Criminal Law - division of law which defines crimes,
treats of their nature, and provides for their
punishment
Crime - an act committed or omitted in violation of a
public law forbidding or commanding it
Sources of Philippine Criminal Law:
1) Revised Penal Code (Act No.3815) and its
amendments
2) Special Penal Laws passed by the Philippine
Commission, Philippine Assembly, Philippine
Legislature, National Assembly, Congress of the
Philippines, Batasang Pambansa
3) Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Martial
Law
* There are no common law crimes (laws developed
through decisions of the Court) in the Philippines.
Why? Because they merely explain the meaning of,
and apply, the law as enacted by the legislative
branch of the government.
THE REVISED PENAL CODE
- created by Administrative Order No. 94 of the DOJ,
dated, October 18, 1927, composed of Anacleto Diaz
(chairman), Quintin Paredes, Guillermo Guevara,
Alex Reyes, and Mariano H. de Joya
- approved on December 8, 1930
- took effect on January 1, 1932
1) Book One: basic principles affecting criminal
liability (Arts. 1-20) and provisions on penalties
including criminal and civil liability (Arts. 21-113)
2) Book Two: defines felonies with the
corresponding penalties, classified under 14 different
titles (Arts. 114-365)
ARTICLE 1 - Time when Act takes effect.
This Code shall take effect on the first day of
January, nineteen hundred and thirty-two (1932).
* The RPC is based mainly on principles of the
classical school.
2 Theories in Criminal Law:
1) Classical Theory
a. The basis of criminal liability is human free will
and the purpose of the penalty is retribution.
b. Man is essentially a moral creature with an
absolutely free will to choose between good and evil,
thereby placing more stress upon the effect/result of
the felonious act than upon the man, the criminal
himself.
c. It has endeavored to establish a mechanical and
direct proportion between crime and penalty.
d. There is a scant regard to the human element.
2) Positivist Theory
a. Man is subdued occasionally by a strange and
morbid phenomenon which constrains him to do
wrong, in spite of his volition (will).
b. Crime is essentially a social and natural
phenomenon. It cannot be treated and checked by the
application of abstract principles of law and
jurisprudence nor by the imposition of a punishment,
fixed and determined a priori; but rather through the
enforcement of individual measures in each particular
case after a thorough, personal, and individual
investigation conducted by a competent body of
psychiatrists and social scientists.
ARTICLE 2 - Application of its provisions.
Except as provided in the treaties and laws of
preferential application, the provisions of this Code
shall be enforced not only within the Philippine
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, interior
waters, and maritime zone, but als outside of its
jurisdiction, against those who:
1) Should commit an offense while on a Philippine
ship or airship
* Any person who committed a crime on board a
Philippine ship/airship while in the Philippine
territory can be tried before our civil courts for
violation of the Penal Code.
* When the Philippine vessel is in the territory of a
foreign country, the crime committed is subject to the
laws of the foreign country.
* Philippine aircraft/vessel should be registered in the
Philippine Bureau of Customs.
* The Philippine court has no jurisdiction over the
crime of theft committed on the high seas on board a
vessel not registered/licensed in the Philippines (U.S.
v. Fowlerm 1 Phil. 614).
* Foreign merchant ship = extension of one's
territory. An offense committed on the high seas on
board a foreign merchant vessel is not triable by our
courts.
* Offenses committed on board a foreign merchant
vessel while on Philippine waters is TRIABLE before
our court.
Rules as to crimes committed aboard foreign
merchant vessels in the territorial waters of another
country:
1) French Rule – Such crimes are not triable in the
courts of that country, unless their commission
affects the peace and security of the territory or the
safety of the state is endangered.
2) English Rule – Such crimes are triable in that
country, unless they merely affect things within the
vessel or they refer to the internal management
thereof. (This is applicable in the Philippines)
Do Philippine courts have jurisdiction over the crime
of homicide committed on board a foreign merchant
vessel by a member of the crew against another?
* All must concede that felonious homicide is a
suject for the local jurisdiction, and that if the proper
authorities are proceeding with the case in the regular
way, the consul has no right to interfere to prevent it.
(Mali and Wildenhus v. Keeper of the Common Jail,
120 U.S. 1)
* Warships/war vessels are always reputed to be the
territory of the country to which they belong and
cannot be subjected to the laws of another state.
Thus, they're always subjected to their territorial
laws. (U.S. v. Fowley, 1 Phil. 614)
2) Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency
note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and
securities issued by the Government of the Philippine
Islands;
* Any person who makes false/counterfeit coins (Art.
163) or forges treasury or bank notes or other
obligations and securities (Art. 166) in a foreign
country may be prosecuted before our ours.
3) Should be liable for acts connected with the
introduction into these islands of the obligations and
securities mentioned in the presiding number;
* The introduction of forged obligations and
securities into the Philippines is as dangerous as the
forging of the same, to the economical interest of the
country.
4) While being public officers or employees, should
commit an offense in the exercise of their functions;
or
* Crimes that may be committed: 1) direct bribery
(Art. 210), 2) indirect bribery (Art. 211), frauds
against the public treasury (Art. 213), possession of
prohibited interest (Art. 216), malversation of public
funds (Art. 217), failure of accountable officer to
render accounts (Art. 218), illegal use of public funds
or property (Art. 220), failure to make delivery of
public funds or property (Art. 221)...
* When any of these felonies is committed ABROAD
by our public officers while in the exercise of the
functions, he can be prosecuted here.
5) Should commit any of the crimes against national
security and the law of nations, defined in Title One
of Book Two of this Code.
* Crimes against national security and the law of
nations are treason (Art. 114), conspiracy and
proposal to commit treason (Art. 115), espionage
(Art. 117), inciting to war and giving motives for
reprisals (Art. 118), violation of neutrality (Art. 119),
correspondence with hostile country (Art. 120)....
** Crimes (committed inside/outside the Philippines)
punishable under Article 2 are cognizable by the
Regional Trial Court in which the charge is filed.
RTCs have original jurisdiction over all crimes and
offenses committed.
ARTICLE 3 - Definition
Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies.
1) Felonies – acts and omissions punishable by the
Revised Penal Code
Elements of Felonies:
a. There must be an act or omission
b. The act/omission must be punishable by the
Revised Penal Code
c. The act is performed or the omission incurred by
means of dolo or culpa.
Classification of felonies according to the means by
which they are committed:
1) Intentional felonies - means of deceit (dolo =
malice)
- act/omission of the offender is malicious
- there is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent
2) Culpable felonies - means of fault (culpa)
- not malicious; injury caused by the offender to
another person is unintentional
- there is fault when the wrongful act results from
imprudence or negligence
* Imprudence - indicates a deficiency of action; lack
of skill
e.g. A was driving a truck along a road. He hit B
because it was raining – reckless imprudence.
* Negligence - deficiency of perception; failure to
foresee impending danger, usually involves lack of
foresight
2) Act – any bodily movement tending to produce
some effect in the external world
- an overt or external act; internal acts are beyond the
sphere of penal law
3) Omission - inaction; failure to perform a duty
required by law
* a criminal thought or a mere intention, no matter
how immoral or improper it may be, will never
constitute a felony
Examples of felony by omission:
1) Anyone who fails to render assistance to any
person whom he finds in an uninhabited place
wounded or in danger of dying is liable for
abandonment of persons in danger (Art. 275, par. 1).
2) Officer entrusted w/ collection of taxes who
voluntarily fails to issue a receipt as provided by law
is guilty of illegal exaction (Art. 213, par. 2).
3) Every person owing allegiance to the Philippines
and having knowledge of any conspiracy against the
government, who does not disclose to the proper
authority is liable for misprison of treason.
Crimes w/c cannot be committed through
imprudence/negligence: murder, treason, robbery,
and malicious mischief
* The act/omission must always be voluntary and
punishable by law to constitute a felony. A criminal
act is presumed to be voluntary. Fact prevails over
assumption, and in the absence of indubitable
explanation, the act must be declared voluntary and
punishable. (People v. Macalisang, 22 SCRA 699)
3 reasons: 1) based on the Classical Theory; basis of
criminal liability is human free will, 2)
acts/omissions are always deemed voluntary since
man is a rational being, 3) both felonies by dolo and
by culpa are done voluntarily, whether their intent is
deliberate or not
* Only difference = the offender acts w/ malice vs.
the offender acts w/o malice
REQUISITES OF DOLO/MALICE
Offender must have:
1. Freedom while doing the act/omitting to do the act
* A person who acts under the compulsion of an
irresistible force is exempt from criminal liability
(Art. 12, par. 5)
2. Intelligence
* The imbecile/the insane, and the infant under 9
years of age, minor over nine but less than 15 years
old and acting w/o discernment, have no criminal
liability BECAUSE THEY ACT WITHOUT
INTELLIGENCE.
3. Intent - intent to commit the act w/ malice
A voluntary act is a free, intelligent, and intentional
act. (U.S. v. Ah Chong, 15 Phil. 488, 495)
* A person who caused an injury by mere accident
had freedom and intelligence, but since he had no
fault or intention of causing it, he is not criminally
liable. (Art. 12, par. 4, RPC)
* Existence of intent is shown by the over acts of a
person. Intent to kill is difficult to prove, it being a
mental act. But it can be deduced from the external
acts performed by a person.
* Criminal intent and the will to commit a crime are
always presumed to exist on teh part of the person
who executes an act w/c the law punishes, unless the
contrary shall appear.
* Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea - A crime is
not committed if the mind of the person performing
to act complained be innocent.
Mistake of fact - a misapprehension of fact on the
part of the person who caused injury to another;
relieves the accused of criminal liability (he is not
criminally liable)
REQUISITES OF MISTAKE OF FACT AS A
DEFENSE:
1) that the act done would have been lawful had the
facts been as the accused believed them to be;
2) intention of the accused is lawful;
3) mistake must be without fault of carelessness
INTENT VS. MOTIVE
Intent - demonstrated by the use of a particular means
to bring about a desired result
- it is not a state of mind or a reason for committing a
crime.
Motive - implies motion; moving power which
impels one to do an act. When there is motive in the
commission of a crime, it always comes before the
intent. But a crime may be committed without
motive.
- established by the testimony of witnesses on the
acts/statements of the accused before or immediately
after the commission of the offense
- backed up by pieces of evidence
ARTICLE 4 - Criminal Liability
Criminal liability shall be incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony, although the
wrongful act done be different from that which he
intended.
- presupposes that the act done is the proximate cause
of the resulting felony. It must be the direct, natural,
and logical consequence of the felonious act
Causes which produce a different result:
a) Mistake in identity of the victim – injuring one
person who is mistaken for another (this is a complex
crime under Art. 48) e.g., A intended to shoot B, but
he instead shot C because he (A) mistook C for B.
* In mistake of identity, if the crime committed was
the same as the crime intended, but on a different
victim, error in persona does not affect the criminal
liability of the offender. But if the crime committed
was different from the crime intended, Article 49 will
apply and the penalty for the lesser crime will be
applied.
b) Mistake in blow – hitting somebody other than the
target due to lack of skill or fortuitous instances (this
is a complex crime under Art. 48) e.g., B and C were
walking together. A wanted to shoot B, but he
instead injured C.

c) Injurious result is greater than that intended –

causing injury graver than intended or expected (this
is a mitigating circumstance due to lack of intent to
commit so grave a wrong under Art. 13) e.g., A
wanted to injure B. However, B died.
* In order that the situation may qualify as praeter
intentionem, there must be a notable disparity
between the means employed and the resulting
felony.

2. By any person performing an act which would be

an offense against persons or property, were it not for
the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or
on account of the employment of inadequate or
ineffectual means.

Requisites: (IMPOSSIBLE CRIME)

Act would have been an offense against persons or
property
Act is not an actual violation of another provision of
the Code or of a special penal law
There was criminal intent
Accomplishment was inherently impossible; or
inadequate or ineffectual means were employed.