be known to
from the latter. With respect to the third him, to have been derived from the
element, Governor A’s actions caused proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft
undue injury to the government as well as (Sec. 2 of PD 1612)
the farmers who were deprived of the [b] Is Ofelia liable under the Anti-Fencing
seedlings. His acts likewise gave his Law? Explain. (2.5%)
241
No. Ofelia is not liable under the or robbery are also applicable to
Anti-Fencing Law. While under the said law carnapping (People v. Asamudding GR No.
mere possession of any good, article, item, 213913, 2 September 2015). In theft,
object or anything of value which has been unlawful taking should be understood
the subject of robbery or thievery shall be within the Spanish concept of
prima facie evidence of fencing, such apoderamiento. In order to constitute
evidence when sufficiently overturned apoderamiento, the physical taking must
constitutes a defense. be coupled with the intent to appropriate
In this case, Ofelia’s defense that the object, which means intent to deprive
she merely acquired the jewelries through the lawful owner of the thing, whether
a legitimate transaction is sufficient. permanently or temporarily (People v.
Further, there is no other circumstance as Valenzuela, GR No. 160188, 21 June
regards the jewelries which would indicate 2007). In this case A took the car without
to Ofelia, an innocent purchaser, that the the consent of B with intent to temporarily
jewelries were the subject of theft. There deprive him of the car. Although the taking
was even a receipt produced by Ofelia for was “temporary” and for a “joy ride”, the
the transaction. Supreme Court in People v. Bustinera,
(supra), sustains as the better view that
SPECIAL LAW- RA 6539-Anti- which holds that when a person, either with
carnapping Law the object of going to a certain place, or
learning how to drive, or enjoying a free
A is the driver of B's Mercedes Benz car. ride, takes possession of a vehicle
When B was on a trip to Paris, A used the belonging to another, without the consent
car for a joy ride with C whom he is of its owner, he is guilty of theft because by
courting. Unfortunately, A met an accident. taking possession of the personal property
Upon his return, B came to know about the belonging to another and using it, his intent
unauthorized use of the car and sued A for to gain is evident since he derives
qualified theft. B alleged that A took and therefrom utility, satisfaction, enjoyment
used the car with intent to gain as he and pleasure.
derived some benefit or satisfaction from its SPECIAL LAW- R.A Child exploitation—
use. On the other hand, A argued that he
has no intent of making himself the owner Arnold, 25 years of age, was sitting on a
of the car as he in fact returned it to the bench in Luneta Park watching the statue
garage after the joy ride. What crime or of Jose Rizal when, without his permission,
crimes, if any, were committed? Explain. Leilani, I 7 years of age, sat beside him and
(5%)(2016 BAR) asked for financial assistance, allegedly for
SUGGESTED ANSWER payment of her tuition fee, in exchange for
The crime commited by A is sex. While they were conversing, police
carnapping. The unlawful taking of motor operatives arrested and charged him with
vehicles is now covered by the Anti- violation of Section l 0 of RA 76 I 0 (Special
Carnapping Law (RA 6539 as amended) Protection of Children against Child Abuse,
and not by the provisions on qualified theft Exploitation and Discrimination Act),
or robbery (People v. Rustinera, GR No. accusing him of having in his company a
242
148233, 8 June 2004). The concept of minor, who is not related to him, in a public
carnapping is the same as that of robbery place. It was established that Arnold was
Page
SUGGESTED ANSWER