Professional Documents
Culture Documents
UP Criminal Law Reviewer PDF
UP Criminal Law Reviewer PDF
L
AW
BAR REVIEWER
2012
CRIMINAL
Criminal Law 1
Criminal Law 2
LAW
Dean Danilo L. Concepcion
Dean, UP College of Law
UP
L
AW
BAR REVIEWER
2012
CRIMINAL
BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION 2012
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Ramon Carlo Marcaida |Commissioner
Raymond Velasco • Mara Kriska Chen |Deputy Commissioners
Barbie Kaye Perez |Secretary
Carmen Cecilia Veneracion |Treasurer
Hazel Angeline Abenoja|Auditor
COMMITTEE HEADS
Eleanor Balaquiao • Mark Xavier Oyales | Acads
Monique Morales • Katleya Kate Belderol • Kathleen Mae
Tuason (D) • Rachel Miranda (D) |Special Lectures
Patricia Madarang • Marinella Felizmenio |Secretariat
Victoria Caranay |Publicity and Promotions
Loraine Saguinsin • Ma. Luz Baldueza |Marketing
Benjamin Joseph Geronimo • Jose Lacas |Logistics
Angelo Bernard Ngo • Annalee Toda|HR
Anne Janelle Yu • Alyssa Carmelli Castillo |Merchandise
Graciello Timothy Reyes |Layout
Charmaine Sto. Domingo • Katrina Maniquis |Mock Bar
Krizel Malabanan • Karren de Chavez |Bar Candidates’ Welfare
Karina Kirstie Paola Ayco • Ma. Ara Garcia |Events
LAW
OPERATIONS HEADS
Charles Icasiano • Katrina Rivera |Hotel Operations
Marijo Alcala • Marian Salanguit |Day-Operations
Jauhari Azis |Night-Operations
Vivienne Villanueva • Charlaine Latorre |Food
Kris Francisco Rimban • Elvin Salindo |Transpo
Paula Plaza |Linkages
LAW
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Criminal Law 1
CHAPTER I. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
OF CRIMINAL LAW .......................... 14
A. Definition of Criminal Law ........ 14
1. Difference between Mala in Se and
Mala Prohibita .......................... 14
B. Scope
of
Application
and
Characteristics of the Philippine Criminal
Law 16
0. Generality ........................ 16
1. Territoriality ..................... 17
2. Prospectivity ..................... 19
3. Legality (nullum crimen nulla
poena sine lege) ....................... 20
4. Strict Construction of Penal Laws
Against State: The ―Doctrine of Pro
Reo‖ ..................................... 20
C. Constitutional limitations on the
power of Congress to enact penal laws in
the Bill of Rights .......................... 20
1. Equal protection ................. 20
2. Due process ....................... 20
3. Non-imposition of cruel and
unusual punishment or excessive fines
20
4. Bill of attainder .................. 20
5. Ex post facto law ................ 20
CHAPTER II. FELONIES ..................... 22
A. Preliminary matters ................ 22
1. Differentiating Felonies, Offense,
Misdemeanor and Crime .............. 22
1. Felonies: How Committed ......... 22
2. How
is
Criminal
Liability
Incurred? ................................ 22
3. Discussion of Article 5........... 23
4. Wrongful Act Different from that
Intended ................................ 23
5. Omission .......................... 25
B. Classifications of Felonies ......... 25
1. According to the Manner of Their
Commission ............................. 26
2. According to the Stages of Their
Execution ............................... 26
3. According to Their Gravity ..... 26
4. As to Count ....................... 27
5. As to Nature ...................... 27
C. Elements of Criminal Liability .... 27
1. Elements of Felonies ............ 27
Intentional Felonies ................... 27
D. Impossible Crimes .................. 31
E.
F.
G.
B.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
C.
LAW
12.
Analogous
Mitigating
Circumstances.......................... 58
D.
1.
1.
E.
1.
2.
3.
F.
1.
2. Pardon ............................. 77
3. Other Absolutory Causes ........ 77
4. Acts Not Covered By Law And In
Case Of Excessive Punishment ....... 77
CHAPTER IV.PERSONS
CRIMINALLY
LIABLE/DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION ..... 78
A. PrincipalsError!
Bookmark
not
defined.
1. By Direct Participation .......... 78
2. By Inducement ................... 79
3. By Indispensable Cooperation .. 79
B. Accomplices ......................... 79
C. Accessories........................... 80
CHAPTER V. PENALTIES .................... 83
A.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
B.
F.
Application .......................... 93
1. Indeterminate Sentence Law
(R.A. 4013, as amended) ............. 94
2. The Three-fold rule ............. 96
3. Subsidiary imprisonment........ 97
G.
H.
CHAPTER
VI.
MODIFICATION
AND
EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY .. 113
A. Prescription of crimes (Art. 90) . 113
B. Prescription of penalties (Art. 92)
114
C. Pardon by the offended party ... 115
D. Pardon by the Chief Executive... 115
E. Amnesty ............................. 115
Criminal Law 2
Title I. Crimes against National Security
and the Law of Nations .................. 155
A.
LAW
E.
B. Chapter
II.
Offenses
against
Decency and Good Customs ............186
0. ........................................186
1. Article 200 - Grave Scandal ...186
2. Article 201 - Immoral Doctrines,
Obscene Publications and Exhibitions
and Indecent Shows ..................186
3. Article 202 - Vagrancy and
Prostitution ............................187
Title VII. Crimes Committed by Public
Officers ..................................... 188
CRIMINAL
A.
B. Chapter
II:
Malfeasance
and
Misfeasance in Office ................... 189
1. Article 204 - Knowingly Rendering
Unjust Judgment ..................... 189
2. Article 205 - Judgment Rendered
Through Negligence .................. 189
3. Article 206 - Unjust Interlocutory
Order ................................... 190
4. Article 207 - Malicious Delay in
the Administration of Justice ....... 190
5. Article 208 - Prosecution of
Offenses; Negligence and Tolerance
190
6. Article 209 – Betrayal of Trust by
an Attorney or a Solicitor – Revelation
of Secrets .............................. 190
7. Article 210 - Direct Bribery.... 191
8. Article 211 - Indirect Bribery . 191
9. Article 211-A - Qualified Bribery
192
10.
Article 212 - Corruption of
Public Officials ........................ 192
C. Chapter III: Frauds and Illegal
Exactions and Transactions ............ 192
1. Article 213 - Fraud against the
Public Treasury and Similar Offenses
192
2. Article 214 - Other Frauds ..... 193
3. Article
215
Prohibited
Transactions ........................... 193
4. Article 216 - Possession of
Prohibited Interest by a Public Officer
194
D. Chapter IV: Malversation of Public
Funds or Property ....................... 194
1. Article 217 - Malversation of
Public
Funds
or
Property
Presumption of Malversation ........ 194
2. Article
218
Failure
of
Accountable
Officer
to
Render
Accounts ............................... 195
3. Article 219 - Failure of a
Responsible Public Officer to Render
Accounts Before Leaving the Country
195
LAW
10
B.
B.
LAW
11.
Article 304 - Possession of
Picklock or Similar Tools .............226
12.
Article 305 - Defines False Keys
226
D.
E.
12
14.
Article 346 – Liability of
ascendants, guardians, teachers and
other persons entrusted with the
custody of the offended party ......249
J. Chapter
10:
Exemption from
Criminal Liability ........................ 239
1. Article 332 - Exemption from
Criminal Liability in Crimes Against
Property................................ 239
Title XI. Crimes against Chastity ....... 242
1. Article 333 - Adultery .......... 242
2. Article 334 - Concubinage ..... 242
3. Article 335 – Rape .............. 243
4. Article
336
Acts
of
Lasciviousness ......................... 243
5. Article 337 - Qualified Seduction
244
6. Article 338 - Simple Seduction 245
7. Article
339
Acts
of
Lasciviousness with the Consent of the
Offended Party........................ 245
8. Article 340 - Corruption of Minors
246
9. Article 341 - White Slave Trade
246
10.
Article
342
Forcible
Abduction .............................. 246
11.
Article
343
Consented
Abduction .............................. 247
12.
Article 344 - Prosecution of
Private Offenses ...................... 248
13.
Article 345: Civil Liability .. 249
B. Chapter
II:
Incriminatory
Machinations..............................256
1. Article 363 - Incriminating
innocent person .......................256
2. Article 364 - Intriguing against
Honor ...................................256
Title XIV. Quasi-Offenses ................ 259
1. Article 365 - Imprudence and
Negligence .............................259
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
13
UP
L
AW
BAR REVIEWER
2012
CRIMINAL
Criminal Law 1
BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION 2012
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Ramon Carlo Marcaida |Commissioner
Raymond Velasco • Mara Kriska Chen |Deputy Commissioners
Barbie Kaye Perez |Secretary
Carmen Cecilia Veneracion |Treasurer
Hazel Angeline Abenoja|Auditor
COMMITTEE HEADS
Eleanor Balaquiao • Mark Xavier Oyales | Acads
Monique Morales • Katleya Kate Belderol • Kathleen Mae Tuason (D) • Rachel
Miranda (D) |Special Lectures
Patricia Madarang • Marinella Felizmenio |Secretariat
Victoria Caranay |Publicity and Promotions
Loraine Saguinsin • Ma. Luz Baldueza |Marketing
Benjamin Joseph Geronimo • Jose Lacas |Logistics
Angelo Bernard Ngo • Annalee Toda|HR
Anne Janelle Yu • Alyssa Carmelli Castillo |Merchandise
Graciello Timothy Reyes |Layout
Charmaine Sto. Domingo • Katrina Maniquis |Mock Bar
Krizel Malabanan • Karren de Chavez |Bar Candidates’ Welfare
Karina Kirstie Paola Ayco • Ma. Ara Garcia |Events
OPERATIONS HEADS
Charles Icasiano • Katrina Rivera |Hotel Operations
Marijo Alcala • Marian Salanguit |Day-Operations
Jauhari Azis |Night-Operations
Vivienne Villanueva • Charlaine Latorre |Food
Kris Francisco Rimban • Elvin Salindo |Transpo
Paula Plaza |Linkages
LAW
CRIMINAL LAW TEAM 2012
Faculty Editor | Prof. Jay
Batongbacal
Subject Heads | Camille
Umali • Charmaine Sto.
Domingo
LAYOUT TEAM 2012
Layout Artists | Alyanna
Apacible • Noel Luciano • RM
Meneses • Jenin Velasquez •
Mara Villegas • Naomi
Quimpo • Leslie Octaviano •
Yas Refran • Cris Bernardino
Layout Head| Graciello
Timothy Reyes
Criminal Law 1
Criminal Law 1
Criminal Law 2
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
CRIMINAL LAW
Fundamental Principles of Criminal
Law
Felonies
Circumstances
which
affect
criminal liability
Persons criminally liable/Degree of
participation
Penalties
Modification and extinction of
criminal
of crime
ment is taken
into account
for the
punishment.
As to mitigating
and aggravating
circumstances
They are
taken into
account in
imposing
penalty
When there is
more than
one offender,
the degree of
participation
of each in the
commission is
taken into
account.
As to degree of
participation
As to stage of
accomplishment
CHAPTER I. FUNDAMENTAL
PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW
A. DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL LAW
B. SCOPE OF APPLICATION AND
CHARACTERISTICS
C. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS
As to what laws
are violated
As to WON
criminal intent
is an element
As to degree of
accomplishment
Mala in Se
Wrong from
its very
nature.
GF a valid
defense,
unless the
crime is the
result of
culpa
Criminal
intent is an
element.
Degree of
accomplish
Mala Prohibita
Wrong because
it is prohibited
by law
GF is not a
defense.
Criminal intent
is immaterial,
BUT still
requires
intelligence &
voluntariness
0. The
Penalty is
computed on
the basis of
whether he is
a principal
offender or
merely an
accomplice or
accessory
Generally,
the RPC.
act
gives
rise
to a
crime
only
when
consu
mmat
ed.
They are not
taken into
account.
Degree of
participation is
generally not
taken into
account. All
who
participated in
the act are
punished to the
same extent.
Penalty on
offenders is
same whether
they acted as
mere
accomplices or
accessories
Generally,
special laws.
Note:
Dolo is not required in crimes mala prohibita.
In those crimes which are mala prohibita, the
act alone irrespective of its motives, constitutes
the offense.
Good faith and absence of criminal intent are
not valid defenses in crimes mala prohibita.
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan (2001): Estrada is
challenging the plunder law. One of the issues he
raised is whether plunder is a malum prohibitum
or malum in se.
Held: Plunder is a malum in se which requires
proof of criminal intent.
Precisely because the crimes constituting plunder
are mala in se the element of mens rea must be
proven in a prosecution for plunder.
i. While intentional felonies are always mala in se,
it does not follow that prohibited acts done in
violation of special laws are always mala
prohibita.
ii. Even if the crime is punished under a special
law, if the act punished is one which is inherently
wrong, the same is malum in se, and, therefore,
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
good faith and the lack of criminal intent are valid
defenses; unless it is the product of criminal
negligence or culpa.
Likewise when the special laws require that the
punished act be committed knowingly and
willfully, criminal intent is required to be proved
before criminal liability may arise.
Prospective
application.
Exception:
favorable
accused.
in
If it is
to
the
Retroactive in
application.
Exception
To
The
Exception:
1. When the accused is a
habitual delinquent.
(Art. 22)
2. Where the new law
expressly
made
inapplicable
to
pending actions or
existing causes of
actions. (Tavera v.
Valdez)
Statutory; it is passed by
the Legislature.
May be promulgated by
the
Legislature
(e.g.
jurisdiction of courts) or
the Judiciary (e.g. Rules
of Court)
b.
The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) Created pursuant to Administrative Order
No. 94; enacted January 1, 1932; based on
the Spanish Penal Code, US Penal Code, and
Phil. Supreme Court decisions.
Special penal laws and penal Presidential
Decrees issued during Martial Law.
PENAL LEGISLATION
a.
(4) Eclectic/Mixed
Combines both positivist and classical thinking.
supplement
the
Exceptions:
(1) Where the special law provides otherwise
(Art.10)
(2) When the provisions of the Code are impossible
of application, either by express provision or by
necessary implication, as in those instances
where the provisions in question are peculiar to
the Code. (Regalado, Criminal Law Prospectus)
Ladonga v People (2005):
Spouses Ladonga were convicted by the RTC for
15
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
16
1. Generality
General Rule:
Art. 14, NCC. The penal law of the country is
binding on all persons who live or sojourn in
Philippine territory, subject to the principles of
public international law and to treaty stipulations.
Limitations:
Art. 2, RPC. ―Except as provided in the treaties or
laws of preferential application xxx‖
a. Treaty Stipulations
Examples:
Bases Agreement entered into by the
Philippines and the US on Mar. 14, 1947 and
expired on Sept. 16, 1991.
Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA)2 signed on
Feb. 10, 1998.
Article V
Criminal Jurisdiction
1. Subject to the provisions of this article:
(a) Philippine authorities shall have jurisdiction
over United States personnel with respect to
offenses committed within the Philippines and
punishable under the law of the Philippines.
But a crime in the Revised Penal Code can absorb
a crime punishable by a special law if it is a
necessary ingredient of the felony defined in the
Code.
So Presidential Decree No. 533, punishing cattlerustling, is not a special law, but
a law amending
provisions of the RPC (Arts. 309 and 310).
It can absorb the crime of murder. If in the
course of cattle rustling, murder was committed,
the offender cannot be prosecuted for murder.
1. GENERALITY (WHO?)
2. TERRITORIALITY (WHERE?)
3. PROSPECTIVITY (WHEN?)
(1) treason;
(2) sabotage, espionage or violation of any law
relating to national defense.
2. Territoriality
GENERAL RULE: Penal laws of the country have
force and effect only within its territory.
17
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
18
EXCEPTIONS
(1) Extraterritorial crimes, which are punishable
even if committed outside the Philippine
territory (Art. 2, RPC) (ASKED 4 TIMES IN BAR
EXAMS)
ii.
i.
coin,
and
vi.
vii.
viii.
19
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
20
Rationale
for
the
prospectivity
rule:
the
punishability of an act must be reasonably known for
the guidance of society [citing Peo v. Jabinal].
[NOTE: The SC outline does not include the next
two characteristics.]
4. Legality
(nullum
poena sine lege)
crimen
nulla
C. Constitutional limitations on
the power of Congress to enact
penal laws in the Bill of Rights
(i) Equal protection
(ii) Due process
(iii)Non-imposition of cruel and unusual
punishment or excessive fines
(iv) Bill of attainder
(v) Ex post facto law
1. Equal protection
Article III, Section 1, 1987 Const. No person shall
be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the
equal protection of the laws.
2. Due process
Art. III, Sec. 14 (1), 1987 Const. No person shall be
held to answer for a criminal offense without due
process of law.
Must be general in application.
3. Non-imposition
of cruel and
unusual punishment or excessive
fines
4. Bill of attainder
Art III, Sec. 22, 1987 Const. No ex post facto law or
bill of attainder shall be enacted.
Bill of attainder - a legislative act that inflicts
punishment without trial, its essence being the
substitution of legislative fiat for a judicial
determination of guilt.
21
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
A. PRELIMINARY MATTERS
B. CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES
C. ELEMENTS OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
D. IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
E. STAGES OF EXECUTION
F. CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL
G MULTIPLE OFFENDERS
H. COMPLEX CRIME AND SPECIAL COMPLEX
CRIMES
A. Preliminary matters
Culpable
Not malicious.
Injury
caused
is
unintentional, being just
an incident of another act
performed
without
malice.
Wrongful act results from
imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight, or lack
of skill.
3. Discussion of Article 5
Art. 5 RPC. Duty of the court in connection with
acts which should be repressed but which are not
covered by the law, and in cases of excessive
penalties.
1) Whenever a court has knowledge of any act
which it may deem proper to repress and which
is not punishable by law,
2) it shall render the proper decision, and shall
report to the Chief Executive, through the
Department of Justice, the reasons which induce
the court to believe that said act should be
made the subject of legislation.
3) In the same way, the court shall submit to the
Chief Executive, through the Department of
Justice, such statement as may be deemed
proper, without suspending the execution of the
sentence,
4) when a strict enforcement of the provisions of
this Code would result in the imposition of a
clearly
excessive
penalty,
taking
into
consideration the degree of malice and the
injury caused by the offense.
Art. 5 covers two situations:
a. Where the court cannot convict the accused
because the act he committed is not punishable
under the law, but the court deems it proper to
repress such act.
The proper judgment is acquittal.
The judge must report to the Chief
Executive that said act be made subject of
penal legislation and the reasons therefore.
b.
23
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
24
Illustrations:
A, B, C, D, and E were driving their vehicles along
Ortigas Ave. A‘s car was ahead, followed by those of
B, C, D, and E.
5. Omission
It is inaction, the failure to perform a positive duty
which a person is bound to do.
There must be a law requiring the doing or
performing of an act.
Punishable omissions in the RPC:
(1) Art. 116: Misprision of treason.
(2) Art. 137: Disloyalty of public officers or
employees.
(3) Art. 208: Negligence and tolerance in
prosecution of offenses.
(4) Art. 223: Conniving with or consenting to
evasion.
(5) Art. 275: Abandonment of person in danger and
abandonment of one‘s own victim.
(6) Art. 276: Abandoning a minor.
B. Classifications of Felonies
FELONIES ARE CLASSIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
1. According to the manner of their commission
2. According to the stages of their execution
(ASKED 9 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
3. According to their gravity
OTHER CLASSIFICATIONS:
4. As to count
5. As to nature
This question was asked in the bar examination: How
do you classify felonies and how are felonies
defined?
TIP: What the examiner had in mind was Articles
3, 6 and 9. Do not write the classification of
felonies under Book 2 of the Revised Penal
Code.
The question does not require the candidate to
classify but also to define.
The purpose of classifying penalties is to bring
about a proportionate penalty and equitable
punishment.
The penalties are graduated according to their
degree of severity.
◦
The stages (Art. 6) may not apply to all
kinds of felonies.
◦
There are felonies which do not admit of
division.
25
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
26
4. As to Count
Plurality of crimes may be in the form of:
a. Compound Crime,
b. Complex crime; and
c. Composite crime.
5. As to Nature
(ASKED 4 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
a.
b.
Mala in se
Mala prohibita
Intentional Felonies
The act or omission is performed or incurred with
deliberate intent (with malice) to cause an injury to
another.
Requisites
i. Freedom
Voluntariness on the part of the person who commits
the act or omission.
If there is lack of freedom, the offender is exempt
from liability (i.e., presence of irresistible force or
uncontrollable fear)
ii.
Intelligence
Criminal intent
27
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
(due to lack of discernment) or there was a mistake
of fact (infra).
28
DISCERNMENT
The
mental
capacity to tell
right
from
wrong.
MOTIVE
It is the moving
power
which
impels one to
do an act (ex.
vengeance).
Integral to the
element
of
intelligence,
NOT intent.
Generally, it is
not an essential
element of a
crime, hence, it
need not be
proved
for
purposes
of
conviction
(except
in
certain
cases
enumerated
below)
Existence
presumed.
is
not
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
Illustration:
Ernie, without any provocation, stabbed Bert.
vi.
The very act of stabbing is the quantum of proof
needed to establish the fact that Ernie intended to
do something wrong. This is the GENERAL CRIMINAL
INTENT.
However, Ernie can be liable for more than one
crime; thus, prosecution must establish Ernie‘s
SPECIFIC INTENT in order to determine whether he
planned to kill Bert or merely to inflict a whole lot
of pain.
Ernie can overturn the presumption of general
criminal intent by proving that he was justified
(infra), entitled to any exempting circumstances
Illustration:
Ernie came home and found his wife in a pleasant
conversation with Bert, former suitor. Thereupon, he
went to the kitchen, opened a drawer and pulled out
a knife. He then stabbed Bert.
The moving force is jealousy.
13
12
14
Requisites:
(a) That the act done would have been lawful had
the facts been as the accused believed them to
be;
(b) That the intention of the accused in performing
the act should be lawful;
(c) That the mistake must be without fault or
carelessness on the part of the accused. When
the accused is negligent, mistake of fact is not a
defense.16
US v. Ah Chong (1910):
A cook who stabs his roommate in the dark, honestly
mistaking the latter to be a robber responsible for a
series of break-ins in the area, and after crying out
sufficient warnings and believing himself to be under
attack, cannot be held criminally liable for
homicide.
1)
15
2)
3)
16
People v. Oanis, 1988
29
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
Under Art. 3, it is clear that culpa is just a modality
by which a felony may be committed.
30
Act of Dolo
Act of Culpa
OR
FELONY
INTENTIONAL
OR
Act of Culpa
CRIMINAL
NEGLIGENCE
(ART 365)
Requisites:
FELONIES
(a) Freedom
(b) Intelligence
(c) Negligence, reckless imprudence,
foresight or lack of skill;
Held:
The second case must be dismissed.
Once convicted or acquitted of a specific act of
reckless imprudence, the accused may not be
prosecuted again for the same act.
For the essence of the quasi-offense under Art.
365 of the RPC lies in the execution of an
imprudent act which would be punishable as a
felony.
The law penalizes the negligent act and not the
result.
The gravity of the consequences is only taken
into account to determine the penalty. It does
not qualify the substance of the offense.
As the careless act is single, whether the
injurious result should affect one person or
several persons, the offense remains one and
the same, and cannot be split into different
crimes and prosecutions.
of
People v. Buan (1968):
The accused was driving a passenger bus. Allegedly
because of his recklessness, the bus collided with a
jeep injuring the passengers of the latter.
A case was filed against the accused for slight
D. Impossible Crimes
Purpose of punishing impossible crimes: To suppress
criminal propensity or criminal tendencies.
Objectively, the offender has not committed a
felony, but subjectively, he is a criminal.
Requisites:
(1) That the act performed would be an offense
against persons or property.
(2) That the act was done with evil intent.
(3) That
its
accomplishment
is
inherently
impossible, or that the means employed is
either inadequate or ineffectual.
17
31
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
32
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
E. Stages of Execution
Classification Under Art. 6
a. Consummated Felony
When all the elements necessary for its execution
and accomplishment are present; the felony is
produced.
b. Frustrated Felony
When the offender performs all the acts of execution
which would produce the felony as a consequence
but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason
of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
c. Attempted Felony
When the offender commences the commission of a
felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform
all the acts of execution which should produce the
felony by reason of some cause or accident other
than his own spontaneous desistance.
Development of a Crime
ELEMENTS OF CRIMINAL
LIABILITY
Actus Reus
Mens Rea
Concurrence
Result
Causation
IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
Lacking due to:
i. inherent
impossibility
ii. employment
of
inadequate means
a. Overt act
A commission of the felony is deemed commenced
when the following are present:
(1) There are external acts.
(2) Such external acts have a direct connection with
the crime intended to be committed.
Overt act: Some physical activity or deed (but not
necessarily physical, depending on the nature of the
felony) indicating the intention to commit a
particular crime, more than a mere planning or
preparation, which if carried to its complete
termination following its natural course, without
being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the
voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will
logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete
offense.
Rait v. People (2008):
The Court found that the petitioner‘s acts of
successfully removing victim‘s clothing and inserting
ATTEMPTED
Intervention
other
than own desistance;
some but not all acts
of execution
FRUSTRATED
CONSUMMATED
Development of a crime
(1) Internal acts
Acts Performed
Why
a.
Attempted Stage
Elements:
(1) The offender commences the commission of the
felony directly by overt acts;
(2) He does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the felony;
(3) The non-performance of all acts of execution
was due to cause or accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance.
Marks the commencement of the subjective phase:
Subjective phase - That portion of the acts
constituting a crime, starting from the point where
the offender begins the commission of the crime to
that point where he still has control over his acts
including their (act‘s) natural course
If between those two points, the offender is stopped
by reason of any cause outside of his own voluntary
desistance, the subjective phase has not been
passed and it is merely an attempt.
Illustration: The subjective phase for Ernie was from
the moment he swung his arm to stab Bert up until
he finished his stroke. This is the interim where he
still has control of his actions.
Desistance – is an absolutory cause which negates
criminal liability because the law encourages a
person to desist from committing a crime.
33
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
34
b.
Frustrated Stage
Elements
(1) The offender performs all the acts of execution;
(2) All the acts performed would produce the felony
as a consequence;
(3) But the felony is not produced;
(4) By reason of causes independent of the will of
the perpetrator.
The end of the subjective phase and the beginning of
the objective phase.
Objective phase – the result of the acts of
execution, that is, the accomplishment of the crime.
If the subjective and objective phases have been
passed there is a consummated felony.
People v. Listerio (2000):
Brothers Jeonito and Marlon were walking when they
met a group composed of men who blocked their
path and attacked them with lead pipes and bladed
weapons. One stabbed Jeonito from behind.
Jeonito‘s brother, Marlon, was hit on the head.
Held:
1) The SC held that the crime is a frustrated felony
not an attempted offense considering that after
being stabbed and clubbed twice in the head as
a result of which he lost consciousness and fell.
Marlon's attackers apparently thought he was
already dead and fled.
2) A crime cannot be held to be attempted unless
the offender, after beginning the commission of
the crime by overt acts, is prevented, against
his will, by some outside cause from performing
all of the acts which should produce the crime.
3) In other words, to be an attempted crime, the
purpose of the offender must be thwarted by a
foreign force or agency which intervenes and
compels him to stop prior to the moment when
he has performed all of the acts which should
produce the crime as a consequence, which acts
it is his intention to perform.
4) If he has performed all the acts which should
result in the consummation of the crime and
voluntarily desists from proceeding further, it
cannot be an attempt.
Crimes which do not admit of frustrated stage
(a) Rape
The essence of the crime is carnal
knowledge.
No matter what the offender may do to
accomplish a penetration, if there was no
penetration yet, it cannot be said that the
offender has performed all the acts of
execution.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
35
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
36
b.
37
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
instance, A stabbed D. C and B followed. In this
case, it was held that conspiracy was present.
38
AS A FELONY
IN ITSELF
AS A
BASIS
FOR
LIABILITY
Stage
Preparatory
acts
Executory
acts
How
incurred
Legal requirements
Illustration
Mere
agreement
A, B, C and D came to an
agreement
to
commit
rebellion. Their agreement
was to ring about the
rebellion on a certain
date.
Even if none of them has
performed the act of
rebellion, there is already
criminal liability arising
from the conspiracy to
commit the rebellion.
But if anyone of them has
committed the overt act of
rebellion, the crime of all
is no longer conspiracy but
rebellion itself.
This subsists even though
the other co-conspirators
do not know that one of
them had already done the
act of rebellion.
Commission
of
overt act
G. Multiple Offenders
Recidivism/Reincindencia; Habituality/Reiteracion/
Art. 14 (9)
Repetition; Art. 14 (10)
Crimes
committed
Period
of
time
the
crimes are
committed
Number of
crimes
committed
Sufficient
that
the
offender
have
been
previously convicted by
final judgment for another
crime embraced in the
same title of the Code on
the date of his trial
Necessary
that
the
offender shall have served
out his sentence for the
first offense
No period of time
The second conviction for The
previous
and
an offense embraced in subsequent offenses must
the same title of RPC
NOT be embraced in the
Quasi-Recidivism;
Art. 160
Before serving or
while
serving
sentence,
the
offender commits
a felony (NOT a
crime)
Before serving or
while
serving
sentence
Offender commits
a felony
Habitual
Delinquency;
Art. 62 (5)
Specified:
1. less serious or
serious physical
injuries
2. robbery
3. theft
4. estafa
5. falsification
Within 10 years
from
his
last
release
or
conviction
Guilty the third
time or oftener
39
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
same title of the RPC
40
Their
effects
1. Recidivism
Basis: the greater perversity of the offender, as shown
by his inclination to commit crimes
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one
crime, shall have been previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime embraced in the same title
of the Revised Penal Code. (People v. Lagarto, 1991)
Requisites
(1) Offender is on trial for an offense
(2) He was previously convicted by final judgment of
another crime
(3) Both the first and second offenses are embraced
in the same title of the RPC
(4) Offender is convicted of the new offense
Note: What is controlling is the time of trial, not the
time of commission of the crime. (Reyes, Revised
Penal Code)
2. Habituality (Reiteracion)
Basis: same as recidivism
Requisites
(1)
Accused is on trial for an offense
(2)
He previously served sentence
a. for another offense to which the law
attaches an equal or greater penalty, OR
b. for two or more crimes to which it attaches
lighter penalty than that for the new offense
(3)
He is convicted of the new offense
3. Quasi-Recidivism
Art. 160. Commission of another crime during
service of penalty imposed for another offense;
Penalty. — Besides the provisions of Rule 5 of
Article 62, any person who shall commit a felony
after having been convicted by final judgment,
before beginning to serve such sentence, or while
serving the same, shall be punished by the maximum
period of the penalty prescribed by law for the new
felony.
4. Habitual Delinquency
Art. 62, last par. For the purpose of this article, a
person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent, if
within a period of ten years from the date of his
release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or
less serious physical injuries, robo, hurto estafa or
falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes
a third time or oftener.
Imposes
the
maximum of the
penalty for the
new offense, and
cannot be offset
by any mitigating
circumstance
An
additional
penalty shall be
imposed
Requisites
(1) Offender had been convicted of any of the crimes
of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery,
theft, estafa, or falsification
(2) After that conviction or after serving his sentence,
he again committed, and, within 10 years from his
release or first conviction, he was again convicted
of any of the said crimes for the second time
(3) After his conviction of, or after serving sentence
for, the second offense, he again committed, and,
within 10 years from his last release or last
conviction, he was again convicted of any of said
offenses, the third time or oftener
Purpose of the law in imposing additional penalty
To render more effective social defense and the
reformation of habitual delinquents (REYES, quoting
People v. Abuyen)
See also: Aggravating circumstances
RECIDIVISM
There must be conviction
by final judgment of the
first or prior offense.
1. Complex Crimes
Several Acts
Submachine gun – because of
the number of bullets released
Firing of the revolver twice in
succession
41
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
criminal impulse, hence each will have a separate
penalty.
42
Requisites:
(1) That at least two offenses are committed
(2) That one or some of the offenses must be
necessary to commit the other
(3) That both or all the offenses must be
punished under the same statute.
Note: The phrase ―necessary means‖ does not mean
―indispensable means‖
People vs. Comadre (2004):
The single act by appellant of detonating a hand
grenade may quantitatively constitute a cluster of
several separate and distinct offenses, yet these
component criminal offenses should be considered
only as a single crime in law on which a single
penalty is imposed because the offender was
impelled by a ―single criminal impulse‖ which shows
his lesser degree of perversity.
No complex crime proper:
(a) Subsequent acts of intercourse, after forcible
abduction with rape, are separate acts of rape.
(b) Not complex crime when trespass to dwelling is
a direct means to commit a grave offense.
(c) No complex crime, when one offense is
committed to conceal the other.
(d) When the offender already had in his possession
the funds which he misappropriated, the
subsequent falsification of a public or official
document involving said offense is a separate
offense.
(e) No complex crime where one of the offenses is
penalized by a special law.
(f) There is no complex crime of rebellion with
murder, arson, robbery, or other common
crimes (People v. Hernandez; Enrile v. Salazar).
(g) In case of continuous crimes.
(h) When the other crime is an indispensable
element of the other offense.
General rules in complexing crimes:
(a) When two crimes produced by a single act are
respectively within the exclusive jurisdiction of
two courts of different jurisdiction, the court of
higher jurisdiction shall try the complex
crime.
(b) The penalty for complex crime is the penalty
for the most serious crime, the same to be
applied in its maximum period.
(c) When two felonies constituting a complex crime
are punishable by imprisonment and fine,
respectively, only the penalty of imprisonment
should be imposed.
(d) Art. 48 applies only to cases where the Code
does not provide a definite specific penalty for a
complex crime.
(e) One information should be filed when a complex
crime is committed.
(f) When a complex crime is charged and one
offense is not proven, the accused can be
convicted of the other.
(g) Art. 48 also applies in cases when out of a single
act of negligence or imprudence, two or more
43
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
iii. at the same time and place, constitutes one
larceny only.
44
EXEMPTING
MITIGATING
AGGRAVATING
ALTERNATIVE
NO WRONG
THERE IS A WRONG
THERE IS A FELONY
THERE IS A FELONY
THERE IS A FELONY
No
criminal
liability
With civil liability
Except:
accident;
insuperable cause
Decreased criminal
liability
Increased
liability
Increased or decreased
liability
With civil liability
No
liability
criminal
No civil liability
Except:
state of necessity
b.
A. Justifying Circumstances
(ASKED 30 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
criminal
Elements:
a.
Unlawful aggression
(1) Equivalent to an actual physical assault; OR
threatened assault of an immediate and
imminent kind which is offensive and
positively strong, showing the wrongful
intent to cause harm.
(2) The aggression must constitute a violation
of the law. When the aggression ceased to
exist, there is no longer a necessity to
defend one‘s self. EXCEPT: when the
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
aggressor retreats to obtain a more
advantageous position to ensure the success
of the initial attack, unlawful aggression is
deemed to continue.
(3) Must come from the person attacked by the
accused.
(4) Unlawful aggression must also be a
continuing circumstance or must have been
existing at the time the defense is made.
Once the unlawful aggression is found to
have ceased, the one making the defense of
a stranger would likewise cease to have any
justification for killing, or even just
wounding, the former aggressor. [People vs.
Dijan (2002)]
Note: No unlawful aggression when there was an
agreement to fight and the challenge to fight
was accepted. BUT aggression which is ahead of
an agreed time or place is unlawful aggression.
b.
c.
Defense of Honor:
Defense of Property:
45
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
victims. Thus, there is incomplete self-defense.
46
2. Defense of Relatives
Elements:
(1) Unlawful aggression
Unlawful aggression may not exist as a matter of
fact, it can be made to depend upon the honest
belief of the one making the defense. Reason: The
law acknowledges the possibility that a relative, by
virtue of blood, will instinctively come to the aid of
their relatives.
(2) Reasonable necessity of means employed to
prevent or repel it
(3) In case person attacked provoked attacker
defender must have no part therein
Reason: Although the provocation prejudices the
person who gave it, its effects do not reach the
defender who took no part therein, because the
latter was prompted by some noble or generous
sentiment in protecting and saving a relative
Relatives entitled to defense:
i. Spouse
ii. Ascendants
iii. Descendants
iv. legitimate, natural or adopted Brothers/Sisters
v. Relatives by affinity in the same degree
vi. Relatives by consanguinity w/in the 4th civil
degree
Illustration:
The sons of A honestly believe that their father was
the victim of an unlawful aggression when in fact it
was their father who attacked B. If they killed B
under such circumstances, they are justified.
Balunueco v. CA (2003):
Held: Of the three (3) requisites of defense of
relatives, unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua
non, for without it any defense is not possible or
justified. In order to consider that an unlawful
aggression was actually committed, it is necessary
that an attack or material aggression, an offensive
act positively determining the intent of the
aggressor to cause an injury shall have been made;a
mere threatening or intimidating attitude is not
sufficient to justify the commission of an act which
is punishable per se, and allow a claim of exemption
from liability on the ground that it was committed in
self-defense or defense of a relative.
3. Defense of Strangers
Elements:
(1) Unlawful aggression;
(2) Reasonable necessity of the means employed
to prevent or repel it;
Requisites:
(1) Offender acted in performance of duty or
lawful exercise of a rig ht/office
(2) The resulting felony is the unavoidable
consequence of the due fulfillment of the duty
or the lawful exercise of the right or office.
Note: If the first condition is present, but the second
is not because the offender acted with culpa, the
offender will be entitled to a privileged mitigating
circumstance. The penalty would be reduced by one
or two degrees.
People v. Ulep (2000): Accused-appellant and the
other police officers involved originally set out to
restore peace and order at Mundog Subdivision
where the victim was then running amuck. The
victim threatened the safety of the police officers
despite accused-appellant's previous warning shot
and verbal admonition to the victim to lay down his
weapon.
Held: As a police officer, it is to be expected that
accused-appellant would stand his ground. Up to
that point, his decision to respond with a barrage of
gunfire to halt the victim's further advance was
justified under the circumstances. A police officer is
not required to afford the victim the opportunity to
fight back. Neither is he expected – when hard
pressed and in the heat of such an encounter at
close quarters – to pause for a long moment and
reflect coolly at his peril, or to wait after each blow
to determine the effects thereof. But he cannot be
exonerated from overdoing his duty when he fatally
shot the victim in the head, even after the latter
slumped to the ground due to multiple gunshot
wounds sustained while charging at the police
officers. Sound discretion and restraint dictated
that a veteran policeman should have ceased firing
at the victim the moment he saw the latter fall to
the ground. The victim at that point no longer posed
a threat. Shooting him in the head was obviously
unnecessary.
The law does not clothe police officers with
authority to arbitrarily judge the necessity to kill- it
must be stressed that their judgment and discretion
as police officers in the performance of their duties
must be exercised neither capriciously nor
oppressively, but within reasonable limits.
47
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
48
scientifically
defined
pattern
of
psychological and behavioral symptoms
found in women living in battering
relationships as a result of cumulative
abuse.
Battered Woman Syndrome as a Defense.
– Victim-survivors who are found by the
courts to be suffering from battered woman
syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil
liability notwithstanding the absence of any
of the elements for justifying circumstances
of self-defense under the Revised Penal
Code.
In the determination of the state of mind of
the woman who was suffering from battered
woman syndrome at the time of the
commission of the crime, the courts shall be
assisted
by
expert
psychiatrists/
psychologists [SECTION 26, RA 9262]
B. Exempting Circumstances
(ASKED 14 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
SIX
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
IMPORTANT POINTS:
The reason for the exemption lies in the
involuntariness or lack of knowledge of the act:
(1) one or some of the ingredients of criminal
liability such as criminal intent, intelligence, or
freedom of action on the part of the offender is
missing
(2) In case it is a culpable felony, there is absence
of freedom of action or intelligence, or absence
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
of negligence, imprudence, lack of foresight or
lack of skill.
2. Minority
Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006
(R.A. 9344); also refer to Child and Youth
Welfare Code (P.D. 603, as amended)
a. Definition of child in conflict with the law
Section 4 (e). "Child in conflict with the law" – a
child who is alleged as, accused of, or adjudged as,
having committed an offense under Philippine laws.
49
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
conflict with the law until s/he is proven to be 18
years old or older.
50
The
3. Accident
(Damnum Absque Injuria)
Requisites:
(1) A person performing a lawful act;
(2) With due care;
(3) He causes an injury to another by mere
accident;
(4) Without fault or intention of causing it.
Accident - something that happens outside the sway
of our will and, although coming about through some
act of our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly
foreseeable consequences.
Under Article 12, paragraph 4, the offender is
exempt not only from criminal but also from civil
liability.
Illustration:
A person who is driving his car within the speed
limit, while considering the condition of the
traffic and the pedestrians at that time, tripped
on a stone with one of his car tires. The stone
flew hitting a pedestrian on the head. The
pedestrian suffered profuse bleeding. There is
no civil liability under paragraph 4 of Article 12.
Although this is just an exempting circumstance,
where generally there is civil liability, yet, in
paragraph 4 of Article 12, there is no civil
liability as well as criminal liability. The driver
is not under obligation to defray the medical
expenses.
4. Irresistible Force
Elements:
(1) That the compulsion is by means of physical
force.
(2) That the physical force must be irresistible.
(3) That the physical force must come from a third
person
Note: Before a force can be considered to be an
irresistible one, it must produce such an effect on
the individual that, in spite of all resistance, it
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
reduces him to a mere instrument and, as such,
incapable of committing the crime. (Aquino, Revised
Penal Code)
People v. Lising (1998)
Held: To be exempt from criminal liability, a person
invoking irresistible force must show that the force
exerted was such that it reduced him to a mere
instrument who acted not only without will but
against his will.
5. Uncontrollable Fear
Requisites:
(1) That the threat which causes the fear is of an
evil greater than or at least equal to, that which
he is forced to commit;
(2) That it promises an evil of such gravity and
imminence that the ordinary man would have
succumbed to it.
A threat of future injury is not enough. The
compulsion must be of such a character as to leave
no opportunity to the accused for escape or selfdefense in equal combat.
Illustration:
A is forced at gun point to forge the signature of B.
See Part F for absolutory causes
US v. Exaltacion (1905): Exaltacion and Tanchico
were convicted w/ rebellion based on documents
found in the house of Contreras, a so-called general
of bandits, containing signatures of defendants
swearing allegiance to the Katipunan. Defendants
aver that these documents were signed under duress
and fear of death. They allege further that they
were abducted by thieves and that these men forced
the defendants to sign the documents
Held: The duress under which the defendants acted
relieved them from criminal liability . Prosecution
was unable to prove the guilt of the accused and
testimonies of witnesses for the accused further
corroborated their defense.
Irresistible Force
Irresistible force must
operate directly upon
the
person
of
the
accused and the injury
feared may be a lesser
degree than the damage
caused by the accused.
Offender uses physical
force or violence to
compel another person
to commit a crime.
Uncontrollable Fear
Uncontrollable fear may
be generated by a
threatened act directly
to a third person such as
the wife of the accused,
but the evil feared must
be greater or at least
equal to the damage
caused to avoid it.
Offender
employs
intimidation or threat in
compelling another to
commit a crime.
C. Mitigating Circumstances
(ASKED 19 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
TWELVE TYPES of mitigating circumstances:
1. Incomplete Justification and Exemption
2. Under 18 or Over 70 years of age
3. No intention to commit so grave a wrong
4. Sufficient Provocation or Threat
5. Immediate vindication of a grave offense
6. Passion or obfuscation
7. Voluntary surrender
8. Voluntary plea of guilt
9. Plea to a lower offense
10. Physical defect
11. Illness
12. Analogous Circumstances
Mitigating circumstances or causas attenuates are
those which, if present in the commission of the
crime, do not entirely free the actor from criminal
liability, but serve only to reduce the penalty.
Basis: They are based on the diminution of either
freedom of action, intelligence or intent or on the
lesser perversity of the offender. However, voluntary
surrender and plea of guilt which, being
circumstances that occur after the commission of
the offense, show the accused‘s respect for the law
(voluntary surrender) and remorse and acceptance
of punishment (plea of guilt), thereby necessitating
a lesser penalty to effect his rehabilitation (based on
the Positivist School)
51
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
52
1. Incomplete
Privileged MC
Cannot be offset by
aggravating
circumstance
The
effect
of
imposing upon the
offender the penalty
lower by one or two
degrees than that
provided by law for
the crime.
Justification
and
Exemption
Incomplete
justifying
circumstance
avoidance of greater evil or injury
of
Incomplete
justifying
performance of duty
circumstance
of
exempting
circumstance
of
(2) Incomplete
exempting
uncontrollable fear.
circumstance
of
53
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
constitute a mitigating circumstance under Art.
13(3).
54
People v. Calleto (2002):
Held: The lack of "intent" to commit a wrong so
grave is an internal state. It is weighed based on the
weapon used, the part of the body injured, the
injury inflicted and the manner it is inflicted. The
fact that the accused used a 9-inch hunting knife in
attacking the victim from behind, without giving
him an opportunity to defend himself, clearly shows
that he intended to do what he actually did, and he
must be held responsible therefor, without the
benefit of this mitigating circumstance.
People v. Ural (1974):
Held: The intention, as an internal act, is judged
not only by the proportion of the means employed
by him to the evil produced by his act, but also by
the fact that the blow was or was not aimed at a
vital part of the body. Thus, it may be deduced
from the proven facts that the accused had no
intent to kill the victim, his design being only to
maltreat him, such that when he realized the
fearful consequences of his felonious act, he
allowed the victim to secure medical treatment
at the municipal dispensary.
Provocation
as
a
mitigating circumstance
It
pertains
to
its
Elements:
(1) That there be a grave offense done to the one
committing the felony, his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted
brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity
within the same degree.
(2) That the felony is committed in vindication of
such grave offense. A lapse of time is allowed
between the vindication and the doing of the
grave offense.
(3) The vindication need not be done by the
person upon whom the grave offense was
committed
Note: Lapse of time is allowed. The word
―immediate‖ used in the English text is not the
correct translation. The Spanish text uses
―proxima.‖ Although the grave offense (slapping of
the accused in front of many persons hours before
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
the killing), which engendered the perturbation of
mind, was not so immediate, it was held that the
influence thereof, by reason of its gravity, lasted
until the moment the crime was committed. (People
v. Parana).
The question whether or not a certain personal
offense is grave must be decided by the court,
having in mind
a. the social standing of the person,
b. the place and
c. the time when the insult was made.
Vindication of a grave offense and passion or
obfuscation cannot be counted separately and
independently.
People v. Torpio (2004: The mitigating
circumstance of sufficient provocation cannot be
considered apart from the circumstance of
vindication of a grave offense. These two
circumstances arose from one and the same
incident, i.e., the attack on the appellant by
Anthony, so that they should be considered as only
one mitigating circumstance.
Provocation
It is made directly only
to
the
person
committing the felony.
The offense need not be
a grave offense.
The
provocation
or
threat must immediately
precede the act.
Vindication
The grave offense may
be committed against
the offender‘s relatives
mentioned by law.
The offended party must
have done a grave
offense to the offender
or his relatives.
The grave offense may
be proximate, which
admits of an interval of
time between the grave
offense done by the
offended party and the
commission of the crime
by the accused.
It concerns the honor of
the person.
Elements:
(1) The accused acted upon an impulse
(2) The impulse must be so powerful that it
naturally produces passion or obfuscation in
him.
Requisites:
(1) That there be an act, both unlawful and
sufficient to produce such condition of mind;
and
(2) That said act which produced the obfuscation
was not far removed from the commission of
the crime by a considerable length of time,
55
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
56
7. Voluntary Surrender
Requisites:
(1) That the offender had not been actually
arrested
(2) That the offender surrendered himself to a
person in authority or to the latter‘s agent
(3) That the surrender was voluntary.
Two Mitigating Circumstances Under This
Paragraph:
(1) Voluntary surrender to a person in authority or
his agents;
(2) Voluntary confession of guilt before the court
prior to the presentation of evidence for the
prosecution.
Whether or not a warrant of arrest had been issued
is immaterial and irrelevant.
Criterion is whether or not
a. the offender had gone into hiding
b. and the law enforcers do not know of his
whereabouts.
Note: For voluntary surrender to be appreciated, the
surrender must be spontaneous, made in such a
Effect of Arrest
General Rule: Not mitigating when defendant was in
fact arrested. (People v. Conwi)
Exceptions:
(1) But where a person, after committing the
offense and having opportunity to escape,
voluntarily waited for the agents of the
authorities and voluntarily gave up, he is
entitled to the benefit of the circumstance,
even if he was placed under arrest by a
policeman then and there. (People v. Parana)
(2) Where the arrest of the offender was after his
voluntary surrender or after his doing an act
amounting to a voluntary surrender to the agent
of a person in authority. (People v. Babiera;
People v. Parana)
Person in Authority and his Agent
Person in authority – is one directly vested with
jurisdiction, that is, a public officer who has the
power to govern and execute the laws whether as an
individual or as a member of some court or
governmental corporation, board or commission. A
barrio captain and a barangay chairman are also
persons in authority. (Art. 152, RPC, as amended by
PD No. 299).
Agent of a person in authority – is a person, who,
by direct provision of law, or by election or by
competent authority, is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the protection and
security of life and property and any person who
comes to the aid of persons in authority. (Art. 152,
as amended by RA 1978).
Time of Surrender
The RPC does not distinguish among the various
moments when the surrender may occur. (Reyes,
Revised Penal Code). The fact that a warrant of
arrest had already been issued is no bar to the
consideration of that circumstance because the law
does not require that the surrender be prior the
arrest. (People v. Yecla and Cahilig). What is
important is that the surrender be spontaneous.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
8. Plea Of Guilt
Requisites:
(1) That the offender spontaneously confessed his
guilt.
(2) That the confession of guilt was made in open
court, that is, before the competent court that
is to try the case; and
charged.
Also, Sec. 2, Rule 116, of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure requires the consent of the
offended party and the prosecutor before an
accused may be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser
offense necessarily included in the offense charged.
The prosecution rejected the offer of the accused.
10.
Physical Defects
11.
Illness
Elements:
(1) That the illness of the offender must diminish
the exercise of his will-power
(2) That such illness should not deprive the
offender of consciousness of his acts.
When the offender completely lost the exercise of
will-power, it may be an exempting circumstance.
It is said that this paragraph refers only to diseases
of pathological state that trouble the conscience or
will.
A mother who, under the influence of a puerperal
fever, killed her child the day following her delivery.
People v. Javier (1999): Javier was married to the
deceased for 41 years. He killed the deceased and
then stabbed himself in the abdomen. Javier was
found guilty of parricide. In his appeal, he claims
that he killed his wife because he was suffering
from insomnia for a month and at the time of the
killing, his mind went totally blank and he did not
know what he was doing. He also claims that he was
insane then.
57
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
58
12.
Analogous
Circumstances
Mitigating
D. Aggravating Circumstances
(ASKED 24 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
Those circumstances which raise the penalty for a
crime in its maximum period provided by law
applicable to that crime or change the nature of the
crime.
Note: The list in this Article is EXCLUSIVE – there are
no analogous aggravating circumstances.
Qualifying aggravating
circumstances
The effect of a qualifying
AC is not only to give the
crime its proper and
exclusive name but also
to place the author
thereof in such a situation
as to deserve no other
penalty
than
that
specially prescribed by
law for said crime.
The circumstance affects
the nature of the crime
itself such that the
offender shall be liable