Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Crim Law Reviewer PDF
Crim Law Reviewer PDF
College of Law
ESGUERRA NOTES
2004-2005
CRIMINAL LAW I
criminal offenses. It is urged that the right to prosecute
and punish crimes is an attribute of sovereignty, but by
reason of the principle of territoriality as applied in the
suppression of crimes, such power is delegated to
subordinate government subdivisions such as territories.
I. DEFINITION AND SOURCES The Philippine Legislature by virtue of the Jones Law,
like other territories of the US, has the power to define
and punish crimes. The present government of the
A. DEFINITION Philippines created by the US Congress is autonomous.
It is within the power of the legislature to prescribe the
Criminal law is that branch or division of law form of the criminal complaint as long as the
which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and constitutional provision of the accused to be informed of
provides for their punishment. the nature of the accusation is not violated.
Sec. 19. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, Pesigan v. Angeles (1984)
nor cruel degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Facts: Anselmo and Marcelo Pesigan were
Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for transporting carabaos in the evening of April 2, 1982
compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the from Camarines Sur to Batangas when the carabaos
Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty were confiscated purportedly in accordance with E.O.
already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. No. 626-A which prohibits transportation of carabao and
The employment of physical, psychological, or carabeef from one province to another.
degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee Held: The E.O. should not be enforced against
or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities the Pesigans because it is a penal regulation (because of
under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. its confiscation and forfeiture provision) and was
Sec. 20. No person shall be imprisoned for published only in the Official Gazette on June 14, 1982.
debt or non-payment of a poll tax. Justice and fairness dictate that the public must be
Sec. 22. No ex post facto law or bill of informed of that provision by means of publication in the
attainder shall be enacted. Gazette before violators of the executive order can be
bound thereby. The summary confiscation was not in
order. The carabaos must be returned. However, the
1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 115
Pesigans cannot transport the carabaos to Batangas
Section 1. Rights of accused at trial. – In all
because they are now bound by the said E.O.
criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled to
the following rights:
Tañada v. Tuvera (1985)
(a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary
Facts: The petitioners seek a writ of
is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
mandamus to compel respondent public officials to
(b) To be informed of the nature and cause of
publish or cause the publication of various PD’s, EO’s,
the accusation against him.
LOI’s etc. invoking the Constitutional right of the people
(c) To be present and defend in person and by
to information on matters of public concern.
counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from
Held: The publication of all presidential
arraignment to promulgation of the judgment. The
issuances of a public nature or of general applicability is
accused may, however, waive his presence at the trial
mandated by law. It is a requirement of due process. It
pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail, unless
is a rule of law that before a person may be bound by
his presence is specifically ordered by the court for
law, he must first be officially and specifically informed
purposes of identification. The absence of the accused
of its contents. The Court therefore declares that
without justifiable cause at the trial of which he had
presidential issuances of general application which have
notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to be
not been published shall have no force and effect.
present thereat. When an accused under custody
However, the implementation of the PDs prior to its
escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived his right to
publication is an operative fact which may have
be present on all subsequent trial dates until custody
consequences which cannot be justly ignored. The past
over him is regained. Upon motion, the accused may be
cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration.
allowed to defend himself in person when it sufficiently
From the report submitted by the clerk of court, it is
appears to the court that he can properly protect his
undisputed that none of these unpublished PDs has ever
rights without the assistance of counsel.
been implemented by the government.
(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but
subject to cross-examination on matters covered by
PENOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES
direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner
a. Prevention – This assumes that man has a
prejudice him.
tendency to commit crime and punishing offenders will
(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a
prevent them from doing so again. Suppression can only
witness against himself.
be made possible through penal jurisprudence.
(f) To confront and cross-examine the
b. Deterrence/Exemplarity – This assumes
witnesses against him at the trial. Either party may
that man is endowed with free will and of his awareness
utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness
of the sanctions against crimes and his fear of such.
who is deceased, out of or can not with due diligence be
Especially if there is:
found in the Philippines, unavailable, or otherwise
1. Certainty
unable to testify, given in another case or proceeding,
- that all crimes will be punished.
judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and
2. Celerity
subject matter, the adverse party having the
– that punishment will come swiftly
opportunity to cross-examine him.
3. Severity
(g) To have compulsory process issued to
– that punishment is proportionate
secure the attendance of witnesses and production of
to his crime.
other evidence in his behalf.
It is also assumed that punishing the offender
(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
with cruel and conspicuous penalties will make an
(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the
example of him to deter others from doing the same in
manner prescribed by law.
the future.
c. Self-Defense – This is probably a
Civil Code, Article 2 conclusion reached by the social contract theorists who
Penal laws and those of public security and hold that there is an unwritten contract between men
safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in and their society where individuals agree to give up
the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public certain rights in exchange for the protection and benefits
international law and to treaty stipulations. offered by a community. If individuals violate this
Civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction with general * a consul is not entitled to the privileges and
court-martial over soldiers of the Armed Forces of the immunities of an ambassador or minister.
Philippines even in times of war, provided that in the
place of the commission of the crime no hostilities are in * under the Constitution, members of Congress are
progress and civil courts are functioning. not liable for libel or slander in connection with any
speech delivered on the floor of an house during
When the military court takes cognizance of the case regular or special session.
involving a person subject to military law, the Articles of
War apply, not the RPC or other penal laws. US v. Sweet (1901)
Facts: Sweet was an employee of the US army
The prosecution of an accused before a court-martial in the Philippines. He assaulted a prisoner of war for
is a bar to another prosecution of the accused for the which he was charged with the crime of physical
same offense. injuries. Sweet interposed the defense that the fact that
he was an employee of the US military authorities
Offenders accused of war crimes are triable by deprived the court of the jurisdiction to try and punish
military commission. A military commission has him.
jurisdiction even if actual hostilities have ceased as long Held: The case is open to the application of the
as a technical state of war continues. general principle that the jurisdiction of the civil
tribunals is unaffected by the military or other special
Exceptions to the general application of criminal character of the person brought before them for trial,
law unless controlled by express legislation to the contrary.
its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domain including the the authorities in making the search found the 8 cans of
territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular opium. Defendant admitted being the owner but did not
shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, confess as to his purpose in buying the opium.
between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago Held: Bringing opium in local territory even if it
regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of is merely for personal use and does not leave the
the internal waters of the Philippines. foreign merchant vessel anchored in Philippine waters is
subject to local laws particularly under Sec. 4 Act. No.
The provisions of the RPC are enforceable to all 2381 a.k.a. Opium Law. Under the said law, importation
crimes committed within the limits of Philippine territory includes merely bringing the drug from a foreign country
but it may also apply outside of the Philippine to Philippine port even if not landed.
jurisdiction against who:
1. should commit an offense while on a Philippine Miquiabas v. Philippines-Ryukus command (1948)
ship or airship; Facts: Petitioner is a Filipino citizen and a
civilian employee of the US army. He has been charged
2. should forge or counterfeit an coin or currency with disposing in the Port of Manila area things
note of the Philippines or obligations and belonging to the US army. He is under the custody of
securities issued by the Philippine government; Commanding General, Philippines-Ryukus command and
3. should be liable for acts connected with the an appointed General Court Martial found him guilty and
introduction into the country of the obligations sentenced him to 15 years imprisonment.
and securities aforestated; Held: Gen. Court-Martial has no jurisdiction
4. while being public officers or employees, because the Port of Manila is not a base under the Bases
should commit an offense in the exercise of Agreement entered into by the Philippines and the US.
their functions; and The Port area is merely a temporary quarters. Also, a
5. should commit any of the crimes against civilian employee cannot be considered a member of the
national security and the law of nations defined US Army as stated in the agreement. Lastly, no waiver
in Title I, Book II of the Code. of jurisdiction can be made either by the prosecuting
attorney or by the Secretary of Justice.
The RPC has therefore territorial and extraterritorial
application. The maritime zone extends to three miles 3. PROSPECTIVITY of Criminal Law
from the outermost coastline. Beyond that is the “high
seas” which is outside the territorial waters of the ¤ RPC, Art.21. Penalties that may be imposed.-
Philippines. No felony shall be punishable by any penalty
not prescribed by law prior to its commission.
There are two rules as to jurisdiction over crimes
committed aboard merchant vessels while in the
¤ RPC, Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. –
territorial waters of another country.
Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect in so
French rule – Such crimes are not triable in the
far as they favor the person guilty of a felony, who is not
courts of that country unless their commission affects
a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of
the peace and security of the territory or the safety of
Article 62 of this Code, although at the time of the
the state is endangered.
publication of such laws a final sentence has been
English rule – Such crimes are triable in that
pronounced and the convict is serving the same.
country unless they merely affect things within the
vessel or they refer to the internal management thereof.
• We observe the English Rule. ¤ Civil Code, Art. 4
Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless
Disorders which disturb only the peace of the ship or the contrary is provided.
those on board are to be dealt with exclusively by the
sovereignty of the home of the ship, but those which General Rule: Ex post facto law is prohibited. Ex post
disturb the public peace may be suppressed, and, if facto law is one that is specifically made to retroact to
need be, the offenders punished by the proper cover acts before it became effective to the prejudice of
authorities of the local jurisdiction. the accused; or to make a certain crime graver or
prescribe a heavier penalty for it.
Smoking opium aboard a foreign vessel in Philippine
waters constitutes a breach of public order because it The law does not have any retroactive effect EXCEPT
causes such drug to produce its pernicious effects within if it favors the offender unless he is a habitual
our territory. delinquent or the law otherwise provides.
This is consistent with the general principle that
Philippine courts have no jurisdiction over offenses criminal laws, being a limitation on the rights of the
committed on board foreign warships in territorial people, should be construed strictly against the State
waters. Warships are always reputed to be the territory and liberally in favor of the accused.
of the country to which they belong and cannot be
subjected to the laws of another state.
Different effects of repeal of penal law.
US v. Ah Sing (1917)
Facts: Defendant is a subject of China who
1. If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the
new law, the new law shall be applied, except
bought eight cans of opium in Saigon and brought them
when the offender is a habitual delinquent or
on board the steamship Shun Chang during the trip to
when the new law is made not applicable to
Cebu. When the steamer anchored in the port of Cebu,
pending action or existing causes of action.
2. If the new law imposes a heavier penalty, the People v. Pimentel (1998)
Facts: Respondent Tujan was charged with
law in force at the time of the commission of
subversion under RA 1700. When he was arrested 7
the offense shall be applied.
years after he was charged, an unlicensed revolver and
3. If the new law totally repeals the existing law ammunition was found in his possession. As such, he
so that the act which was penalized under the was also charged with Illegal Possession of Firearms
old law is no longer punishable, the crime is under PD 1866.
obliterated. Held: Tujan was not placed in double jeopardy
because the issue had not yet arisen for he had not yet
When the repeal is absolute the offense ceases to be been actually convicted.
criminal. RA 7636 totally repealed RA 1700 making
When the new law and the old law penalize the same subversion no longer a crime. Based on Art. 22 of RPC,
offense, the offender can be tried under the old law. this law should be given retroactive effect since the law
When the repealing law fails to penalize the offense is favorable to the accused and since he is not a habitual
under the old law, the accused cannot be convicted delinquent. The Court convicted Tujan with simple illegal
under the new law. possession of firearm and ammunition but since Tujan’s
A person erroneously accused and convicted under a length of detention is greater than the penalty
repealed statute may be punished under the repealing prescribed, the court ordered immediate release.
statute.
5. STRICT CONSTRUCTION of penal laws against
Gumabon v. Director of Prisons (1971) the State
Facts: Petitioners who were serving their
sentence of life imprisonment for the complex crime of ¤ 1987 Constitution, Article III, Sec. 14(2)
rebellion with murder and other crimes seek the In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall
retroactive application of the Hernandez doctrine which be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved….
was promulgated after their conviction. The Hernandez
ruling negated the existence of the crime charged Rules of Construction of Penal Laws
stating that rebellion cannot be complexed with other 1. Criminal statutes are liberally construed in
crimes. Thus, the accused in the Hernandez case was favor of the offender. This means that no person
sentenced only to 10 years of imprisonment. shall be brought within their terms of the law
Held: Both RPC and the Civil Code allow for the who is not clearly within them, nor should any
retroactive application of judicial decisions. While act be pronounced criminal which is not clearly
reference in Art. 22 of the Civil Code is made to made so by statute.
legislative acts, it would be merely an exaltation of the 2. The original text in which a penal law is
literal to deny its application to a case like the present. approved will govern in case of a conflict with an
The Civil Code provides that judicial decisions applying official translation. Hence, the RPC, which was
or interpreting the constitution, as well as legislation approved in Spanish text, is controlling over its
form part of our legal system. English translation.
3. Interpretation by analogy has no place in
4. Nullum Crimen Nulla Poena Sine Lege criminal matters.
- reasoning by analogy is applied only when
similarities are limited and it is admitted that
Art. 3. Definitions. — Acts and omissions
significant differences also exist.
punishable by law are felonies (delitos).
Pascual v. Board of Medical Examiners (1969)
Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. — Facts: Pascual was charged in an
No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not administrative case for immorality and was announced
prescribed by law prior to its commission. by counsel of complainants to be their first witness.
Held: The Board of Medical examiners cannot,
There is no crime when where is no law punishing it. consistently with the self-incriminating clause, compel
the person proceeded against to take the witness stand
The phrase “punished by law” should be understood without his consent. A proceeding for malpractice
to mean “punished by the Revised Penal Code”, and not possesses a criminal or penal aspect in the sense that
by special law. the respondent would suffer the revocation of his license
as a medical practitioner which is even a greater form of
Bernardo v. People (1983) deprivation than forfeiture of property.
Facts: The accused were charged and While crime should not go unpunished and that
convicted for violating PD No. 772 for possessing and the truth must be revealed, such desirable objective
squatting on a parcel of land owned by Cruz. should not be accomplished according to means
Held: Conviction is null and void. PD No. 772 offensive to high sense of respect accorded to human
does not apply to pasture lands because its preamble personality. More and more in line with the democratic
shows that it was intended to apply to squatting in creed, the deference accorded to an individual even
urban communities. It is a basic principle of criminal law those suspected of the most heinous crimes is given due
that no person should be brought within the terms of a weight.
penal statute who is not clearly within them nor should
any act be pronounced criminal which is not clearly
made so by the statute.
D. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- the offender in performing the act or incurring the ♣ Motive is not an essential element of a
omission, has the intention to cause an injury to crime, and, hence need not be proved for purposes of
another conviction.
- the word “deceit” in par. 2 of Art. 3 is not the ♣ Motive is essential only when there is doubt
proper translation of the word “dolo”. Dolus is as to the identity of the assailant. It is immaterial when
actually equivalent to malice which is the intent the accused has been positively identified.
to do an injury to another. ♣ Proof of motive alone is not sufficient to
support a conviction but lack of motive may be an aid in
2. CULPABLE showing the innocence of the accused.
(by means of fault or culpa) ♣ There is no felony by dolo if there is no
intent
- an act performed without malice but at the same
time punishable though in a lesser degree and with People v. Temblor (1988)
an equal result Facts: Cagampang and his wife were
conversing in the store adjacent to their house when
imprudence - lack of precaution to avoid injury, Temblor arrived and asked to buy cigarettes. Temblor,
usually involves lack of skill then, shot Cagampang and demanded the wife to bring
negligence - failure to foresee impending out her husband’s firearm. Months after, the wife was
danger, usually involves lack of foresight summoned to the police station and there she identified
the accused. The accused’s defense was alibi and lack of
1. DOLO motive.
Held: The knowledge of the accused that
REQUISITES OF DOLO OR MALICE Cagampang possessed a firearm was enough motive to
1. freedom – that the act or omission was kill him as killings were perpetrated by members of the
NPA for the sole purpose of acquiring more arms and
voluntary and without external
ammunition. Their group is prevalent not only in Agusan
compulsion.
del Norte but elsewhere in the country. It is known as
2. intelligence – knowledge needed to the NPA’s “agaw armas” campaign. Moreover, proof of
determine the morality and consequences motive is not essential when the culprit has been
of an act. The imbecile, insane and minors positively identified.
have no criminal liability.
3. intent – intent to commit the act with People v. Hassan (1988)
Facts: The accused, an illiterate, 15-year-old
malice, being purely a mental process, is
pushcart cargador, was convicted of the crime of murder
presumed and the presumption arises
for the death of Ramon. The lone eyewitness claimed he
from the proof of the commission of the
saw the accused stab Ramon only once at the back. He
unlawful act.
identified the accused alone at the funeral parlor without
being placed in a police line-up.
♣ Intent presupposes the exercise of freedom and the
Held: The testimony of witness was weak. It
use of intelligence
conflicted with the findings of the Medico-legal officer
♣ The existence of intent is shown by the overt acts of
who identified 2 stab wounds which were inflicted while
a person
assailant was in front of the victim. The manner by
♣ Criminal intent is presumed from the commission of
which the witness was made to identify the accused was
an unlawful act BUT the presumption of criminal
pointedly suggestive and activated visual imagination
intent does not arise from the proof of the commission
when there was none. The method of identification
of an act which is not unlawful.
became just a confrontation and was made in violation
of the constitutional right of the accused.
Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea
The court noted the total absence of motive
“the act itself does not make a man guilty
ascribed to the accused for stabbing Ramon who is a
unless his intention were so”
complete stranger to him. While as a general rule,
A crime is not committed if the mind of
motive is not essential for purposes of complying with
the person performing to act complained be
the requirement that a judgment of guilty must stem
innocent.
from proof beyond reasonable doubt, the lack of motive
It must be borne in mind that the act from
on the part of the accused plays a pivotal role towards
which the presumption of existence of criminal
his acquittal. This is especially true where there is doubt
intent springs must be a criminal act.
as to the identity of the culprit as when the identification
is extremely tenuous as in this case.
Actus me invito factus non est meus actus
♣ Criminal intent is replaced by negligence and ♣ The provisions of this Code are not applicable to
imprudence in felonies committed by means of culpa. offenses punished by special laws especially those
relating to the requisite of criminal intent; the stages of
2. CULPA commission; and the application of penalties.
♣ However, when the special law is silent, the Code can
give suppletory effect.
applied for probation while the wife appealed arguing 1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
that the RTC erred in finding her criminally liable for although the wrongful act done be different from that
conspiring with her husband as the principle of which he intended.
conspiracy is inapplicable to BP Blg. 22 which is a special 2. By any person performing an act which
law. would be an offense against persons or property, were it
Held: B.P. Blg. 22 does not expressly prescribe not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment
the suppletory application of the provisions of the RPC. or an account of the employment of inadequate or
Thus, in the absence of contrary provision in B.P. Blg. ineffectual means.
22, the general provisions of the RPC which, by their
nature, are necessarily applicable, may be applied B. PUNISHABLE CONDUCT
suppletorily. The court cited the case of Yu vs. People,
where the provisions on subsidiary imprisonment under 1. WRONGFUL ACT
Article 39 32 of the RPC to B.P. Blg. 22 was applied DIFFERENT
suppletorily. FROM THAT
The suppletory application of the principle of INTENDED
conspiracy in this case is analogous to the application of
the provision on principals under Article 17 in U.S. vs. ♠ One who commits an intentional felony is
Ponte. For once conspiracy or action in concert to responsible for all the consequences which may naturally
achieve a criminal design is shown, the act of one is the and logically result therefrom, whether foreseen or
act of all the conspirators, and the precise extent or intended or not.
modality of participation of each of them becomes ♠ Rationale: el que es causa de la causa es
secondary, since all the conspirators are principals. causa del mal causado
The Court in this case however ruled in favor “He who is the cause of the cause is the cause
of Ladonga(wife) as the prosecution failed to prove that of the evil caused”
she performed any overt act in furtherance of the ♠ When a person has not committed a felony,
alleged conspiracy. he is not criminally liable for the result which is not
intended.
People v. Bustinera (2004)
♠ The causes which may produce a result
Facts: Bustinera was convicted by the trial
different from that which the offender intended are:
Court for qualified theft under Article 310 of the Revised
Penal Code for the unlawful taking of the taxi cab driven a. ERROR IN PERSONAE – mistake in the
by him which is owned and operated by Cipriano and identity of the victim; injuring one person
was sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion mistaken for another (this is a complex crime
perpetua. under Art. 49)
Held: The unlawful taking of motor vehicles is
now covered by the anti-carnapping law (RA No. 6539)
b. ABERRATIO ICTUS – mistake in the
and not by the provisions on qualified theft or robbery. blow, that is, when the offender intending to
The trial court having convicted Bustinera of qualified do an injury to one person actually inflicts it on
theft instead of carnapping, erred in the imposition of another; and
the penalty. While the information alleges that the crime c. PRAETER INTENTIONEM – the act
was attended with grave abuse of confidence, the same exceeds the intent, that is, the injurious result
cannot be appreciated as the suppletory effect of the is greater than that intended.
Revised Penal Code to special laws, as provided in ♠ The felony committed must be the proximate cause of
Article 10 of said Code, cannot be invoked when there is the resulting injury.
a legal impossibility of application, either by express
provision or by necessary implication. PROXIMATE CAUSE – the cause, which, in
Moreover, when the penalties under the special natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any
law are different from and are without reference or efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and
relation to those under the Revised Penal Code, there without which the result would not have occurred.
can be no suppletory effect of the rules, for the
application of penalties under the said Code or by other ♠ When death is presumed to be the natural
relevant statutory provisions are based on or applicable consequence of physical injuries inflicted:
only to said rules for felonies under the Code. 1. That the victim at the time the physical injuries
The court cited the case of People v. Panida were inflicted was in normal health.
which involved the crime of carnapping and the penalty 2. That the death may be expected from the
imposed was the indeterminate sentence of 14 years physical injuries inflicted.
and 8 months, as minimum, to 17 years and 4 months, 3. That death ensued within a reasonable time.
as maximum, this Court did not apply the provisions of
the Revised Penal Code suppletorily as the anti- ♠ The felony committed is not the proximate cause of
carnapping law provides for its own penalties which are the resulting injury when:
distinct and without reference to the said Code. a. There is an active force that intervened
Bustinera was sentenced to an indeterminate between the felony committed and the resulting injury,
penalty of 14 years and 8 months as minimum, to 17 and the active force is a distinct act or fact absolutely
years and 4 months, as maximum for the crime of foreign from the felonious act of the accused; or
carnapping under RA 6539, as amended. b. The resulting injury is due to the intentional
act of the victim.
Art. 4. Criminal liability. — Criminal liability shall be People v. Sabalones (1988)
incurred:
Facts: Two vehicles proceeded to the house of who, having been elected by popular election to a public
Stephen Lim when Sabalones et. al. fired towards the office, shall refuse without legal motive to be sworn in or
vehicles killing 2 of the passengers and seriously injuring to discharge the duties of said office.
3 others. The lower court convicted the accused.
Appellants accuse the trial court of engaging in
Art. 275. Abandonment of person in danger and
conjecture in ruling that there was aberratio ictus in this
abandonment of one’s own victim. — The penalty of
case.
arresto mayor shall be imposed upon:
Held: The allegation does not advance the
1. Any one who shall fail to render assistance to any
cause of the appellants. It must be stressed that the
person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place
trial court relied on the concept of aberratio ictus to
wounded or in danger of dying, when he can render
explain why the appellants staged the ambush, not to
such assistance without detriment to himself, unless
prove that appellants did in fact commit the crimes. In
such omission shall constitute a more serious offense.
any event, the lower court was not engaging in
2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance
conjecture because the conclusion that the appellants
to another whom he has accidentally wounded or
killed the wrong persons was based on the extrajudicial
injured.
statement of appellant Beronga and the testimony of
3. Anyone who, having found an abandoned child
one witness. Nonetheless, the fact that they were
under seven years of age, shall fail to deliver said child
mistaken does not diminish their culpability. Mistake in
to the authorities or to his family, or shall fail to take
the identity of the victim carries the same gravity as
him to a safe place.
when the accused zeroes in on his intended victim.
Art. 116. Misprision of treason. — Every person Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony.
owing allegiance to (the United States) the Government — Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
of the Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner, and punishable only in the cases in which the law specially
having knowledge of any conspiracy against them, provides a penalty therefore.
conceals or does not disclose and make known the A conspiracy exists when two or more persons
same, as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
the province, or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which felony and decide to commit it.
he resides, as the case may be, shall be punished as an There is proposal when the person who has
accessory to the crime of treason. decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to
some other person or persons.
Art. 208. Prosecution of offenses; negligence and Art. 136. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup
tolerance. — The penalty of prision correccional in its d’etat, rebellion or insurrection. — The conspiracy
minimum period and suspension shall be imposed upon and proposal to commit coup d’etat shall be punished by
any public officer, or officer of the law, who, in prision mayor in minimum period and a fine which shall
dereliction of the duties of his office, shall maliciously not exceed eight thousand pesos (P8,000.00).
refrain from instituting prosecution for the punishment
of violators of the law, or shall tolerate the commission Art. 141. Conspiracy to commit sedition. — Persons
of offenses. conspiring to commit the crime of sedition shall be
punished by prision correccional in its medium period
Art. 223. Conniving with or consenting to evasion. and a fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos
— Any public officer who shall consent to the escape of a
prisoner in his custody or charge, shall be punished: Art. 186. Monopolies and combinations in restraint
1. By prision correccional in its medium and of trade. — The penalty of prision correccional in its
maximum periods and temporary special disqualification minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000
in its maximum period to perpetual special pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon:
disqualification, if the fugitive shall have been sentenced 1. Any person who shall enter into any contract
by final judgment to any penalty. or agreement or shall take part in any conspiracy or
2. By prision correccional in its minimum combination in the form of a trust or otherwise, in
period and temporary special disqualification, in case the restraint of trade or commerce or to prevent by artificial
fugitive shall not have been finally convicted but only means free competition in the market;
held as a detention prisoner for any crime or violation of
law or municipal ordinance. Art. 306. Who are brigands; Penalty. — When more
than three armed persons form a band of robbers for the
Art. 234. Refusal to discharge elective office. — purpose of committing robbery in the highway, or
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or to
1,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person obtain ransom or for any other purpose to be attained
by means of force and violence, they shall be deemed c. That the execution of the felony be
highway robbers or brigands. decided upon.
Persons found guilty of this offense shall be
punished by prision mayor in its medium period to - the conspirators have made up their minds
reclusion temporal in its minimum period if the act or to commit the crime. There must be a determination to
acts committed by them are not punishable by higher commit the crime of treason, rebellion or sedition.
penalties, in which case, they shall suffer such high
penalties. PROPOSAL
If any of the arms carried by any of said
persons be an unlicensed firearm, it shall be presumed Requisites:
that said persons are highway robbers or brigands, and a. That a person has decided to commit a
in case of convictions the penalty shall be imposed in felony; and
the maximum period. b. That he proposes its execution to some
other person or persons.
Art. 340. Corruption of minors. — Any person who
shall promote or facilitate the prostitution or corruption ♠ There is no criminal proposal when:
of persons underage to satisfy the lust of another, shall a. The person who proposes is not
be punished by prision mayor, and if the culprit is a determined to commit the felony.
pubic officer or employee, including those in b. There is no decided, concrete and formal
government-owned or controlled corporations, he shall proposal.
also suffer the penalty of temporary absolute c. It is not the execution of a felony that is
disqualification. proposed.
behind. The brother of the victim also testified that he Held: Fabro’s contention that Martin was the
positively identified Valdez as the one carrying the gun real curlprit being the source of the contraband does not
and that it was Orodio who was running with him. in any way absolve her of the crime of selling marijuana.
Held: If conspiracy is proved to exist in the While it is true that it was Martin who took the money, it
commission of the felony, it is not necessary to prove was Fabro who negotiated with the poseur buyers,
that participation of each conspirator of all are liable as fetched her co-accused; and carried and handed over
any act of a co-conspirator becomes the act of the other the marijuana to Apduhan. The acts of Martin and Fabro
regardless of the precise degree of participation in the clearly show a unity of purpose in the consummation of
act. The evidence is more than adequate to show the sale of marijuana.
conspiracy between two accused even if prosecution It is clear that Section 21 (b) of R.A. 6425
failed to show who actually pulled the trigger of the punishes the mere conspiracy to commit the offense of
shotgun; the act of one is the act of all. selling, delivering, distributing and transporting of
dangerous drugs. Conspiracy herein refers to the mere
People v. Escober (1988) agreement to commit the said acts and not the actual
Facts: Alorte, Escober and Punzalan were execution thereof. While the rule is that a mere
convicted of having killed the children of spouses Chua conspiracy to commit a crime without doing any overt
while robbing Bee Seng Electrical Supply owned by the act is not punishable, the exception is when such is
spouses. Abuyen was the former security guard of the specifically penalized by law, as in the case of Section 21
store while Escober was the present one. Punzalan is a of Republic Act 6425. Conspiracy as crime should be
friend of Abuyen. Escober and Punzalan were charged as distinguished from conspiracy as a manner of incurring
principals by indispensable cooperation. criminal liability the latter being applicable to the case.
Held: Escober was acquitted. Escober being on
duty that fateful night and opening the gate to persons People v. Bello (2004)
who turned out to be robbers and killers make him an Facts: Accused Bello et. al. mapped out a plan
easy suspect. However, the fact that accused was at the to rob a moneychanger. Calling the moneychanger from
scene of the crime is not by itself sufficient to establish a motel room, Bello misrepresented that she came from
his criminal liability. To hold the accused as co-principal Japan and would like to convert her 40 pieces of yen to
in the crime charged, the existence of conspiracy pesos. She requested that the currency conversion be
between the accused and the actual killers must be made in her room as she did not want to carry around a
shown and the same degree of proof required for huge sum of money. During the occasion of the robbery,
establishing the crime is required to support a finding of Andasan, the messenger who brought the money to
the presence of the conspiracy. Bello was killed. The trial court ruled that Bello conspired
Punzalan, on the other hand, is guilty as with the other accused and was found guilty as principal
principal. His participation is to act as a look-out and for the crime of robbery with homicide.
even if he did not participate in the actual killing, he Bello, argued that her alleged conspiracy with
cannot evade responsibility for the crime. the other accused was not sufficiently established by
circumstantial evidence as there was no showing that
People v. Elijorde (2003) she had the same purpose and united with the other
Facts: Hierro and Visbal went to the sari-sari accused in the execution of the crime. She alleged that
store where they encountered Elijorde, Punzalan and her mere presence in the crime scene is not per se a
Menes. Menes reacted to a comment made by Hierro by sufficient indiqium of conspiracy. She insists that she
punching him in the face followed by Elijorde who also acted against her will due to the irresistible force
boxed him, and Punzalan who kicked him in the back. employed by her co-accused.
The two victims ran away. Another confrontation Held: The Court held that Bello conspired with
ensued. Punzalan kicked Hierro at the back and the her co-accused to commit the crime. Records clearly
latter ran away but pursued by Elijorde. Elijorde, then. reveal that Bello was part of the plan to rob the
Stabbed Hierro at the back with a knife resulting to his moneychanger. The chain of events and the conduct of
death. Elijorde and Punzalan were charged with murder. Bello lead to no other conclusion than that she conspired
Held: No conspiracy between the 2 because with her co-accused to commit the crime.
there is no evidence to show unity of purpose and Conspiracy exists where the plotters agree,
design in the execution of the killing. Punzalan only expressly or impliedly, to commit the crime and decide
kicked Hierro twice after which he did not cooperate with to pursue it. Conspiracy is predominantly a state of mind
Elijorde in pursuing and killing the victim. Mere kicking as it involves the meeting of the minds and intent of the
does not necessarily prove intent to kill. Thus, each of malefactors. Consequently, direct proof is not essential
the accused is liable only for his own acts. Punzalan is to establish it. The existence of the assent of minds of
acquitted. the co-conspirators may be inferred from proof of facts
and circumstances which, taken together, indicate that
People v. Fabro (2000) they are parts of the complete plan to commit the crime.
Facts: Petitioner Fabro together with her
common-law husband Pilay and Irene Martin was Li v. People (2001)
charged with the crime of "violation of Section 21 (b) Facts: Because of an altercation between
Art. IV, in relation to Section 4, Art. II of Republic Act Arugay and Li, Li armed himself with a baseball bat and
No. 6425 as amended, for selling to PO2 Apduhan, who used the same to hit Arugay on the arm. Arugay armed
acted as poseur buyer, one kilo of dried marijuana with a bolo, retaliated by hacking Li on the head causing
leaves. Fabro contends that her guilt was not proven the bat to fall from his hand and leaving him
beyond reasonable doubt as based on the testimony of unconscious or semi-unconsious. At this point in time,
the NBI, the real possessor of the confiscated properties Sangalang, who was also present stabbed Arugay
was her co-accused Martin. several times which resulted to the latter’s death. The
lower court held that there was conspiracy in the Bangcado directed the victims to form a line against a
present case Ford Fierra. Because Bangcado and Banisa were holding
Held: The existence of conspiracy should be handguns, Cogasi and his friends did as they were told
ruled out. Sangalang was the main actor in stabbing and were caught unaware when they were shot by
Arugay to death. As Li was incapacitated or probably Bangcado. Adawan and Lino died of gunshot wounds in
unconscious at the time Sangalang stabbed Arugay, it the head, while Cogasi and Clemente sustained head
cannot be assumed that Sangalang did what he has wounds. The lower court convicted both Bangcado and
done with the knowledge or assent of Li, much more in Banisa for 2 counts of murder and 2 counts of frustrated
coordination with each other. Based on the murder.
circumstances, the Court is hard put to conclude that Held: There being no finding of Conspiracy
Sangalang and Li had acted in concert to commit the with Bangcado, the Court acquitted Banisa of all the
offense. In fact, the stabbing of Arugay could very well charges against him. In the absence of any previous
be construed as a spur-of-the-moment reaction by plan or agreement to commit a crime, the criminal
Sangalang upon seeing that his friend Li was struck on responsibility arising from different acts directed against
the head by Arugay. From such a spontaneous reaction, one and the same person is individual and not collective,
a finding of conspiracy cannot arise. and that each of the participants is liable only for his
Proving conspiracy is a dicey matter, especially own acts. Consequently, Banisa must be absolved from
difficult in cases such as the present wherein the criminal responsibility for the assault on the victims. It is
criminal acts arose spontaneously, as opposed to clear that neither the victims nor Banisa could have
instances wherein the participants would have the anticipated Bangcado's act of shooting the victims since
opportunity to orchestrate a more deliberate plan. the attack was sudden and without any reason or
Spontaneity alone does not preclude the establishment purpose. Thus, the criminal design of Bangcado had not
of conspiracy, which after all, can be consummated in a yet been revealed prior to the killings.
moment’s notice — through a single word of assent to a
proposal or an unambiguous handshake. Yet it is more People v. Ramos (2004)
difficult to presume conspiracy in extemporaneous Facts: The trial court found appellant Eulalia
outbursts of violence; hence, the demand that it be San Roque guilty for conspiring and confederating with
established by positive evidence. A conviction premised her co-accused for the murder of her live-in-partner
on a finding of conspiracy must be founded on facts, not Lomida. Lomida was stabbed, shot and burned resulting
on mere inferences and presumption. to his death. Appellant argues that the fact of such
conspiracy has not been satisfactorily proven during the
People v. Bagano (2002) trial of the case. She vigorously contends that she did
Facts: Jeremias and his wife Merlinda were not participate in the killing of the victim.
sleeping in their home when they were awakened by Held: In determining the existence of
someone repeatedly calling Jeremias' name. Jeremias conspiracy, it is not necessary to show that all the
went to the window to see who it was and thereafter left conspirators actually hit and killed the victim. The
their room to go outside. Merlinda remained in their presence of conspiracy among the accused can be
room, but peering through the window she saw Cañete proven by their conduct before, during or after the
suddenly embrace Jeremias as the latter was opening commission of the crime showing that they acted in
the gate. Thereupon, Bagano with ice pick in hand unison with each other, evincing a common purpose or
stabbed Jeremias on the chest. Jeremias struggled to design. There must be a showing that appellant
free himself from Cañete's clasp and ran, but Bagano cooperated in the commission of the offense, either
gave chase. Jeremias died upon arrival at the hospital. morally, through advice, encouragement or agreement
Held: Conspiracy is attendant in the or materially through external acts indicating a manifest
commission of the crime. For conspiracy to exist, it is intent of supplying aid in the perpetration of the crime in
sufficient that at the time of the commission of the an efficacious way. In such case, the act of one becomes
offense the accused had the same purpose and were the act of all, and each of the accused will thereby be
united in its execution. Proof of an actual planning of deemed equally guilty of the crime committed.
the perpetuation of the crime is not a condition The series of events in this case convincingly
precedent. From the mode and manner in which the show that appellant and her co-accused acted in unison
offense was perpetrated, and as can be inferred from and cooperated with each other in killing Lomida.
their acts, it is evident that Bagano and Cañete were Appellant was the one who opened the door and allowed
one in their intention to kill Jeremias. Hence, in the other accused to enter the house. She joined them
accordance with the principle that in conspiracy the act in bringing the victim to the residence of Ramos, her
of one is the act of all, the fact that it was Bagano who brother-in-law. While her co-accused dragged the
delivered the fatal blow on Jeremias and Cañete's helpless victim, tied him to a santol tree, stabbed him
participation was limited to a mere embrace is twice by a bladed knife, and shot him 5 to 7 times,
immaterial. Conspiracy bestows upon them equal appellant merely watched intensely. She even “turned
liability; hence, they shall suffer the same fate for their her back” as the lifeless body of the victim was being
acts. burned. And after attaining their purpose, she fled with
the other accused.
The above circumstances clearly show the
common purpose and concerted efforts on the part of
People v. Bangcado (2000) appellant and her co-accused.
Facts: SPO1 Bangcado together with SPO1
Banisa frisked and searched Cogasi, Clemente, Adawan STAGES OF COMMISSION OF A CRIME
and Lino to see if they were concealing any weapons.
After making sure that the victims were unarmed,
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted 4. The non-performance of all acts of execution was
felonies. — Consummated felonies as well as those due to cause or accident other than his own
which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable. spontaneous desistance.
A felony is consummated when all the
elements necessary for its execution and ♠ The commission of the felony is deemed commenced
accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when directly by overt acts when 1) there be external acts; 2)
the offender performs all the acts of execution which such external acts have direct connection with the crime
would produce the felony as a consequence but which, intended to be committed.
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
independent of the will of the perpetrator. OVERT ACT – some physical activity or deed, indicating
There is an attempt when the offender the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a
commences the commission of a felony directly or over mere planning or preparation, which if carried to its
acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution complete termination following its natural curse, without
which should produce the felony by reason of some being frustrated by external obstacles nor by voluntary
cause or accident other than this own spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and
desistance. necessarily ripen into a concrete offense.
b. crimes consummated by mere attempt Less grave felonies are those which the law
(ex. Attempt to flee to an enemy country, punishes with penalties which in their maximum period
treason) are correctional, in accordance with the above-
• There is not ATTEMPTED crime because the mentioned Art.
overt act in itself consummates the crime.
♠ Art. 9 classifies felonies according to their gravity.
c. felonies by omission a. GRAVE FELONIES – those in which the law
• There can be no attempted stage because the attaches a capital punishment or afflictive
offender does not execute acts. He omits to penalty.
perform an act which the law requires him to do.
♠ Capital punishment is death penalty
d. crimes committed by mere agreement
♠ The afflictive penalties in accordance with Art.
- The offer made by one of the parties to the other 25 of this code are:
constitutes attempted felony, if the offer is reclusion perpetua
rejected. reclusion temporal
- In view of this rule, it would seem that there is perpetual or temporary absolute
no frustrated bribery but in People v. Diego Quin, disqualification
SC ruled that if the public officer returned the perpetual or temporary special
money given by the defendant, there is disqualification
frustrated bribery. prision mayor
e. material crimes
b. LESS GRAVE FELONIES – those in which
- There are three stages of consummation: their maximum period are correctional
attempted, frustrated and consummated.
♠ When the penalty prescribed for the offense is
US v. Adiao (1955) composed of two or more distinct penalties, the
Facts: Adiao is a customs inspector. He higher or highest of the penalties must be a
abstracted a leather belt from the luggage of a Japanese correctional penalty.
and secreted the belt under his desk in the Customs
House where it was found by other customs employees. ♠ The following are correctional penalties
Adiao was convicted of frustrated theft. prision correccional
Held: Since the defendant performed all the arresto mayor
acts of execution necessary for the accomplishment of suspension
the felony, he is guilty of consummated crime of theft. destierro
The fact that he was under observation during the entire
transaction and was unable to get the merchandise out
of the Customs House is not decisive; all the elements of
c. LIGHT FELONIES – those infractions of law in
the completed crime of theft are present. which the penalty is arresto menor or a fine not
exceeding P200 or both.
People v. Hernandez (1925)
Facts: The accused, a 70-year-old man was ♠ A felony punishable by a fine not exceeding
convicted by the trial court of frustrated rape for having P200 and censure is a light felony, because public
intercourse with his granddaughter who was at that time censure, like arresto menor, is a light felony.
only 9 years of age. The lower court claimed that there
can be no consummated rape without a complete Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable. — Light
penetration of the hymen. felonies are punishable only when they have been
Held: Finding the hymen intact is not always consummated, with the exception of those committed
proof that no rape has been committed. The law may against person or property.
now indeed be considered as settled that while the Light felonies are those infractions of law for the
rupturing of the hymen is not indispensable to a commission of which a penalty of arresto menor or a
conviction, there must be proof of some degree of fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both; is provided.
entrance of the male organ within the labia of
pudendum. In the present case, the physician found the ♠ This should be seen in the light of articles prescribing
labia and the opening of the vagina inflamed together penalties for crimes in their different stages of
with an abundance of semen. Child even testified that commission. This means that light felonies which are
defendant succeeded partial penetration. The accused is only attempted or frustrated are not punishable by law.
guilty of consummated rape.
♠ However, in the commission of crimes against persons
D. CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES and property, every stage of execution is punishable but
only the principals and accomplices are liable in light
Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies, the accessories are not.
felonies. — Grave felonies are those to which the law
attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in ♠ Rationale: Light felonies produce such slight or
any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Art. insignificant moral and material injuries that public
25 of this Code. conscience is assuaged b not providing for penalty for
light felonies which are not consummated and to mere b. ABERRATIO ICTUS - mistake in the
accomplices.
blow, that is, when the offender intending
to do an injury to one person actually
III. CRIMINAL LIABILITY inflicts it on another; and
c. PRAETER INTENTIONEM – the act
A. HOW INCURRED exceeds the intent, that is, the injurious
result is greater than that intended.
Art. 4. Criminal liability. — Criminal liability shall be
* RPC, Art. 13 Mitigating circumstance –
incurred:
3) That the offender had no intention to
1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
commit so grave a wrong as that committed.
although the wrongful act done be different from that
which he intended.
2. By any person performing an act which would
2. By any person performing an act which
be an offense against persons or property, were it
would be an offense against persons or property, were it
not for the inherent impossibility of its
not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment
accomplishment or an account of the employment
or an account of the employment of inadequate or
of inadequate or ineffectual means.
ineffectual means.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES
♣ This article has no reference to the manner criminal
liability is incurred. The manner incurring criminal REQUISITES:
liability under the RPC is stated under Art. 3, that is,
performing or failing to do an act, when either is 1. That the act performed would be an
punished b law, by means of deceit or fault. offense against persons or property.
FELONIES AGAINST PERSONS ARE:
♣ Art. 4 merely states that criminal liability is incurred a. Parricide
by those mentioned by the said article. b. Murder
c. Homicide
1. By any person committing a felony although the d. Infanticide
wrongful act done be different from that which he e. Abortion
intended f. Duel
g. Physical Injuries
REQUISITES: h. Rape
FELONIES AGAINST PROPERTY ARE:
a. That an intentional felony has been
a. Robbery
committed; and b. Brigandage
b. That the wrong done to the aggrieved c. Theft
party be the direct and natural and logical d. Usurpation
consequence of the felony. e. Culpable Insolvency
f. Swindling and other deceits
♣ Any person who creates in another’s mind an g. Chattel Mortgage
immediate sense of danger, which causes the latter to h. Arson and other crimes involving
do something resulting in the latter’s injuries, is liable destruction
for the resulting injuries. i. Malicious Mischief
2. That the act was done with evil
♣ Wrong done must be the direct, natural and logical intent.
consequence of the felony committed. The offender must have intent to do injury to
- where it clearly appears that the injury would another.
not have cased death, in the ordinary course of events,
but would have healed in so many days and where it is
shown beyond all doubt that the death was due to the 3. That its accomplishment is inherently
malicious or careless acts of the injured person or a impossible, or that the means employed is
third person, the accused is not liable for homicide. either inadequate or ineffectual.
In impossible crime, the act performed by the
♣ The offended party is not obliged to submit to a offender cannot produce an offense against persons
surgical operation to relieve the accused from the or property because:
natural and ordinary results of his crime.
♣ The felony committed must be the proximate cause of a. the commission of the offense is
the resulting injury. inherently impossible of accomplishment
- The act intended by the offender is by its
♠ The causes which may produce a result different from nature one of impossible accomplishment.
that which the offender intended are: - There must either 1) LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY,
or 2) PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY
a. ERROR IN PERSONAE - mistake in the - examples: 1) when one tries to kill another
identity of the victim; injuring one person by putting in his substance which he believes to be
mistaken for another (this is a complex arsenic when in fact it is common salt; 2) when one
crime under Art. 49) tries to murder a corpse.
b. the means employed is either inadequate wide, with water about a foot deep. After a while,
or ineffectual respondent Pacheco, who was holding a fish, came out
- example: when one tries to poison another but of the drainage system and left without saying a word.
the quantity of arsenic added in his substance was Andres also came out, went back inside, and emerged
not sufficient to kill a person again, this time, carrying Wilson who was already dead.
- but where the means employed is adequate Andres laid the boy's lifeless body down in the grassy
and the result expected is not produced, it is not an area. Shocked at the sudden turn of events, Garcia fled
impossible crime, but a frustrated felony. from the scene. For his part, Andres went to the house
of petitioner Melba Quinto, Wilson's mother, and
4. That the act performed should not informed her that her son had died. Melba Quinto rushed
constitute a violation of another provision of to the drainage culvert while respondent Andres followed
the RPC her.
- example: A pointed a gun at B to rob the latter Held: The court ruled that respondents cannot
of a watch but B was not wearing a watch. It is be held criminally nor civilly liable for the death of
not an impossible crime because A’s pointing his Wilson. In this case, the petitioner failed to adduce proof
gun at B already constituted at least the crime of of any ill-motive on the part of either respondent to kill
grave threats. the deceased before or after the latter was invited to
join them in fishing. Indeed, the petitioner testified that
Why is an impossible crime punishable? respondent Andres used to go to their house and play
with her son before the latter's death. When the
It is punishable in order to suppress criminal petitioner's son died inside the drainage culvert, it was
tendencies. Objectively, the offender has not committed respondent Andres who brought out the deceased. He
a felony, but subjectively, he is a criminal. then informed the petitioner of her son's death. Even
after informing the petitioner of the death of her son,
Urbano v. IAC (1988) respondent Andres followed the petitioner on her way to
Facts: Urbano went to his rice field and found the grassy area where the deceased was.
his palay flooded with water. Urbano found out that it
was Javier who was responsible for the opening of the People v. Valledor (2002)
irrigation canal. He got angry and tried to hack Javier Facts:
but the latter tried to parry the attack and in the
process, a two-inch incised wound was inflicted on the
right palm of Javier’s hand. The wound was treated and
incapacitation was diagnosed to be from 7-9 days. 22 Roger was in his house working on a lettering job inside
days after, Javier was rushed to the hospital in a very his bedroom together with his first cousin, Elsa and his
serious condition caused by tetanus toxin. Javier died friends, Simplicio and Antonio. All of a sudden, Valledor
the next day. Urbano was convicted of homicide. entered the room; uttered Roger's nickname ("Jer") and
Held: Urbano is acquitted because the infection immediately attacked him with a knife. Valledor then
was distinct and foreign to the crime. The proximate stabbed Elsa on the chest and said, "Ako akabales den,
cause of Javier’s death was due to his own negligence as Elsa." (I had my revenge, Elsa). Thereafter, Valledor
he went back to work even if his wound had not yet fled, leaving Simplicio and Antonio unharmed. Roger and
healed properly. The evidence on record also shows that Elsa were immediately brought to the hospital. On their
the wound inflicted by Urbano did not exhibit any signs way out, Antonio noticed a commotion and saw that
of being infected with tetanus; at most, it was only Ricardo, a neighbor of the victim, who was likewise
infected with a mild form of tetanus and not the severe stabbed by Valledor was wounded. Elsa was declared
form that killed him. dead on arrival. Roger on the other hand was treated for
the 5-centimeter wound sustained by him on his right
Intod v. CA (1992) forearm. Valledor invoked the defense of insanity.
Facts: Intod et al. went to Palangpangan’s Held: Valledor failed to discharge the burden of
house, all armed with firearms. They went the bedroom overcoming the presumption of sanity at the time of the
and began firing their weapons. However, Palangpangan commission of the crime.
was in another city and her home was occupied by her Judging from his acts, Valledor was clearly
son-in-law and his family. No one was in the room when aware and in control of what he was doing as he in fact
the accused fired their weapons. RTC convicted the purposely chose to stab only the two victims. Two other
accused of attempted murder. people were also inside the room, but Valledor went for
Held: The accused is guilty of an impossible the victims. His obvious motive of revenge against the
crime. The factual situation in the case presents a victims was accentuated by calling out their names and
physical impossibility which rendered the intended crime uttering the words, "I had my revenge" after stabbing
impossible of performance. them. Finally, his act of immediately fleeing from the
scene after the incident indicates that he was aware of
Quinto v. Andres (2005) the wrong he has done and the consequence thereof.
Facts: Garcia, a Grade 4 elementary school As consistently held by this Court, "A man may
pupil, and his playmate, Wilson Quinto, who was about act crazy but it does not necessarily and conclusively
11 yrs old saw Andres and Pacheco who invited them to prove that he is legally so. Then, too, the medical
go fishing inside a drainage culvert. Wilson assented but findings showing that Valledor was suffering from a
Garcia seeing that it was dark inside opted to remain mental disorder after the commission of the crime, has
seated in a grassy area about 2meters from the no bearing on his liability. What is decisive is his mental
entrance of the drainage system. Pacheco, Andres and condition at the time of the perpetration of the offense.
Quinto, entered the drainage system which was covered Failing to discharge the burden of proving that he was
by concrete culvert about a meter high and a meter
legally insane when he stabbed the victims, he should less harmful means of preventing it.
be held liable for his felonious acts.
5. Any person who acts in fulfillment of a duty
B. CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING CRIMINAL or in the lawful exercise of a right or office.
LIABILITY
6. Any person who acts in obedience to an
order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose.
IMPUTABILITY RESPONSIBILITY
Quality by which an act Obligation of suffering the
may be ascribed to a consequences of the • Article 11 recognizes the acts of such persons as
person as its author or crime. justified. Such persons are not criminals, as there is no
owner. crime committed
Implies that a deed may Implies that the person
be imputed to a person. must take the
consequence of such deed. Par. 1 – SELF-DEFENSE
2. Any one who acts in defense of the person 2. IMMINENT- that the danger is on the point of
or rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or happening. It is not required that the attack already
legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or his begins, for it may be too late.
relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those
consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided • A slap on the face constitutes unlawful aggression
that the first and second requisites prescribed in the since the face represents a person and his dignity.
next preceding circumstance are present, and the Slapping it is a serious personal attack.
further requisite, in case the revocation was given by
the person attacked, that the one making defense had • Retaliation is different from an act of self-defense.
not part therein. In retaliation, the aggression that was begun by the
injured party already ceased to exist when the
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person accused attacked him. In self-defense, the
or rights of a stranger, provided that the first and aggression was still existing when the aggressor was
second requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of injured or disabled by the person making a defense.
this Article are present and that the person defending be
not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil • In self-defense, the person must have no time nor
motive. occasion for deliberation and cool thinking.
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or • The unlawful aggression must come from the
injury, does not act which causes damage, provided that person who was attacked by the accused.
the following requisites are present:
• There is no unlawful aggression when there is
First. That the evil sought t be avoided agreement to fight because where the fight has been
actually exists. agreed upon, each of the protagonists is at once
Second. That the injury feared be greater assailant and assaulted. But when the aggression is
than that done to avoid it; ahead of the stipulated time and place, it is unlawful.
Third. That there be no other practical and
*** THE FIRST TWO REQUISITES ARE COMMON TO 3. In case the provocation was given by the
THREE KINDS OF LEGITIMATE DEFENSE: 1) SELF- person attacked, the one making a defense
DEFENSE, 2) DEFENSE OF A RELATIVE AND 3) had no part therein.
DEFENSE OF A STRANGER. • There is still legitimate defense of relative even if
the relative being defended has given provocation,
c. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of provided that the one defending such relative has
the person defending himself no part in the provocation.
• The third requisite of self-defense is present: • Reason for the rule: Although the provocation
1. When no provocation at all was given to the prejudices the person who gave it, its effects do not
aggressor by the person defending himself; or reach the defender who took no part therein,
2. When, even if a provocation was giver, it because the latter was prompted by some noble or
was not sufficient; or generous sentiment in protecting and saving a
3. When, even if the provocation was relative.
sufficient, it was not given by the person defending
himself; or Par. 3 – DEFENSE OF STRANGER
4. When, even if a provocation was given by
the person defending himself, it was not proximate and REQUISITES:
immediate to the act of aggression. 1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity of the means
Par. 2 – DEFENSE OF RELATIVES employed to prevent or repel it;
3. The person defending be not induced by
RELATIVES THAT CAN BE DEFENDED revenge, resentment or other evil motive.
1. Spouse
2. Ascendants Who are deemed strangers?
3. Descendants Any person not included in the enumeration of
4. Legitimate, natural or relatives mentioned in paragraph 2 of this article, is
adopted brothers and sisters, or considered stranger for the purpose of paragraph 3.
relatives by affinity in the same
degrees.
BASIS: What one may do in his defense, another may mind of her husband which is not a sufficient
do for him. The ordinary man would not stand idly by provocation under the law of self-defense.
and see his companion killed without attempting to save
his life. People v. Alconga (1947)
Facts: The deceased Barion was the banker in
People v. Narvaez (1983) the game of black jack. Raposo played the game while
Facts: Narvaez was taking his rest inside his the accused posted himself behind the Barion acting as a
house when he heard that the wall of his house was spotter of the cards of the latter and communicating it
being chiseled. He saw that Fleischer and Rubia, to his partner Raposo. When Barion learned about what
together with their laborers, were fencing the land of the Raposo and Alconga, an exchange of words ensued. One
father of the deceased Fleischer. If the fencing would go morning, when Alconga was in the guardhouse, Barion
on, Narvaez would be prevented from getting into his arrived and swung his pingahan but the former the
house and the bodega of his ricemill so he asked the accused was able to avoid the blow. In a crawling
group to stop but they refused. The accused got mad so position, Alconga avoided the following blows and was
he got his shotgun and shot Fleischer. Rubia ran towards able to draw his revolver and shoot Barion. He was able
the jeep and knowing there is a gun on the jeep, the to crawl out of the guardhouse and a hand-to-hand fight
accused fired at Rubia as well. Narvaez claimed he acted ensued. Having sustained several wounds, Barion ran
in defense of his person and rights. away but was followed by the accused and another fight
Held: The court took into consideration the fact took place. Alconga then slashed Barion’s head with a
that the 2 deceased were accompanied with three bolo which caused the latter’s death. The accused
laborers and that the were using tools which could be pleaded self-defense.
lethal weapons such as nail and hammer, bolo, etc. and Held: An accused was no longer acting in self-
that the jeep the deceased used contained a gun leaning defense when he pursued and killed a fleeing adversary,
near the steering wheel. There was aggression on the though originally the unlawful aggressor, there being no
part of the victims not on the person of the accused but more aggression to defend against, the same having
on his property rights when Fleischer angrily ordered the ceased from the moment the deceased took to his heels.
continuance of the fencing.
The third element of self-defense is also People v. Sumicad (1932)
present because there was no sufficient provocation on Facts: Sumicad was hauling logs when Cubol
the part of Narvaez since he was sleeping when the suddenly struck him with his fist. Sumicad tried to
deceased where fencing. escape but Cubol continued to strike him with his fists.
However, the second element was lacking. Sumicad receded until he found himself cornered by a
Shooting the victims from the window of his house is pile of logs which prevented him from further retreat. As
disproportionate to the physical aggression by the Cubol advanced towards him, Sumicad drew out his bolo
victims. Thus, there is incomplete self-defense and the and struck him. Cubol tried to wrest the bolo from
accused is entitled to a penalty lower by one or two Sumicad and to prevent this, the latter struck him again
degrees. twice which broke his Cubol’s cranium resulting to his
Dissent: Defense of property is not of such death.
importance as the right to life and defense of property Held: As a general rule, a man is not justified
can only be invoked when it is coupled with some form in killing an assailant who is not armed with any
of attack on the person of one entrusted with said dangerous weapon. This rule applies only when the
property. In this case before us, there is no evidence contending parties are in the open and the person
that an attack was attempted. The utterance, “no, assaulted can escape. However, where one has no
gaddemit, proceed, go ahead” is not unlawful aggression means of escaping, the one who is assaulted can use a
which entitles him neither to a plea of self-defense nor weapon in any way reasonably necessary to his
to a mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense. protection against the aggressor.
The deceased here is a bull of known violent
People v. Boholst-Caballero (1974) character and although unarmed, he attempted to take
Facts: Boholst (wife) and Caballero (husband) from the accused a bolo which is the only means of
are married to each other. But since their marriage was defense possessed by the latter. It would have been an
an unhappy one, they separated. One evening, the wife act of suicide on the part of the accused to allow the
went caroling with her friends and she was seen by her bolo to pass into the hands of his antagonist.
husband standing in a corner of the yard of Barabad.
She accused her of prostituting and threatened to kill People v. Luague (1935)
her as he held her by the hair, slapped her face until her Facts: The deceased tried to rape the accused
nose bled. He, then, choked her and at the same time while her husband was away. The deceased threatened
continuously saying that he will kill her. The wife then the accused with a knife to compel her to have sex with
pulled out the knife of her husband tucked inside the him. As the deceased was preparing to lie down with
belt line and stabbed him. When she was released, she her, he placed the knife on the floor and so the accused
ran home. The wife is claiming self-defense. took advantage of the situation by getting the knife and
Held: The wife who being strangled and choked stabbing the deceased with it.
by a furious aggressor had no other recourse but to get Held: An attempt to rape is a sufficient
hold of any weapon within her reach to save herself. The aggression for a legitimate claim of self-defense. We
claim that it was not proper for the wife to be standing have the right to HONOR. Woman’s honor is a right as
in the middle of the night outside a yard giving the precious as her very existence because chastity once
impression that she is prostituting herself, is not defiled cannot be restored.
sufficient provocation. All that the accused did was to
provoke an imaginary commission of a wrong in the People v. Dela Cruz (1935)
Facts: Accused was found guilty of homicide met Ricky at the doorstep of his house and without
for stabbing and killing Rivera. Prosecution claimed that warning stabbed Ricky on the abdomen with a bolo
Dela Cruz and Rivera had a relationship and that the which resulted to his death. In the lower courts, Toledo
accused was madly in love with the deceased and was defended himself by allegeing that his bolo accidentaly
extremely jealous of another woman with whom Rivera hit the stomach of the victim and that he was able to
also had a relationship. Dela Cruz claimed, on the other prove all the essential elements of self defense.
hand, that on her way home one evening, Rivera Held: The Court ruled that it is an aberration
followed her, embraced and kissed her and touched her for Toledo to invoke the two defenses at the same time
private parts. She didn’t know that it was Rivera and because the said defenses are intrinsically antithetical.
that she was unable to resist the strength of Rivera so There is no such defense as accidental self-defense in
she got a knife from her pocket and stabbed him in the realm of criminal law.
defense of her honor. The court further ruled that Toledo was not
Held: She is justified in using the pocketknife justified in stabbing Ricky. There was no imminent
in repelling what she believed to be an attack upon her threat in his life necessitating his assault. Records reveal
honor. It was a dark night and she could not have that there is no unlawful agression, a condition sine qua
identified Rivera. There being no other means of self- non for the justifying circumstance of self defense, on
defense. the part of Ricky. Ricky arrived at Toledo’s house
unarmed. With no weapon to attack Toledo or defend
People v. Juarigue (1946) himself, no sign of hostility may be deduced from him.
Facts: Amado (deceased) has been courting
the accused Avelina in vain. On the day of the crime, People v. Enfectana(2002)
Avelina and Amado were in Church. Amado sat beside Facts: While Adelaida and her husband Leo
Avelina and placed his hand on her thigh. Thereafter, were on their way home, they were sideswiped by a
Avelina took out her knife and stabbed Amado in the tricycle driven by appellant Erwin with Efren both
neck, causing the death of Amado. surnamed Enfectana as passenger. As a result, her
Held: Although the defense of one’s honor husband fell in a crouching position. When he was about
exempts one from criminal liability, it must be proved to get up, Eusebio also surnamed Enfectana came from
that there is actual danger of being raped. In this case, behind to stab him. Then Erwin and Efren took turns in
1) the church was well-lit, 2) there were several people stabbing Leo. He died as a result. In court, Eusebio
in the church, including the father of the accused and Enfectana admitted that he killed Leo. He, however,
other town officials. In light of these circumstances, alleged that he acted in self-defense
accused could not have possibly been raped. The means Held: It is an established principle that once
employed in defense of her honor was evidently this justifying circumstance is raised, the burden of
excessive. proving the elements of the claim shifts to him who
invokes it. The elements of self-defense are: (1) that the
US v. Bumaglang (1909) victim has committed unlawful aggression amounting to
Facts: Bumanglang was missing 40 bundles of actual or imminent threat to the life and limb of the
palay. Later, accompanied by his co-defendants, he person claiming self-defense; (2) that there be
awaited the culprit and caught Ribis so they confronted reasonable necessity in the means employed to prevent
him assaulted him with sticks and other cutting and or repel the unlawful aggression; and (3) that there be
stabbing weapons. As a result, Ribis died. Defendants lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
declared that during the fight they only beat the claiming self-defense or, at least, that any provocation
deceased with sticks and Ribis unsheathed his bolo. executed by the person claiming self-defense be not the
Bumanglang et al were convicted of homicide. proximate and immediate cause of the victim's
Held: The bolo of the deceased was sheathed aggression. The condition of unlawful aggression is a
when the body was discovered. There was no unlawful sine qua non; otherwise stated, there can be no self-
aggression on the part of Ribis. Thus, there can be no defense, complete or incomplete, unless the victim has
claim of self-defense. committed unlawful aggression against the person
Separate Opinion: A man who ambushed one defending himself.
he suspects to be a thief can claim defense of property. Given the fact that the relationship between
Not only was there unlawful aggression against the parties had been marred by ill will and animosities,
Bumanglag, there was also a wrongful invasion of his and pursuant to the rule on the burden of evidence
habitat and attempt to commit a felony against his imposed by law on the party invoking self-defense, the
property. With the imminence of danger to his life, he admission of Eusebio that he killed Leo made it
realized that he had to ask assistance from his friends, incumbent upon appellant to convincingly prove that
considering Ribis’ criminal record, character and unusual there was unlawful aggression on the part of the victim
strength. which necessitated the use of deadly force by Eusebio.
Unfortunately, Eusebio miserably failed to prove the
Toledo v. People (2004) existence of unlawful aggression on the part of the
Facts: Toledo saw his nephew, Ricky, and the victim. Eusebio is guilty of murder.
latter's friends about 5 m away from his house, having a
drinking spree. He ordered them not to make loud Cano v. People (2003)
noises, and they obliged. He then went to his house and Facts: Conrado and his deceased brother were
went to sleep. Ricky and his friends also went to sleep rivals in the Rush ID Photo business and had booths
after some time. They had not laid down for long when along the sidewalk of Rizal Avenue, Sta. Cruz, Manila.
he heard stones being hurled at the roof of the house. Condrado borrowed the permit of the deceased and had
Ricky saw Toledo stoning their house and asked him it photocopied without the latter’s permission. The
why he was doing the same. Toledo did not answer but deceased confonted Conrado and tried to stab him with
a fan knife. The latter locked himself in the dark room of bring himself to the authorities and try to dispel any
his booth to protect himself but was followed by the suspicion of guilt that the authorities might have against
deceased and they ended up attacking each other. him. Ricardo failed to do the same. With the exception
During the scuffle, the scissors which Orlando was able of his self-serving allegations, there is nothing on record
to grab fell from his hands. He then grabbed the knife that would justify his killing of Senando.
of the deceased who in turn picked the scissors. They
again attacked each other which resulted to the death of People v. Dijan (2002)
the other. Facts Silvestre and Hilario were at a store to
Held: Conrado’s act of killilng his brother was buy some cigarettes when they saw the group of Dijan,
attended by a justifying circumstance of self-defense. It Paglinawan and Lizardo, passing by the store.
was the deceased who purposely sought and initially Paglinawan suddenly confronted Hilario for purportedly
attacked Orlando with a knife. The act of a person giving him a "bad stare." Silvestre apologized and
armed with a bladed weapon pursuing another explained that it was the natural way Hilario gazed at
constitutes unlawful agression because it signifies the people. Dijan, Paglinawan and Lizardo then left the place
pursuers intent to commit an assault with his weapon. while Silvestre and Hilario proceeded home. While
There was also lack of sufficient provocation on the part Silvestre and Hilario were walking, the 3 accused,
of Condrado. His act of photocopying the permit of his ganged up on, and took turns in stabbing, Hilario. At
brother without the latters permission can hardly be that point, Hilario, who was walking slightly ahead of
conidered as provocation to merit so deadly an assault Silvestre, cried out and told the latter to flee. Silvestre
with a bladed weapon. ran away until he was able to cling to a passing
passenger jeepney. Hilario was found to have sustained
Balunueco v. CA (2003) several stab wounds, punctured and incised wounds,
Facts: Amelia was coddling her youngest child and abrasion in various parts of the body which caused
in front of her house, when she saw accused Reynaldo, his death. Appealing his conviction in court, Dijan
his father Juanito and brothers Ricardo and Ramon, all invoked the justifying circumstance of “defense of a
surnamed Balunueco, and one Flores chasing her stranger.”
brother-in-law Servando. With the 5 individuals in hot Held: In order to successfully put up this
pursuit, Servando scampered into the safety of Amelia's defense an accused must show the existence of unlawful
house. Meanwhile, Senando, who was then cooking aggression on the part of the victim. The unlawful
supper, went out of the house unaware of the aggression must be a continuing circumstance or must
commotion going on outside. Upon seeing Senando, have been existing at the time the defense is made.
Reynaldo turned his attention on him and gave chase. Once unlawful aggression is found to have ceased, the
Senando instinctively fled towards the fields but he was one making the defense of a stranger would likewise
met by Armando who hit him with a stone, causing cease to have any justification for killing, or even just
Senando to feel dizzy. Reynaldo, Ricardo, and Armando wounding, the former aggressor. From the defense
cornered their quarry near a canal and ganged up on account, it would appear that Hilario was already
him. Armando placed a can on top of Senando's head disarmed and the unlawful aggression by Hilario (if
and Ricardo repeatedly struck Senando with an ax on indeed he was the aggressor) to have by then been
the head, shoulder, and hand. At one point, Ricardo lost abated, when Dijan still delivered the fatal thrusts on
his hold on the ax, but somebody tossed him a bolo and the victim.
then he continued hacking the victim who fell on his The number of wounds sustained by the victim
knees. To shield him from further violence, Amelia put would itself likewise negate Dijan’s claim of defense of a
her arms around her husband but it was not enough to stranger. The autopsy conducted on the corpse would
detract Ricardo from his murderous frenzy. Amelia was show that the deceased sustained 14 injuries consisting
also hit on the leg. The RTC and CA convicted Ricardo of of 9 stab wounds, 3 punctured wounds, an incised
Homicide. He now imputes errors to the CA in not taking wound and an abrasion. Certainly, the nature and
into consideration the fact that if indeed he participated, number of wounds inflicted by an accused on the victim
he had acted in defense of his relatives. should be significant indicia in determining the
Held: Of the three (3) requisites of defense of plausibility of the defense plea.
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 Par. 4 – AVOIDANCE OF A GREATER EVIL
aggression was actually committed, it is necessary that
an attack or material aggression, an offensive act ♣ Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury,
positively determining the intent of the aggressor to does an act which causes damage to another.
cause an injury shall have been made; a mere
threatening or intimidating attitude is not sufficient to DAMAGE TO ANOTHER – the term covers
justify the commission of an act which is punishable per injury to persons and damage to property.
se, and allow a claim of exemption from liability on the
ground that it was committed in self-defense or defense REQUISITES:
of a relative.
In the case at bar, petitioner Ricardo utterly
1. That the evil sought to be avoided
actually exists;
failed to adduce sufficient proof of the existence of a
- The evil must actually exist and not
positively strong act of real aggression on the part of the
merely expected or anticipated or may happen
deceased Senando.. It was he and his kin who had
in the future.
inititated the unlawful agression and not Senando.
Further, the natural impulse of any person who has
2. That the injury feared be greater than
killed someone in defense of his person or relative is to
that done to avoid it;
Note: The instinct of self-preservation Held:The court sustained the findings of the
will always make one feel that his own safety is lower courts. The evil sought to be avoided is merely
of greater importance than that of another. expected or anticipated. If the evil sought to be avoided
- The greater evil should not be brought about is merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the
by the negligence or imprudence of the actor. future, the defense of an uncontrollable fear of a greater
- The evil which brought about the greater evil injury” is not applicable. Ty could have taken advantage
must not result from a violation of law by the actor. of an available option to avoid committing a crime. By
her own admission, she had the choice to give jewelry or
3. That there be no other practical and other forms of security instead of postdated checks to
less harmful means of preventing it. secure her obligation.
Moreover, for the defense of state of necessity
General rule: No liability in justifying to be availing, the greater injury feared should not have
circumstances because there is no crime. been brought about by the negligence or imprudence,
Exception: There is CIVIL LIABILITY under more so, the willful inaction of the actor. In this case,
this paragraph. It is borne by the persons benefited by the issuance of the bounced checks was brought about
the act. They shall be liable in proportion to the benefit by Ty's own failure to pay her mother's hospital bills.
which they may have been received.
weapon in his hand, which compelled the policeman to pause for a long moment and reflect coolly at his peril,
resort to such extreme means, which, although it proved or to wait after each blow to determine the effects
to be fatal, was justified by the circumstance. thereof.
However, he cannot be exonerated from
People v. Oanis (1943) overdoing his duty during the second stage of the
Although an officer in making a lawful arrest is incident — when he fatally shot the victim in the head,
justified in using such force as is reasonably necessary even after the latter slumped to the ground due to
to secure and detain the offender, overcome his multiple gunshot wounds sustained while charging at the
resistance, prevent his escape, recapture him if he police officers. Sound discretion and restraint dictated
escapes, and protect himself from bodily harm, yet he is that accused-appellant, a veteran policeman, should
never justified in using unnecessary force or in treating have ceased firing at the victim the moment he saw the
him with wanton violence or in resorting to dangerous latter fall to the ground. The victim at that point no
means when the arrest could be effected otherwise. longer posed a threat and was already incapable of
mounting an aggression against the police officers.
Pomoy v. People (2004) Shooting him in the head was obviously unnecessary.
:
Fats Police sergeant Pomoy, went near the The law does not clothe police officers with
authority to arbitrarily judge the necessity to kill- it must
door of the jail where Balboa was detained for robbery
be stressed that their judgment and discretion as police
and directed the latter to come out, purportedly for
officers in the performance of their duties must be
tactical interrogation at the investigation room. At that
excercised neither capriciously nor oppressively, but
time, petitioner had a gun, a .45 caliber pistol, tucked in
within reasonable limits.
a holster which was hanging by the side of his belt. The
gun was fully embedded in its holster, with only the
handle of the gun protruding from the holster. Balboa
tried to remove Pomoy’s gun and the two grappled for Par. 6 – OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR
possession of the gun. Thereafter, 2 gunshots were SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE
heard. When the source of the shots was verified,
petitioner was seen still holding a .45 caliber pistol, REQUISITES:
facing Balboa, who was lying in a pool of blood. Pomoy 1. That an order has been issued by a
invoked the defense of accident for his defense. superior.
Held: Pomoy is acquitted. At the time of the 2. That such order must be for some lawful
incident, petitioner was a member — specifically, one of purpose.
the investigators — of the Philippine National Police 3. That the means used by the subordinate to
(PNP) stationed at the Iloilo Provincial Mobile Force carry out said order is lawful.
Company. Thus, it was in the lawful performance of his
duties as investigating officer that, under the ♣ When the order is not for a lawful purpose,
instructions of his superior, he fetched the victim from the subordinate who obeyed it is criminally liable.
the latter's cell for a routine interrogation. ♣ The subordinate is not liable for carrying out
The participation of petitioner, if any, in the an illegal order of his superior, if he is not aware of the
victim's death was limited only to acts committed in the illegality of the order and he is not negligent.
course of the lawful performance of his duties as an
enforcer of the law. The removal of the gun from its People v. Beronilla (1955)
holster, the release of the safety lock, and the firing of Facts: Borjal was the elected mayor of La Paz,
the two successive shots — all of which led to the death Abra at the outbreak of war and continued to serve as
of the victim — were sufficiently demonstrated to have Mayor during Japanese occupation. Beronilla was
been consequences of circumstances beyond the control appointed later as Military Mayor. Later, while the
of petitioner. At the very least, these factual operations for the liberation of Abra was in progress,
circumstances create serious doubt on the Pomoy’s Beronilla, pursuant to his instructions, placed Borjal in
culpability. his custody and asked the residents to file charges of
espionage, aiding the enemy, and abuse of authority
People v. Ulep (2000) against him. After trial, Borjal’s execution took place.
Accused-appellant and the other police officers Later, Beronilla, together with a priest, executioner,
involved originally set out to perform a legal duty: to graver digger, etc. were indicted for murder. The
render police assistance, and restore peace and order at prosecution claimed that Col. Volkmann transmitted a
Mundog Subdivision where the victim was then running radiogram message stating that the jury system
amuck. There were two (2) stages of the incident at organized by the municipality is illegal and cannot order
Mundog Subdivision. During the first stage, the victim execution of Borjal.
threatened the safety of the police officers by Held: There is no proof that Beronilla was able
menacingly advancing towards them, notwithstanding to receive the radiogram message. The records are
accused-appellant's previous warning shot and verbal ample to sustain the claim of the accused that the
admonition to the victim to lay down his weapon or he arrest, prosecution and trial were done pursuant to
would be shot. As a police officer, it is to be expected express orders of the 15th Infantry HQ. Where the
that accused-appellant would stand his ground. Up to accused acted upon orders of superior officers that the,
that point, his decision to respond with a barrage of as military subordinates, could not question, and obeyed
gunfire to halt the victim's further advance was justified in good faith, without being aware of their illegality,
under the circumstances. After all, a police officer is not without any fault or negligence on their part, the act is
required to afford the victim the opportunity to fight not accompanied by criminal intent. A crime is not
back. Neither is he expected – when hard pressed and in committed if the mind of the person performing the ac
the heat of such an encounter at close quarters – to be innocent.
a. Dementia praecox
b. Kleptomania – if found by a competent People v. Taneo (1933)
psychiatrist as irresistible Facts: A fiesta was being celebrated in the
c. Epilepsy barrio and visitors were being entertained at the house
d. Somnambulism – sleep-walking of Taneo and his wife. That afternoon, Taneo went to
e. Malignant malaria – which affects the sleep and while sleeping, he suddenly got up, left the
nervous system room with a bolo in his hand. He wounded his wife who
was pregnant at that time in the abdomen when she
In Re M’Naghten (1843) tried to stop him. He attacked two of his visitors and his
Guidelines father, after which, he wounded himself. 5 days later,
A man who shot someone claimed insanity. his wife died because of the wound. He was charged of
Held: Every man is presumed to be sane. It parricide.
must be clearly proved that at the time of committing Held: The accused acted while in a dream and
the act, A was under a defect of reason that he did not his acts, with which he is charged, were not voluntary in
know the nature of act or if he did know what he was the sense of entailing criminal liability.
doing, he did not know he was wrong.
The question to be asked is whether the People v. Formigones (1950)
accused at the time of doing the act knew the Held: One day, the accused stabbed his wife
differences between right and wrong? The emphasis is from the back who was sitting at the top of the stairs in
on reason or cognition. their house. Accused admitted the killing and that he
was jealous and had suspicions that his wife and his
People v. Tubogoca (1998) brother were having a relationship. Counsel for accused
Facts: Jacqueline, together with her sisters, interposed the defense of insanity stating that in prison,
lived with their father after their mother died. One night, the accused behaved like an insane person, would go
she was roused by her father who asked her to scratch stark naked in the presence of his inmates, remain
his back but later she was forced to have intercourse indifferent to his surroundings and sang chorus with
with him. Her sister Jinky also experienced the same inmates or by himself.
with his father 2 years after. When their grandmother Held: At most, the accused is found to be
found out about the incident, they filed charges against feeble-minded but this does not exempt him from
the accused. The accused claim that he cannot liability but may serve as a mitigating circumstance. The
remember anything because he often drinks liquor at accused admitted to his motive for the killing which is
home. jealousy so he must know what he was doing at that
Held: The law presumes every man to be sane. time. His actions immediately after he struck his wife
The accused failed to overthrow the presumption of and his behavior in prison may only be due to remorse
sanity. Failure to remember is in itself no proof of the at having killed his wife or his feeblemindedness.
mental condition of the accused when the crime was
performed. His charade of amnesia is a desperate People v. Valledor (supra)
gambit for exculpation. Facts: Roger was in his house working on a
lettering job inside his bedroom together with his first
People v. Madarang (2000) cousin, Elsa and his friends, Simplicio and Antonio. All
Facts: Fernando and his wife quarreled. In the of a sudden, Valledor entered the room; uttered Roger's
heat of the fight, the accused stabbed his wife causing nickname ("Jer") and immediately attacked him with a
her death. The accused declared that he had no knife. Valledor then stabbed Elsa on the chest and said,
recollection of the stabbing incident. Further, he alleges "Ako akabales den, Elsa." (I had my revenge, Elsa).
that he did not know where he was that day. Court Thereafter, Valledor fled, leaving Simplicio and Antonio
ordered the accused’s confinement in a mental unharmed. Roger and Elsa were immediately brought to
institution where it was found that he was inflicted with the hospital. On their way out, Antonio noticed a
schizophrenia. He was submitted to treatment for 2 commotion and saw that Ricardo, a neighbor of the
years, after which, he faced the charges against him. victim, who was likewise stabbed by Valledor was
Held: The accused failed to prove that he was wounded. Elsa was declared dead on arrival. Roger on
completely deprived of intelligence in committing the the other hand was treated for the 5-centimeter wound
act. He did not show any signs of insanity prior to and sustained by him on his right forearm. Valledor invoked
immediately after the act. He was only diagnosed of the defense of insanity.
schizophrenia months after the incident. Also, schizos Held: Valledor failed to discharge the burden of
have lucid intervals. overcoming the presumption of sanity at the time of the
commission of the crime.
People v. Bonoan (1937) Judging from his acts, Valledor was clearly
A person suffering from dementia praecox aware and in control of what he was doing as he in fact
pleaded insanity as a defense for committing murder. In purposely chose to stab only the two victims. Two other
dementia praecox, the crime is usually preceded by people were also inside the room, but Valledor went for
much complaining and planning. in these people, the victims. His obvious motive of revenge against the
homicide attacks are common because of delusions that victims was accentuated by calling out their names and
they are being interfered with sexually or that their uttering the words, "I had my revenge" after stabbing
property is being taken. During period of excitement, them. Finally, his act of immediately fleeing from the
such person has no control whatever of his acts. An scene after the incident indicates that he was aware of
irresistible homicide impulse was considered embraced the wrong he has done and the consequence thereof.
in the terms of “insanity”. As consistently held by this Court, "A man may
act crazy but it does not necessarily and conclusively
prove that he is legally so. Then, too, the medical commission of the act but also after and even during
findings showing that Valledor was suffering from a trial.
mental disorder after the commission of the crime, has
no bearing on his liability. What is decisive is his mental
condition at the time of the perpetration of the offense. Jose v. People (2005)
Failing to discharge the burden of proving that he was Facts: Jose, 13 yrs old was in a car with his
legally insane when he stabbed the victims, he should cousin Zarraga, when the latter inquired from the poseur
be held liable for his felonious acts. buyer SPO1 Guevarra if he could afford to buy shabu.
Guevarra replied in the affirmative afterwhich Zarraga
Par. 2. – A PERSON UNDER NINE YEARS OF AGE called the petitioner to bring out and hand over the
shabu wrapped in plastic and white soft paper. Jose
• NINE YEARS OR LESS – presumed to be incapable of handed over the plastic containing the shabu to Zarraga
committing a crime, and this presumption is an absolute who handed the same to Guevarra. The trial court
one which cannot be overcome by any evidence. rendered judgment convicting both Jose and Zarraga.
Held: Jose is acquitted. The prosecution failed
• Senility, although said to be the second childhood, is to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he acted with
only mitigating. discernment relative to the sale of shabu. Aside from
bringing out and handing over the plastic bag to
4 PERIODS OF THE LIFE OF A HUMAN BEING Zarraga, Jose merely sat in the car and had no other
a. 9 years and below – participation in the transaction between his cousin and
AGE OF ABSOLUTE IRRESPONSIBILITY the poseur buyer. There is no evidence that Jose knew
b. between 9 and 15 years - what was inside the plastic and soft white paper before
AGE OF CONDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITY and at the time he handed the same to Zarraga.
c. 18 or over to 70 years -
AGE OF FULL RESPONSIBILITY Art. 80. Suspension of sentence of minor delinquents.
d. over 9 and under 15 with discernment; 15 or — Whenever a minor of either sex, under sixteen years
over but less than 18, over 70 years of age – of age at the date of the commission of a grave or less
AGE OF MITIGATED RESPONSIBILITY. grave felony, is accused thereof, the court, after hearing
the evidence in the proper proceedings, instead of
Par. 3. – A PERSON OVER 9 YEARS OF AGE AND pronouncing judgment of conviction, shall suspend all
UNDER 15 UNLESS HE HAS ACTED WITH further proceedings and shall commit such minor to the
DISCERNMENT, IN WHICH CASE, SUCH MINOR custody or care of a public or private, benevolent or
SHALL BE PROCEEDED AGAINST IN COORDANCE charitable institution, established under the law of the
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 80 OF THIS care, correction or education of orphaned, homeless,
CODE. defective, and delinquent children, or to the custody or
care of any other responsible person in any other place
• A minor over 9 and under 15 years of age must have subject to visitation and supervision by the Director of
acted without discernment to be exempted from criminal Public Welfare or any of his agents or representatives, if
liability. there be any, or otherwise by the superintendent of
public schools or his representatives, subject to such
DISCERNMENT – means the mental capacity of a minor conditions as are prescribed herein below until such
between 9 and 15 years of age to fully appreciate the minor shall have reached his majority age or for such
consequences of his lawful act. less period as the court may deem proper.
The court, in committing said minor as
DISCERNMENT INTENT provided above, shall take into consideration the religion
Moral significance that a Desired act of the person of such minor, his parents or next of kin, in order to
person ascribes to the said avoid his commitment to any private institution not
act under the control and supervision of the religious sect or
denomination to which they belong.
• Discernment may be shown by 1) the manner the The Director of Public Welfare or his duly
crime was committed or 2) the conduct of the offender authorized representatives or agents, the
after its commission. superintendent of public schools or his representatives,
or the person to whose custody or care the minor has
People v. Doquena (1939) been committed, shall submit to the court every four
A 13-year old student stabs the school bully, months and as often as required in special cases, a
and is convicted for having shown discernment through written report on the good or bad conduct of said minor
his responsible demeanor and school performance. and the moral and intellectual progress made by him.
Doquena’s discernment is gleaned from his academic The suspension of the proceedings against a
records, leadership qualities and demeanor while minor may be extended or shortened by the court on
testifying in court. the recommendation of the Director of Public Welfare or
The discernment that constitutes an exception his authorized representative or agents, or the
to the exemption from criminal liability of a minor under superintendent of public schools or his representatives,
fifteen years of age but over nine, is his mental capacity according as to whether the conduct of such minor has
to understand the difference between right and wrong, been good or not and whether he has complied with the
and such capacity may be known by taking into conditions imposed upon him, or not. The provisions of
consideration all the facts and circumstances afforded by the first paragraph of this article shall not, however, be
the records in each case, the very appearance, the very affected by those contained herein.
attitude of said minor not only before and during the
If the minor has been committed to the The provisions of Article 80 of the Revised Penal
custody or care of any of the institutions mentioned in Code shall be deemed modified by the provisions of this
the first paragraph of this article, with the approval of Chapter.
the Director of Public Welfare and subject to such
conditions as this official in accordance with law may Article 190. Physical and Mental
Examination. - It shall be the duty of the law-enforcement
deem proper to impose, such minor may be allowed to
agency concerned to take the youthful offender, immediately
stay elsewhere under the care of a responsible person.
after his apprehension, to the proper medical or health
If the minor has behaved properly and has
officer for a thorough physical and mental examination.
complied with the conditions imposed upon him during Whenever treatment for any physical or mental defect is
his confinement, in accordance with the provisions of indicated, steps shall be immediately undertaken to provide
this article, he shall be returned to the court in order the same.
that the same may order his final release. The examination and treatment papers shall form
In case the minor fails to behave properly or to part of the record of the case of the youthful offender.
comply with the regulations of the institution to which
he has been committed or with the conditions imposed Article 191. Care of Youthful Offender Held
upon him when he was committed to the care of a for Examination or Trial. - A youthful offender held for
responsible person, or in case he should be found physical and mental examination or trial or pending appeal,
incorrigible or his continued stay in such institution if unable to furnish bail, shall from the time of his arrest be
should be inadvisable, he shall be returned to the court committed to the care of the Department of Social Welfare
in order that the same may render the judgment or the local rehabilitation center or a detention home in the
province or city which shall be responsible for his
corresponding to the crime committed by him.
appearance in court whenever required: Provided, That in
The expenses for the maintenance of a minor
the absence of any such center or agency within a
delinquent confined in the institution to which he has reasonable distance from the venue of the trial, the
been committed, shall be borne totally or partially by his provincial, city and municipal jail shall provide quarters for
parents or relatives or those persons liable to support youthful offenders separate from other detainees. The court
him, if they are able to do so, in the discretion of the may, in its discretion, upon recommendation of the
court; Provided, That in case his parents or relatives or Department of Social Welfare or other agency or agencies
those persons liable to support him have not been authorized by the Court, release a youthful offender on
ordered to pay said expenses or are found indigent and recognizance, to the custody of his parents or other suitable
cannot pay said expenses, the municipality in which the person who shall be responsible for his appearance
offense was committed shall pay one-third of said whenever required.
expenses; the province to which the municipality
belongs shall pay one-third; and the remaining one-third Article 192. Suspension of Sentence and
shall be borne by the National Government: Provided, Commitment of Youthful Offender. - If after hearing the
evidence in the proper proceedings, the court should find
however, That whenever the Secretary of Finance
that the youthful offender has committed the acts charged
certifies that a municipality is not able to pay its share in
against him the court shall determine the imposable penalty,
the expenses above mentioned, such share which is not including any civil liability chargeable against him. However,
paid by said municipality shall be borne by the National instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, the court
Government. Chartered cities shall pay two-thirds of shall suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such
said expenses; and in case a chartered city cannot pay minor to the custody or care of the Department of Social
said expenses, the internal revenue allotments which Welfare, or to any training institution operated by the
may be due to said city shall be withheld and applied in government, or duly licensed agencies or any other
settlement of said indebtedness in accordance with responsible person, until he shall have reached twenty-one
section five hundred and eighty-eight of the years of age or, for a shorter period as the court may deem
Administrative Code. proper, after considering the reports and recommendations
of the Department of Social Welfare or the agency or
responsible individual under whose care he has been
• When the minor is adjudged criminally irresponsible –
committed.
duty of court is to commit him to custody of his family or
The youthful offender shall be subject to visitation
some institution. and supervision by a representative of the Department of
Social Welfare or any duly licensed agency or such other
• The allegation of “with intent to kill” in the information officer as the Court may designate subject to such conditions
is sufficient allegation of discernment. as it may prescribe.
chartered city cannot pay said expenses, part of the internal civil liability has also been imposed in the criminal action, in
revenue allotments applicable to the unpaid portion shall be which case such records shall be destroyed after satisfaction
withheld and applied to the settlement of said indebtedness. of such civil liability. The youthful offender concerned shall
All city and provincial governments must exert not be held under any provision of law, to be guilty of
efforts for the immediate establishment of local detention perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation by reason of
homes for youthful offenders. his failure to acknowledge the case or recite any fact related
thereto in response to any inquiry made of him for any
Article 195. Report on Conduct of Child. - The purpose.
Department of Social Welfare or its representative or duly "Records" within the meaning of this article shall
licensed agency or individual under whose care the youthful include those which may be in the files of the National
offender has been committed shall submit to the court every Bureau of Investigation and with any police department, or
four months or oftener as may be required in special cases, any other government agency which may have been
a written report on the conduct of said youthful offender as involved in the case.
well as the intellectual, physical, moral, social and emotional
progress made by him. Article 201. Civil Liability of Youthful
Offenders. - The civil liability for acts committed by a
Article 196. Dismissal of the Case. - If it is youthful offender shall devolve upon the offender's father
shown to the satisfaction of the court that the youthful and, in case of his death or incapacity, upon the mother, or
offender whose sentence has been suspended, has behaved in case of her death or incapacity, upon the guardian. Civil
properly and has shown his capability to be a useful member liability may also be voluntarily assumed by a relative or
of the community, even before reaching the age of majority, family friend of the youthful offender.
upon recommendation of the Department of Social Welfare, Article 202. Rehabilitation Centers. - The
it shall dismiss the case and order his final discharge. Department of Social Welfare shall establish regional
rehabilitation centers for youthful offenders. The local
Article 197. Return of the Youth Offender to government and other non-governmental entities shall
Court. - Whenever the youthful offender has been found collaborate and contribute their support for the
incorrigible or has wilfully failed to comply with the establishment and maintenance of these facilities.
conditions of his rehabilitation programs, or should his Article 203. Detention Homes. - The
continued stay in the training institution be inadvisable, he Department of Local Government and Community
shall be returned to the committing court for the Development shall establish detention homes in cities and
pronouncement of judgment. provinces distinct and separate from jails pending the
When the youthful offender has reached the age disposition of cases of juvenile offenders.
of twenty-one while in commitment, the court shall Article 204. Liability of Parents or Guardian
determine whether to dismiss the case in accordance with or Any Person in the Commission of Delinquent Acts
the next preceding article or to pronounce the judgment of by Their Children or Wards. - A person whether the
conviction. parent or guardian of the child or not, who knowingly or
In any case covered by this article, the youthful wilfully,
offender shall be credited in the service of his sentence with 1. Aids, causes, abets or connives with the
the full time spent in actual commitment and detention commission by a child of a delinquency, or
effected under the provisions of this Chapter. 2. Does any act producing, promoting, or
contributing to a child's being or becoming a juvenile
Article 198. Effect of Release of Child Based delinquent, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five
on Good Conduct. - The final release of a child pursuant to hundred pesos or to imprisonment for a period not
the provisions of this Chapter shall not obliterate his civil exceeding two years, or both such fine and imprisonment, at
liability for damages. Such release shall be without prejudice the discretion of the court.
to the right for a writ of execution for the recovery of civil
damages.
forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation and (n) "Involuntarily committed child" is one whose
other conditions prejudicial to his development . parents have been permanently and judicially
SECTION 2. Interpretation. — The deprived of parental authority due to abandonment;
best interests of the child shall be the paramount substantial, continuous, or repeated neglect; abuse;
consideration in all actions concerning him, whether or incompetence to discharge parental
undertaken by public or private social welfare responsibilities in accordance with Section 4 herein.
institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities (o) "Voluntarily committed child" is one whose
and legislative bodies consistent with the United parents knowingly and willingly relinquished parental
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. authority to the Department or any duly licensed
SECTION 3. Definition of Terms. — child-placement or child-caring agency or individual
(a) "Child" is a person below eighteen years of in accordance with Section 3 herein.
age. (p) "Child-placing or child-placement agency"
(b) "Department" refers to the Department of refers to a private non-profit or charitable institution
Social Welfare and Development. or government agency duly licensed, and accredited
(c) "Dependent child" is one who is without a by the Department to provide comprehensive child
parent, guardian or custodian, or one whose parents, welfare services, including but not limited to,
guardian or other custodian for good cause desires to receiving applications for adoption or foster care,
be relieved of his care and custody, and is dependent evaluating the prospective adoptive or foster parents
upon the public for support. and preparing the home study report.
(d) "Abandoned child" is one who has no proper (q) "Child-caring agency" refers to a private
parental care or guardianship, or whose parents or non-profit or charitable institution or government
guardian has deserted him for a period of at least six agency duly licensed and accredited by the
(6) continuous months. Department that provides twenty-four hour
(e) "Neglected child" is one whose basic needs residential care services for abandoned, orphaned,
have been deliberately unattended to or neglected, involuntarily or voluntarily committed
inadequately attended to, physically or emotionally, children.
by his parents or guardian. (r) "Guardian ad litem" is a person appointed
(f) "Physical neglect" occurs when the child is by the court where the case is pending for a child
malnourished, ill-clad and without proper shelter. sought to be committed to protect his best interests.
(g) "Emotional neglect" occurs when a child is (s) "Case Study Report" is a written report of
raped, seduced, maltreated, exploited, overworked the result of an investigation conducted by a social
or made to work under conditions not conducive to worker as to the socio-cultural, economic and legal
good health; made to beg in the streets or public status or condition of the child sought to be
places, or when placed in moral danger, or exposed committed. It shall include among others his
to drugs, alcohol, gambling, prostitution and other developmental age, educational attainment, family
vices. and social relationships, the quality of his peer group,
(h) "Disabled child" includes mentally retarded, his family's strengths and weaknesses and parental
physically handicapped, emotionally disturbed and control over him. The report is submitted to the
mentally ill children, children with cerebral palsy and Family Court to aid it in its. evaluation of whether the
those with similar afflictions. child ought to be committed to the care of the
(i) "Mentally retarded child" is one who is (1) Department or any duly licensed child-placement or
socially incompetent, that is, socially inadequate, child-caring agency or individual.
occupationally incompetent and unable to manage
his own affairs; (2) mentally subnormal; (3) SECTION 4. Petition for Involuntary
intellectually retarded from birth or early age; (4) Commitment of a Child. —
retarded at maturity; (5) mentally deficient as a (a) Who may file. — The Secretary of the
result of constitutional origin through heredity or Department or his authorized representative or any
diseases or (6) essentially incurable. duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency
(j) "Physically handicapped child" is one who is having knowledge of a child who appears to be
crippled, deaf-mute, blind, or otherwise suffers from dependent, abandoned or neglected, may file a
a defect which restricts his means of action or verified petition for involuntary commitment of said
communication with others. child to the care of any duly licensed child-placement
(k) "Emotionally disturbed child" is one who, or child-caring agency or individual.
although not afflicted with insanity or mental defect, (b) Venue. — The petition shall be filed with the
is unable to maintain normal social relations with Family Court of the province or city in which the
others and the community in general due to parent or guardian resides or where the child is
emotional problems or complexes, found.
(l) "Mentally ill child" is one with any (c) Contents of Verified Petition. — The petition
behavioral disorder, whether functional or organic, must state:
which is of such a degree of severity as to require (1) The names of the parents or
professional help or hospitalization. guardian and their place of residence. If the
(m) "Commitment" or "surrender of a child" is child's parents are unknown, petitioner must
the legal act of entrusting a child to the care of the allege that diligent efforts have been exerted to
Department or any duly licensed child-placement or locate them. If said parents are deceased,
child-caring agency or individual by the court, parent petitioner shall attach a certified true copy of
or guardian or any interested party. their death certificate;
(2) The facts showing that the child is neglected, and if so, the cause and circumstances of
dependent, abandoned, or neglected; such condition.
(3) The facts showing who has custody (j) Judgment. — If, after the hearing, the court
of the child at the time of the filing of the shall find the child to be dependent, abandoned, or
petition; and neglected, it shall render judgment committing him
(4) The name, address and written to the care and custody of the Department or any
consent of the Department or duly licensed duly licensed child-placement or child-caring agency
child-placement or child-caring agency or or individual until he reaches the age of eighteen
individual to whose care the commitment of the (18). The judgment shall likewise make proper
child is sought to be entrusted. provisions for the custody of the property or money
(d) Summons; Court to Set Time for Hearing. — belonging to the committed. child.
If the court is satisfied that the petition is sufficient in If the child is committed to the Department, it
form and substance, it shall direct the clerk of court shall notify the court within thirty (30) days from the
to immediately issue summons which shall be served order of commitment, the name and address of the
together with a copy of the petition and a notice of duly licensed and accredited child-placement or
hearing, upon the parents or guardian of the child child-caring agency or individual where the child
and the office of the public prosecutor not less than shall be placed.
five (5) days before the date of the hearing. The However, if the court finds that the
office of the public prosecutor shall be directed to abandonment or neglect of the child may be
immediately transmit the summons to the prosecutor remedied, the child may be allowed to stay in his
assigned to the Family Court concerned. own home under the care and control of his parents
If it appears from the petition that both parents or guardian, subject to supervision and direction of
of the child are dead or that neither parent can be the Department.
found in the province or city where the court is (k) Visitation or Inspection. — Any duly licensed
located and the child has no guardian residing child-placement or child-caring agency or individual
therein, summons may not be issued and the court to whom a child has been committed by the court
shall thereupon appoint a guardian ad litem pursuant shall be subject to visitation or inspection by a
to Sub-section (f) below and proceed with the representative of the court or of the Department, as
hearing of the case with due notice to the provincial the case may be or of both, to determine whether
or city prosecutor, the welfare and interests of the child are being
(e) Social Worker. — After the court sets the served.
petition for hearing in accordance with Sub-section (l) Report of Person or Institution. — Any duly
(d) above, it shall direct the social worker to submit, licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or
before the hearing, a case study report of the child to individual to whom a child has been committed by
aid it in evaluating whether said child should be judicial order may at any time be required by the
committed to the care of the Department or any duly court to submit a report, containing all necessary
licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or information for determining whether the welfare of
individual. The report shall bear the signature of the the child is being served.
social worker on every page. (m) Temporary Custody of Child. — The duly
(f) Guardian Ad Litem of Child. — If neither of licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or
the parents nor the guardian of the child can be individual to whom a child has been committed may
located or does not appear in court despite due file a verified motion with the court which granted
notice, or if the court finds them incompetent to the petition for involuntary commitment of a child to
protect the best interests of the child, it shall be the place him in the care of any suitable person, upon
duty of the court to appoint a suitable person as the latter's request, for a period not exceeding one
guardian ad litem to represent the child. In making month at a time. The court may order the social
the appointment, the court shall consider the worker to submit a case study report to aid it in
background of the guardian ad litem and his evaluating whether such temporary custody shall be
familiarity with the judicial process, social service for the best interests of the child. The period of
programs and child development. A member of the temporary custody of the child may be extended by
Philippine Bar may be appointed guardian ad litem. the court for a period not exceeding one month at a
(g) Child's Right to Counsel. — The court, upon time upon motion of the duly licensed child-
request of the child capable of forming his own views placement or child-caring agency or individual to
or upon request of his guardian ad litem, shall which the child has been committed.
appoint a lawyer to represent him in the The court, motu proprio, or upon request of the
proceedings. child assisted by his guardian ad litem, or at the
(h) Duty of Public Prosecutor. — The provincial instance of the agency or person to whom the child
or city prosecutor shall appear for the State and was committed, after due notice and hearing, shall
ascertain if there has been due notice to all parties discontinue the temporary custody of the child if it
concerned and that there is justification for the appears that he is not being given proper care.
declaration of dependency, abandonment or neglect. After one month from the date temporary
(i) Hearing. — The court shall direct the person custody of the child was given to another suitable
or agency which has custody of the child to bring the person, the agency or individual shall submit to the
latter to the court on the date of the hearing of the court a verified report on whether the temporary
petition and shall ascertain the facts and determine custody of the child has promoted his best interests.
whether the child is dependent, abandoned, or (n) Change of Custody. — If the child is
committed to the Department, it shall have the
authority to change the custody of a child it had shall issue a resolution terminating the
placed with any duly licensed child-placement or parental authority of the person, agency or
child-caring agency or individual if it appears that institution to whom the child was committed
such change is for the best interests of the child. The by judicial order and restoring parental
Department shall notify the court of any change in authority to the movant.
custody of the child. q) Jurisdiction for Prosecution of Punishable
When conflicting interests arise among child- Acts. — The Family Court which granted the
placement or child-caring agencies, the court which involuntary commitment shall have jurisdiction over
granted the involuntary commitment of the child, the prosecution of a child who left without prior
upon motion of the Department or any of the permission from the person or institution to which he
agencies concerned, shall order the change of has been judicially committed or the person under
commitment of the child. whose custody he has been judicially committed in
(o) Removal of Custody. — A motion to remove accordance with Subsection (m) of Section 4 of this
custody of a child may be filed by an authorized Rule. It shall likewise have jurisdiction over the
representative of the Department with knowledge of person who induced the child to leave such person or
the facts against a child-placement or child-caring institution, except in case of actual or imminent
agency or individual to whose custody a child has grave physical or moral danger to the child. The
been committed by the court on the ground of Family Court which granted the involuntary
neglect of such child as defined in Section 3 (e) of commitment shall also have jurisdiction over the
this Rule. The court shall set the motion for hearing prosecution of parents or guardians of the child who
with notice to the public prosecutor and the court- may be held liable under Articles 59 and 60 of P.D.
designated social worker. If the court finds after No. 603 and Sections 9, 10 and 31 of R.A. No. 7610.
hearing that the allegations of the motion have been
established and that it is for the best interests and SECTION 5. Voluntary Commitment of a
welfare of the child, the court shall issue an order Child to an Institution or Individual. — The
removing him from the custody of the person or parent or guardian of a dependent, abandoned or
agency, as the case may be, and committing him to neglected child may voluntarily commit him to the
the custody of another duly licensed child-placement Department or any duly licensed child-placement or
or child-caring agency or individual. child-caring agency or individual subject to the rules
In the same proceeding, the court may suspend of the Department. However, no child shall be
or revoke the license of the agency or individual committed unless he is surrendered in writing by his
found guilty of such neglect depending upon the parents or guardian stating such voluntary
gravity or frequency of the offense. commitment and specifically naming the office,
(p) Restoration of Parental Authority After agency, or individual to whose custody the child is to
Involuntary Commitment. — be committed. Such written instrument should be
(i) Who may file; Ground. — The notarized and signed in the presence of an
parents or guardian of a child committed to authorized representative of the Department after
the care of a person, agency or institution by counseling and other services have been made
judicial order may file a verified motion for the available to encourage the child's parents to keep
restoration of his rights over the child with the the child.
court which granted the involuntary (a) Petition for removal of Custody. —
commitment on the ground that he is now (i) Who may file; Ground. — The
able to take proper care and custody of said parents or guardian who voluntarily committed
child, provided, however, that the child has the child, or in their absence or failure, any
not yet been adopted. HDATSI person with knowledge of the facts, may file a
(ii) Notice of Hearing. — The court verified petition to remove custody of the child
shall fix the time and date for the hearing of against the child-placement or child-caring
the motion, which shall not be earlier than agency or individual to whose custody the child
thirty (30) days nor later than sixty (60) days has been voluntarily committed on the ground of
from the date of the filing of said motion and neglect of such child as defined in Section 3 (e)
cause notice of the hearing to be sent to the of this Rule. A child may also be removed from
person, agency or institution to which the child the custody of the child-placement or child-
has been committed, the public prosecutor caring agency or individual on the ground that
and the court-designated social worker, at the voluntary commitment of the child was
least five (5) days before the date of hearing. unjustified.
(iii) Hearing. — At the hearing, any (ii) Venue. — The petition shall be filed
person may be allowed to intervene at the with the Family Court of the province or city
discretion of the court to contest the right to where the child-placement or child-caring
the relief demanded. Witnesses may be called agency to which the child has been voluntarily
and examined by the parties or by the court committed is located or where the child may be
motu proprio. found.
(iv) Resolution. — If it is found that the (iii) Contents of Verified Petition — The
cause for the commitment of the child no petition must state:
longer exists and that the movant is already (1) The name and address of the child-
able to take proper care and custody of the placement or child-caring agency or
child, the court, after taking into consideration individual to whose custody the child has
the best interests and the welfare of the child, been voluntarily committed; SEIDAC
(2) The facts showing that the child SECTION 6. Petition for Commitment of a
has been neglected by the agency or in Disabled Child. —
cases where the voluntary commitment was (a) Who may file. — Where a child appears to
unjustified, that the parents of the child are be mentally retarded, physically handicapped,
actually capable of taking care and custody emotionally disturbed, mentally ill, with cerebral
of the child; palsy or with similar afflictions and needs
(3) The name, address and written institutional care but his parents or guardians are
consent of the duly licensed child-placement opposed thereto, the Department, or any duly
or child-caring agency or individual to whose licensed child-placement or child-caring agency or
care the child may be transferred. individual may file a verified petition for commitment
(4) The facts showing that petitioner of the said child to any reputable institution providing
has exhausted the administrative remedies care, training and rehabilitation for disabled children.
available to him. The parents or guardian of the child may file a
(iv) Notice of Hearing. — If the petition similar petition in case no immediate placement can
is sufficient in form and substance, the court be arranged for the disabled child when his welfare
shall set the same for hearing with notice to the and interests are at stake. AEHTIC
Department, the public prosecutor, the court- (b) Venue. — The petition for commitment of a
designated social worker, the agency or disabled child shall be filed with the Family Court of
individual to whom the child has been the place where the parent or guardian resides or
committed and in appropriate cases, the parents where the child is found.
of the child. (c) Contents of Verified Petition. — The petition
(v) Judgment. — If after hearing the for commitment must state the following:
court finds that the allegations of the petition (1) The facts showing that the child
have been established and that it is for the best appears to be mentally retarded, physically
interests and welfare of the child, it shall issue handicapped, emotionally disturbed, mentally ill,
an order removing the child from the custody of with cerebral palsy or with similar afflictions and
the person or agency concerned, and needs institutional care; IADCES
committing him to the custody of another duly (2) The name of the parents and their
licensed child-placement or child-caring agency residence, if known, or if the child has no living
or individual. parent, the name and residence of the guardian,
The court, in the same proceeding may, after if any; and
hearing the comment or recommendation of the (3) The fact that the parents or
Department, suspend or revoke the license of the guardian or any duly licensed disabled child-
agency or individual found guilty of such neglect placement or child-caring agency, as the case
depending upon the gravity or frequency of the may be, has opposed the commitment of such
offense. child;
(b) Restoration of Parental Authority After (4) The name and written conformity
Voluntary Commitment. — The restoration of rights of the institution where the child is to be
of the parent or guardian over the child who has committed.
been voluntarily committed shall be governed by the (5) An estimate of the costs and other
rules of the Department, provided, however, that the expenses of maintaining the child in the
petition for restoration is filed within six (6) months institution.
from the date of voluntary commitment. In case the The verified petition shall be sufficient if
Department refuses to grant legal custody and based upon the personal knowledge of the
parental authority to the parent or guardian over the petitioner.
child who has been voluntarily committed to an (d) Order of Hearing; Notice. — If the petition
agency or individual, the parent or guardian may file filed is sufficient in form and substance, the court, by
a petition in court for restoration of parental an order reciting the purpose of the petition, shall fix
authority in accordance with Section 4 (p) of this the date of the hearing thereof, and a copy of such
Rule. order shall be served on the child alleged to be
(c) Jurisdiction for Prosecution of Punishable mentally retarded, physically handicapped,
Acts. — The Family Court of the place where the child emotionally disturbed, mentally ill, with cerebral
may be found or where the duly licensed child- palsy or with similar afflictions and on the person
placement or child-caring agency or individual is having charge of him or any of his relatives residing
located shall have jurisdiction over the prosecution of in the province or city as the court may deem proper.
a child who left without prior permission from the The order shall also direct the sheriff or any
person or institution to which he has been voluntarily other officer of the court to produce, if necessary, the
committed. It shall likewise have jurisdiction over the alleged disabled child on the date of the hearing.
person who induced the child to leave such person or (e) Hearing and Judgment. — If the court finds
institution, except in case of grave actual or that the allegations of the petition have been
imminent physical or moral danger, to the child. The established and that institutional care of the child is
same Family Court shall also have jurisdiction over for his best interests or the public welfare and that
the prosecution of parents or guardians of the child his parents, or guardian or relatives are unable for
who may be held liable under Articles 59 and 60 of any reason whatsoever to take proper care of him,
P.D. No. 603 and Sections 9, 10 and 31 of R.A. No. the court shall order his commitment to the proper
7610. institution for disabled children. The court shall
likewise make proper provisions for the custody of
the social worker assigned by the Department of offender that he can be reintegrated into society. It.
Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) or local also enhances public safety by activating the
government unit to assist him as soon as he enters offender, the victim and the community in prevention
the justice system. strategies.
(e) Case study report is a written report of the (p) Initial contact is the apprehension or taking
result of an investigation conducted by the social into custody of a juvenile in conflict with the law by
worker designated by the Family Court on the social, law enforcement officers or private citizens. It
cultural, economic and legal status or condition of includes the time when the juvenile receives a
the juvenile in conflict with the law. It includes, subpoena under Section 3 (b) of Rule 112 of the
among others, his developmental age; educational Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure or summons
attainment; family and social relationships; the under Section 6 (a) or Sec. 9 (b) of the same Rule in
quality of his peer group; the strengths and cases that do not require preliminary investigation or
weaknesses of his family; parental control over him; where there is no necessity to place the juvenile
his attitude toward the offense; the harm or damage under immediate custody.
done to others resulting from the offense; his record (q) Corporal punishment is any kind of physical
of prior offenses, if any; and the attitude of his punishment inflicted on the body as distinguished
parents towards his responsibility for the offense. from pecuniary punishment or fine.
(f) Diversion refers to an alternative child- SECTION 5. Exemption from Criminal
appropriate process of determining the responsibility Liability. — A minor under nine (9) years of age at
and treatment of a juvenile in conflict with the law on the time of the commission of the offense shall be
the basis of his social, cultural, economic, exempt from criminal liability.
psychological or educational background without A minor nine (9) years and above but under
resorting to formal court adjudication. fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the
(g) Diversion programs refer to programs that commission of the offense shall be committed to the
the juvenile in conflict with the law is required to care of his father or mother, or nearest relative or
undergo in lieu of formal court proceedings, family friend; in the sound discretion of the court and
(h) Disposition conference is a meeting held by subject to its supervision. However, if the prosecution
the court with the social worker who prepared the proves that he has acted with discernment; he shall
case study report together with the juvenile in be proceeded against in accordance with Sections 24
conflict with the law and his parents or guardian ad to 28, or 36 to 40 of this Rule, as the case may be,
litem, for the purpose of determining the disposition and subjected to a delinquency prevention program
measures appropriate to the personal and peculiar as determined by the court.
circumstances of the juvenile. Exemption from criminal liability does not
(i) Recognizance is an undertaking in lieu of a include exemption from civil liability which shall be
bond assumed by a parent or custodian who shall be enforced in accordance with the provisions of Article
responsible for the appearance in court by the 221 of the Family Code in relation to Article 101 of
juvenile in conflict with the law when required. the Revised Penal Code and Rule 111 of the Revised
(j) Probation is a disposition alternative under Rules of Criminal Procedure.
which a juvenile in conflict with the law is released In case the act or omission of the juvenile
and permitted to remain in his home after conviction involves a quasi-delict, Article 2180 of the Civil Code
and sentence. The juvenile is subject to conditions shall apply.
imposed in the sentence and to supervision by the
court and a probation officer who has the duty to SECTION 6. Procedure in Taking a Juvenile
return the juvenile to the court in case of violation of into Custody. — Any person taking into custody a
a condition of his probation. juvenile in conflict with the law shall:
(k) Suspended sentence is the holding in (a) Identify himself and present proper
abeyance of the service of the sentence imposed by identification to the juvenile;
the court upon a finding of guilt of the juvenile in (b) Inform the juvenile of the reason for such
conflict with the law who will undergo rehabilitation. custody and advise him of his constitutional rights in
(l) Community continuum is a community- a language or dialect understood by him;
based group therapy process that provides (c) Refrain from using vulgar or profane words
continuous guidance and support to the juvenile in and from sexually harassing or abusing, or making
conflict with the law upon his release from sexual advances on the juvenile;
rehabilitation and his reintegration into society. (d) Avoid displaying or using any firearm,
(m) Age of criminal responsibility is the age weapon, handcuffs or other instruments of force or
when a juvenile who is nine (9) years or over but restraint, unless absolutely necessary and only after
under fifteen (15) years commits an offense with all other methods of control have been exhausted
discernment. and have failed;
(n) Discernment means the mental capacity to (e) Refrain from subjecting the juvenile to
understand the difference between right and wrong greater restraint than is necessary for his
and its consequences. apprehension;
(o) Restorative Justice is a principle which (f) Avoid violence or unnecessary force;
requires a process of resolving conflicts with the (g) Notify the parents of the juvenile or his
maximum involvement of the victim, the offender, nearest relative or guardian, if any, and the local
and the community. It seeks to obtain reparation for social welfare officer as soon as the apprehension is
the victim, reconciliation of the offender, the made;
offended and the community and reassurance to the
In the event the juvenile cannot post bail for lack the Public Attorney's Office and the social worker
of financial resources, the Family Court shall commit assigned to the said Family Court as members.
the juvenile pursuant to Section 18 of this Rule. The chairperson of the Committee shall call for a
However, where the juvenile does not pose a conference with notice to the juvenile, his
threat to public safety, the Family Court may, motu parents/legal guardian and his counsel, and the
proprio or upon motion and recommendation of the private complainant and his counsel, and
DSWD, release the juvenile on recognizance to the recommend to the Family Court whether the juvenile
custody of his parents or other responsible person. should be diverted to a diversion program or undergo
formal court proceedings. In making its
SECTION 17. When Bail Not A Matter recommendation, the Committee shall consider the
of Right. — No juvenile charged with an offense following factors:
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life a) The record of the juvenile on his conflict
imprisonment shall be admitted to bail when with the law;
evidence of guilt is strong. b) Whether the imposable maximum penalty of
the offense is more than six (6) months, regardless of
SECTION 18. Care of Juveniles in fine; or only a fine, regardless of amount;
Conflict with the Law. — The juvenile charged with c) Whether the juvenile is an obvious threat to
having committed a delinquent act, held for trial or himself and/or the community;
while the case is pending appeal, if unable to furnish d) Whether the juvenile is unrepentant;
bail or is denied bail, shall, from the time of his being e) Whether the juvenile or his parents are
taken into custody, be committed by the Family indifferent or hostile; and
Court to the care of the DSWD, a youth detention Whether the juvenile's relationships with his
center, or a local rehabilitation center recognized by peers increase the possibility of delinquent behavior.
the government in the province, city or municipality If the Committee recommends diversion, it shall
within the jurisdiction of the said court. The center or submit the diversion program for the juvenile for the
agency concerned shall be responsible for the consideration and approval of the court.
juvenile's appearance in court whenever required. In The Committee cannot recommend diversion
the absence of any such center or agency within a should the juvenile or the private complainant object
reasonable distance from the venue of the trial, the thereto. If no diversion program is recommended, the
juvenile shall be detained in the provincial, city or court shall include the case in its calendar for formal
municipal jail which shall provide adequate quarters proceedings.
for the juvenile separate from adult detainees and Consent to diversion by the juvenile or payment
detainees of the opposite sex. by him of civil indemnity shall not in any way be
construed as admission of guilt and used as evidence
SECTION 19. Case Study Report. — against him in the event that his case is included in
After the institution of the criminal action, the social the court calendar for formal proceedings.
worker of the Family Court shall immediately
undertake a case study of the juvenile and his family, SECTION 22. Diversion Programs. —
his environment and such other matters relevant to The diversion program designed by the Committee
the proper disposition of the case. His report shall be shall be distinct to each juvenile in conflict with the
submitted within the period fixed by the Family law limited for a specific period. It may include any or
Court, preferably before arraignment, to aid it in the a combination of the following:
proper disposition of the case. a) Written or oral reprimand or citation;
b) Return of property;
SECTION 20. Diversion Proceedings c) Payment of the damage caused;
Before Arraignment. — Where the maximum d) Written or oral apology;
penalty imposed by law for the offense with which e) Guidance and supervision orders;
the juvenile in conflict with the law is charged is f) Counseling for the juvenile and his family;
imprisonment of not more than six (6) months, g) Training, seminars and lectures on (i) anger
regardless of fine or fine alone regardless of amount, management skills; (ii) problem-solving and/or
and the corresponding complaint or information is conflict resolution skills; (iii) values formation; and
filed with the Family Court, the case shall not be set (iv) other skills that will aid the juvenile to properly
for arraignment; instead, it shall forthwith be referred deal with situations that can lead to a repetition of
to the Diversion Committee which shall determine the offense;
whether the juvenile can be diverted and referred to h) Participation in available community-based
alternative measures or services offered by non- programs;
court institutions. Pending determination by the i) Institutional care and custody; or j)
Committee, the court shall deliver the juvenile on Work-detail program in the community.
recognizance to the custody of his parents or legal
guardian who shall be responsible for the presence of SECTION 23. Hearing of Diversion
the juvenile during the diversion proceedings. Program. — The Family Court shall set the
recommendation and diversion program for hearing
SECTION 21. Diversion Committee. within ten (10) days from receipt thereof.
— In each Family Court, there shall be a Diversion
Committee to be composed of its branch clerk of SECTION 24. Undertaking. — In all
court as chairperson, and the prosecutor, a lawyer of cases where a juvenile in conflict with the law is
given the benefit of a diversion program, an
undertaking describing the program shall be signed a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary
by him, his parents or legal guardian and the is proved beyond reasonable doubt;
complainant, and approved by the Family Court. The b) To be informed promptly and directly of the
program, which shall be enforced under the nature and cause of the charge against him, and if
supervision and control of the Family Court, shall appropriate, through his parents or legal guardian;
contain the following terms and conditions: c) To be present at every stage of the
a) The juvenile shall present himself to the proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of
social worker of the Family Court that approved the judgment. The juvenile may, however, waive his
diversion program at least once a month for presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set
evaluation of its effectiveness. Whenever the juvenile forth in his bail, unless his presence at the trial is
is permitted to reside in a place under the jurisdiction specifically ordered by the court for purposes of
of another Family Court, control and supervision over identification. The absence of the juvenile without
him shall be transferred to the Family Court of that justifiable cause at the trial of which he had notice
place, and in such case, a copy of the undertaking, shall be considered a waiver of his right to be
the intake and case study reports and other pertinent present thereat. When the juvenile under custody
records shall be furnished the said court. Thereafter, escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived his right
the Family Court to which jurisdiction over the to be present in all subsequent hearings until
juvenile is transferred shall have the power with custody over him is regained;
respect to the latter that was previously possessed d) To have legal and other appropriate
by the Family Court that approved the diversion and assistance in the preparation and presentation of his
such other conditions as the Committee may deem defense;
just and proper under the circumstances. e) To testify as a witness in his own behalf and
b) The juvenile shall faithfully comply with the subject to cross-examination only on matters
terms and conditions in the undertaking. His non- covered by direct examination, provided that the
compliance shall be referred by the Committee to the Rule on the Examination of a Child Witness shall be
Family Court where the case has been transferred for observed whenever convenient and practicable.
a show-cause hearing with notice to the juvenile and The juvenile shall not be compelled to be a
private complainant. The court shall determine witness against himself and his silence shall not in
whether the juvenile should continue with the any manner prejudice him;
diversion program or his case returned to the original f) To confront and cross-examine the
court for formal proceedings. witnesses against him;
The Family Court shall exert its best efforts to g) To have compulsory process issued to
secure satisfaction of the civil liability of the juvenile secure the attendance of witnesses and production
and his parents or guardian. However, inability to of other evidence in his behalf;
pay the said liability shall not by itself be a ground to h) To have speedy and impartial trial, with
discontinue the diversion program of the juvenile. legal or other appropriate assistance and preferably
in the presence of his parents or legal guardian,
SECTION 25. Closure Order. — The unless such presence is considered not to be in the
juvenile subject of diversion proceedings shall be best interests of the juvenile taking into account his
visited periodically by the Family Court social worker age or other peculiar circumstances;
who shall submit to the Committee his reports (i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the
thereon. At any time before or at the end of the manner prescribed by law;
diversion period, a report recommending closure or j) To be accorded all the rights under the Rule
extension of diversion, as the case may be, shall be on Examination of a Child Witness; and
filed by the Committee with the Family Court. The k) To have his privacy fully respected in all
report and recommendation shall be heard by the stages of the proceedings.
Family Court within fifteen (15) days from its receipt
thereof, with notice to the members of the SECTION 27. Arraignment and Plea.
Committee, the juvenile and his parents or legal — The provisions of Rules 116 and 117 of the
guardian and counsel and the complainant to Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure shall apply to
determine whether the undertaking has been fully the arraignment of the juvenile in conflict with the
and satisfactorily complied with. If the juvenile has law. The arraignment shall be scheduled within
complied with his undertaking, the Family Court shall seven (7) days from the date of the filing of the
issue the corresponding closure order terminating complaint or information with the Family Court,
the diversion program. It may, however, extend the unless a shorter period is provided for by law.
period of diversion to give the juvenile a further Arraignment shall be held in chambers and
chance to be rehabilitated. In the event the court conducted by the judge by furnishing the juvenile a
finds that the diversion program will no longer serve copy of the complaint or information, reading the
its. purpose, it shall include the case of the juvenile same in a language or dialect known to and
in its calendar for formal proceedings. understood by him, explaining the nature and
consequences of a plea of guilty or not guilty and
SECTION 26. Duty of the Family Court to asking him what his plea is.
Protect the Rights of the Juvenile. — In all
criminal proceedings in the Family Court, the judge SECTION 28. Pre-trial. — The
shall ensure the protection of the following rights of provisions of Rule 118 of the Revised Rules of
the juvenile in conflict with the law: Criminal Procedure shall govern the pre-trial of the
juvenile in conflict with the law. Agreements or
admissions made during the pre trial conference The Social Services and Counseling Division
shall be in writing and signed by the juvenile, his (SSCD) of the DSWD shall monitor the compliance by
parents or guardian and his counsel; otherwise, they the juvenile in conflict with the law with the
cannot be used against him. disposition measure and shall submit regularly to the
Whenever possible and practicable, the Family Court a status and progress report on the
Family Court shall explore all possibilities of matter. The Family Court may set a conference for
settlement of the case, except its criminal aspect. the evaluation of such report in the presence, if
Plea bargaining shall be resorted to only as a last practicable, of the juvenile, his parents or guardian,
measure when it will serve the best interests of the and other persons whose presence may be deemed
juvenile and the demands of restorative justice. necessary.
The benefits of suspended sentence shall not
SECTION 29. Trial. — All hearings shall apply to a juvenile in conflict with the law who has
be conducted in a manner conducive to the best once enjoyed suspension of sentence, or to one who
interests of the juvenile and in an environment that is convicted of an offense punishable by death,
will allow him to participate fully and freely in reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, or when at
accordance with the Rule on Examination of a Child the time of promulgation of judgment the juvenile is
Witness. already eighteen (18) years of age or over.
3. He causes an least 3 more shots were fired, hitting him in the chest.
injury to another by mere accident; Lorenzo died instantly. In his defense Concepcion
4. Without fault or claimed that the shooting was only accidental.
intention of causing it. Held: There was no accident. By Concepcion’s
own testimony, the victim was unarmed. In contrast, he
• Striking another with a gun in self-defense, even if it had an armalite and a handgun. It is highly
fired and seriously injured the assailant is a lawful act. inconceivable that an unarmed man could pose bodily
harm to another who is heavily armed. Concepcion’s gun
ACCIDENT – something that happen outside the sway discharged several shots that hit vital parts of the
of our will and although it comes about through some victim's body. As observed by the trial court, recklessly
act of our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly appellant had put his finger on the trigger of his cocked
foreseeable consequences. and loaded rifle. In that state, with the slightest
- If the consequences are plainly foreseeable, movement of his finger, the rifle would fire readily. And
it will be a case of negligence. it did not just once but several fires. Concepcion is
guilty of homicide.
People v. Agliday (2001)
Facts: The wife of the accused was washing Ty v. People (supra)
dishes in the kitchen when her son was shot with a Facts: Ty's mother Chua Lao So Un was
shotgun by her husband. Conchita claimed that she and confined at the Manila Doctors' Hospital from October
her husband quarreled before the incident and then her 1990 until June 1992. Being the patient's daughter, Ty
husband left the kitchen got his shotgun and went back signed the "Acknowledgment of Responsibility for
to the kitchen to shoot his son. Payment" in the Contract of Admission. Ty's sister, Judy
Accused claimed that it was only an accident. Chua, was also confined at the same hospital. The total
He was merely cleaning his gun and the gun accidentally hospital bills of the two patients amounted to
went off and his son’s buttock was hit. P1,075,592.95. Ty executed a promissory note wherein
Held: The exemption from criminal liability she assumed payment of the obligation in installments.
under the circumstance showing accident is based on To assure payment of the obligation, she drew 7
the lack of criminal intent. In the case at bar, accused postdated checks against Metrobank payable to the
got his shotgun and returned to the kitchen to shoot his hospital which were all dishonored by the drawee bank
son who had intervened in the quarrel between the and returned unpaid to the hospital due to insufficiency
former and his wife. There was clear intent to fire and of funds. For her defense, Ty claimed that she issued the
not mere accident. checks because of “an uncontrollable fear of a greater
injury” She averred that she was forced to issue the
US v. Tanedo (1910) checks to obtain release for her mother who was being
Facts: The accused, while hunting, saw wild inhumanely and harshly treated by the hospital. She
chickens and fired a shot. The slug, after hitting a wild alleged that her mother has comtemplated suicide if she
chicken, recoiled and struck the tenant who was a would not be discharged from the hospital. Ty was found
relative of the accused. The man who was injured died. guilty by the lower courts of 7 counts of violation of
Held: If life is taken by misfortune or accident BP22.
while the actor is in the performance of a lawful act Held:The court sustained the findings of the
executed with due care and without intention of doing lower courts. The evil sought to be avoided is merely
harm, there is no criminal liability. expected or anticipated. If the evil sought to be avoided
is merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the
People v. Bindoy (1931) future, the defense of an uncontrollable fear of a greater
Facts: The accused, while in a drinking session, injury” is not applicable. Ty could have taken advantage
offered some tuba to Pacas’ wife but she refused so the of an available option to avoid committing a crime. By
accused threatened to injure her if she didn’t accept. her own admission, she had the choice to give jewelry or
Pacas stepped into defend his wife, attempting to take other forms of security instead of postdated checks to
away from the accused the bolo he carried. In the secure her obligation.
course of the struggle, accused succeeded in Moreover, for the defense of state of necessity
disengaging himself from Pacas, wrenching the bolo to be availing, the greater injury feared should not have
from the latter’s hand towards the left behind the been brought about by the negligence or imprudence,
accused, with such violence that the point of the bolo more so, the willful inaction of the actor. In this case,
reached Emigdio’s chest who was then behind the the issuance of the bounced checks was brought about
accused. by Ty's own failure to pay her mother's hospital bills.
Held: The accused, in his effort to free himself
hit Emigdio in the chest. There is no evidence that this Par 5. – ANY PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER THE
was done deliberately. It is merely accidental. COMPULSION OF AN IRRESISTIBLE FORCE.
• REQUISITES: a. existence of an uncontrollable fear; b. They are based on the diminution of either
the fear must be real and imminent; and c. the fear of freedom of action, intelligence or intent or on the lesser
an injury is greater than or at least equal to that perversity of the offender.
committed.
CLASSES OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
• Duress as a valid defense should be based on real,
imminent or reasonable fear for one’s life or limb and 1. ORDINARY MITIGATING
should not be speculative, fanciful or remote fear. - Those mentioned in subsections 1 to 10 of Art.
13.
• A threat of future injury is not enough. The compulsion
must be of such a character as to leave no opportunity 2. PRIVILEGED MITIGATING
to the accused for escape or self-defense in equal
combat. Art. 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person
under eighteen years of age. — When the offender is
• Speculative, fanciful and remote fear is not a minor under eighteen years and his case is one
uncontrollable fear. coming under the provisions of the paragraphs next to
the last of Article 80 of this Code, the following rules
• The case of US v. Exaltation is also an example were shall be observed:
there is real, imminent or reasonable fear. 1. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine
years of age, who is not exempted from liability by
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE UNCONTROLLABLE reason of the court having declared that he acted with
FEAR discernment, a discretionary penalty shall be imposed,
The offender uses violence The offender employs but always lower by two degrees at least than that
or physical force to compel intimidation or threat in prescribed by law for the crime which he committed.
another person to commit compelling another to 2. Upon a person over fifteen and under
the crime. commit a crime. eighteen years of age the penalty next lower than that
prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in the
proper period.
JUSTIFYING EXEMPTING
There is neither a crime There is a crime but no
nor a criminal. criminal. The act is not Art. 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime
justified but the actor is committed is not wholly excusable. — A penalty
not criminally liable. lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law
No civil liability except in There is civil liability shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable by
no. 4 except no. 4 and 7. reason of the lack of some of the conditions required to
justify the same or to exempt from criminal liability in
the several cases mentioned in Article 11 and 12,
Par. 7 – ANY PERSON WHO FAILS TO PERFORM AN
provided that the majority of such conditions be present.
ACT REQUIRED BY LAW, WHEN PREVENTED BY
The courts shall impose the penalty in the period which
SOME LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE.
may be deemed proper, in view of the number and
nature of the conditions of exemption present or lacking.
ELEMENTS:
1. That an act is required by law to be done;
• Privileged mitigating circumstances which are
2. That a person fails to perform such act;
applicable only to particular crimes:
3. That his failure to perform such act was
1. Art. 268, par. 3. Voluntary release of the
due to some lawful or insuperable cause.
person illegally detained within 3 days without the
offender attaining his purpose and before the institution
US v. Vicentillo (1911)
of criminal action. The penalty is one degree lower.
A policeman charged cannot be held liable for
2. Art. 333, par. 3. Abandonment without
illegal detention when after arresting his victims, it took
justification of the spouse who committed adultery. The
him three days to reach the nearest judge. The distance
penalty is one degree lower.
which required a journey for three days was considered
to be an insuperable cause.
ORDINARY MC PRIVILEDGED MC
Susceptible of being offset Cannot be offset by
People v. Bandian (1936)
by any aggravating aggravating circumstance
A woman cannot be held liable for infanticide
circumstance
when she left her newborn child in the bushes without
being aware that she had given birth at all. Severe If not offset by The effect of imposing
dizziness and extreme debility made it physically aggravating circumstance, upon the offender the
impossible for Bandian to take home the child plus the produces the effect of penalty lower by one or
assertion that she didn’t know that she had given birth. applying the penalty two degrees than that
provided by law for the provided by law for the
crime in its min period in crime.
3. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES case of divisible penalty
Mitigating circumstances are those which, if •• NOTE: Mitigating circumstances only reduce the
present in the commission of the crime, do not entirely penalty but do not change the nature of the crime.
free the actor from criminal liability, but serve only to
reduce the penalty.
b. With due care; been committed, shall submit to the court every four
c. He causes an injury to another by mere months and as often as required in special cases, a
accident; and written report on the good or bad conduct of said minor
d. Without fault or intention of causing it. and the moral and intellectual progress made by him.
The suspension of the proceedings against a
● If the 2nd requisite and 1st part of the 4th minor may be extended or shortened by the court on
requisite are absent, the case will fall under Art. 365 the recommendation of the Director of Public Welfare or
which punishes reckless imprudence. his authorized representative or agents, or the
superintendent of public schools or his representatives,
● If the 1st requisite and 2nd part of the 4th according as to whether the conduct of such minor has
requisite are absent, it will be an intentional felony. been good or not and whether he has complied with the
conditions imposed upon him, or not. The provisions of
3. Incomplete exempting circumstance of the first paragraph of this article shall not, however, be
uncontrollable fear. affected by those contained herein.
If the minor has been committed to the
REQUISITES under par. 6 of Art. 12: custody or care of any of the institutions mentioned in
a. That the threat which caused the fear was the first paragraph of this article, with the approval of
of an evil greater than, or at least equal the Director of Public Welfare and subject to such
to, that which he was required to commit; conditions as this official in accordance with law may
b. That it promised an evil of such gravity deem proper to impose, such minor may be allowed to
and imminence that an ordinary person stay elsewhere under the care of a responsible person.
would have succumbed to it. If the minor has behaved properly and has
complied with the conditions imposed upon him during
● If only one of these requisites is present, his confinement, in accordance with the provisions of
there is only a mitigating circumstance. this article, he shall be returned to the court in order
that the same may order his final release.
Par. 2 – THAT THE OFFENDER IS UNDER 18 YEARS In case the minor fails to behave properly or to
OF AGE OR OVER 70 YEARS. IN THE CASE OF THE comply with the regulations of the institution to which
MINOR, HE SHALL BE PROCEEDED AGAINST IN he has been committed or with the conditions imposed
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ART. 80. upon him when he was committed to the care of a
responsible person, or in case he should be found
Par. 2 contemplates the ff: incorrigible or his continued stay in such institution
1. An offender over 9 but under 15 of age who should be inadvisable, he shall be returned to the court
acted with discernment. in order that the same may render the judgment
2. An offender fifteen or over but under 18 years corresponding to the crime committed by him.
of age. The expenses for the maintenance of a minor
3. An offender over 70 years old. delinquent confined in the institution to which he has
been committed, shall be borne totally or partially by his
Art. 80. Suspension of sentence of minor parents or relatives or those persons liable to support
delinquents. — Whenever a minor of either sex, under him, if they are able to do so, in the discretion of the
sixteen years of age at the date of the commission of a court; Provided, That in case his parents or relatives or
grave or less grave felony, is accused thereof, the court, those persons liable to support him have not been
after hearing the evidence in the proper proceedings, ordered to pay said expenses or are found indigent and
instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, shall cannot pay said expenses, the municipality in which the
suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such offense was committed shall pay one-third of said
minor to the custody or care of a public or private, expenses; the province to which the municipality
benevolent or charitable institution, established under belongs shall pay one-third; and the remaining one-third
the law of the care, correction or education of orphaned, shall be borne by the National Government: Provided,
homeless, defective, and delinquent children, or to the however, That whenever the Secretary of Finance
custody or care of any other responsible person in any certifies that a municipality is not able to pay its share in
other place subject to visitation and supervision by the the expenses above mentioned, such share which is not
Director of Public Welfare or any of his agents or paid by said municipality shall be borne by the National
representatives, if there be any, or otherwise by the Government. Chartered cities shall pay two-thirds of
superintendent of public schools or his representatives, said expenses; and in case a chartered city cannot pay
subject to such conditions as are prescribed herein said expenses, the internal revenue allotments which
below until such minor shall have reached his majority may be due to said city shall be withheld and applied in
age or for such less period as the court may deem settlement of said indebtedness in accordance with
proper. section five hundred and eighty-eight of the
The court, in committing said minor as Administrative Code.
provided above, shall take into consideration the religion
of such minor, his parents or next of kin, in order to
avoid his commitment to any private institution not LEGAL EFFECTS OF VARIOUS AGES OF OFFENDER:
under the control and supervision of the religious sect or 1. Under 9 years of age, an exempting circumstance.
denomination to which they belong. (Art. 12, par. 2)
The Director of Public Welfare or his duly 2. Over 9 and under 15 years of age, also an
authorized representatives or agents, the exempting circumstance, unless he acted with
superintendent of public schools or his representatives, discernment (Art. 12, par. 3)
or the person to whose custody or care the minor has
3. Minor delinquent under 18 years of age, the Facts: Amit pleads guilty to rape with homicide
sentence may be suspended. (Art. 192, PD No. and sentenced to death. Amit appeals claiming that
603 as amended by PD 1179) there are 3 mitigating circumstances including lack of
4. Under 18 years of age, privileged mitigating intention to commit so grave a wrong.
circumstance (Art. 68) Held: A great disproportion between means
5. 18 years or over, full criminal responsibility. employed to accomplish the criminal act on the one
hand, and its consequences on the other, must first be
shown. Otherwise, the mitigating circumstance could
Par. 3 – THAT THE OFFENDER HAD NO INTENTION not be considered.
TO COMMIT SO GR A WRONG AS THAT Based on the narration given by the accused
COMMITTED. where he said that he held victim’s neck down as he
boxed her in the face, and considering moreover that
♠ This circumstance can be taken into account the victim was 57 years old while the accused was only
only when the facts proven show that there is a notable 32, the court held that the means employed by the
and evident disproportion between the means accused was sufficient to have caused the death of the
employed to execute the criminal act and its victim.
consequences. Death penalty should be imposed. It is a single
♠ The intention, as an internal act, is judged indivisible penalty applied regardless of mitigating
not only by the proportion of the means employed by circumstance, especially when records of the present
him to the evil produced by his act, but also by the fact case evince the aggravating circumstances of nighttime
that the blow was or was not aimed at a vital part of and abuse of superior strength.
the body.
♠ Intention must be judged by considering the People v. Regato (1984)
weapon used, the injury inflicted and his attitude of the Facts: Regato, Ramirez and Salceda robbed
mind when the accused attacked the deceased. the store of Victor Flores. Victor was maltreated to force
him to reveal where their money was. The robbers
♠ This mitigating circumstance is not applicable
found the money in a place different from where Victor
when the offender employed brute force.
revealed to them. Ramirez got mad and called Victor a
♠ Lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong is
liar. Victor retorted, “you robbers!”. With this remark,
not appreciated where the offense committed is
Ramirez shot Victor and the three rushed out of the
characterized by treachery.
house.
♠ In crimes against persons who do not die as
Held: The SC did not find merit in the
a result of the assault, the absence of the intent to kill
contention that there was lack of intent to commit so
reduces the felony to mere physical injuries, but it does
grave a wrong as that committed. Intention is a mental
not constitute a mitigating circumstance under Art. 13
process and is an internal state of mind. The intention
par 3.
must be judged by the ACTION, CONDUCT and
♠ It is not applicable to felonies by negligence
EXTERNAL ACTS of the accused. What men do is the
because in these kinds of felonies, there is no intent on
best index of their intention. In the case at bar, the
the part of the offender which may be considered
aforesaid mitigating circumstance cannot be
diminished.
appreciated considering that the acts employed by the
♣ Par. 3 is only applicable to offense resulting
accused were reasonably sufficient to produce the
in physical injuries or material harm. It is not applicable
result that they actually made – the death of the victim.
to defamation or slander.
People v. Calleto (2002)
People v. Ural (1974)
Facts: Alfredo, Lecpoy and Eduardo were
Facts: Witness Alberto saw policeman Ural
beside each other as they watched a cara y cruz game.
inside the jail boxing detention prisoner Napola. As
Alfredo sat close to the ground, with his buttocks
Napola collapsed on the floor, Ural went out to get a
resting on his right foot. Lecpoy and Eduardo sat on a
bottle. He poured the contents to the dress of Napola
piece of wood and on a stone, respectively. Out of
and set it on fire. Napola got burned and he asked
nowhere, the accused, Callet, appeared behind Alfredo
mercy from Ural. Instead, Ural locked him up and
and stabbed the latter on the left shoulder near the
threatened the witness not to tell anyone or else he will
base of the neck with a 9-inch hunting knife.
burn also. When Napola was already suffering much
Instinctively, Alfredo stood up and managed to walk a
from the burns, Ural became frightened and he and
few meters. When he fell on the ground, Lecpoy and
Siton helped put out the fire. Napola died later because
Eduardo rushed to help him but to no avail. Alfredo died
of the burns.
shortly thereafter. Calleto voluntary surrendered. He
Held: Offender is criminally liable although
claims that his liabiity should be mitigated by the fact
consequence of his felonious act was not intended by
that he had no intention to commit so grave a wrong.
him. This is covered by Art. 4 of the RPC. The TC failed
Held: The lack of "intent" to commit a wrong
to appreciate the mitigating circumstance that the
so grave is an internal state. It is weighed based on the
offender has no intention to commit so grave a wrong
weapon used, the part of the body injured, the injury
as that committed. It is manifest from the facts that the
inflicted and the manner it is inflicted. The fact that the
accused had no intent to kill the victim. His only design
accused used a 9-inch hunting knife in attacking the
was only to maltreat him maybe because of his drunken
victim from behind, without giving him an opportunity
condition. When the accused realized the fearful
to defend himself, clearly shows that he intended to do
consequences of his act, he allowed the victim to secure
what he actually did, and he must be held responsible
medical treatment.
therefor, without the benefit of this mitigating
circumstance.
People v. Amit (1970)
of the roast pig. Patobo replied, “There is no more. shore towards the creek but Dennis met him, blocked
Come here and I will make roast pig of you.” Later, him and stabbed him. When he was hit, Anthony ran
while Patobo was squatting down, Ampar struck him on but got entangled with a fishing net beside the creek
the head with an ax, causing his death the following and fell on his back. Dennis then mounted on him and
day. The TC appreciated the mitigating circumstance of continued stabbing him resulting to the latters death.
immediate vindication of a grave offense. Thereafter, Dennis left and slept at a grassy meadow
Held: The offense which the defendant was near a Camp. In the morning, he went to Estrera, a
endeavoring to vindicate would be to the average person police officer to whom he voluntarily surrendered.
considered as a mere trifle. But to this defendant, an old Held: The mitigating circumstance of having
man, it evidently was a serious matter to be made the acted in the immediate vindication of a grave offense is
butt of a joke in the presence of so many guests. The TC properly appreciated. Dennis was humiliated, mauled
was correct. and almost stabbed by the Anthony. Although the
unlawful aggression had ceased when Dennis stabbed
Peope v. Parana (1937) Anthony, it was nonetheless a grave offense for which
Facts: The preceding night, Parana and Lamay the Dennis may be given the benefit of a mitigating
were at the house of the deceased’s brother playing circumstance. However, the mitigating circumstance of
cards when the two had an exchange of words so the sufficient provocation cannot be considered apart from
deceased asked them to leave. The accused refused so the circumstance of vindication of a grave offense.
the deceased slapped him and ordered him to leave. These two circumstances arose from one and the same
The morning after, Parana was about to surprise the incident, i.e., the attack on the appellant by Anthony,
deceased and stab him from behind when the chauffeur so that they should be considered as only one
shouted to warn the deceased. The deceased, mitigating circumstance.
defending himself retreated until he fell into a ditch.
The appellant mounted astride of the deceased and Par. 6. – THAT OF HAVING ACTED UPON AN
continued to stab him with the dagger. The deceased IMPULSE SO POWERFUL AS NATURALLY TO HAVE
was first brought to the hospital but expired 6 days PRODUCED PASSION OR OBFUSCATION.
after.
Held: The mitigating circumstance that he had REQUISITES:
acted in the immediate vindication of a grave offense a. The accused acted upon an impulse.
committed against him a few hours before, when he b. The impulse must be so powerful that it
was slapped by the deceased in the presence of many naturally produce passion or obfuscation
persons, must likewise be taken into consideration. in him.
Although this offense (slapping) was not so immediate,
the court believes that the influence thereof, by reason ♠ Passion or obfuscation may constitute as a mitigating
of its gravity and the circumstances under which it was circumstance only when the same arose from LAWFUL
inflicted, lasted until the moment the crime was SENTIMENTS. It is not applicable when:
committed. a. The act committed in a spirit of LAWLESSNESS.
b. the act is committed in a spirit of REVENGE.
People v. Diokno (1936)
Facts: The deceased and the daughter of ♠ The crime committed must be the result of a sudden
accused Epifanio eloped. Epifanio and his son, Roman impulse of natural and uncontrollable fury.
went to look for them. When they were able to find the
deceased, they stabbed him several times until he died. ♠ The accused who raped a woman is not entitled to the
Held: The presence of the 5th mitigating mitigating circumstance of “having acted upon an
circumstance must be taken into consideration. There impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced
was no interruption from the time the offense was passion” just because he finds himself in a secluded
committed to the vindication thereof. The herein place with that young ravishing woman, almost naked
accused belong to a family of old customs to whom the and therefore, “liable to succumb to the uncontrollable
elopement of a daughter with a man constitutes a passion of his bestial instinct.”
grave offense to their honor and causes disturbance of
the peace of the home. The fact that the accused saw
♠ The mitigating circumstance of obfuscation arising
the deceased run upstairs when he became aware of
from jealousy cannot be invoked in favor of the accused
their presence, as if he refused to deal with them after
whose relationship with the woman was illegitimate.
having gravely offended them, was certainly a stimulus
strong enough to produce in their mind a fit of passion
♠ Passion and obfuscation may lawfully arise from
which blinded them and led them to commit that crime.
causes existing only in the honest belief of the offender.
People v. Torpio (2004)
PASSION OR IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
Facts: While having a drinking spree in a
OBFUSCATION
cottage, Anthony tried to let Dennis Torpio drink gin
Mitigating circumstance Exempting circumstance
and as the latter refused, Anthony bathed Dennis with
gin and mauled him several times. Dennis crawled Cannot give rise to an
beneath the table and Anthony tried to stab him with a irresistible force because
22 fan knife but did not hit him. Dennis got up and ran the latter requires physical
towards their home. Upon reaching home, he got a force
knife. He went back to the cottage by another route Passion or obfuscation is in Irresistible force must
and upon arrival Anthony was still there. Upon seeing the offender himself come from a third person
Dennis, Anthony avoided Dennis and ran by passing the Must arise from lawful The irresistible force is
sentiments unlawful
verifiy the news that the latter mauled and stabbed the
PASSION PROVOCATION accused’s mentally retarded brother, Rafael. Raymund
Produced by an impulse Comes form the injured was not yet at home and the moment he arrived, the
which may be caused by party accused spotted him and shot him.
provocation Held: There is no treachery. Passion cannot co-
Need not be immediate. It Must immediately precede exist with treachery because in passion, the offender
is only required that the the commission of the loses his control and reason while in treachery the
influence thereof lasts crime means employed are consciously adopted. One who
until the moment the loses his reason and self-control could not deliberately
crime is committed employ a particular method or form of attack in the
The effect is the loss of reason and self-control on the execution of the crime. Passion existed in this case
part of the offender. because it clearly arose from lawful sentiments or
legitimate feelings. The accused committed the crime
due to the maltreatment inflicted by the victim on his
People v. Muit (1982) mentally retarded brother.
Facts: Rosario Muit was the Brgy. Zone
President and Torrero was the zone auditor. They used People v. Gonzalez (2001)
to meet frequently because they were having an affair Facts: Both of the families of Andres and that
which eventually reached the husband of Rosario, of Gonzalez were on their way to the exit of the Loyola
Delfin. Delfin shot Torrero 3 times at the front yard of Memorial Park. Gonzales was with his grandson and 3
the Muits. Delfin surrendered himself and turned in the housemaids, while Andres was driving with his pregnant
pistol he had used. wife, Feliber, his 2yr old son, Kenneth, his nephew Kevin
Held: Muit is guilty of murder with mitigating and his sister-in-law. At an intersection, their two
circumstances of voluntary surrender and passion and vehicles almost collided. Gonzales continued driving
obsfuscation. The accused was driven strongly by while Andres tailed Gonzales’ vehicle and cut him off
jealousy. The feeling of resentment resulting from the when he found the opportunity to do so, then got out of
rivalry in amorous relations with a woman is a powerful his vehicle and knocked on the appellant's car window.
stimulant to jealousy and prone to produce anger and Heated exchange of remarks followed. On his way back
obfuscation. to his vehicle, he met Gonzales son, Dino. Andres had a
shouting match this time with Dino. Gonzales then
US v. HICKS (1909) alighted from his car and fired a single shot at the last
Facts: For about 5 years, Hicks and Sola lived window on the left side of Andres' vehicle at an angle
together as husband and wife when they separated. A away from Andres. The single bullet fired hit Kenneth,
few days later, Sola contracted new relations with Kevin and Feliber which caused the latters death.
another negro named Wallace. Hicks went to Wallace’s Held: The mitigating circumstance of passion
house and asked the latter to go out. They talked for and obfuscation is not obtaining. Andres' act of shouting
awhile and then Hicks shot Wallace at Gonzales’ son, who was then a nurse and of legal
Held: Even if it is true that the accused acted age, is not sufficient to produce passion and obfuscation.
with obfuscation because of jealousy, the mitigating Dino was shouting back at Andres. It was not a case
circumstance cannot be considered in his favor because wherein Gonzales son appeared helpless and oppressed
the causes which mitigate criminal responsibility for the that Gonzales lost his reason and shot at the vehicle of
loss of self-control are such which originate from Andres. The same holds true for Gonzales’ claim of
legitimate feelings and not those which arise from provocation on the part of Andres. Provocation must be
vicious, unworthy and immoral passions. The cause of sufficient to excite a person to commit the wrong
the passion of the accused was his vexation committed and that the provocation must be
engendered by the refusal of the woman to continue to commensurate to the crime committed. The sufficiency
live in illicit relations with him, which she had a perfect of provocation varies according to the circumstances of
right to do. the case. The aggressive behavior of Andres towards
Gonzales and his son may be demeaning or humiliating
US v. DE LA CRUZ (1912) but it is not sufficient provocation to shoot at Gonzales’
Facts: The evidence clearly discloses that the vehicle.
convict, in the heat of passion, killed the deceased, who
had theretofore been his lover upon discovering her in People v. Lab-eo (2002)
flagrante in carnal communication with a mutual Facts: After being told to go away by the
acquaintance. victim, Cayno, Lab-eo left and returned to where the
Held: The accused was entitled to the victim was selling clothes and then and there stabbed
mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation her at the back with a knife. Thereafter, he surrendered
because the impulse was caused by the sudden to the Chief of Police. Lab-eo argues for the appreciation
revelation that she was untrue to him, and his of the mitigating circumstances of passion and
discovery of her in flagrante in the arms of another. obfuscation, as well as of sufficient provocation, in his
• note: when the court used the word “illicit”, favor.
it doesn’t mean that it is an illegitimate or Held: For a person to be motivated by passion
bigamous relationship. It means that it is and obfuscation, there must first exist an unlawful act
cohabitation without a valid marriage. that would naturally produce an impulse sufficient to
overcome reason and self-control. There is passional
People v. Germina (1998) obfuscation when the crime is committed due to an
Facts: One night, the accused went to the uncontrollable burst of passion provoked by prior unjust
Angeles residence to look for Raymund. He went to or improper acts, or due to a legitimate stimulus so
powerful as to overcome reason. In asking Lab—eo to c. That the surrender was voluntary.
leave, the victim did not do anything unlawful. There is
an absolute lack of proof that the Lab-eo was utterly ♠ Merely requesting a policeman to accompany the
humiliated by the victim's utterance. Nor was it shown accused to the police HQ is not equivalent to voluntary
that the victim made that remark in an insulting and surrender.
repugnant manner. The victim's utterance was not the
stimulus required by jurisprudence to be so ♠ Other examples:
overwhelming as to overcome reason and self-restraint. a. The warrant of arrest showed that the
accused was in fact arrested.
b. The accused surrendered only after the
warrant of arrest was served.
People v. Bates (2003) c. The accused went into hiding and
Facts: While Edgar, Simon, and Jose are along surrendered only when they realized that the forces of
a trail leading to the house of Carlito Bates, the latter the law were closing in on them.
suddenly emerged from the thick banana plantation
surrounding the trail, aiming his firearm at Jose who was ♠ Surrender must be SPONTANEOUS. He surrendered 1)
then walking ahead of his companions. Jose grabbed because he acknowledges his guilty or 2) because he
Carlito's right hand and elbow and tried to wrest wishes to save them the trouble and expenses
possession of the firearm. While the 2 were grappling for necessarily incurred in his search and capture.
possession, the gun fired, hitting Carlito who
immediately fell to the ground. At that instant, Marcelo ♠ The surrender must be by reason of the commission of
Bates and his son Marcelo Bates, Jr., brother and the crime for which he is prosecuted.
nephew of Carlito, respectively, emerged from the
banana plantation, each brandishing a bolo. They People v. Pinca (1999)
immediately attacked Jose hacking him several times. Facts: Pinca and Abenir, after drinking at a
Jose fell to the ground and rolled but Marcelo and his bakeshop, hitched a ride with a tricycle driver on their
son kept on hacking him. way home. After passing a man who was apparently
Held: Passion and obfuscation may not be drunk because he was swaying while he walked, the
properly appreciated in favor of the appellant. To be accused asked the driver to drop them off already. Pinca
considered as a mitigating circumstance, passion or told Abenir that that was the guy who spilled a drink on
obfuscation must arise from lawful sentiments and not him earlier that day. The accused picked up a long piece
from a spirit of lawlessness or revenge or from anger of wood and waited for the man to pass by. When the
and resentment. In the present case, clearly, Marcelo latter did, the accused hit him at the back of his head
was infuriated upon seeing his brother, Carlito, shot by which led to his death.
Jose. However, a distinction must be made between the When the police came, the accused readily
first time that Marcelo hacked Jose and the second time went with them and proceeded to tell his story that he
that the former hacked the latter. When Marcelo hacked was innocent and that it was Abenir who killed the man.
Jose right after seeing the latter shoot at Carlito, and if The accused was convicted of the crime of murder.
appellant refrained from doing anything else fter that, Held: For voluntary surrender to be
he could have validly invoked the mitigating appreciated, 3 requisites should be present: 1) the
circumstance of passion and obfuscation. But when, offender has not been actually arrested; 2) the offender
upon seeing his brother Carlito dead, Marcelo went back surrendered to a person of authority and 3) the
to Jose, who by then was already prostrate on the surrender was voluntary. The actions of the accused
ground and hardly moving, hacking Jose again was a belied this claim. He actually DENIED having committed
clear case of someone acting out of anger in the spirit of the crimes. He went on to try and “clear his name.”
revenge. There is no voluntary surrender.
confessed his guilt before the court prior to the Par. 10. – AND FINALLY, ANY OTHER
presentation of the evidence for the prosecution. The CIRCUMSTANCE OF A SIMILAR NATURE AND
following requirements must therefore concur: (1) the ANALOGOUS OF THOSE ABOVEMENTIONED.
accused spontaneously confessed his guilt; (2) the
confession of guilt was made in open court, that is, ♣ Over 60 years old with failing sight, similar to over 70
before a competent court trying the case; and (3) the years of age mentioned in paragraph 2.
confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of ♣ Voluntary restitution of the property stolen by the
evidence for the prosecution. The third requisite is accused or immediately reimbursing the amount
wanting in the present case. malversed is a mitigating circumstance as analogous to
voluntary surrender.
People v. Dawaton (2002) ♣ Not resisting arrest is not analogous to voluntary
Facts: An Information for murder qualified by surrender.
treachery and evident premeditation was filed against
♣ Testifying for the prosecution is analogous to plea of
Edgar Dawaton. When first arraigned he pleaded not
guilty.
guilty, but during the pre-trial he offered to plead guilty
to the lesser offense of homicide but was rejected by the
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH ARE NEITHER
prosecution, hence, the case proceeded to trial. The trial
EXEMPTING NOR MITIGATING
court sentenced him to death. He avers that he is
entitled to the mitigating circumstance of plea of guilty.
Held: While the accused offered to plead guilty 1. Mistake in the blow or aberratio ictus, for
to the lesser offense of homicide, he was charged with under Art. 48, there is a complex crime
murder for which he had already entered a plea of not committed. The penalty is even higher.
guilty. We have ruled that an offer to enter a plea of 2. Mistake in the identity of the victim, for under
guilty to a lesser offense cannot be considered as an Art. 4, par. 1, the accused is criminally liable
attenuating circumstance under the provisions of Art. 13 even if the wrong done is different from that
of The Revised Penal Code because to be voluntary the which is intended.
plea of guilty must be to the offense charged. 3. Entrapment of the accused.
Furthermore, Sec. 2, Rule 116, of the Revised 4. The accused is over 18 years of age. If the
Rules of Criminal Procedure requires the consent of the offender is over 18 years old, his age is neither
offended party and the prosecutor before an accused exempting nor mitigating.
may be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser offense 5. Performance of righteous action.
necessarily included in the offense charged. We note
that the prosecution rejected the offer of the accused. 4. AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
upon the accused to the such a situation as to 11. That the crime be committed in
MAXIMUM PERIOD. deserve no other penalty consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
than that specially 12. That the crime be committed by means of
prescribed by law for said inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel
crime. or international damage thereto, derailment of a
A generic aggravating A qualifying AC cannot be locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving
circumstance may be offset by a mitigating great waste and ruin.
compensated by a circumstance. 13. That the act be committed with evidence
mitigating circumstance. premeditation.
According to the new rules, generic and qualifying 14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be
aggravating circumstances must be alleged in order to employed.
be appreciated. 15. That advantage be taken of superior
strength, or means be employed to weaken the defense.
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH DO NOT 16. That the act be committed with treachery
HAVE THE EFFECT OF INCREASING THE PENALTY (alevosia).
AC 1) which in themselves constitute a crime There is treachery when the offender commits
specially punishable by law, or b) which are included by any of the crimes against the person, employing means,
the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend
therefore shall not be taken into account for the purpose directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk
of increasing the penalty (Art. 62, par. 1) to himself arising from the defense which the offended
party might make.
¤ AC which arise: a) from the moral attributes of the 17. That means be employed or circumstances
offender or b) from his private relations with the brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects
offended party, or c) from any other personal cause, of the act.
shall only serve to aggravate the liability of the 18. That the crime be committed after an
principals, accomplices, and accessories as to whom unlawful entry.
such circumstances are attendant. 19. There is an unlawful entry when an
entrance of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window
Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. — The following be broken.
are aggravating circumstances: 20. That the crime be committed with the aid
1. That advantage be taken by the offender of of persons under fifteen years of age or by means of
his public position. motor vehicles, motorized watercraft, airships, or other
2. That the crime be committed in contempt or similar means. (As amended by RA 5438).
with insult to the public authorities. 21. That the wrong done in the commission of
3. That the act be committed with insult or in the crime be deliberately augmented by causing other
disregard of the respect due the offended party on wrong not necessary for its commissions.
account of his rank, age, or sex, or that is be committed
in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not People v. Antonio (2002)
given provocation. Facts: Kevin Paul, 7 yr old son of the victim
4. That the act be committed with abuse of Sergio was lying on the bed beside his father Sergio in
confidence or obvious ungratefulness. the bedroom when he heard a window being opened and
5. That the crime be committed in the palace the sound of feet stepping on the floor. Then someone
of the Chief Executive or in his presence, or where public kicked open the door to the bedroom. Kevin saw Wilson
authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, Antonio carrying a shotgun. Wilson aimed his gun at
or in a place dedicated to religious worship. Sergio who was asleep on the bed and fired hitting
6. That the crime be committed in the night Sergio on the chest, shoulder and back. He was also hit
time, or in an uninhabited place, or by a band, whenever on his left thigh. Immediately after firing his gun, Wilson
such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the hurriedly left the room. When the police arrived, Sergio
offense. was already dead. Wilson surrendered to the police
Whenever more than three armed malefactors after eluding arrest for more than 1 yr. The trial court
shall have acted together in the commission of an convicted him of murder qualified by treachery and
offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a aggravated by the circumstance of evident
band. premeditation, dwelling and unlawful entry. The above
7. That the crime be committed on the agrravating circumstances were not alleged in the
occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, Information.
epidemic or other calamity or misfortune. Held: Pursuant to the 2000 Revised Rules of
8. That the crime be committed with the aid of Criminal Procedure, every Complaint or Information
armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity. must state not only the qualifying but also the
9. That the accused is a recidivist. aggravating circumstances. This rule may be given
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial retroactive effect in the light of the well-established rule
for one crime, shall have been previously convicted by that statutes regulating the procedure of the courts will
final judgment of another crime embraced in the same be construed as applicable to actions pending and
title of this Code. undetermined at the time of their passage. The
10. That the offender has been previously aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation,
punished by an offense to which the law attaches an dwelling and unlawful entry, not having been alleged in
equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to the Information, may not now be appreciated to
which it attaches a lighter penalty. enhance the liability of Wilson.
accused could have perpetrated the crime even without ¤ There must be evidence that in the commission of the
occupying his position, there is no abuse of public crime, the accused deliberately intended to offend or
position. The Court cited the case of People v. Herrera, insult the sex or age of the offended party.
where the Court emphatically said that the mere fact
that accused-appellant is a policeman and used his (1) WITH INSULT OR IN DISREGARD OF
government issued .38 caliber revolver to kill is not THE REPECT DUE THE OFFENDED PARTY ON
sufficient to establish that he misused his public position ACCOUNT:
in the commission of the crime.
(a) OF THE RANK OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
Par. 2. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN ex. An attempt upon the life of a general of the
CONTEMPT OR WITH INSULT TO THE PUBLIC Philippine Army is committed in disregard of his rank.
AUTHORITIES.
(b) OF THE AGE OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
REQUISITES: ex. When the aggressor is 45 years old and the
a. That the public authority is engaged in the victim was an octogenarian.
exercise of his functions. ¤ It is not proper to consider disregard of old
b. That he who is thus engaged in the age in crimes against property. Robbery with homicide is
exercise of his functions is not the person primarily a crime against property.
against whom the crime is committed.
c. The offender knows him to be a public (c) OF THE SEX OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
authority. ¤ This refers to the female sex, not to the male
d. His presence has not prevented the sex (Reyes)
offender from committing the criminal act. ¤ Killing a woman is not attended by this AC if
the offender did not manifest any specific insult or
PUBLIC AUTHORITY / PERSON IN AUTHORITY disrespect towards her sex.
A public officer who is directly vested with ¤ THIS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE IS
jurisdiction, that is, a public officer who has the power to NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FOLLOWING:
govern and execute the laws. The councilor, mayor, 1. When the offender acted with passion and
governor, barangay captain etc. are persons in obfuscation.
authority. A school teacher, town municipal health 2. When there exists a relationship between the
officer, agent of the BIR, chief of police, etc. are now offended party and the offender.
considered a person in authority. 3. When the condition of being a woman is
indispensable in the commission of the crime
¤ Par. 2 is not applicable if committee din the presence i.e. parricide, rape, etc.
of an agent only such as a police officer.
¤ Disregard of sex absorbed in treachery.
AGENT
A subordinate public officer charged with the (2) THAT BE COMMITTED IN THE
maintenance of public order and the protection and DWELLING OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
security of life and property, such as barrio policemen,
councilmen, and any person who comes to the aid of DWELLING – BUILDING OR STRUCTURE,
persons in authority. EXCLUSIVELY USED FOR REST AND COMFORT.
¤ a “combination house and store” or a market
¤ The crime should not be committed against the public stall where the victim slept is not a dwelling.
authority or else it becomes direct assault. ¤ This is considered an AC primarily because of
the sanctity of privacy, the law accords to human abode.
¤ Lack of knowledge on the part of the offender that a Also, in certain cases, there is an abuse of confidence
public authority is present indicates lack of intention to which the offended party reposed in the offender by
insult the public authority. opening the door to him.
¤ The evidence must show clearly that the
defendant entered the house of the deceased to attack
Par. 3. - THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED (1) WITH
him.
INSULT OR IN DISREGARD OF THE RESPECT DUE
¤ The offended party must not give
THE OFFENDED PARTY ON ACCOUNT OF HIS (a)
provocation. If the provocation did not take place in the
RANK, (b) AGE, OR (c) SEX, OR (2) THAT IS BE
house, dwelling may be considered as an AC.
COMMITTED IN THE DWELLING OF THE OFFENDED
¤ Dwelling is aggravating, even if the offender
PARTY, IF THE LATTER HAS NOT GIVEN
did not enter the upper part of the house where the
PROVOCATION.
victim was, but shot from under the house.
¤ Even if the killing took place outside the
¤ Four circumstances are enumerated in this paragraph, dwelling, it is aggravating provided that the commission
which can be considered single or together. If all the 4 of the crime was begun in the dwelling.
circumstances are present, they have the weight of one ¤ Dwelling is aggravating in abduction or illegal
aggravating circumstance only. detention.
¤ It is not aggravating where the deceased was
¤ This circumstance (rank, age or sex) may be taken called down from his house and he was murdered in the
into account only in crimes against person or honor. vicinity of his house.
¤ Dwelling includes dependencies, the foot of
the staircase and the enclosure under the house. If the
deceased was only about to step on the first rung of the made trouble whenever he was drunk. They wanted to
ladder when he was assaulted, the AC of dwelling will put up the accuse in another house. That night while
not be applicable. they were discussing the plans for the accused, while
their father went to his room, the accused, who looked
DWELLING NOT APPLICABLE: drunk, ran to the kitchen and got 2 knives and then
1. When both offender and offended party are stabbed the father. The father died.
occupants of the same house. Held: The AC of dwelling cannot be considered
2. When the robbery is committed by the use of aggravating where the accused and the victim were
force upon things, dwelling is not aggravating because living in the same house where the crime was
it is inherent to the crime. committed. The rationale for considering dwelling an AC
3. In the crime of trespass to dwelling, it is also is the violation by the offender of the sanctity of the
inherent or included by law in defining the crime. home of the victim by trespassing therein to commit the
4. When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient crime. This reason is entirely absent in this case.
and immediate provocation.
5. When the dwelling where the crime was People v. Lapaz (1989)
committed did not belong to the offended party. Facts: Eulalia Cabunag, a 70-year-old woman
6. When the rape was committed in the ground who was living alone, was beaten to death by 3 men.
floor of the 2-storey structure, the lower floor being Appellant Barleso, Lapaz and Cristoto agreed to kill
used as a video rental store and not as a private place Eulalia because there was one incident when the victim
of abode or residence. called Barleso a thief in front of many people.
Held: The presence of treachery is clear as
¤ A victim raped in the boarding house where she was a Barleso invited two companions to help him execute his
bedspacer. Her room constituted a “dwelling”. plan to beat the victim to death with pieces of wood in
the middle of the night insuring the killing of the victim
¤ Dwelling may be temporary dwelling. without risk to himself arising from the defense with the
offended party might make.
¤ Note: The Code speaks of dwelling, not domicile. While it may be true that nighttime is absorbed
in the AC of treachery, the AC of disregard of sex and
¤ Dwelling is not aggravating in adultery when paramour age cannot be similarly absorbed. Treachery refers to
also lives in the conjugal home. the manner of the commission of the crime. Disregard of
sex and age pertains to the relationship of the victim,
¤ Dwelling is not included in treachery. who is a 70-year old woman, and the appellant who is a
young man, 27 years old, at the time of the commission
People v. Rodil (1981) of the offense.
Facts: Lt. Mesana approached Rodil and
identifies himself as a PC officer. He asked Rodil whether People v. Taboga (2002)
or not the gun which the latter possessed had a license. Facts: Taboga entered the house of Tubon, a
Rodil attempted to draw his gun but was prevented by widowed septuagenarian, robbed, stabbed and burned
Mesana’s companions. Rodil was asked to sign a beyond recognition the latter’s house.
document attesting to the confiscation of the gun but he Held: Anent the circumstance of age, there
refused. Instead, he drew a dagger and managed to must be a showing that the malefactor deliberately
stab Mesana in the chest repeatedly. intended to offend or insult the age of the victim.
Held: The AC of disregard of rank should be Neither could disregard of respect due to sex be
appreciated because it is obvious that Mesana identified appreciated if the offender did not manifest any
himself as a PC officer to the accused who is merely a intention to offend or disregard the sex of the victim. In
member of the Anti-Smuggling Unit and therefore other words, killing a woman is not attended by the
inferior both in rank and social status to the victim. aggravating circumstance if the offender did not
manifest any specific insult or disrespect towards the
People v. Daniel (1978) offended party's sex. In the case at bar, there is
Facts: 13-year-old Margarita was at the bus absolutely no showing that Taboga deliberately intended
station when the accused, Daniel, started molesting her, to offend or insult the victim. However, even if
asking her name and trying to get her bag to carry it for disrespect or disregard of age or sex were not
her. She refused and asked the help of the conductor appreciated, the four circumstances enumerated in
and driver but they did not help her. She ran to the Article 14, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code, as
jeepney stop and rode the jeep. Daniel followed her to amended, can be considered singly or together.
the boarding house and he raped her.
Held: Although Margarita was merely renting a People v. De Mesa (2001)
bedspace in a boarding house, her room constituted for Facts: Motas, Barangay Chairman of Barangay
all intents and purposes a “dwelling” as the term is used Sta. Cruz Putol, San Pablo City, was shot by De Mesa
in Art. 14(3) of the RPC. Be he a lessee, a boarder, or a while playing a card game with some townmates at a
bedspacer, the place is his home the sanctity of which neighborhood store resulting to his death. The trial
the law seeks to protect and uphold. court, in convicting De Mesa for murder, appreciated the
aggravating circumstance of commission of the crime in
contempt of or with assault to public authorities.
Held: The trial court also erred in appreciating
People v. Banez (1999) the aggravating circumstance that the commission of
Facts: The accused was living with his parents. the crime was in contempt of or with assault to public
His sisters complained to their father that the accused authorities. The requisites of this circumstance are: (1)
the public authority is engaged in the discharge of his The trial court appreciated the aggravating circumstance
duties and (2) he is not the person against whom the of dwelling.
crime is committed. None of these circumstances are Held: The trial court correctly appreciated the
present in this case. In the first place, the crime was aggravating circumstance of dwelling or morada in this
committed against the barangay chairman himself. At case. The word dwelling includes every dependency of
the time that he was killed, he was not engaged in the the house that forms an integral part thereof and
discharge of his duties as he was in fact playing a card therefore it includes the staircase of the house and
game with his neighbors. much more, its terrace. When a crime is committed in
the dwelling of the offended party and the latter has not
People v. Montinola (Supra) given provocation, dwelling may be appreciated as an
Facts: Montinola boarded a passenger jeepney aggravating circumstance. 32 Provocation in the
driven by Hibinioda. Among the passengers was aggravating circumstance of dwelling must be: (a) given
Reteracion. All of a sudden, appellant drew his gun, an by the offended party, (b) sufficient, and (c) immediate
unlicensed firearm, .380 cal pistol and directed to the commission of the crime.
Reteracion to hand over his money or else he would be
killed. Montinola aimed the firearm at the neck of People v. Arizobal (2000)
Reteracion and fired successive shots at the latter. As a Facts: Arizobal and two others entered the
result Reteracion slumped dead. Montinola was charged house of spouses Clementina and Laurencio Gimenez.
with robbery with homicide and illegal possession of They then ransacked the house and ordered Laurencio
firearm. to go with them to his son Jimmy’s house. Upon
Held: DIsregard of age, sex or rank is not reaching the house of Jimmy, they tied the latter and
aggravating in robbery with homicide, which is primarily one Francisco also surnamed Gimenez. They consumed
a crime against property, as the homicide is regarded as the food and cigarettes Jimmy’s wife Erlinda, was
merely incidental to the robbery. selling. They proceeded to ransacked the household in
search of valuables. Thereafter, Erlinda was ordered to
People v. Taño (2000) produce P100,00 in exchange for Jimmy’s life. Erlinda
Facts: Amy was tending a video rental shop offered to give a certificate of large cattle but the
owned by Marina. Taño kept going in and out of the document was thrown back at her. The 3 then dragged
shop and on the last time he went inside said shop, he Jimmy outside the house together with Laurencio. One
suddenly jumped over the counter, strangled Amy, of the culprits returned and told Erlinda that Jimmy and
poked a knife at the left side of her neck, pulled her Laurencio had been killed for trying to escape. The trial
towards the kitchen where he forced her to undress, and court found Arizobal and Lignes guilty of robbery with
gained carnal knowledge of her against her will and homicide. It also appreciated the aggravating
consent. Before they could reach the upper floor, he circumstance of dwelling.
suddenly pulled Amy down and started mauling her until Held: The trial court is correct in appreciating
she lost consciousness; then he freely ransacked the dwelling as an aggravating circumstance. Generally,
place. Leaving Amy for dead after repeatedly banging dwelling is considered inherent in the crimes which can
her head, first on the wall, then on the toilet bowl, he only be committed in the abode of the victim, such as
took her bracelet, ring and wristwatch. He then trespass to dwelling and robbery in an inhabited place.
proceeded upstairs where he took as well the jewelry However, in robbery with homicide the authors thereof
box containing other valuables belonging to his victim's can commit the heinous crime without transgressing the
employer. The trial court appreciated dwelling as an sanctity of the victim's domicile. In the case at bar, the
aggravating circumstance because the incident took robbers demonstrated an impudent disregard of the
place supposedly at the residence of private inviolability of the victims' abode when they forced their
complainant's employer, "which doubles as a video way in, looted their houses, intimidated and coerced
rental shop. their inhabitants into submission, disabled Laurencio and
Held: Dwelling cannot be appreciated as an Jimmy by tying their hands before dragging them out of
aggravating circumstance in this case because the rape the house to be killed.
was committed in the ground floor of a two-story
structure, the lower floor being used as a video rental Par. 4. - THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH (1)
store and not as a private place of abode or residence. ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR (2) OBVIOUS
UNGRATEFULNESS.
People v. Rios (2000)
Facts: Rios, hurled stones at the house of (1) ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE
Ambrocio and Anacita Benedicto. A few minutes later,
and while the Benedicto spouses were tending their REQUISITES:
store, Rios bought cigarettes. Ambrocio confronted Rios a. That the offended party had trusted the offender.
about the stoning incident and an altercation ensued b. That the offender abused such trust by
between them. Having heard the appellant shout at committing a crime against the offended party.
Ambrocio, Mesa intervened and requested the 2 to part c. That the abuse of confidence facilitated the
ways and escorted them to their respective residences. commission of the crime.
A few minutes later, appellant went back to the store.
Ambrocio went to the terrace of their house. Appellant ¤ The confidence between the offender and the offended
suddenly approached Ambrocio and stabbed his right party must be immediate and personal.
stomach. Mesa and his group saw Anacita weeping while
Ambrocio was lying lifeless in the terrace of their house. ¤ It is inherent in malversation, qualified theft, estafa by
Ambrocio died before he was brought to the hospital. conversion or misappropriation and qualified seduction.
(2) OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS successfully consummate their plans. The fact that they
brought with them a flashlight clearly shows that they
¤ The ungratefulness must be obvious – intended to commit the crime in darkness.
manifest and clear.
People v. Ancheta (2004)
People v. Mandolado (1983) Facts: Appellant Ulep and his group, robbed
Facts: Mandolado and Ortillano, with Erinada Alfredo Roca of 35 sacks of Palay after killing his son, his
and Simon are trainees/draftees of the AFP. They got to wife and his mother with their guns. Thereafter, they
know each other and had a drinking session at the bus boarded their jeep and left.
terminal. The accused was drunk. He got his gun and Held: The offense was proven to have been
started firing. Erinada and Simon rode a jeep and tried executed by a band. A crime is committed by a band
to escape from Mandolado and Ortillano but the two when at least four armed malefactors act together in the
eventually caught up with them. The two accused shot commission thereof. In this case, all six accused were
the victims to death. armed with guns which they used on their victims.
Held: There is no AC of abuse of confidence. In Clearly, all the armed assailants took direct part in the
order that abuse of confidence be deemed as execution of the robbery with homicide.
aggravating, it is necessary that “there exists a relation
of trust and confidence between the accused and one People v. Librando (2000)
against whom the crime was committed and that the Facts: Edwin and his daughter Aileen, and a
accused made use of such a relationship to commit the relative, Fernando, were traversing a hilly portion of a
crime. It is also essential that the confidence between trail on their way home when they met Raelito Librando,
the parties must be immediate and personal such as Larry and Eddie. Edwin was carrying a torch at that time
would give the accused some advantage to commit the as it was already dark. Raelito inquired from Edwin the
crime. It is obvious that the accused and the victims whereabouts of Fernando and without any warning hit
only met for the first time so there is no personal or Edwin with a piece of wood. Eddie followed suit and
immediate relationship upon which confidence might delivered another blow to Edwin. Edwin ran but he was
rest between them. chased by Raelito. Thereafter, the three men took turns
hitting Edwin with pieces of wood until the latter fell and
People v. Arrojado (2001) died. The trial court considered nighttime and
Facts: Arrojado and the victim Mary Ann are uninhabited place as just one aggravating circumstance.
first cousins and lived with her and her father. Arrojado Held: The court did not err in considering
helped care for the victim’s father for which he was paid nighttime and uninhabited place as just one aggravating
a P1,000 monthly salary. Arrojado killed Mary Ann by circumstance. The court cited the case of People vs.
stabbing her with a knife. Thereafter he claimed that the Santos where it has been held that if the aggravating
latter committed suicide. circumstances of nighttime, uninhabited place or band
Held: The aggravating circumstance of abuse concur in the commission of the crime, all will constitute
of confidence is present in this case. For this one aggravating circumstance only as a general rule
aggravating circumstance to exist, it is essential to show although they can be considered separately if their
that the confidence between the parties must be elements are distinctly perceived and can subsist
immediate and personal such as would give the accused independently, revealing a greater degree of perversity.
some advantage or make it easier for him to commit the
criminal act. The confidence must be a means of Par. 5. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN THE
facilitating the commission of the crime, the culprit PALACE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OR IN HIS
taking advantage of the offended party's belief that the PRESENCE, OR WHERE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES ARE
former would not abuse said confidence. ENGAGED IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR DUTIES,
OR IN A PLACE DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS
People v. Silva (2002) WORSHIP.
Facts: Accused armed with a gun, a bolo, a
rope and a flashlight abducted brothers Edmund and PLACE WHER PUBLIC CONTEMPT OR INSULT
Manuel Ceriales while the two were playing a game of AUTHORITIES ARE TO PUBLIC
cards inside their house in the middle of the night. They ENGAGED IN THE AUTHORITIES
tied both their hands and feet with a rope and they DISCHARGE OF THEIR (par. 2)
brought the brothers at an isolated place. Edmund was DUTIES (par. 5)
stabbed and beheaded causing his instantaneous death.
The public authorities are in the performance of their
Edmund Ceriales was able to escape while the accused
duties.
were about to kill his brother. The trial court appreciated
The public authorities who The public authorities are
nighttime as an aggravating circumstance.
are in the performance of performing their duties
Held: By and of itself, nighttime is not an
their duties must be in outside of their offices.
aggravating circumstance, however, it becomes
their office.
aggravating only when: (1) it is especially sought by the
The public authority may The public authority should
offender; or (2) it is taken advantage of by him; or (3) it
be the offended party. not be the offended party.
facilitates the commission of the crime by ensuring the
offender's immunity from capture. In this case, the trial
court correctly appreciated nighttime as aggravating ¤ If it is the Malacañang palace or a church, it is
considering that nighttime facilitated the abduction of aggravating, regardless of whether State or official or
the Ceriales brothers, the killing of Manuel and the religious functions are being held.
attempt to kill Edmund. Evidence shows that accused-
appellants took advantage of the darkness to ¤ The President need not be in the palace. His presence
alone in any place where the crime is committed is
enough to constitute the AC. It also applies even if he is - Whenever more than 3 armed malefactors
not engaged in the discharge of his duties in the place shall have acted together in the commission of an
where the crime was committed. offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a
band.
¤ But as regards the place where the public authorities - The armed men must act together in the
are engaged in the discharge of their duties, there must commission of the crime.
be some performance of public functions. - If one of the four armed persons is a principal
by inducement, they do not form a band.
¤ Cemeteries are not places dedicated for religious - All the armed men, at least four in number,
worship. must take direct part in the execution of the act
constituting the crime.
¤ Offender must have the intention to commit a crime - Considered in crimes against property and
when he entered the place. persons and not to crimes against chastity.
- It is inherent in brigandage.
Par. 6. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED (1) IN
THE NIGHT TIME, OR (2) IN AN UNINHABITED People v. Jose (supra)
PLACE, OR (3) BY A BAND, WHENEVER SUCH Facts: The Maggie Dela Riva story. Maggie was
CIRCUMSTANCES MAY FACILITATE THE on her was home, driving her car accompanied by her
COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE. maid, when she was stopped by another car boarded by
WHENEVER MORE THAN THREE ARMED 4 men. Accused Pineda pulled her out of the car and
MALEFACTORS SHALL HAVE ACTED TOGETHER IN forced her inside the assailants’ car. She was brought to
THE COMMISSION OF AN OFFENSE, IT SHALL BE a hotel and there, the 4 raped her.
DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED BY A BAND. Held: SC found that there was committed
forcible abduction with rape. With rape as the more
¤ These 3 circumstances may be considered separately serious crime, the penalty to be imposed is the
when their elements are distinctly perceived and can maximum in accordance with Art. 48 of the RPC. With
subsist independently, revealing a greater degree of this finding, the extreme penalty of death was imposed.
perversity. While the SC found no necessity of considering the AC’s,
the Court still considered the AC’s for the purpose of
Nighttime, uninhabited place or band is determining the proper penalty to be imposed in each of
aggravating: the other 3 crimes of simple rape. The court claimed
1. When it facilitated the commission of the that there was an AC of nighttime because of appellants
crime; or have purposely sought such circumstance to facilitate
2. When especially sought for by the the commission of these crimes.
offender to insure the commission of the crime or
for the purpose of impunity; or People v. Desalisa (1994)
3. When the offender took advantage thereof Facts: Moved by hatred and jealousy, the
for the purpose of impunity. accused, armed with a sharp pointed instrument,
attacked and inflicted physical injuries on the vagina of
(1) NIGHTTIME his wife who was about 5 months pregnant. Thereafter,
- The commission of the crime must begin and the accused hanged his wife to a jackfruit tree, causing
be accomplished in the nighttime. her death and that of her fetus.
- The offense must be actually committed in He was found guilty of the complex crime of
the darkness of the night. When the place is illuminated parricide with unintentional abortion and was sentenced
by light, nighttime is not aggravating. to life imprisonment by the LC.
Held: The AC of uninhabited place is present.
(2) UNINHABITED PLACE The uninhabitedness of a place is determined not by the
- One where there are no houses at all, a place distance of the nearest house to the scene of the crime
at a considerable distance from town, or where the but whether or not in the place of the commission, there
houses are scattered at a great distance from each was reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some
other. help. Considering that the killing was done during
- TEST: WON in the place of the commission of nighttime and many fruit trees obstruct the view of
the offense, there was a reasonable possibility of the neighbors and passersby, there was no reasonable
victim receiving some help. possibility for the victim to receive any assistance. The
- The fact that persons occasionally passed in couple lived on a small nipa house on a hill. There are 2
the uninhabited place and that on the night of the other houses in the neighborhood which are 150 meters
murder another hunting party was not a great distance away; the house of Norma’s parents and house of
away, does not matter. It is the nature of the place Carlito. These cannot, however, be seen from the
which is decisive. couple’s house because of the many fruit trees and
- It must appear that the accused SOUGHT shrubs prevalent in the area.
THE SOLITUDE of the place where the crime was
committed, in order to better attain his purpose. Gamara v. Valero (1973)
- The offenders must choose the place as an Facts: Petition for certiorari and prohibition
aid either (1) to an easy and uninterrupted was filed impugning the order of the judge of the lower
accomplishment of their criminal designs or (2) to insure court to forward the records of the case to the Military
concealment of the offense. Tribunal. This is claimed to be in accordance with
General Orders No. 12 that those involving crimes
(3) BAND against persons and property when committed by a
syndicate or a band falls under the jurisdiction of the person who shall commit a felony after having been
Military Tribunal. convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve
Held: While the information charges four such sentence, or while serving the same, shall be
persons, it was not, however, shown that all of them punished by the maximum period of the penalty
were armed when they allegedly acted in concert in the prescribed by law for the new felony.
commission of the crime. What is more, the supposed Any convict of the class referred to in this
participation of petitioner Gamara was that of principal article, who is not a habitual criminal, shall be pardoned
by inducement, which undoubtedly connotes that he had at the age of seventy years if he shall have already
no direct participation in the perpetration thereof. served out his original sentence, or when he shall
complete it after reaching the said age, unless by reason
Par. 7. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED ON THE of his conduct or other circumstances he shall not be
OCCASION OF A CONFLAGRATION, SHIPWRECK, worthy of such clemency.
EARTHQUAKE, EPIDEMIC OR OTHER CALAMITY OR
MISFORTUNE. ¤ A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one
crime, shall have been previously convicted by final
¤ The reason for the existence of this AC is found in the judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of
debased form of criminality met in one who, in the midst the RPC.
of a great calamity, instead of lending aid to the
afflicted, adds to their suffering by taking advantage of REQUISITES:
their misfortune to despoil them. a. That the offender is on trial for an offense;
b. That he was previously convicted by final
¤ The offender must take advantage of the calamity or judgment of another crime;
misfortune. c. That both the first and the second
offenses are embraced in the same title of the
¤ “OR OTHER CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE” – refers to Code;
other conditions of distress similar to “conflagration, d. That the offender is convicted of the new
shipwreck, earthquake or epidemic.” offense.
Par. 8. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED WITH ¤ What is controlling is the time of trial, not the time of
THE AID OF ARMED MEN OR PERSONS WHO the commission of the crime.
INSURE OR AFFORD IMPUNITY. ¤ There is no recidivism if the subsequent conviction is
for an offense committed before the offense involved in
REQUISITES: the prior conviction.
1. That the armed men or persons took part
in the commission of the crime, directly or ¤ Sec. 7 of Rule 120 , Rules of Court, provides that a
indirectly. judgment in a criminal case becomes final
2. That the accused availed himself of their (1) after the lapse of the [period for perfecting
aid or relied upon them when the crime was an appeal, or
committed. (2) when the sentence has been partially or
totally satisfied or served, or
¤ The armed men must take part directly or indirectly in (3) the defendant has expressly waived in
the offense. writing his right to appeal, or
¤ This AC shall not be considered when both the (4) the accused has applied for probation.
attacking party and the party attacked were equally
armed. ¤ There is recidivism even if the lapse of time between
¤ This AC is not present when the accused as well as two felonies is more than 10 years. Recidivism must be
those who cooperated with him in the commission of the taken into account no mater how many years have
crime, acted under the same plan and for the same intervened between the 1st and 2nd felonies.
purpose.
¤ Pardon does not obliterate the fact that the accused
WITH AID OF ARMED BY A BAND was a recidivist; but amnesty extinguishes the penalty
MEN (par. 8) (par. 6) and its effects.
Aid of armed men is More than 3 armed
People v. Molina (2000)
present even if one of the malefactors that have
Facts: Brothers Joseph and Angelito, along
offenders merely relied on acted together in the
with their cousin, Danny were on their way home when
their aid, for actual aid is commission of an offense.
they heard somebody shout “kuba”, referring to Joseph,
not necessary.
a hunchback. They asked who said that but no one
admitted. As the 3 were about to go, Molina delivered a
¤ If there are 4 armed men, “aid of armed men” is
strong stabbing blow at the back of Joseph. Angelito
absorbed by “employment of a band”
came to aid his brother but Molina also stabbed him at
¤ “Aid of armed men” includes “armed women”
the back. Joseph was dead on arrival at the clinic.
Held: To prove recidivism, it is necessary to
Par. 9. - THAT THE ACCUSED IS A RECIDIVIST. allege the same in the information and to attach thereto
certified copies of the sentences rendered against the
Art. 160. Commission of another crime during service accused. Nonetheless, the trial court may still give such
of penalty imposed for another offense; Penalty. — AC credence if the accused does not object to the
Besides the provisions of Rule 5 of Article 62, any presentation of evidence on the fact of recidivism.
In the case at bar, the accused never voiced of ten years from the date of his release or last
out any objection when confronted with the fact of his conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious
previous conviction for attempted homicide. physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is
found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener.
People v. Dacillo (2004)
Facts: Pacot stabbed and strangled Rosemarie REQUISITES:
leading to the latters death. Dacillo for his part, hold a. That the accused is on trial for
down Rosemarie’s legs to prevent her from struggling. an offense;
The two men stopped only when they were sure that the b. That he previously served
victim was already dead. Dacillo then encase her corpse sentence for another offense to which the law
in a cement. The trial court imposed the death penalty attaches an equal or greater penalty, or for 2 or
on the ground that Dacillo admitted during re-cross more crimes to which it attaches lighter penalty
examination that he had a prior conviction for the death han that for the new offense; and
of his former live-in partner. The fact that Dacillo was a c. That he is convicted of the new
recidivist was appreciated by the trial court as a generic offense.
aggravating circumstance which increased the imposable
penalty from reclusion perpetua to death REITERACION/ RECIDIVISM
Held: The aggravating circumstance of HABITUALITY
recidivism was not alleged in the information and
It is necessary that the It is enough that a final
therefore cannot be appreciated against appellant.
offender shall have served judgment has been
In order to appreciate recidivism as an
out his sentence for the rendered in the first
aggravating circumstance, it is necessary to allege it in
first offense. offense.
the information and to attach certified true copies of the
The previous and It is the requirement that
sentences previously meted out to the accused. 26 This
subsequent offenses must the offenses be included in
is in accord with Rule 110, Section 8 of the Revised
not be embraced in the the same title of the Code.
Rules of Criminal Procedure which states: SEC. 8.
same title of the Code.
Designation of the offense. — The complaint or
Reiteracion is not always Recidivism is not always to
information shall state the designation of the offense
an aggravating be taken into consideration
given by the statute, aver the acts or omissions
circumstance. in fixing the penalty to be
constituting the offense, and specify its qualifying and
imposed upon the
aggravating circumstances. If there is no designation of
accused.
the offense, reference shall be made to the section or
subsection of the statute punishing it.
FOUR FORMS OR REPETITION:
1. RECIDIVISM
Par. 10. - THAT THE OFFENDER HAS BEEN
PREVIOUSLY PUNISHED BY AN OFFENSE TO
WHICH THE LAW ATTACHES AN EQUAL OR 2. REITERACTION OR HABITUALITY
GREATER PENALTY OR FOR TWO OR MORE CRIMES
TO WHICH IT ATTACHES A LIGHTER PENALTY. 3. MULTI-RECIDIVISM OR HABITUAL
DELINQUENCY
Art. 62. Effect of the attendance of - when a person, within a period of 10 years
mitigating or aggravating circumstances and of from the date of his release or last conviction of the
habitual delinquency. — Mitigating or aggravating crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
circumstances and habitual delinquency shall be taken robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, is found guilty of
into account for the purpose of diminishing or increasing any of said crimes a third time or oftener. In habitual
the penalty in conformity with the following rules: delinquency, the offender is either a recidivist or one
5. Habitual delinquency shall have the who has been previously punished for two or more
following effects: offenses (habituality). He shall suffer an additional
(a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be penalty for being a habitual delinquent.
sentenced to the penalty provided by law for the last
crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional 4. QUASI-RECIDIVISM
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and - Any person who shall commit a felony after
maximum periods; having been convicted by final judgment, before
(b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall beginning to serve such sentence or while serving the
be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime same, shall be punished by the maximum period of the
of which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty penalty prescribed by law for the new felony.
of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods;
and People v. Gaorana (1998)
(c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the Facts: Marivel, upon instruction of Rowena
culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the (common-law wife of the accused) went to the house of
last crime of which he be found guilty and to the Gaorana and saw the couple lying down. Marivel was
additional penalty of prision mayor in its maximum asked to come it and Rowena stood up to urinate.
period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period. Gaorana covered her mouth and pointed a hunting knife
Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of to her neck and raped her. The second incident of rape
the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender, in occurred while Marivel was sleeping in the sala with her
conformity herewith, shall in no case exceed 30 years. brother and sister. Marivel did not shout because she
For the purpose of this article, a person shall was afraid of the accused who was a prisoner and had
be deemed to be habitual delinquent, is within a period already killed somebody.
Held: The 2 Information alleged that both promise and the one who accepts it, both of whom are
instances of rape were attended by the aggravating principals – to the former, because he directly induces
circumstance of quasi-recidivism. The TC made no the latter to commit the crime, and the latter because
express ruling that the appellant was a quasi-recidivist, he commits it.
and rightly so. During the trial, the prosecution
manifested that appellant had been convicted by the • When this AC is present, it affects not only the person
RTC and was serving sentence for the crime of homicide. who received the price or reward, but also the person
However, the prosecution failed or neglected to present who gave it.
in evidence the record of appellant’s previous conviction.
Quasi-recidivism, like recidivism and reiteracion, • The evidence must show that one of the accused used
necessitates the presentation of a certified copy of the money or other valuable consideration for the purpose
sentence convicting an accused. The fact that appellant of inducing another to perform the deed.
was an inmate of DAPECOL does not prove that final
judgment had been rendered against him. Par. 12. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED BY
MEANS OF INUNDATION, FIRE, POISON,
People v. Villapando (1989) EXPLOSION, STRANDING OF A VESSEL OR
Facts: The accused was charged before the INTERNATIONAL DAMAGE THERETO, DERAILMENT
RTC with the crimes of murder and of attempted OF A LOCOMOTIVE, OR BY THE USE OF ANY OTHER
homicide. ARTIFICE INVOLVING GREAT WASTE AND RUIN.
Held: The court does not agree that reiteracion
or habituality should be appreciated in this case. The • Unless used by the offender as a means to accomplish
appellant was found by the trial court to have committed a criminal purpose, any of the circumstances in
offenses prior to and after the incident of Jan. 14, 1979. paragraph 12 cannot be considered to increase the
In habituality, it is essential that the offender be penalty or to change the nature of the offense.
previously punished, that is, he has served the • When another AC already qualifies the crime, any of
sentence, for an offense in which the law attaches, or these AC’s shall be considered as generic aggravating
provides for an equal or greater penalty than that circumstance only.
attached by law to the second offense, or for two or ore • When the crime intended to be committed is arson and
offenses, in which the law attaches a lighter penalty. somebody dies as a result thereof, the crime is simply
Here, the records do not disclose that the appellant has arson and the act resulting in the death of that person is
been previously punished by an offense to which the law not even an independent crime of homicide, it being
attaches an equal or greater or penalty or for two or absorbed.
more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty.
• The killing of the victim by means of such
People v. Cajara (2000) circumstances as inundation, fire, poison or explosion
Facts: Accused Cajara raped 16-year old qualifies the offense to murder.
Marita in front of his common-law wife who is the half-
sister of the victim and his two small children. The trial • It will be noted that each of the circumstances of
court convicted him as charged and sentenced him to “fire”, “explosion,” and “derailment of a locomotive” may
death. be a part of the definition of particular crime, such as,
Held: The records show that the crime was arson, crime involving destruction, and damages and
aggravated by reiteracion under Art. 14, par. 10, of The obstruction to means of communication.
Revised Penal Code, the accused having been convicted In these cases, they do not serve to increase
of frustrated murder in 1975 and of homicide, frustrated the penalty, because they are already included by the
homicide, trespass to dwelling, illegal possession of law in defining the crimes.
firearms and murder sometime in 1989 where his
sentences were later commuted to imprisonment for 23
Par. 13. - THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH
years and a fine of P200,000.00. He was granted
EVIDENCE PREMEDITATION.
conditional pardon by the President of the Philippines on
8 November 1991. Reiteracion or habituality under Art.
14, par. 10, herein cited, is present when the accused • Evident premeditation implies a deliberate planning of
has been previously punished for an offense to which the act before executing it.
the law attaches an equal or greater penalty than that
attached by law to the second offense or for two or more • The essence of premeditation is that the execution of
offenses to which it attaches a lighter penalty. As the criminal act must be preceded by cool thought and
already discussed, herein accused can be convicted only reflection upon the resolution to carry out the criminal
of simple rape and the imposable penalty therefor is intent during the space of time sufficient to arrive at a
reclusion perpetua. Where the law prescribes a single calm judgment.
indivisible penalty, it shall be applied regardless of the
mitigating or aggravating circumstances attendant to • Evident premeditation may not be appreciated absent
the crime, such as in the instant case. any proof as to how and when the plan was hatched or
what time elapsed before it was carried out.
Par. 11. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN
REQUISITIES:
CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD, OR
1. The time when the offender
PROMISE.
determined to commit the crime;
2. An act manifestly indicating that
• When this AC is present, there must be 2 or more the culprit has clung to his determination; and
principals, the one who gives or offers the price or
- When the crime was carefully planned by the Held: Evident premeditation was not
offenders; established by the prosecution. Although the facts tend
- When the offenders previously prepared the to show that Camilet might have harbored ill-feelings
means which they considered adequate to towards the Camanchos after they took a portion of the
carry it out. land he was farming and, as he himself stated to the
3. A sufficient lapse of time police, they also took the produce from his cornfield,
between the determination and execution, to there is no proof that Camilet conceived of killing the
allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his victim. Indeed, there is no evidence of 1) the time when
act and to allow is conscience to overcome the he determined to commit the crime, 2) an act manifestly
resolution of his will. indicating that he has clung to his determination and
- The offender must have an opportunity to execution to allow him to reflect upon the consequences
coolly and serenely think and deliberate on the of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the
meaning and the consequences of what he resolution of his will had he desired to hearken to its
planned to do, an interval long enough for his warnings.
conscience and better judgment to overcome People v. Ilaoa (1994)
his evil desire and scheme. Facts: The 5 accused were charged for the
gruesome murder of Nestor de Loyola. The conviction
• Conspiracy generally presupposes premeditation. was based on the following circumstances: a) The
• Evident premeditation, while inherent in robbery, may deceased was seen on the night before the killing in a
be aggravating in robbery with homicide if the drinking session with some of the accused; 2) The
premeditation included the killing of the victim. drunken voices accused Ruben and Nestor were later
heard and Nestor was then seen being kicked and
People v. Bibat (1998) mauled by the 5 accused; 3) some of the accused
Facts: At around 1:30 pm, Bibat stabbed to borrowed the tricycle of Alex at about 2 a.m.; 4) blood
death one Lloyd del Rosario as the latter was on his way was found in Ruben’s shirt.
to school waiting for a ride. The suspect fled while the Held: Evident premeditation cannot be
victim was brought to the hospital where he was considered. There is nothing in the records to show that
pronounced dead on arrival. A witness testified that the appellant, prior to the night in question, resolved to kill
accused and several others often met in Robles’ house. Nestor, nor is there proof to show that such killing was
In one of their meetings, the accused and his the result of meditation, calculation or resolution on his
companions hid some guns and “tusok” in the house. part. On the contrary, the evidence tends to show that
Also, other witnesses saw the accused at around 11:30 the series of circumstances which culminated in the
am with some companions and heard the plan to kill killing constitutes an unbroken chain of events with no
someone. interval of time separating them for calculation and
Held: There is evident premeditation meditation.
determination because the 3 requisites are present.
There was evident premeditation where 2 hours had People v. Mondijar (2002)
elapsed from the time the accused clung to his Facts:. In a previous incident, Aplacador had
determination to kill the victim up to the actual stabbed Mondijar, his father in law on the knee. A
perpetration of the crime. month after, Mondiijar stabbed and hacked his son-in-
law with the use of a sharp and pointed bolo which
People v. Lug-aw (1994) resulted to his death.
Facts: Pal-loy was fencing the boundary limits Held: There was no evident premeditation. For
of the land he was faming when his daughter, Sonia, the circumstance of evident premeditation to be
heard a shot. Immediately, she went uphill and just as a appreciated, the prosecution must present clear and
second gun shot resounded, she saw Bannay and Lug- positive evidence of the planning and preparation
aw from a distance and that her father was bout to draw undertaken by the offender prior to the commission of
his bolo when Lug-aw shot him. the crime. Settled is the rule that evident premeditation,
Held: The SC ruled that there was no evident like any other circumstance that qualifies a killing to
premeditation because no one witnessed the initial murder, must be established beyond reasonable doubt
attack. As Sonia herself testified, she heard the first as conclusively and indubitably as the killing itself. In
whot, went up a hill, climbed a tree and from ther, saw the present case, no evidence was presented by the
Lug-aw shooting her father with the shot reverberating prosecution as to when and how appellant planned and
as the second gun report. What she did see was her prepared for the killing of the victim. There is no
father trying to repel the assault with a bolo but he showing of any notorious act evidencing a determination
failed because a second shot hit him. The records are to commit the crime which could prove appellant's
bereft of evidence that the crime was committed with criminal intent.
evident premeditation.
People v. Torpio (supra)
People v. Camilet (1986) Facts: While having a drinking spree in a
Facts: After a prayer meeting was held at the cottage, Anthony tried to let Dennis Torpio drink gin
place of the victim, a deaf-mute boy arrived crying and and as the latter refused, Anthony bathed Dennis with
while making signals, was able to convey that he was gin and mauled him several times. Dennis crawled
strangled and spanked. Accompanied by some of his beneath the table and Anthony tried to stab him with a
guests, the victim proceeded to go to the place where 22 fan knife but did not hit him. Dennis got up and ran
the boy said he was accosted. Nearing the place, the towards their home. Upon reaching home, he got a
victim was suddenly stabbed by the accused in the knife. He went back to the cottage by another route
stomach with a long knife. and upon arrival Anthony was still there. Upon seeing
Dennis, Anthony avoided Dennis and ran by passing the Dario and if they did intend to kill him, the prosecution
shore towards the creek but Dennis met him, blocked failed to prove how the malefactors intended to
him and stabbed him. When he was hit, Anthony ran consummate the crime. Except for the fact that the
but got entangled with a fishing net beside the creek appellant and his three companions waited in an alley
and fell on his back. Dennis then mounted on him and for Dario to return to his house, the prosecution failed to
continued stabbing him resulting to the latters death. prove any overt acts on the part of the appellant and his
Thereafter, Dennis left and slept at a grassy meadow cohorts showing that that they had clung to any plan to
near a Camp. In the morning, he went to Estrera, a kill the victim.
police officer to whom he voluntarily surrendered.
Held: No evident premeditation exist in this Par. 14. - THAT THE CRAFT, FRAUD OR DISGUISE
case. There was no sufficient interregnum from the BE EMPLOYED.
time the Dennis was stabbed by the victim, when the
Dennis fled to their house and his arming himself with a CRAFT – involves intellectual trickery and cunning on
knife, and when he stabbed the victim. In a case of the part of the accused. It is employed as a scheme in
fairly recent vintage, it was ruled that there is no the execution of the crime.
evident premeditation when the fracas was the result, e.x. Where the defendants pretended to be
not of a deliberate plan but of rising tempers, or when constabulary soldiers to gain entry into the place of the
the attack was made in the heat of anger. victims.
The act of the accused in pretending to be
People v. Bernal (2002) bona fide passengers of the taxicab driven by the
Facts: Appellant, Fernando, Felix, Rey all deceased, when they were not so in fact, in order not to
surnamed Bernal and the victim Pedrito went to a arouse his suspicion, and then killing him, constituted
pubhouse. Pedrito Rey and appellant went inside while craft.
Fernando and Felix waited outside. Fernando later went
inside and saw the three in a sleeping position. • Where craft partakes of an element of the offense, the
Fernando then asked Felix to start the trycicle as they same may not be appreciated independently for the
would bring home the three. He first brought Pedrito out purpose of aggravation.
of the pub and had him seated at the passengers seat
inside the trycicle. Fernado then got appellant who was FRAUD – insidious words or machinations used to
roused when they reached the trycicle. While Fernado induce the victim to act in a manner which would enable
was fetching Rey, accused positioned himself at the back the offender to carry out his design.
of Pedrito who was still asleep and discharged his e.x. To enter the house, one of the accused
firearm twice hitting the latter on the head. shouted from the outside that they wanted to buy
Held: The Court ruled that there was no cigarettes.
evidence directly showing any pre-conceived plan or
devise employed by accused-appellant to kill the victim. • There is a hairline distinction between craft and fraud.
Accused-appellant did not go to Barangay Dangdangla,
Bangued to kill the victim but to attend to some • DISTINCTION: When there is a DIRECT INDUCEMENT
important matters. Accused-appellant was just invited by insidious words or machinations, fraud is present;
by his relatives, whom he had not seen for a while after otherwise, the act of the accused done in order NOT TO
he changed residence, to have a drinking spree. The AROUSE THE SUSPICION of the victim constitutes craft.
probability is that the decision to shoot the victim was
made only right there and then. This should at least cast DISGUISE – resorting to any device to conceal identity.
reasonable doubt on the existence of a premeditated ex. Wearing of masks
plan to kill the victim. Further, the mere existence of ill-
feeling or grudge between the parties is not sufficient to • The purpose of the offender in using any device must
establish premeditated killing. Hence, it would be be to conceal his identity.
erroneous to declare that the killing of the victim was
premeditated. People v. Marquez (1982)
Facts: Francisca was in their house together
People v. Biso (2003) with her children and main when somebody called in
Facts: Dario, a black belt in karate, entered an front of their window who identified themselves as PC
eatery, seated himself beside Teresita and made sexual soldiers looking for contraband. The men ordered her to
advances to her in the presence of her brother, Eduardo. open up otherwise they will shoot up their house. Then
Eduardo contacted his cousin, Biso an ex-convict and a accused Marquez went inside together with other armed
known toughie in the area, and related to him what companions. They took some of their belongings and
Dario had done to Teresita. Eduardo and Pio, and 2 one of them even raped Francisca, Leticia (daughter of
others decided to confront Dario. They positioned Francisca) and Rufina (maid).
themselves in the alley near the house of Dario. Dario Held: The following AC’s were proved a)
arrived on board a taxicab. The four assaulted Dario. nighttime; 2) unlawful entry; 3) dwelling of the offended
Eduardo held, with his right hand, the wrist of Dario and parties; 4) disguise, that is by pretending to be PC
covered the mouth of Dario with his left hand. The 2 officers; and 5) by utter disregard due to victims’ age
others held Dario's right hand and hair. Pio then stabbed and sex.
Dario near the breast with a fan knife. Eduardo stabbed
Dario and fled with his three companions from the People v. Empacis (1993)
scene. Facts: Empacis et al. held-up the store of Fidel
Held: There was no evident premeditation. The and his wife. As Fidel was about to give the money, he
prosecution failed to prove that the four intended to kill decided to fight. He was stabbed several times which
was stripped of his service revolver. Ontuca was pursued prosecution should still prove that the assailants
by Padilla. The former, with only a piece of plywood as a purposely used excessive force out of proportion to the
defense, was shot by the latter in the head. means of defense available to the persons attacked."
Held: The killing was qualified by the AC of "Finally, to appreciate the qualifying
abuse of superior strength which was alleged in the circumstance of abuse of superior strength, what should
information and proved during trial. The abuse of be considered is whether the aggressors took advantage
superior strength is present not only when the offenders of their combined strength in order to consummate the
enjoy numerical superiority, or there is a notorious offense. To take advantage of superior strength means
inequality of forces between the victim and the to purposely use excessive force out of proportion to the
aggressor, but also when the offender uses a powerful means available to the person attacked to defend
weapon which is out of proportion to the defense himself." In the case at bar, the victim Uldarico de
available to the victim as in this case. Castro was the one who picked a fight with the accused-
appellants because he did not like the joke by one of the
accused-appellants. There was no evidence to show that
People v. Lobrigas (2002) the accused-appellants purposely sought and took
Facts: Frank, Marlito, both surnamed Lobrigas advantage of their number to subdue the victim.
and Mante mauled and box Taylaran who was already 76 People v. Ventura (2004)
years old. The victim died caused by severe beating and Facts: Ventura armed with a .38 Caliber Home-
mauling on the chest portion on the victim’s body. made Revolver and Flores armed with a bladed weapon,
Held: The crime committed was murder entered the house of the Bocatejas by cutting a hole in
qualified by the aggravating circumstance of abuse of the kitchen door. Ventura announced a hold-up and hit
superior strength. To appreciate abuse of superior Jaime on the head and asked for the keys. Jaime called
strength, there must be a deliberate intent on the part out for help and tried to wrestle the gun away from
of the malefactors to take advantage of their greater Ventura. Flores then stabbed Jaime 3 times. Flores also
number. They must have notoriously selected and made stabbed Jaime’s wife Aileen who had been awakened.
use of superior strength in the commission of the crime. Aileen tried to defend herself with an elecrtric cord to
To take advantage of superior strength is to use no avail. Aileen died on the hospital on the same day.
excessive force that is out of proportion to the means for Held: By deliberately employing a deadly
self-defense available to the person attacked; thus, the weapon against Aileen, Flores took advantage of the
prosecution must clearly show the offenders' deliberate superiority which his strength, sex and weapon gave
intent to do so. him over his unarmed victim. The fact that Aileen
attempted to fend off the attack on her and her husband
People v. Barcelon (2002) by throwing nearby objects, such as an electric cord, at
Facts: Barcleon went inside the house of appellant Flores does not automatically negate the
Amador. Thereafter, accuded strangled and stabbed the possibility that the latter was able to take advantage of
victim with a knife. Amador died as a result. At the time his superior strength
the crime was committed, Amador was a 69 year-old
woman and Barcelon was only 29 years old. Par. 16. - THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH
Held: Abuse of superior strength was present TREACHERY (ALEVOSIA).
in the commission of the crime. The court cited the case
of People vs. Ocumen, where an attack by a man with a • TREACHERY means that the offended party
deadly weapon upon an unarmed woman constitutes the was not given opportunity to make a defense.
circumstance of abuse of that superiority which his sex • There is treachery when the offender
and the weapon used in the act afforded him, and from commits any of the crimes against the person,
which the woman was unable to defend herself. employing means, methods or forms in the execution
The disparity in age between the assailant and thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its
the victim, aged 29 and 69, respectively, indicates execution, without risk to himself arising from the
physical superiority on appellant's part over the defense which the offended party might make.
deceased. It did not matter that appellant was "dark"
with a "slim body build" or "medyo mataba." What REQUISITES:
mattered was that the malefactor was male and armed a. That at the time of the attack,
with a lethal weapon that he used to slay the victim. the victim was not in a position to defend
himself; and
People v. Sansaet (2002) b. That the offender consciously
Facts Uldarico was drinking with 15 other men adopted the particular means, method or form
that include the Sansaet brothers, Rogelio, Leopoldo and of attack employed by him.
Silverio. Because of a bad joke that cropped up, verbal • Treachery does not connote the element of surprise
exchanges ensued. Thereafter, Rogelio and Uldarico alone.
started hacking each other with bolos. Silverio and • There is no treachery when the attack is preceded by a
Leopolo positioned themselves behind the victim and warning or the accused gave the deceased a chance to
also hacked him. Uldarico retaliated wounding Silverio. prepare.
Rogelio then hacked Uldarico a 2nd time. Leopoldo and • The qualifying circumstance of treachery may not be
Rogelio continued hacking Uldarico when the latter fell. simply deduced from presumption as it is necessary that
They then dragged Uldarico towards the river and there the existence of this qualifying or aggravating
they each twice hacked Uldarico resulting to his death. circumstance should be proven as fully as the crime
Held: "Mere superiority in number, even itself in order to aggravate the liability or penalty
assuming it to be a fact, would not necessarily indicate incurred by the culprit.
the attendance of abuse of superior strength. The
RULES REGARDING TREACHERY • Nighttime and craft are absorbed in treachery except if
a. Applicable only to crimes against treachery rests upon an independent factual basis.
persons.
b. Means, methods or forms need • Treachery is inherent in murder by poisoning.
not insure accomplishment of crime.
c. The mode of attack must be • Treachery cannot co-exist with passion and
consciously adopted. obfuscation.
unexpected, from behind and with the victim unarmed Held: The qualifying circumstance of treachery
without any chance to defend himself against the initial was not established with concrete evidence. The
assault, clearly show that treachery was present. circumstantial evidence on record does not clearly show
that there was any conscious and deliberate effort on
People v. Verchez (1994) the part of the accused to adopt any particular means,
Facts: A team of government agents of the PC method or form of attack to ensure the commission of
conducted a surveillance on a house reported to be the the crime without affording the victim any means to
hideout of a gang of suspected robbers. The agents defend herself. The conclusion that there was treachery
stopped a car coming out of the house. It was driven by can hardly be gleaned because the victim and Umayam
Balane. Balane was prevailed upon into accompanying were inside their shanty and no one witnessed how the
the agents into the house. They proceeded to the house killing took place. Notably, the medical findings of the
in 4 cars and when the 1 st car approached, they were victim's cadaver show, contusions on her arms and legs,
met with heavy gunfire. A firefight ensued. 3 of the indicating that there may have been a quarrel prior to
agents were hit; one died and two were injured. The the stabbing. This reasonably negates treachery.
men inside the house later surrendered. Among them
was Verchez. People v. Piedad (2002)
Held: The two requisites of treachery were not The essence of treachery is a deliberate and
proven. The lawmen, knowing that they were dealing sudden attack, affording the hapless, unarmed and
with a gang of bank robbers, were prepared to deal with unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or to escape.
any resistance that may possibly be put up. Also, Sgt. While it is true that the victim herein may have been
Norcio was killed during the gun battle and not during warned of a possible danger to his person, since the
the first volley of shots fired by the robbers. Thus, there victim and his companion headed towards their
is no showing that appellants deliberately and residence when they saw the group of accused-
consciously adopted their mode of attack. Neither is appellants coming back for them after an earlier quarrel
there any showing that they intended to ambush the just minutes before, in treachery, what is decisive is that
lawmen. the attack was executed in such a manner as to make it
impossible for the victim to retaliate.
People v. Rendaje (2000) In the case at bar, Mateo did not have any
Facts: Lennie was a 15-year old deaf-mute. chance of defending himself from the accused-
Rendaje, on the other hand, was 23 years old and in the appellant's concerted assault, even if he was forewarned
prime of his strength. Rendaje followed Lennie when the of the attack. Mateo was obviously overpowered and
latter was on her way home alone. With the use of a helpless when accused-appellants' group numbering
knife, he then inflicted 8 stab wounds, 5 of which were around eight, ganged up and mauled him. Luz came to
fatal on the victim’s back. Lennie died as a result. Her Mateo's succor by embracing him and pacifying his
body was found in a sugar cane plantation. aggressors, but accused-appellants were unrelenting.
Held: Treachery qualified the killing to murder. More importantly, Mateo could not have actually
To constitute treachery, two conditions must concur: (1) anticipated the sudden landing of a large concrete stone
the employment of means, methods or manner of on his head. The stone was thus treacherously struck.
execution that would ensure the offender's safety from Neither could the victim have been aware that Lito came
any defense or retaliatory act on the part of the up beside him to stab his back as persons were beating
offended party; and (2) the offender's deliberate or him from every direction. Lito's act of stabbing the
conscious choice of the means, method or manner of victim with a knife, inflicting a 15-cm deep wound shows
execution. deliberate intent of using a particular means of attack.
No one has positively testified on how Lennie Considering the location of the injuries sustained by the
was killed but the victim’s body shows the manner in victim and the absence of defense wounds, Mateo
which she was attacked by her assailant. It eloquently clearly had no chance to defend himself.
speaks for itself. The injuries established the manner in
which the killing was cruelly carried out with little or no
risk to the assailant. The number of stab wounds, most People v. Dumadag (2004)
of which were inflicted at the back of the child — Facts: Prudente with his friends including
unarmed and alone — shows the deliberateness, the Meliston agreed to meet at a swimming pool to celebrate
suddenness and the unexpectedness of the attack, the feast of St. John. On their way home, there was
which thus deprived her of the opportunity to run or heavy downpour so they decided to take a shelter at a
fight back. store where 2 men, 1 of whom is Dumadag are having
some drinks. Dumadag offered Prudente a drink of
People v. Umayam (2002) Tanduay but the latter refused then left. Dumadag
Facts: Umayam and the victim, Mendoza were followed Prudented and stabbed the victim on his breast
living as husband and wife in a shanty erected inside a with a knife which resulted to his death.
compound owned by Velasquez. During the couple’s stay Held: As a general rule, a sudden attack by the
in the compound, Velasquez would notice them assailant, whether frontally or from behind, is treachery
frequently quarelling and Mendoza on occasions would if such mode of attack was deliberately adopted by him
run to Velasquez for help for the beatings inflicted on with the purpose of depriving the victim of a chance to
her by her husband. Velasquez then noticed a foul odor either fight or retreat. The rule does not apply if the
emanating from the couple’s shanty which he at first attack was not preconceived but merely triggered by
thought to be that of a poultry feed or kaning baboy. infuriation of the appellant on an act made by the
With the assistance of the police who broke the shanty’s victim. In the present case, it is apparent that the attack
walls, the decomposing of Mendoza was found inside. was not preconceived. It was triggered by the
The trial court found Umayam guilty of murder.
appellant's anger because of the victim's refusal to have Facts: Jessie was about to leave their house to
a drink with the appellant and his companions. watch cartoons in his uncle's house next door when
accused suddenly entered the front door of their house.
Par. 17. - THAT MEANS BE EMPLOYED OR They ordered Jessie to drop to the floor, and then hit
CIRCUMSTANCES BROUGHT ABOUT WHICH ADD him in the back with the butt of a long gun. Without
IGNOMINY TO THE NATURAL EFFECTS OF THE ACT. much ado, the intruders shot to death Jessie's uncle,
Victorino who was then in the living room. Jessie
IGNOMINY – it is a circumstance pertaining to the forthwith crawled and hid under a bed, from where he
moral order, which adds disgrace ad obloquy to the saw the feet of a third man who had also entered the
material injury caused by the crime. house. The men entered the kitchen and continued
shooting. When the rampage was over and after the
• This AC is applicable to crimes against chastity and malefactors had already departed, Jessie came out of his
persons. hiding place and proceeded to the kitchen. There he saw
his mother, Carmelita; his brother Felix.; and his cousin
• When the accused raped a woman after winding cogon Rubenson — all slaughtered. The death certificate of
grass around his genital organ, he thereby augmented Victorino reveals that his penis was excised.
the wrong done by increasing its pain and adding Held: Ignominy cannot be appreciated in this
ignominy there to (People v. Torrefiel). case. For ignominy to be appreciated, it is required that
* NOTE: According to Professor Ambion, this is the offense be committed in a manner that tends to
not ignominy but cruelty. make its effect more humiliating, thus adding to the
victim's moral suffering. Where the victim was already
• The means employed or the circumstances brought dead when his body or a part thereof was dismembered,
about must tend to make the effects of the crime MORE ignominy cannot be taken against the accused. In this
HUMILIATING or TO PUT THE OFFENDED PARTY TO case, the information states that Victorino's sexual
SHAME. organ was severed after he was shot and there is no
ex. When the accused raped a married woman allegation that it was done to add ignominy to the
in the presence of her husband. natural effects of the act. We cannot, therefore, consider
ignominy as an aggravating circumstance.
People v. Siao (2000)
Facts: Estrella worked as a housemaid of Rene People v. Bumidang (2000)
Siao’s family. One day, Rene ordered Reylan, their Facts: Baliwang Bumidang raped Gloria in front
houseboy, to bring Estrella to a room. While holding a of her 80 year old father, Melecio. Melecio helplessly saw
gun, Rene forced Reylan to have sex with Estrella (oral the accused rape her daughter but did not move
sex, missionary position, and in the manner dogs because he was too afraid and weak. Before raping the
perform sexual intercourse). victim, Baliwang examined the genitals of Gloria with a
Held: The accused was held guilty of rape with flashlight.
the use of a deadly weapon, which is punishable by Held: The aggravating circumstance of
reclusion perpetua to death. But the trial court ignominy shall be taken into account if means are
overlooked and did not take into account the employed or circumstances brought about which add
aggravating circumstance of ignominy and sentenced ignominy to the natural effects of the offense; or if the
accused to the single indivisible penalty of reclusion crime was committed in a manner that tends to make its
perpetua. It has been held that where the accused in effects more humiliating to the victim, that is, add to her
committing the rape used not only the missionary moral suffering. It was established that Baliwang used
position, the AC of ignominy attended the commission the flashlight and examined the genital of Gloria before
thereof. he ravished her. He committed his bestial deed in the
presence of Gloria's old father. These facts clearly show
People v. Siao (2000) that Baliwang deliberately wanted to further humiliate
Facts: Accused-appellant Siao forced and Gloria, thereby aggravating and compounding her moral
intimidated at gunpoint his household helpers sufferings. Ignominy was appreciated in a case where a
Raymundo, a 14 year old girl from the province and 17 woman was raped in the presence of her betrothed, or
year old Gimena to have carnal knowledge of each of her husband, or was made to exhibit to the rapists
other. Siao commanded Gimena to rape Raymundo in 3 her complete nakedness before they raped her.
different positions, pointing a handgun at them the
whole time. Both performed the sexual act because they
were afraid to be killed. Both Siao and Gimena were Par. 18. - THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED AFTER
charged with the crime of rape but while Gimena was AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY.
acquitted, Siao was convicted by the RTC. THERE IS AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY WHEN AN
Held: The aggravating circumstance of ENTRANCE OF A CRIME A WALL, ROOF, FLOOR,
ignominy is present in this case. Where the accused in DOOR, OR WINDOW BE BROKEN.
committing the rape used not only the missionary
position, i.e. male superior, female inferior but also the • There is unlawful entry when an entrance is effected
dog position as dogs do, i.e. entry from behind, as was by a way not intended for the purpose.
proven like the crime itself in the instant case, the • Unlawful entry must be a means to effect entrance and
aggravating circumstance of ignominy attended the not for escape.
commission thereof. • There is no unlawful entry when the door is broken
and thereafter the accused made an entry thru the
People v. Cachola (2004) broken door. The breaking of the door is covered by
paragraph 19.
Calunod seconded by striking the victim with a piece of commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into
wood on the face. When Willy finally collapsed, other person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or
Sumalpong picked him up, carried him over his object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.
shoulder, and carried Willy to a place where they burned
Willy. The latter’s skeletal remains were discovered by a Article 266-B. Penalties. - Rape under paragraph 1 of the
child who was pasturing his cow near a peanut next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion
plantation. perpetua.
Held: The N circumstance of cruelty may no be Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a
considered as there is no showing that the victim was deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall
be reclusion perpetua to death.
burned while he was still alive. For cruelty to exist, there
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
must be proof showing that the accused delighted in
the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion
making their victim suffer slowly and gradually, causing perpetua to death.
him unnecessary physical and moral pain in the When the rape is attempted and a homicide is
consummation of the criminal act. No proof was committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty
presented that would show that accused-appellants shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
deliberately and wantonly augmented the suffering of When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
their victim. homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death.
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the
People v. Guerrero (2002) crime of rape is committed with any of the following
Appellant first severed the victim's head aggravating/qualifying circumstances:
before his penis was cut-off. This being the sequence of 1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of
events, cruelty has to be ruled out for it connotes an act age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent,
of deliberately and sadistically augmenting the wrong by guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the
third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent
causing another wrong not necessary for its commission,
of the victim.
or inhumanely increasing the victim's suffering. As
2) When the victim is under the custody of the
testified to by Dr. Sanglay, and reflected in her medical police or military authorities or any law enforcement of penal
certificate, Ernesto in fact died as a result of his head institution.
being severed. No cruelty is to be appreciated where the 3) When the rape is committed in full view of the
act constituting the alleged cruelty in the killing was spouse, parent, any of the children or other relatives within
perpetrated when the victim was already dead. the third civil degree of consanguinity.
4) When the victim is a religious engaged in
legitimate religious vocation or calling and is personally
known to be such by the offender before or at the time of
SPECIAL AGGRAVATING the commission of the crime.
CIRCUMSTANCES (5) When the victim is a child below seven (7)
years old.
Republic Act 8353 (6) When the offender knows that he is afflicted
An act expanding the definition of the crime of with Human Immune-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired
rape, reclassifying the same as a crime against persons, Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually
amending for the purpose act no. 3815, as amended, transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted
otherwise known as the revised penal code, and for other to the victim.
purposes (7) When committed by any member of the Armed
SECTION 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be Forces of the Philippines or paramilitary units thereof or the
known as "The Anti-Rape Law of 1997". Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency or
SECTION 2. Rape as a Crime Against penal institution, when the offender took advantage of his
Persons. - The crime of rape shall hereafter be classified as position to facilitate the commission of the crime.
a Crime Against Persons under Title Eight of Act 3815, as (8) When by reason or on the occasion of the
amended, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code. rape, the victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or
Accordingly, there shall be incorporated into Title Eight of disability.
the same Code a new chapter to be known as Chapter Three (9) When the offender knew of the pregnancy of
on Rape, to read as follows: the offended party at the time of the commission of the
"Chapter Three Rape" crime.
(10) When the offender knew of the mental
Article 266-A. Rape: When and How Committed. - Rape is disability, emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the
Committed- offended party at the time of the commission of the crime.
Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a article shall be punished by prision mayor.
woman under any of the following circumstances: Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly
weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation; prision mayor to reclusion temporal.
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
or otherwise unconscious; the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave temporal.
abuse of authority; When the rape is attempted and a homicide is
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty
years of age or is demented, even though none of the shall be reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua.
circumstances mentioned above be present; When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
homicide is committed, the penalty shall be reclusion
2) By any person who, under any of the perpetua.
circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall
Reclusion temporal shall also be imposed if the appellant. Verily, no other interpretation is justified, for
rape is committed by any of the ten aggravating/qualifying the language of the new law demonstrates the
circumstances mentioned in this article. legislative intent to favor the accused. Accordingly,
appellant cannot be convicted of 2 separate offenses of
Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon - The subsequent illegal possession of firearms and direct assault with
valid marriage between the offender and the offended party attempted homicide. Since the crime committed was
shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed. direct assault and not homicide or murder, illegal
In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the possession of firearms cannot be deemed an
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party aggravating circumstance.
shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty. Provided,
That the crime shall be extinguish or the penalty shall not be
5. ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
abated if the marriage is void ab initio.
Article 266-D. Presumptions. - Any physical • Alternative circumstances are those which must be
overt act manifesting resistance against the act of rape in taken into consideration as AGGRAVATING or
any degree from the offended party, or where the offended MITIGATING according to the nature and effects of the
party is so situated as to render her/him incapable of giving crime and the other conditions attending its commission.
valid consent, may be accepted as evidence in the
prosecution of the acts punished under Article 266-A." Art. 15. Their concept. — Alternative circumstances
SECTION 3. Separability Clause.- If any part, section, or are those which must be taken into consideration as
provision of this Act is declared invalid or unconstitutional, aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and
the other parts thereof not affected thereby shall remain effects of the crime and the other conditions attending
valid.
its commission. They are the relationship, intoxication
and the degree of instruction and education of the
SECTION 4. Repealing Clause.- Article 335 of Act No.
3815, as amended, and all laws, acts presidential decrees, offender.
executive orders, administrative orders, rules and The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be
regulations, inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of taken into consideration when the offended party in the
this Act are deemed amended, modified or repealed spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural, or
accordingly. adopted brother or sister, or relative by affinity in the
same degrees of the offender.
SECTION 5. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into
(15) days after completion of its publication in two (2) consideration as a mitigating circumstances when the
newspapers of general circulation. offender has committed a felony in a state of
intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to
People v. Balgos (2000) the plan to commit said felony but when the intoxication
Facts: Balgos was accused of raping a 6-year is habitual or intentional, it shall be considered as an
old child named Criselle. While the victim was playing, aggravating circumstance.
the accused asked his nieces to go outside and buy
cheese curls. When they left, the accused opened his The alternative circumstances are:
zipper and made Criselle hold his penis. The 2 girls came a. RELATIONSHIP
back and he asked them to go out and buy more cheese b. INTOXICATION
curls. When they left, he locked the door and had carnal c. DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND
knowledge with Criselle. The accused cannot penetrate EDUCATION OF THE OFFENDER
the victim’s organ. The lower court convicted the
accused of qualified rape. a. RELATIONSHIP
Held: The trial court was correct. Under Art.
335 of the RPC as amended by RA 7659 and further This is taken into consideration when the
amended by RA 8353, the penalty of death shall be offended party is the:
imposed if the crime of rape is committed against a child a. spouse
below 7 years of age. There is no dispute that the victim b. ascendant
was 6 years of age when the accused had carnal c. descendant
knowledge with her. d. legitimate, natural or adopted brother or
sister
People v. Ladjaalam (2000) e. relative by affinity in the same degree of
Facts: Accused who is maintaining a drug den the offender
fired an unlicensed M-14 rifle at the policemen who were
about to enter his house to serve a search warrant. • As a rule, relationship is MITIGATING in crimes against
Held: If an unlicensed firearm is used in the property by analogy to the provisions of Art. 332.
commission of any crime, there can be no separate - Under Art. 332 of the RPC, no criminal, but
offense of simple illegal possession of firearms. Hence, if only civil, liability shall result from commission of the
the "other crime" is murder or homicide, illegal crime of theft, swindling or malicious mischief
possession of firearms becomes merely an aggravating committed or caused mutually by spouses, ascendants,
circumstance, not a separate offense. Since direct and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same
assault with multiple attempted homicide was line; brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
committed in this case, appellant can no longer be held sisters-in-law, if living together.
liable for illegal possession of firearms. - Relationship becomes actually an exempting
Moreover, penal laws are construed liberally in circumstance since there is no occasion to consider a
favor of the accused. In this case, the plain meaning of mitigating or an aggravating circumstance because there
RA 8294's simple language is most favorable to herein is no criminal liability.
d. Other penalties consisting in imprisonment rest of the conspirators as to move them to executing
and other deprivation of liberty like destierro, can be the conspiracy.
executed only against individuals. • Mere knowledge without cooperation or
agreement to cooperate is not enough to constitute
♣ Officers, not the corporation, are criminally conspiracy.
liable. • Silence does not make one a conspirator
♣ Juridical persons are criminally liable under • The existence of conspiracy does not require
certain special laws. necessarily an agreement for an appreciable length of
♣ In all crimes there are always 2 parties: time prior to the execution of its purpose, since from the
ACTIVE (the criminal) and PASSIVE (the injured party). legal viewpoint, conspiracy exists if, at the time of the
commission of the offense, the accused had the same
A. PRINCIPALS purpose and were united in its execution.
• Conspiracy arises on the very instant the
Art. 17. Principals. — The following are considered plotters agree, expressly or impliedly, to commit the
principals: felony and forthwith decide to pursue it.
1. Those who take a direct part in the • Formal agreement or previous acquaintance
execution of the act; among several persons not necessary in conspiracy.
2. Those who directly force or induce others to • Must be established by positive and
commit it; conclusive evidence.
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of • When there is no conspiracy, each of the
the offense by another act without which it would not offenders is liable only for the act performed by him.
have been accomplished.
∞ It is not enough that a person participated
• When a single individual commits a crime, there is in the assault made by another in order to consider him
no difficulty in determining his participation in the a co-principal in the crime committed. He must also
commission thereof. participate in the criminal resolution of the other.
• But when 2 or more persons are involved, it is ∞ When there is conspiracy, the act of one is
necessary to determine the participation of each. the act of all. There is collective criminal responsibility.
∞ Conspiracy may cover persons previously
undetermined.
PAR. 1. – PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION
∞ A person in conspiracy with others, who had
desisted before the crime was committed by the other,
The principal by direct participation is not criminally liable.
PERSONALLY TAKES PART IN THE EXECUTION OF THE ∞ When there is conspiracy, it is not necessary
ACT constituting the crime. to ascertain the specific act of each conspirator.
∞ There could be no conspiracy to commit an
• Two or more persons who took part in the commission offense through negligence.
of the crime are principals by direct participation, when ∞ In cases of criminal negligence or crimes
the following requisites are present: punishable by special law, allowing or failing to prevent
1. That they participated in the an act to be performed by another, makes one a co-
criminal resolution principal.
2. That they carried out their plan
and personally took part in its execution by Second requisite – that the culprits “carried out
acts which directly tended to the same end. their plan and personally took part in its
execution, by acts which directly tended to the
First requisite – Participation in the criminal same end.”
resolution
• Two or more persons are said to have ∞ The principals by direct participation must
participated in the criminal resolution when they were in be at the scene of the crime, personally taking part in its
conspiracy at the time of the commission of the crime. execution.
• It is well settled that a person may be ∞ The acts of each offender must directly tend
convicted for the criminal act of another where, between to the same end.
them, there has been conspiracy or unity of purpose and ∞ One serving as guard pursuant to the
intention in the commission of the crime charged. conspiracy is a principal by direct participation.
∞ When the second requisite is lacking, there
CONSPIRACY is only conspiracy.
• A conspiracy exists when 2 or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the commission of a People v. Nunag (1989)
felony and decide to commit it. Facts: The victim claimed that while she was
• The conspiracy contemplated in the first standing outside the house of her neighbor peeping
requisite is not a felony, but only a manner of incurring through an open window to watch a TV program, Nunag
criminal liability. came towards her appearing to be drunk. Nunag,
• In order to hold an accused guilty as co- threatening to kill her, led her to a nearby ricefield.
principal by reason of conspiracy, it must be established Later, they were joined by the other 4 accused. Nunag
that he performed an over act in furtherance of the then undressed her and had sexual intercourse with her.
conspiracy, either by actively participating in the actual Mandap followed and she lost consciousness after. She
commission of the crime, or by lending moral assistance regained consciousness only when Manalili was abusing
to his co-conspirators by being present at the scene of her.
the crime, or by exerting moral ascendancy over the
Held: Accused Nunag, Mandap and Manalili are a. By giving price, or offering reward or
found guilty of 3 distinct and separate crimes of rape. promise.
They being principals by direct participation while the b. By using words of command.
other 2 accused as principals by indispensable
cooperation since there is no sufficient evidence that the REQUISITES:
latter also had sexual intercourse with the victim. The 1. That the inducement be made directly with the
victim lost consciousness and only assumed that the two intention of procuring the commission of the crime;
also raped her. and
a. A thoughtless
People v. Dela Cerna (1967) expression without intention to produce the
Facts: Rafael filed an ejectment suit against result is not an inducement to commit a
dela Cerna’s father wherein the court ruled in his favor. crime.
Later he was shot by the accused while the former and b. The inducement may
his family were bringing sacks of corn. He was taken be by acts of command, advice, or through
away by his family to tend his wounds but Dela Cerna influence, or agreement for consideration.
and company followed them and Rafael was shot again
resulting to his death. Maquiling, one companion of Dela 2. That such inducement be the determining cause
Cerna, shot Casiano, a relative of Rafael. of the commission of the crime by the material
Held: Dela Cerna cannot be held liable for the executor.
death of Casiano because the conspiracy was to kill - The words of advice of the influence must
Rafael only. The rule has always been: co-conspirators have actually moved the hands of the principal by
are liable only for acts done pursuant to the conspiracy; direct participation.
for other acts done outside the contemplation of the co-
conspirators or which are not the necessary and logical PRINCIPAL BY PROPOSAL TO COMMIT
consequence of the intended crime, only the actual INDUCEMENT THE FELONY
perpetrators are liable. Although Maquiling got the gun There is an inducement to commit a crime.
from Dela Cerna, the latter only gave it to the former as The principal by The mere proposal to
per their agreement to shoot Rafael inducement becomes liable commit a felony is
As to the other companions, facts prove their only when the crime is punishable in treason and
active participation in the killing. They are all principals. committed by the principal rebellion. The person to
by direct participation. whom the proposal is
People v. Dacillo (supra) made should not commit
Facts: Pacot stabbed and strangled Rosemarie the crime; otherwise, the
leading to the latters death. Dacillo for his part, hold proponent becomes a
down Rosemarie’s legs to prevent her from struggling. principal by inducement.
The two men stopped only when they were sure that the The inducement involves The proposal to be
victim was already dead. Dacillo then encase her corpse any crime punishable must involve
in a cement. only treason or rebellion.
Held:. Two or more persons taking part in the
commission of a crime are considered principals by
direct participation if the following requisites are EFFECTS OF ACQUITTAL OF PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT
present: 1. they participated in the criminal resolution PARTICIPATION UPON THE LIABILITY OF
and 2. they carried out their plan and personally took PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT
part in its execution by acts which directly tended to the 1) Conspiracy is negated by the acquittal of co-
same end. Both requisites were met in this case. Further defendant.
Dacillo’s admission that he participated in the 2) One cannot be held guilty of having instigated
commission of the crime by holding Rosemarie’s legs the commission of a crime without first being
made him a principal by direct participation. shown that the crime has been actually
committed by another.
conceived, much less committed. Clearly, he was the The police also died because of the wounds inflicted by
principal by induction. Capalad.
Held: The accused was correctly considered a
US v. Indianan (1913) co-principal for having collaborated with Capalad in the
Facts: Indianan was the HEADMAN of the killing of the police officer. The 2 acted in concert. Even
district of Parang. He ordered his subordinates to seize if the accused did not himself commit the act of
Sariol (victim) and bring the latter to Indianan. The stabbing, he is nonetheless equally guilty thereof for
victim was detained by Indianan until nightfall, then having prevented the police from resisting the attack
Indianan ordered his subordinates to take Sariol to an against him. The accused was a principal by
isolated place and kill him. Indianan bolstered his indispensable cooperation.
command by claiming that he had an order from the
governor that Sariol be executed. Indianan’s
subordinates took Sariol to a cemetery and killed him. B. ACCOMPLICES
Held: Indianan had a very powerful
influence over his subordinates based on TRADITION Art. 18. Accomplices. — Accomplices are those persons
AND CUSTOM as well as his representation that he had who, not being included in Art. 17, cooperate in the
an order from the governor. Hence, his power over them execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous
was such that any order issued by him had the force and acts.
efficacy of physical coercion. The domination of Indianan
was such as to make him responsible for whatever they ♣ In quasi-collective criminal responsibility,
did in obedience to such orders. He is a principal by some of the offenders in the crime are principals and the
inducement. others are accomplices.
♣ The participation of an accomplice
PAR. 3. – PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE presupposes the commission of the crime b the principal
COOPERATION by direct participation.
♣ When there is no conspiracy between or
“Those who cooperate in the commission among the defendants but they were animated by one
of the offense by another act without which it would not and the same purpose to accomplish the criminal
have been accomplished.” objective, those who cooperated by previous or
simultaneous act but cannot be held liable as principals
REQUISITES: are accomplices.
1. Participation in the criminal resolution, ♣ An accomplice does not have a previous
that is, there is either anterior conspiracy or agreement or understanding or is not in conspiracy with
unity of criminal purpose and intention the principal by direct participation.
immediately before the commission of the
crime charged; and CONSPIRATOR ACCOMPLICE
2. Cooperation in the commission of the They know and agree with the criminal design.
offense by performing another act, without Conspirators know the Accomplices come to know
which it would not have been accomplished. criminal intention because about it after the principals
they themselves have have reached the decision
To be liable as principals, the offender must fall decided upon such course and only then do they
under any of the three concepts defined in Article 17. of action. agree to cooperate in its
There is collective criminal responsibility when execution.
the offenders are criminally liable in the same manner Conspirators decide that a Accomplices merely assent
and to the same extent. The penalty to be imposed must crime should be to the plan and cooperate
be the same for all. committed. in it accomplishment
Principals by direct participation have collective
criminal responsibility. Principal by induction, except Conspirators are the Accomplices are merely
that who directly forced another to commit a crime, and authors of a crime instruments who perform
principal by direct participation have collective criminal acts not essential to the
responsibility. Principal by indispensable cooperation has perpetration of the
collective criminal responsibility with the principal by offense.
direct participation.
pulled out their knives, rushed to the scene and stabbed 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the
Joselito. The victim fell in the canal. Odilon and the escape of the principals of the crime, provided the
appellant fled. Before running away from the scene, accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or
Ronnie picked up a piece of hollow block and with it whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason,
bashed Joselito's head. Not content, Ronnie got a piece parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the
of broken bottle and struck Joselito once more. Joselito Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of
died on the spot. some other crime.
Held: To hold a person liable as an accomplice,
two elements must concur: (a) the community of An accessory does not participate in the
criminal design; that is, knowing the criminal design of criminal design, nor cooperate in the commission of the
the principal by direct participation, he concurs with the felony, but, with knowledge of the commission of the
latter in his purpose; (b) the performance of previous or crime, he subsequently takes part in 3 ways:
simultaneous acts that are not indispensable to the a) by profiting from the effects of the
commission of the crime. Accomplices come to know crime;
about the criminal resolution of the principal by direct b) by concealing the body, effects or
participation after the principal has reached the decision instruments of the crime in order to prevent its
to commit the felony and only then does the accomplice discovery; and
agree to cooperate in its execution. Accomplices do not c) by assisting in the escape or
decide whether the crime should be committed; they concealment of the principal of the crime,
merely assent to the plan of the principal by direct provided he acts with abuse of his public
participation and cooperate in its accomplishment. functions or the principal is guilty of treason,
However, where one cooperates in the commission of parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the
the crime by performing overt acts which by themselves life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
are acts of execution, he is a principal by direct habitually guilt of some other crime.
participation, and not merely an accomplice
All things considered, it was ruled that Ronnie “knowledge of the commission of the crime”
and the appellant conspired with Odilon to kill the ♣ Mere possession of stolen property does not
victim; hence, all of them are criminally liable for the make the accused an accessory where the thief was
latter's death. The appellant is not merely an accomplice already convicted.
but is a principal by direct participation. ♣ Entertaining suspicion that a crime has been
Even assuming that the appellant did not committed is not enough.
conspire with Ronnie and Odilon to kill the victim, the ♣ Knowledge of the commission of the crime may
appellant is nevertheless criminally liable as a principal be established by circumstantial evidence
by direct participation. The stab wounds inflicted by him
cooperated in bringing about and accelerated the death “commission of the crime”
of the victim or contributed materially thereto.
♣ the crime committed by the principal must be
proved beyond reasonable doubt.
People v. Garcia (2002)
Facts: Valler and Garcia kidnapped Atty.
“without having participated therein either as
Tioleco for the purpose of extorting ransom. Lariba and
principals or accomplices”
Rogel were caught by police officers inside the house
where a handcuffed and blinfolded Atty. Tioleco was
“take part subsequent to its commission”
detained. Both were unarmed although guns inside the
♣ The accessory takes part AFTER the crime has
house are available for their possession.
been committed.
Held: Lariba and Rogel, were merely guarding
the house for the purpose of either helping the other
SPECIFIC ACTS OF THE ACCESSORIES
accused-appellants in facilitating the successful
denouement to the crime or repelling any attempt to
1. BY PROFITING THEMSELVES OR
rescue the victim, as shown by the availability of arms
ASSISTING THE OFFENDER TO PROFIT BY
and ammunition to them. They thus cooperated in the
THE EFFECTS OF THE CRIME
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous
- The accessory must receive the property
acts by means of which they aided or facilitated the
from the principal. He should not take it without the
execution of the crime but without any indispensable act
consent of the principal, or else, he is not an
for its accomplishment. Under Art. 18 of The Revised
accessory but a principal in the crime of theft.
Penal Code, they are mere accomplices.
- When is profiting by the effect of the
crime punished as the act of principal, and not the
C. ACCESSORIES
act of accessory?
When a person knowingly acquired or
Art. 19. Accessories. — Accessories are those who, received property taken by the brigands.
having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and
without having participated therein, either as principals
or accomplices, take part subsequent to its commission 2. BY CONCEALING OR DESTROYING THE
in any of the following manners: BODY OF THE CRIME TO PREVENT ITS
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the DISCOVERY.
offender to profit by the effects of the crime.
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the BODY OF THE CRIME –“corpus delicti” which means
crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order to that a specific offense was in fact committed by
prevent its discovery. someone
1. The accessory does not take direct part or when the police came, she claimed she had no suspects
cooperate in, or induce, the commission of the crime. in mind. She, thus, became active in her cooperation
2. The accessory does not cooperate in the with the 4 accused.
commission of the offense by acts either prior thereto or
simultaneous therewith. People v. Tolentino (2002)
3. That the participation of the accessory in all Facts: Wilfredo Tolentino hit Herman Sagario
cases always takes place after the commission of the with a piece of wood and later stabbed him with a bolo.
crime. Wilfedo then instructed appellant Jonathan Fabros and
Merwin Ledesma to help him bring Hernan out of the
Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal house. Wilfredo held him by the neck while both
liability. — The penalties prescribed for accessories appellant and Merwin grasped his feet. They then
shall not be imposed upon those who are such with carried Hernan towards a creek. Appellant assisted
respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants, Wilfredo out of fear and when he noticed that Sagario
legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or regained conciousness, he ran away towards a banana
relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with the plantation. Wilfredo then stab Sagario on the different
single exception of accessories falling within the parts of his body that caused his death. Thereafter,
provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article. Wilfredo pushed and waded Sagario on the water.
Held: Appellant Jonathan Fabros cannot be
♣ The exemption is based on the ties of blood convicted as an accessory. Under paragraph 2 of Article
and the preservation of the cleanliness of one’s name, 19 of the Revised Penal Code, the concealment or the
which compels one to conceal crimes committed by destruction of the body of the crime or of the effects or
relatives. the instruments thereof must have been done in order
to prevent the discovery of the crime. That, precisely, is
♣ An ACESSORY is exempt from criminal wanting in the present case. Appellant was afraid that
liability, when the principal is his: his co-accused would hurt him if he refused so he
1. spouse, agreed to assist the latter in carrying the victim towards
2. ascendant, the river. The fact that appellant left thereafter likewise
3. descendant, indicated his innocence of the charge. Verily, he
4. legitimate, natural or adopted brother, adequately explained his conduct prior to the stabbing
sister or relative by affinity within the incident as one born of fear for his own life. It is not
same degree. incredible for an eyewitness to a crime, especially if
- even if only two of the principals guilty of unarmed, to desist from assisting the victim if to do so
murder are the brothers of the accessory and the others would put the former's life in peril.
are not related to him, such accessory is exempt from
criminal liability. People v. Mariano (2000)
- a nephew or niece is not included Facts: Ruth and their maid Michelle often
engaged in a physical fight. The fight usually ends with
♣ An accessory is NOT EXEMPT from criminal Ruth pouring boiling water on Michelle. During their
liability even if the principal is related to him, if such fights which numbers to at least 6 times a month, Ruth
accessory (1) PROFITED by the effects of the crime, or would bang Michelles head and pull on her hair. Michelle
(2) assisted the offender to profit by the effects of subsequently died as a result. Ruth placed the body of
the crime Michelle in a box which she then loaded inside the
luggage compartment of her sister Ruby’s car. Ruth and
People v. Talingdan (1978) Ruby were both convicted of murder by the trial court.
Facts: Bernardo and Teresa lived Held: Ruby is the sister of Ruth. As such, their
together but for quite some time their relationship has relationship exempts Ruby from criminal liability under
gotten bitter. Bernardo knew that Teresa had an illicit Art. 20 of the Revised Penal Code —ARTICLE 20.
relationship with Talingdan. Their child testified that on Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability.—The
the day the killing occurred, there were 4 men inside penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed
their house and Bernardo knew about it but continued upon those who are such with respect to their spouses,
plowing his field. Later, when Bernardo came inside the ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural and
kitchen, Talingdan and Tobias fired at Bernardo and the adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity
4 climbed the stairs of the Batalan. Seeing that the within the same degrees, with the single exception of
victim was alive they fired at him again. Teresa came accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1
out after from her room and pulled her child to question of the preceding article (emphasis supplied). The reason
her. Teresa threatened to kill her if she would reveal the for exemption is obvious; it is based on ties of blood and
incident. the preservation of the cleanliness of one's name, which
Held: One who conceals or assists in compels one to conceal crimes committed by relatives so
the escape of the principal in the crime can be held near as those mentioned in the above-quoted article.
guilty as accessory. There is morally convincing proof Ruby Mariano is acquitted.
that Teresa is an accessory to the offense. She was
inside the room when her husband was shot. As she V. PENALTIES
came out after the shooting, she inquired from the child
if she was able to recognize the assailants and when the
latter identified the 4 accused as the culprits, Teresa did Penalty is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for
not only enjoin her daughter not to reveal what she the transgression of a law.
knew to anyone but she went to the extent of warning
her not to tell anyone or else she would kill her. Later Different Juridical Conditions of Penalty:
attainder because it “tars and feathers” the communist Exception: to give them retroactive effect when
party as a “continuing menace to the freedom and favorable to the accused.
security of the country.” Reason for the exception: The sovereign, in
Held: A bill of attainder is a legislative act enacting a subsequent penal law more favorable to the
which inflicts punishment without a trial. The Act simply accused, has recognized that the greater severity of the
declares the Communist Party to be an organized former law is unjust. The sovereign would be
conspiracy for the overthrow of the government. Its inconsistent if it would still enforce its right under
focus is not on the individuals but on the conduct. It is conditions of the former law, which has already been
not enough that the statute specify persons or groups in regarded by conscientious public opinion as juridical
order that it may be called a bill of attainder. It is burdensome.
necessary that it must apply retroactively and reach
past conduct. This requirement follows from the nature ∗ The favorable retroactive effect of a new law may find
of a bill of attainder as a legislative adjudication of guilt. the defendant in one of these 3 situations:
a. The crime has been committed and prosecution
People v. Bracamonte (1996) begins;
Facts: Violeta and her common law husband, b. Sentence has been passed but service has not
Clark Din, arrived home and 3 men rushing out of the begun;
house. Inside the house, they found their maid hands c. The sentence is being carried out.
tied with her mouth gagged and bathed in her own ∗ When the culprit is HABITUAL DELINQUENT, he is not
blood. Thereafter, they saw their son in the kitchen his entitled to the benefit of the provisions of the new
head and body immersed in a pail of water, dead. favorable statute.
Held: To impose upon the accused the death ∗ A person shall be deemed to be a HABITUAL
penalty reimposed by RA 7659 which took effect on Dec. DELINQUENT if within a period of 10 years from the date
31, 1993 for a crime committed back on Sep. 23, 1987 of his release of last conviction of the crimes of serious
would violate the basic rule in criminal law that, if the or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or
new law imposes a heavier penalty, the law in force at falsification, he is found guilt of an said crimes a third
the time of the commission of the offense shall be time or oftener.
applied. ∗ The principle against retroactivity does not apply to
civil liability.
People v. Valdez (1999) - but a new law increasing the civil liability
Facts: Accused was convicted by the RTC and cannot be given retroactive effect.
sentenced him to death for the complex crime of ∗ The provisions of this article are applicable even to
Multiple Murder with Double Frustrated Murder, and special laws which provide more favorable conditions to
likewise separately sentenced him to suffer the prison the accused.
term of reclusion perpetua for the crime of Illegal ∗ Criminal liability under the former law is obliterated
Possession of Firearms (PD 1866) when the repeal is absolute.
Held: There can be no separate conviction of ∗ Criminal liability under the repealed law subsists:
the crime of illegal possession under PD 1866 in view of a. When the provisions of the former law are
the amendments introduced by RA 8294 wherein illegal REENACTED; or
possession being merely taken as an aggravating b. When the repeal is by IMPLICATION;
circumstance to other crimes committed. Insofar as RA c. When there is a SAVING CLAUSE
8294 will spare the accused from a separate conviction
for the crime of illegal possession, it may be given ∗ What penalty may be imposed for the commission of a
retroactive effect. felony?
- Only the penalty prescribed by law prior tot the
PROSPECTIVITY; EXCEPTION commission of the felony may be imposed.
- Felonies are punishable under the laws in force
RPC, Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. — No at the time of their commission.
felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed - But the penalty prescribed by law enacted after
by law prior to its commission. the commission of the felony may be imposed, if
it is favorable to the offender.
Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. — Penal
Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor People v. Gallo (1999)
the persons guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual Facts: The accused seeks a modification of his
criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of death sentence to reclusion perpetua in line with the
this Code, although at the time of the publication of such new Court rulings which annunciate that the 7 attendant
laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the circumstances introduced in Sec. 11 of RA 7659 partake
convict is serving the same. of the nature of qualifying circumstances that must be
pleaded in the indictment in order to warrant the
imposition of the penalty (Garcia doctrine reiterated in
CIVIL CODE, Art. 14. Penal laws and those of public Medina).
security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live Held: By operation of law, the appellant is
or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the rightfully entitled to the beneficial application of the
principles of public international law and to treaty Garcia or Medina doctrine. Sentence modified.
stipulations.
People v. Patalin (1999)
GENERAL RULE: TO GIVE CRIMINAL LAWS Facts: The accused were convicted of
PROSPECTIVE EFFECT Robbery with Physical Injuries and Robbery with Multiple
NOTE: Public censure is a penalty, thus, it is not proper complement nor a passenger, shall seize the whole or part of the
in acquittal. However, the Court in acquitting the cargo of said vessel, its equipment or passengers.
accused may criticize his acts or conduct. The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of mutiny on
the high seas or in Philippine waters."
Art. 123. Qualified piracy. - The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death
• Penalties that are either principal or accessory.
shall be imposed upon those who commit any of the crimes referred
Perpetual or temporary absolute to in the preceding article, under any of the following circumstances:
disqualification, perpetual or temporary special 1. Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or firing
disqualification, and suspension may be principal or upon the same;
accessory penalties, because they formed in the 2 2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without
general classes. means of saving themselves or;
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide,
physical injuries or rape."
DURATION OF EACH OF DIFFERENT PENALTIES
Section 4. There shall be incorporated after Article 211 of the
same Code a new article to read as follows:
1. Reclusion perpetua – 20 years and 1 day
to 40 years "Art. 211-A. Qualified Bribery. - If any public officer is entrusted
2. Reclusion temporal – 12 years and 1 day with law enforcement and he refrains from arresting or prosecuting an
to 20 years offender who has committed a crime punishable by reclusion
3. Prision mayor and temporary perpetua and/or death in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or
disqualification - 6 years and 1 day to 12 years present, he shall suffer the penalty for the offense which was not
prosecuted.
except when disqualification is accessory penalty; in
If it is the public officer who asks or demands such gift or
which case its duration is that of the principal penalty present, he shall suffer the penalty of death."
4. Prision correccional, suspension and
destierro - 6 months and 1 day to 6 years except Section 5. The penalty of death for parricide under Article 246
when suspension is an accessory penalty, in which case of the same Code is hereby restored, so that it shall read as follows:
its duration is that of the principal penalty.
5. Arresto Mayor - 1 month and 1 day to 6 "Art. 246. Parricide. - Any person who shall kill his father,
months mother, or child, whether legitimate of illegitimate, or any of his
ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide
6. Arresto Menor – 1 day to 30 days.
and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death."
C. SPECIFIC PRINCIPAL AND Section 6. Article 248 of the same Code is hereby amended to
ACCESSORY PENALTIES read as follows:
"Art. 248. Murder. - Any person who, not falling within the
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
provisions of Article 246 shall kill another, shall be guilty of murder
and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua, to death if committed
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7659
with any of the following attendant circumstances:
AN ACT TO IMPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY ON CERTAIN 1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with
HEINOUS CRIMES, AMENDING FOR THAT PURPOSE the aid of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense or
THE REVISED PENAL LAWS, AS AMENDED, OTHER of means or persons to insure or afford impunity.
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 2. In consideration of a price, reward or promise.
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck,
Section 1. Declaration of Policy. - It is hereby declared the stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of an
policy of the State to foster and ensure not only obedience to its airship, or by means of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other
authority, but also to adopt such measures as would effectively means involving great waste and ruin.
promote the maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, 4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the
liberty and property, and the promotion of the general welfare which preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano,
are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of destructive cyclone, epidemic or other public calamity.
democracy in a just and humane society; 5. With evident premeditation.
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the
Section 2. Article 114 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, suffering of the victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person or
is hereby amended to read as follows: corpse."
"Art. 114. Treason. - Any Filipino citizen who levies war against Section 7. Article 255 of the same Code is hereby amended to
the Philippines or adheres to her enemies giving them aid or comfort read as follows:
within the Philippines or elsewhere, shall be punished by reclusion "Art. 255. Infanticide. - The penalty provided for parricide in
perpetua to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed 100,000 pesos." Article 246 and for murder in Article 248 shall be imposed upon any
No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the person who shall kill any child less than three days of age.
testimony of two witnesses at least to the same overt act or on If any crime penalized in this Article be committed by the
confession of the accused in open court. mother of the child for the purpose of concealing her dishonor, she
Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines, who commits shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its medium and maximum
acts of treason as defined in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be periods, and if said crime be committed for the same purpose by the
punished by reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine not to maternal grandparents or either of them, the penalty shall be
exceed 100,000 pesos." reclusion temporal."
Section 3. Section Three, Chapter One, Title One of Book Two Section 8. Article 267 of the same Code is hereby amended to
of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows: read as follows:
"Section Three. - Piracy and mutiny on the high seas or in the
Philippine waters "Art. 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention. - Any private
Art. 122. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in individual who shall kidnap or detain another, or in any other manner
Philippine waters. - The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be deprive him of his liberty, shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
inflicted upon any person who, on the high seas, or in Philippine perpetua to death:
waters, shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being a member of its
1. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more whether their purpose is merely to burn or destroy the building or the
than three days. burning merely constitutes an overt act in the commission or another
2. If it shall have been committed simulating public violation of law.
authority. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall also be
3. If any serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted imposed upon any person who shall burn:
upon the person kidnapped or detained; or if threats to kill him shall 1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military powder or
have been made. fireworks factory, ordnance, storehouse, archives or general museum
4. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor, except of the Government.
when the accused is any of the parents, female or a public officer. 2. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of
The penalty shall be death penalty where the kidnapping inflammable or explosive materials.
or detention was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom from If as a consequence of the commission of any of the acts
the victim or any other person, even if none of the circumstances penalized under this Article, death results, the mandatory penalty of
above-mentioned were present in the commission of the offense. death shall be imposed."
When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the
detention or is raped, or is subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts, Section 11. Article 335 of the same Code is hereby amended to read
the maximum penalty shall be imposed." as follows:
"Art. 335. When and how rape is committed. - Rape is
Section 9. Article 294 of the same Code is hereby amended to committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the
read as follows: following circumstances:
1. By using force or intimidation;
"Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of 2. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
persons - Penalties. - Any person guilty of robbery with the use of unconscious; and
violence against or intimidation of any person shall suffer: 3. When the woman is under twelve years of age or is
1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by reason demented.
or on occasion of the robbery, the crime of homicide shall have been The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion
committed, or when the robbery shall have been accompanied by perpetua.
rape or intentional mutilation or arson. Whenever the crime of rape is committed with the use of
2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be
reclusion perpetua, when or if by reason or on occasion of such reclusion perpetua to death.
robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in subdivision I of When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim
Article 263 shall have been inflicted. has become insane, the penalty shall be death.
3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason or on When the rape is attempted or frustrated and a homicide
occasion of the robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall
subdivision 2 of the article mentioned in the next preceding be reclusion perpetua to death.
paragraph, shall have been inflicted. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, a
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death.
reclusion temporal in its medium period, if the violence or intimidation The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of
employed in the commission of the robbery shall have been carried to rape is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:
a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime, or 1. when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age
when in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian,
upon any person not responsible for its commission any of the relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the
physical injuries covered by subdivisions 3 and 4 of said Article 263. common-law-spouse of the parent of the victim.
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to 2. when the victim is under the custody of the police or
prision mayor in its medium period in other cases." military authorities.
3. when the rape is committed in full view of the husband,
Section 10. Article 320 of the same Code is hereby amended parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third degree of
to read as follows: consanguinity.
4. when the victim is a religious or a child below seven (7)
"Art. 320. Destructive Arson. - The penalty of reclusion years old.
perpetua to death shall be imposed upon any person who shall burn: 5. when the offender knows that he is afflicted with
1. One (1) or more buildings or edifices, consequent to one Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) disease.
single act of burning, or as a result of simultaneous burnings, 6. when committed by any member of the Armed Forces
committed on several or different occasions. of the Philippines or the Philippine National Police or any law
2. Any building of public or private ownership, devoted to the enforcement agency.
public in general or where people usually gather or congregate for a 7. when by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the
definite purpose such as, but not limited to, official governmental victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation."
function or business, private transaction, commerce, trade, workshop,
meetings and conferences, or merely incidental to a definite purpose Section 12. Section 2 of Republic Act No. 7080 (An Act
such as but not limited to hotels, motels, transient dwellings, public Defining and Penalizing the Crime of Plunder) is hereby amended to
conveyances or stops or terminals, regardless of whether the read as follows:
offender had knowledge that there are persons in said building or "Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder; Penalties. -
edifice at the time it is set on fire and regardless also of whether the Any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of
building is actually inhabited or not. his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates,
3. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or airplane, subordinates or other persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-
devoted to transportation or conveyance, or for public use, gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt criminal acts
entertainment or leisure. as described in Section 1 (d) hereof in the aggregate amount or total
4. Any building, factory, warehouse installation and any value of at least Fifty million pesos (P50,000,000.00) shall be guilty of
appurtenances thereto, which are devoted to the service of public the crime of plunder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to
utilities. death. Any person who participated with the said public officer in the
5. Any building the burning of which is for the purpose of commission of an offense contributing to the crime of plunder shall
concealing or destroying evidence of another violation of law, or for likewise be punished for such offense. In the imposition of penalties,
the purpose of concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or to the degree of participation and the attendance of mitigating and
collect from insurance. extenuating circumstances, as provided by the Revised Penal Code,
Irrespective of the application of the above enumerated shall be considered by the court. The court shall declare any and all
qualifying circumstances, the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death ill-gotten wealth and their interests and other incomes and assets
shall likewise be imposed when the arson is perpetrated or committed including the properties and shares of stocks derived from the deposit
by two (2) or more persons or by a group of persons, regardless of or investment thereof forfeited in favor of the State."
proceeds of the crime including but not limited to money and other Arresto mayor. - The duration of the penalty of arresto
obtained thereby and the instruments or tools with which it was mayor shall be from one month and one day to six months.
committed, unless they are the property of a third person not liable Arresto menor. - The duration of the penalty of arresto
for the offense, but those which are not of lawful commerce shall menor shall be from one day to thirty days.
be ordered destroyed without delay. Dangerous drugs and plant Bond to keep the peace. - The bond to keep the peace shall be
sources of such drugs as well as the proceeds or instruments of required to cover such period of time as the court may determine."
the crime so confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government
shall be turned over to the Board for proper disposal without delay. Section 22. Article 47 of the same Code is hereby
Any apprehending or arresting officer who misappropriates or amended to read as follows:
misapplies or fails to account for seized or confiscated dangerous Art. 47. In what cases the death penalty shall not be
drugs or plant-sources of dangerous drugs or proceeds or imposed; Automatic review of the Death Penalty Cases. - The
instruments of the crime as are herein defined shall after death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be
conviction be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to imposed under existing laws, except when the guilty person is
death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten below eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of
million pesos." the crime or is more than seventy years of age or when upon
appeal or automatic review of the case by the Supreme Court, the
Section 18. There shall be incorporated after Section 20 required majority vote is not obtained for the imposition of the
of Republic Act No. 6425, as amended, known as the Dangerous death penalty, in which cases the penalty shall be reclusion
Drugs Act of 1972, a new section to read as follows: perpetua.
"Sec. 20-A. Plea-bargaining Provisions. - Any person In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by the
charged under any provision of this Act where the imposable trial court, the records shall be forwarded to the Supreme Court for
penalty is reclusion perpetua to death shall not be allowed to avail automatic review and judgment by the Court en banc, within
of the provision on plea bargaining." twenty (20) days but not earlier than fifteen (15) days after
promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of any motion for
Section 19. Section 24 of Republic Act No. 6425, as new trial or reconsideration. The transcript shall also be forwarded
amended, known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, is hereby within ten (10) days from the filing thereof by the stenographic
amended to read as follows : reporter."
"Sec. 24. Penalties for Government Official and
Employees and Officers and Members of Police Agencies and the Section 23. Article 62 of the same Code, as amended, is
Armed Forces, 'Planting' of Evidence. - The maximum penalties hereby amended to read as follows :
provided for Section 3, 4(1), 5(1), 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 of "Art. 62. Effects of the attendance of mitigating or
Article II and Sections 14, 14-A, 15(1), 16 and 19 of Article III shall aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency. -
be imposed, if those found guilty of any of the said offenses are Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and habitual delinquency
government officials, employees or officers, including members of shall be taken into account for the purpose of diminishing or
police agencies and the armed forces. increasing the penalty in conformity with the following rules:
Any such above government official, employee or officer 1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves
who is found guilty of "planting" any dangerous drugs punished in constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which are
Sections 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 13 of Article II and Sections 14, 14-A, 15 included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty
and 16 of Article III of this Act in the person or in the immediate therefor shall not be taken into account for the purpose of
vicinity of another as evidence to implicate the latter, shall suffer increasing the penalty.
the same penalty as therein provided." 1(a). When in the commission of the crime, advantage
was taken by the offender of his public position, the penalty to be
Section 20. Sec. 14 of Republic Act No. 6539, as imposed shall be in its maximum regardless of mitigating
amended, known as the Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972, is hereby circumstances.
amended to read as follows: The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was
"Sec. 14. Penalty for Carnapping. - Any person who is committed by any group who belongs to an organized/syndicated
found guilty of carnapping, as this term is defined in Section Two crime group.
of this Act, shall, irrespective of the value of motor vehicle taken, An organized/syndicated crime group means a group of
be punished by imprisonment for not less than fourteen years and two or more persons collaborating, confederating or mutually
eight months and not more than seventeen years and four months, helping one another for purposes of gain in the commission of any
when the carnapping is committed without violence or intimidation crime.
of persons, or force upon things; and by imprisonment for not less 2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any
than seventeen years and four months and not more than thirty aggravating circumstances inherent in the crime to such a degree
years, when the carnapping is committed by means of violence that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof.
against or intimidation of any person, or force upon things; and the 3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise
penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed when the from the moral attributes of the offender, or from his private
owner, driver or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed relations with the offended party, or from any other personal
or raped in the course of the commission of the carnapping or on cause, shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the
the occasion thereof." principals, accomplices and accessories as to whom such
circumstances are attendant.
Section 21. Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, as 4. The circumstances which consist in the material
amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: execution of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it,
"Art. 27. Reclusion perpetua. - The penalty of reclusion shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons
perpetua shall be from twenty years and one day to forty years. only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of
Reclusion temporal. - The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be the act or their cooperation therein.
from twelve years and one day to twenty years. 5. Habitual delinquency shall have the following effects :
Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. - The (a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be sentenced to
duration of the penalties of prision mayor and temporary the penalty provided by law for the last crime of which he be found
disqualification shall be from six years and one day to twelve guilty and to the additional penalty of prision correccional in its
years, except when the penalty of disqualification is imposed as an medium and maximum periods;
accessory penalty, in which case, it shall be that of the principal (b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to
penalty. the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty
Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro. - The and to the additional penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and
duration of the penalties of prision correccional, suspension, and medium periods; and
destierro shall be from six months and one day to six years, except (c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the culprit shall be
when the suspension is imposed as an accessory penalty, in sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be
which case, its duration shall be that of the principal penalty.
found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision mayor in its of the person under the sentence during the lethal injection as well as
maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period. during the proceedings prior to the execution.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of the
two penalties to be imposed upon the offender, in conformity "The Director of the Bureau of Corrections shall take steps
herewith, shall in no case exceed 30 years. to ensure that the lethal injection to be administered is sufficient to
For purposes of this article, a person shall be deemed to be cause the instantaneous death of the convict.
a 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 "Pursuant to this, all personnel involved in the administration
serious physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is of lethal injection shall be trained prior to the performance of such
found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. task.
Section 24. Article 81 of the same Code, as amended, is "The authorized physician of the Bureau of Corrections, after
hereby amended to read as follows : thorough examination, shall officially make a pronouncement of the
"Art. 81. When and how the death penalty is to be executed. convict's death and shall certify thereto in the records of the Bureau
- The death sentence shall be executed with preference to any of Corrections.
other and shall consist in putting the person under sentence to
death by electrocution. The death sentence shall be executed The death sentence shall be carried out not earlier than one
under the authority of the Director of Prisons, endeavoring so far (1) year nor later than eighteen (18) months after the judgment has
as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the person under the become final and executory without prejudice to the exercise by the
sentence during electrocution as well as during the proceedings President of his executive clemency powers at all times."
prior to the execution.
If the person under sentence so desires, he shall be Sec. 2. Persons already sentenced by judgment,
anaesthetized at the moment of the execution. which has become final and executory, who are waiting to undergo
As soon as facilities are provided by the Bureau of Prisons, the death penalty by electrocution or gas poisoning shall be under the
the method of carrying out the sentence shall be changed to gas coverage of the provisions of this Act upon its effectivity. Their
poisoning. sentences shall be automatically modified for this purpose.
The death sentence shall be carried out not later than one
(1) year after the judgment has become final. Sec. 3. Implementing Rules. — The Secretary of
Justice in coordination with the Secretary of Health and the Bureau of
Section 25. Article 83 of the same Code is hereby amended Corrections shall, within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of this Act,
to read as follows: promulgate the rules to implement its provisions.
"Art. 83. Suspension of the execution of the death sentence.
- The death sentence shall not be inflicted upon a woman while Sec. 4. Repealing Clause. — All laws, presidential
she is pregnant or within one (1) year after delivery, nor upon any decrees and issuances, executive orders, rules and regulations or
person over seventy years of age. In this last case, the death parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby
sentence shall be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua repealed or modified accordingly.
with the accessory penalties provided in Article 40.
In all cases where the death sentence has become final, the Sec. 5. Effectivity. — This Act shall take effect fifteen
records of the case shall be forwarded immediately by the (15) days after its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two
Supreme Court to the Office of the President for possible exercise (2) national newspapers of general circulation, whichever comes
of the pardoning power." earlier. Publication shall not be later than ten (10) days after the
approval thereof.
Section 26. < modified or repealed hereby are Act this of
provisions the with inconsistent thereof parts regulations and rules Approved: March 20, 1996
orders, executive issuances, decrees presidential laws,>
Section 27. If, for any reason or reasons, any part of the
provision of this Act shall be held to be unconstitutional or invalid, RULES AND REGULATIONS TO IMPLEMENT
other parts or provisions hereof which are not affected thereby REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8177
shall continue to be in full force and effect. Pursuant to Section 3 of Republic Act No. 8177 entitled "AN ACT
DESIGNATING DEATH BY LETHAL INJECTION AS THE METHOD
Section 28. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days OF CARRYING OUT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, AMENDING FOR
after its publication in two (2) national newspapers of general THE PURPOSE ARTICLE 81 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE, AS
circulation. The publication shall not be later than seven (7) days AMENDED BY SECTION 24 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7659", the
after the approval hereof. undersigned, in coordination with the Secretary of Health and
the Director of Corrections, hereby issues the following Rules to
Approved: December 13, 1993 govern the implementation of said Act:
a. There shall be no discrimination in the treatment of a death SECTION 17. Suspension of the Execution of the Death
convict on account of race, color, religion, language, politics, Sentence. — Execution by lethal injection shall not be inflicted upon a
nationality, social origin, property, birth or other status. woman within the three years next following the date of the sentence
b. In the execution of a death penalty, the death convict shall or while she is pregnant, nor upon any person over seventy (70)
be spared from unnecessary anxiety or distress. years of age. In this latter case, the death sentence shall be
c. The religious beliefs of the death convict shall be respected. commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the accessory
SECTION 4. Prison Services. — Subject to the penalties provided in Article 40 of the Revised Penal Code.
availability of resources, a death convict shall enjoy the following SECTION 18. Place of Execution. — The execution by lethal
services and privileges to encourage and enhance his self-respect injection shall take place in the prison establishment and space
and dignity: thereat as may be designated by the Director. Said place shall be
a. Medical and Dental; closed to public view.
b. Religious, Guidance and Counseling; SECTION 19. Execution Procedure. — Details of the procedure
c. Exercise; prior to, during and after administering the lethal injection shall be set
d. Visitation; and forth in a manual to be prepared by the Director. The manual shall
e. Mail. contain details of, among others, the sequence of events before and
SECTION 5. Confinement. — Whenever after the execution; procedures in setting up the intravenous line; the
practicable, the death convict shall be confined in an individual cell in administration of the lethal drugs; the pronouncement of death; and
a building that is exclusively assigned for the use of death convicts. the removal of the intravenous system.
The convict shall be provided with a bunk, a steel/wooden bed or Said manual shall be confidential and its distribution shall be
mat, a pillow or blanket and mosquito net. limited to authorized prison personnel.
SECTION 20. Quantity and Safekeeping of Drugs Purchased.
SECTION 6. Religious Services. — Subject to security — The exact quantities of the drugs needed for an execution of a
conditions, a death convict may be visited by the priest or minister of death penalty shall be purchased by the Director pursuant to existing
his faith and given such available religious materials which he may rules and regulations not earlier than ten (10) days before the
require. scheduled date of execution. The drugs shall be kept securely at the
SECTION 7. Exercise. — A death convict shall be allowed office of the superintendent of the prison where the death sentence is
to enjoy regular exercise periods under the supervision of a guard. to be executed. All unused drugs shall be inventoried and disposed of
SECTION 8. Meal Services. — Meals shall, whenever properly under the direct supervision of the Director.
practicable, be served individually to a death convict inside his cell. SECTION 21. Administering Lethal Drugs. — The
Mess utensils shall be made of plastic. After each meal, said utensils injection of the lethal drugs to a death convict shall be made by a
shall be collected and accounted. person designated by the Director.
SECTION 9. Visitation. — A death convict shall be allowed SECTION 22. Identity of Person Administering Lethal
to be visited by his immediate family and reputable friends at regular Injection. — The identity of the person who is designated to
intervals and during designated hours subject to security procedures. administer the lethal injection shall be kept secret.
SECTION 10. List of Visitors. — A list of persons who may visit SECTION 23. Persons Who May Witness Execution. —
a death convict shall be compiled and maintained by the prison The execution of a death convict shall be witnessed only by the priest
authorities. The list may include the members of the convict's or minister assisting the offender and by his lawyers, and by his
immediate family such as his parents, step parents, foster parents, relatives, not exceeding six, if the convict so desires, by the physician
brothers and sisters, wife or husband and children. The list may, upon and the necessary personnel of the penal establishment, and by such
the request of the convict, include his grandparents, aunts, uncles, in- persons as the Director may authorize.
laws and cousins. Other visitors may, after investigation, be included A person below eighteen (18) years of age shall not be
in the list if it will assist in raising the morale of the convict. allowed to witness an execution.
SECTION 11. Interviews of Convicts. — Television, radio and SECTION 24. Expulsion of Witness. — Any
other interviews by media of a death convict shall not be allowed. person who makes unnecessary noise or displays rude or improper
SECTION 12. Handling of Inmate Mail. — The sending and behavior during an execution shall be expelled from the lethal
receiving of mail by a death convict shall be controlled to prevent illicit injection chamber.
communication. Mail shall be censored in accordance with existing SECTION 25. Non-Recording of Execution. —
prison rules. The Director shall not allow the visual, sound or other recording of the
SECTION 13. Outside Movement. — A death convict may be actual execution by media or by any private person or group.
allowed to leave his place of confinement only for diagnosis of a life- SECTION 26. Disposition of Corpse of Convict.
threatening situation or treatment of a serious ailment, if the diagnosis — Unless claimed by his family, the corpse of a death convict shall,
cannot be done or the treatment provided in the prison hospital. upon the completion of the legal proceedings subsequent to the
SECTION 14. Court Appearance. — A death convict shall not execution, be turned over to an institution of learning or scientific
be brought outside the penal institution where he is confined for research first applying for it, for the purpose of study and
appearance or attendance in any court except when the Supreme investigation, provided that such institution shall take charge of the
Court authorizes, upon proper application, said outside movement. A decent burial of the remains. Otherwise, the Director shall order the
judge who requires the appearance or attendance of a death convict burial of the body of the convict at government expense, granting
in any judicial proceeding shall conduct such proceeding within the permission to be present thereat to the members of the family of the
premises of the penal institution where the convict is confined. convict and the friends of the latter. In no case shall the burial of a
SECTION 15. How Lethal Injection is to be Administered. — death convict be held with pomp.
The execution of the death sentence by lethal injection shall be done SECTION 27. Effectivity. — These Rules shall
under the authority of the Director who shall endeavor to mitigate the take effect fifteen (15) days after publication in a newspaper of
sufferings of the convict prior to and during the execution. general circulation.
SECTION 16. Notification and Execution of the Sentence and APPROVED.
Assistance to the Convict. — The court shall designate a working day Adopted: April 28, 1997
for the execution of the death penalty but not the hour thereof. Such
designation shall only be communicated to the convict after sunrise of
the day of the execution, and the execution shall not take place until
after the expiration of at least eight (8) hours following the notification, 1987 CONSTITUTION. Section 19.
but before sunset. During the interval between the notification and 1. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel,
execution, the convict shall, as far as possible, be furnished such degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall
assistance as he may request in order to be attended in his last death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling
moments by a priest or minister of the religion he professes and to reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress
consult his lawyers, as well as in order to make a will and confer with hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already
members of his family or of persons in charge of the management of
imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
his business, of the administration of his property, or of the care of his
descendants.
∗ The death penalty is not excessive, unjust or cruel Art. 83. Suspension of the execution of
within the meaning of that word in the Constitution. the death sentence. — The death sentence shall not
Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or be inflicted upon a woman within the three years next
lingering death. following the date of the sentence or while she is
∗ RA 296 providing that eight justices must concur pregnant, nor upon any person over seventy years of
in the imposition of death penalty is retroactive. age. In this last case, the death sentence shall be
∗ Review by the SC of the death sentence is commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the
absolutely necessary. accessory penalties provided in Article 40.
∗ In what crimes is death penalty imposed:
1. Treason ∗ Death sentence shall be suspended when the accused
2. Piracy is a:
3. Qualified Piracy a. Woman, while pregnant;
4. Qualified bribery b. Woman, within one year after delivery;
5. Parricide c. Person over 70 years of age;
6. Murder d. Convict who becomes insane after final
7. Infanticide sentence of death has been pronounced.
8. Kidnapping and serious
illegal detention
∗ Art. 47 provides for cases in which death penalty is Facts: Upon conviction of Echegaray in People
not to be imposed. On the other hand, Art. 83 provides v. Echegaray, the SC temporarily restrained the
for suspension only of the execution of death sentence. execution of its own decision. The respondents claim
∗ RTC can suspend execution of death sentence. that SC has no more jurisdiction over the case because
∗ The records of the case shall be forwarded to the judgment has become final and it cannot restrain the
Office of the President, when the death sentence has execution of its decision.
become final, for possible exercise of the pardoning Held: The rule on finality of judgment cannot
power. divest the SC of its jurisdiction to execute and enforce
the same judgment. Notwithstanding the order of
Art. 84. Place of execution and persons execution and the executory nature thereof on the date
who may witness the same. — The execution shall set, the date can be postponed. The power to control the
take place in the penitentiary of Bilibid in a space closed execution of its decision is an essential aspect of
to the public view and shall be witnessed only by the jurisdiction – supervening events may change the
priests assisting the offender and by his lawyers, and by circumstance of the parties and compel the courts to
his relatives, not exceeding six, if he so request, by the intervene and adjust the rights of the litigants to
physician and the necessary personnel of the penal prevent unfairness. The SC did not restrain the
establishment, and by such persons as the Director of effectivity of the law enacted by the Congress. It merely
Prisons may authorize. restrained the execution of its judgment to give
reasonable time to check its fairness in light of
supervening events in Congress.
∗ The execution shall take place in the penitentiary or
Bilibid in a space closed to the public view.
People v. Esparas (1996)
Facts: Esparas was charged with violation of
PERSONS WHO MAY WITNESS EXECUTION:
RA 6425 as amended by RA 759 for importing into the
a. priests assisting the offender;
country 20kg of shabu. As the accused remains at large
b. offender’s lawyers;
up to the present time, the issue that confronts the
c. offender’s relatives, not exceeding six, if so
Court is whether or not it will proceed to automatically
requested;
review her death sentence.
d. physician, and
Held: The reimposition of the death penalty
e. necessary personnel of penal establishment
revived the procedure by which the Supreme Court
∗ a person below 18 years of age may not be allowed
reviews death penalty cases pursuant to the Rules of
to witness an execution.
Court – it remains automatic and continues to be
mandatory and does not depend on the whims of the
RPC, Art. 85. Provisions relative to the corpse of death convict and leaves the SC without any option. Any
the person executed and its burial. — Unless court decision authorizing the State to take life must be
claimed by his family, the corpse of the culprit shall, as error-free as possible. It is not only within the power
upon the completion of the legal proceedings of the SC but also it is its duty to review all death
subsequent to the execution, be turned over to the penalty cases.
institute of learning or scientific research first applying Sec. 8 of Rule 124 of the Rules of Court which
for it, for the purpose of study and investigation, authorizes the dismissal of an appeal when the appellant
provided that such institute shall take charge of the jumps bail has no application to cases where the death
decent burial of the remains. Otherwise, the Director of penalty has been imposed.
Prisons shall order the burial of the body of the culprit at
government expense, granting permission to be present People v. Munoz (1989)
thereat to the members of the family of the culprit and Facts: Of the 11 persons who were charged
the friends of the latter. In no case shall the burial of the with murder, only 4 were identified and convicted. They
body of a person sentenced to death be held with pomp. were held guilty for killing 3 persons.
Held: The advocates of the Masangkay ruling
∗ The burial of the body of a person sentenced to death argue that the Constitution abolished the death penalty
should not be held with pomp. and thereby limited the penalty for murder to the
- The purpose of the law is to prevent anyone remaining periods, to wit, the minimum and the
from making a hero out of a criminal. medium. However, a reading of the Constitution will
readily show that there is really nothing therein which
People v. Echegaray (1996) expressly declares the abolition of death penalty. It
Facts: Echegaray was sentenced to death merely states that the death penalty shall not be
penalty for raping his 10-year–old daughter. On appeal, imposed unless for compelling reasons involving heinous
the accused claimed that the penalty imposed by the crimes the Congress hereafter provides for it and, if
court is erroneous under RA 7659 because he is neither already imposed, shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
a father, stepfather nor grandfather of Rodessa although The Constitution does not change the
he was a confirmed lover of the Rodessa’s mother. periods of the penalty prescribed by Art. 248 of the RPC,
Held: Where the accused is a confirmed lover except only in so far as it prohibits the imposition of the
of the victim’s mother, he falls squarely within Sec. 11 death penalty and reduces it to reclusion perpetua. The
of RA 7659 under the term “common-law spouse of the range of the medium and minimum penalties remains
parent of the victim.” Also, the fact that the victim unchanged. The problem in an event is addressed not to
referred to the accused as “Papa” is reason enough to this Court but to the Congress.
conclude that the accused is either the farther or
stepfather of the victim. AFFLICTIVE PENALTIES
Art. 44. Arresto; Its accessory penalties. — The otherwise to deposit such amount in the office of the
penalty of arresto shall carry with it that of suspension clerk of the court to guarantee said undertaking.
of the right too hold office and the right of suffrage The court shall determine, according to its
during the term of the sentence. discretion, the period of duration of the bond.
Should the person sentenced fail to give the
ARRESTO MENOR bond as required he shall be detained for a period which
shall in no case exceed six months, is he shall have been
Duration: 1 day to 30 days prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall
Accessory Penalties: not exceed thirty days, if for a light felony.
a. Suspension of right to hold office
b. Suspension of the right of suffrage during the ∗ The offender must present 2 sufficient
term of the sentence. sureties who shall undertake that the offender will not
commit the offense sought to be prevented, and that in
PUBLIC CENSURE case such offense be committed they will pay the
amount determined by the court; or
∗ Censure, being a penalty is not proper in acquittal. ∗ The offender must deposit such amount with
the clerk of court to guarantee said undertaking; or
PENALTIES COMMON TO AFFLICTIVE, ∗ The offender may be detained, if he cannot
CORRECCIONAL AND LIGHT PENALTIES give the bond, for a period not to exceed 6 months if
prosecuted for grave or less grave felony, or for a period
FINE not to exceed 30 days, if for a light felony.
Art. 26. When afflictive, correctional, or ∗ Bond to keep the peace is different from bail bon
light penalty. — A fine, whether imposed as a single of which is posted for the provisional release of a person
as an alternative penalty, shall be considered an arrested for or accused of a crime.
afflictive penalty, if it exceeds 6,000 pesos; a
correctional penalty, if it does not exceed 6,000 pesos D. ACCESSORY PENALTIES
but is not less than 200 pesos; and a light penalty if it
less than 200 pesos. Art. 30. Effects of the penalties of perpetual or
temporary absolute disqualification. — The penalties
∗ This article merely classifies fine and has nothing to do of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification for
with the definition of light felony. public office shall produce the following effects:
1. The deprivation of the public offices and
Fine is: employments which the offender may have held even if
1. Afflictive – over P6,000 conferred by popular election.
2. Correctional – P200 to P6,000 2. The deprivation of the right to vote in any
3. Light Penalty – less than P200 election for any popular office or to be elected to such
office.
Art. 66. Imposition of fines. — In imposing 3. The disqualification for the offices or public
fines the courts may fix any amount within the limits employments and for the exercise of any of the rights
established by law; in fixing the amount in each case mentioned.
attention shall be given, not only to the mitigating and In case of temporary disqualification, such
aggravating circumstances, but more particularly to the disqualification as is comprised in paragraphs 2 and 3 of
wealth or means of the culprit. this article shall last during the term of the sentence.
4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or
∗ The court can fix any amount of the fine within the other pension for any office formerly held.
limits established by law.
∗ The court must consider: Art. 31. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or
a. The mitigating and aggravating circumstances; and temporary special disqualification. — The penalties
b. More particularly, the wealth or means of the of perpetual or temporal special disqualification for
culprit. public office, profession or calling shall produce the
∗ When the law does not fix the minimum of the fine, following effects:
the determination of the amount of the fine to be 1. The deprivation of the office, employment,
imposed upon the culprit is left to the sound discretion profession or calling affected;
of the court, provided it shall not exceed the maximum 2. The disqualification for holding similar
authorized by law. offices or employments either perpetually or during the
∗ Fines are not divided into 3 equal portions. term of the sentence according to the extent of such
disqualification.
BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE
Art. 32. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or
Art. 35. Effects of bond to keep the peace. temporary special disqualification for the exercise
— It shall be the duty of any person sentenced to give of the right of suffrage. — The perpetual or
bond to keep the peace, to present two sufficient temporary special disqualification for the exercise of the
sureties who shall undertake that such person will not right of suffrage shall deprive the offender perpetually or
commit the offense sought to be prevented, and that in during the term of the sentence, according to the nature
case such offense be committed they will pay the of said penalty, of the right to vote in any popular
amount determined by the court in the judgment, or election for any public office or to be elected to such
office. Moreover, the offender shall not be permitted to the offense, but those articles which are not subject of
hold any public office during the period of his lawful commerce shall be destroyed.
disqualification.
PERPETUAL OR TEMPORARY ABSOLUTE
Art. 33. Effects of the penalties of suspension from DISQUALIFICATION
any public office, profession or calling, or the right
of suffrage. — The suspension from public office, Effects:
profession or calling, and the exercise of the right of a. Deprivation of any public office or employment
suffrage shall disqualify the offender from holding such f offender
office or exercising such profession or calling or right of b. Deprivation of the right to vote in any election
suffrage during the term of the sentence. or to be voted upon
The person suspended from holding public office shall c. Loss of rights to retirement pay or pension
not hold another having similar functions during the ∗ All these effects last during the lifetime of the convict
period of his suspension. and even after the service of the sentence except as
regards paragraphs 2 and 3 of the above in connection
with temporary absolute disqualification.
Art. 34. Civil interdiction. — Civil interdiction shall
deprive the offender during the time of his sentence of
PERPETUAL OR TEMPORARY SPECIAL
the rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either
DISQUALIFICATION
as to the person or property of any ward, of marital
Effects:
authority, of the right to manage his property and of the
For public office, profession or calling:
right to dispose of such property by any act or any
a. Deprivation of the office, employment, profession
conveyance inter vivos.
or calling affected;
b. Disqualification for holding similar offices or
Art. 41. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion employments during the period of disqualification;
temporal; Their accessory penalties. — The For the exercise of right to suffrage:
penalties of reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal c. Deprivation of the right to vote or to be elected in
shall carry with them that of civil interdiction for life or an office;
during the period of the sentence as the case may be, d. Cannot hold any public office during the period of
and that of perpetual absolute disqualification which the disqualification
offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the
principal penalty, unless the same shall have been ∗ The penalty for disqualification if imposed as an
expressly remitted in the pardon. accessory penalty is imposed for PROTECTION and NOT
for the withholding of a privilege.
Art. 42. Prision mayor; Its accessory penalties. — ∗ Temporary disqualification or suspension if imposed as
The penalty of prision mayor, shall carry with it that of an accessory penalty, the duration is the same as that of
temporary absolute disqualification and that of perpetual the principal penalty.
special disqualification from the right of suffrage which
the offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the SUSPENSION FROM PUBLIC OFFICE, THE RIGHT TO
principal penalty, unless the same shall have been VOTE AND BE VOTED FOR, THE RIGHT TO
expressly remitted in the pardon. PRACTICE A PROFESSION OR CALLING
Effects:
Art. 43. Prision correccional; Its accessory
a. Disqualification from holding such office or the
penalties. — The penalty of prision correccional shall
exercise of such profession or right of suffrage
carry with it that of suspension from public office, from
during the term of the sentence;
the right to follow a profession or calling, and that of
b. Cannot hold another office having similar
perpetual special disqualification from the right of
functions during the period of suspension.
suffrage, if the duration of said imprisonment shall
exceed eighteen months. The offender shall suffer the
CIVIL INTERDICTION
disqualification provided in the article although pardoned
Effects:
as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have
Deprivation of the following rights:
been expressly remitted in the pardon.
1) Parental
authority
Art. 44. Arresto; Its accessory penalties. — The 2) Guardianship
penalty of arresto shall carry with it that of suspension over the ward
of the right to hold office and the right of suffrage during 3) Marital authority
the term of the sentence. 4) Right to manage
property and to dispose of the same by acts
Art. 45. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds inter vivos
or instruments of the crime. — Every penalty
imposed for the commission of a felony shall carry with ∗ Civil interdiction is an accessory penalty to the
it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the following principal penalties:
instruments or tools with which it was committed. a) Death if commuted to life imprisonment;
Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be b) Reclusion perpetua
confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government, c) Reclusion temporal
unless they be property of a third person not liable for
preventive imprisonment, if the detention prisoner ♠ The division of a divisible penalty into three periods,
agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same as maximum, medium and minimum, refers to the
disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, proper period of the penalty which should be imposed
except in the following cases: when aggravating or mitigating circumstances attend
1. When they are recidivists or have been the commission of the crime.
convicted previously twice or more times of any crime;
and People v. Formigones (1950)
2. When upon being summoned for the Facts: The accused without a previous quarrel
execution of their sentence they have failed to surrender or provocation took his bolo and stabbed his wife in the
voluntarily. back resulting to the latter’s death. The accused was
If the detention prisoner does not agree to sentenced to the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon Held: The penalty applicable for parricide
convicted prisoners, he shall be credited in the service of under Art. 246 of the RPC is composed only of 2
his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he indivisible penalties, reclusion perpetua to death.
has undergone preventive imprisonment. (As amended Although the commission of the act is attended by some
by Republic Act 6127, June 17, 1970). mitigating circumstance without any aggravating
Whenever an accused has undergone circumstance to offset them, Art. 63 of the RPC should
preventive imprisonment for a period equal to or more be applied. The said article provides that when the
than the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense commission of the act is attended by some mitigating
charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is circumstance and there is no aggravating circumstance,
not yet terminated, he shall be released immediately the lesser penalty shall be applied.
without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof
or the proceeding on appeal, if the same is under PRINCIPALS, ACCOMPLICES AND ACCESSORIES IN
review. In case the maximum penalty to which the CONSUMMATED, FRUSTRATED AND ATTEMPTED
accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be FELONIES.
released after thirty (30) days of preventive
imprisonment. (As amended by E.O. No. 214, July 10, Art. 46. Penalty to be imposed upon
1988). principals in general. — The penalty prescribed by law
for the commission of a felony shall be imposed upon
♠ The accused undergoes preventive imprisonment when the principals in the commission of such felony.
the offense charged is nonbailable, or even if bailable, Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony is
he cannot furnish the required bail. general terms, it shall be understood as applicable to the
♠ The convict is to be released immediately if the consummated felony.
penalty imposed after trial is less than the full time or
four-fifths of the time of the preventive imprisonment.
Art. 50. Penalty to be imposed upon
♠ The accused shall be released immediately whenever
principals of a frustrated crime. — The penalty next
he has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period
lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
equal to or more than the possible maximum
consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principal
imprisonment for the offense charged.
in a frustrated felony.
Art. 51. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of
Art. 46. Penalty to be imposed upon attempted crimes. — A penalty lower by two degrees
principals in general. — The penalty prescribed by law than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony
for the commission of a felony shall be imposed upon shall be imposed upon the principals in an attempt to
the principals in the commission of such felony. commit a felony.
Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a
felony is general terms, it shall be understood as
applicable to the consummated felony. Art. 52. Penalty to be imposed upon
accomplices in consummated crime. — The penalty
next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
GENERAL RULE:
consummated shall be imposed upon the accomplices in
The penalty prescribed by law in general terms shall be
the commission of a consummated felony.
imposed:
a. Upon the principals
b. For consummated felony Art. 53. Penalty to be imposed upon
EXCEPTION: accessories to the commission of a consummated
The exception is when the penalty to be felony. — The penalty lower by two degrees than that
imposed upon the principal in frustrated or attempted prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be
felony is fixed by law. imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a
consummated felony.
♠ Whenever it is believed that the penalty lower by one
or two degrees corresponding to said acts of execution is Art. 54. Penalty to imposed upon
not in proportion to the wrong done, the law fixes a accomplices in a frustrated crime. — The penalty
distinct penalty for the principal in frustrated or next lower in degree than prescribed by law for the
attempted felony. frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices
♠ The graduation of penalties by degrees refers to in the commission of a frustrated felony.
STAGES OF EXECUTION (consummated, frustrated or
attempted) and to the DEGREE OF THE CRIMINAL Art. 55. Penalty to be imposed upon
PARTICIPATION OF THE OFFENDER (whether as accessories of a frustrated crime. — The penalty
principal, accomplice or accessory)
lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the Articles 50 to 57, inclusive, of this Code shall not be
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories applicable to cases in which the law expressly prescribes
to the commission of a frustrated felony. the penalty provided for a frustrated or attempted
felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or
Art. 56. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories.
accomplices in an attempted crime. — The penalty
next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for an ♠ Arts. 50 to 57 shall not apply to cases where the law
attempt to commit a felony shall be imposed upon the expressly prescribes the penalty for frustrated or
accomplices in an attempt to commit the felony. attempted felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or
accessories.
GENERAL RULE: An accomplice is punished by a
Art. 57. Penalty to be imposed upon
penalty one degree lower than the penalty imposed
accessories of an attempted crime. — The penalty
upon the principal.
lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
EXCEPTIONS:
attempted felony shall be imposed upon the accessories
to the attempt to commit a felony. a. The ascendants, guardians, curators,
teachers and any person who by abuse of
DIAGRAM OF THE APPLICATION OF ARTS. 50-57: authority or confidential relationship, shall
cooperate as accomplices in the crimes of rape,
CONSUMM FRUSTRAT ATTEMPT acts of lasciviousness, seduction, corruption of
ATED ED ED minors, white slate trade or abduction. (Art. 346)
PRINCIPAL 0 1 2 b. One who furnished the place for the
S perpetration of the crime of slight illegal
ACCOMPLI 1 2 3 detention. (Art. 268)
CES
ACCESSOR 2 3 4 GENERAL RULE: An accessory is punished by a penalty
IES two degrees lower than the penalty imposed upon the
principal.
EXCEPTION: When accessory is punished as principal –
“0” represents the penalty prescribed by law in defining knowingly concealing certain evil practices is ordinarily
a crime, which is to be imposed n the PRINCIPAL in a an act of the accessory, but in Art. 142, such act is
CONSUMMATED OFFENSE, in accordance with the punished as the act of the principal.
provisions of Art. 46. The other figures represent the When accessories are punished with a penalty
degrees to which the penalty must be lowered, to meet one degree lower:
the different situation anticipated by law. a. Knowingly using counterfeited seal or
forged signature or stamp of the President
EXCEPTIONS: Arts. 50 to 57 shall not apply to cases (Art. 162).
where the law expressly prescribes the penalty for b. Illegal possession and use of a false
frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed upon treasury or bank note (Art. 168).
accomplices or accessories. c. Using falsified document (Art. 173 par.3 )
d. Using falsified dispatch (Art. 173 par. 2)
BASES FOR THE DETERMINATION OF THE EXTENT
OF PENALTY:
Art. 61. Rules for graduating penalties. —
1. The stage reached by the crime in its
For the purpose of graduating the penalties which,
development (either attempted, frustrated or
according to the provisions of Articles 50 to 57,
consummated)
inclusive, of this Code, are to be imposed upon persons
2. The participation therein of the person liable.
guilty as principals of any frustrated or attempted
3. The aggravating or mitigating circumstances
felony, or as accomplices or accessories, the following
which attended the commission of the crime.
rules shall be observed:
1. When the penalty prescribed for the felony
♠ A DEGREE is one entire penalty, one whole
is single and indivisible, the penalty next lower in
penalty or one unit of the penalties enumerated in the
degrees shall be that immediately following that
graduated scales provided for in Art. 71. Each of the
indivisible penalty in the respective graduated scale
penalties of reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal,
prescribed in Article 71 of this Code.
prision mayor, etc., enumerated in the graduated scales
2. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
of Art. 71 is a degree.
composed of two indivisible penalties, or of one or more
♠ When there is a mitigating or aggravating
divisible penalties to be impose to their full extent, the
circumstance, the penalty is lowered or increased by
penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately
PERIOD only, except when the penalty is divisible and
following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the
there are two or more mitigating and without
respective graduated scale.
aggravating circumstances, in which case the penalty is
3. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
lowered by degree.
composed of one or two indivisible penalties and the
♠ A PERIOD is one of the three equal portions
maximum period of another divisible penalty, the
called the minimum, medium and maximum of a
penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the
divisible penalty.
medium and minimum periods of the proper divisible
penalty and the maximum periods of the proper divisible
Art. 60. Exception to the rules established penalty and the maximum period of that immediately
in Articles 50 to 57. — The provisions contained in following in said respective graduated scale.
4. when the penalty prescribed for the crime is Ex. reclusion perpetua to death
composed of several periods, corresponding to different ♠ The penalty immediately following
divisible penalties, the penalty next lower in degree shall the lesser of the penalties, which is reclusion
be composed of the period immediately following the perpetua, is reclusion temporal.
minimum prescribed and of the two next following, When the penalty is composed of one or more divisible
which shall be taken from the penalty prescribed, if penalties to be imposed to their full extent
possible; otherwise from the penalty immediately Ex. prision correccional to prision mayor
following in the above mentioned respective graduated ♠ The penalty immediately following
scale. the lesser of the penalties of prision
5. When the law prescribes a penalty for a correccional to prision mayor is arresto mayor.
crime in some manner not especially provided for in the
four preceding rules, the courts, proceeding by analogy, THIRD RULE:
shall impose corresponding penalties upon those guilty When the penalty is composed of two indivisible
as principals of the frustrated felony, or of attempt to penalties and the maximum period of a divisible penalty
commit the same, and upon accomplices and Ex. reclusion temporal in its MAXIMUM period
accessories. to death
Death
♠ This article provides for the rules to be observed in Reclusion Penalty for the principal in
lowering the penalty by one or two degrees. Perpetua consummated murder
a. For the principal in frustrated felony – one Maximum
degree lower; Reclusion Medium Penalty for accomplice; or
b. For the principal in attempted felony – two Temporal Minimum for principal in frustrated
degrees lower; Maximum murder
c. For the accomplice in consummated felony Prision Medium
– one degree lower; and Mayor Minimum
d. For the accessory in consummated felony
– two degrees lower.
♠ The rules provided for in Art. 61 should also apply in When the penalty is composed of one indivisible penalty
determining the MINIMUM of the indeterminate penalty and the maximum period of a divisible penalty
under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The MINIMUM Ex. Reclusion temporal in its MAXIMUM period
of the indeterminate penalty is within the range of the to Reclusion perpetua
penalty next lower than that prescribed by the RPC for ♠ The same rule shall be observed in lowering
the offense. the penalty by one or two degrees.
♠ Those rules also apply in lowering the penalty by
one or two degrees by reason of the presence of FOURTH RULE:
privileged mitigating circumstance (Arts. 68 and 69), or When the penalty is composed of several periods
when the penalty is divisible and there are two or more - This rule contemplates a penalty composed of
mitigating circumstances (generic) and no aggravating at least 3 periods. The several periods must correspond
circumstance (Art. 64). to different divisible penalties.
♠ The lower penalty shall be taken from the graduated Ex. Prision Mayor in its MEDIUM period to
scale in Art. 71. Reclusion temporal in its MINIMUM period.
- If the penalty is any one of the three periods crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional
of a divisible penalty, the penalty next lower in degree penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to
shall be that period next following the given penalty. reclusion temporal in its minimum period.
Ex. Prision Mayor in its MAXIMUM period Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the
♠ The penalty immediately inferior is prision total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the
mayor in its MEDIUM period. offender, in conformity herewith, shall in no case exceed
30 years.
SIMPLIFIED RULES: For the purpose of this article, a person shall be
The rules prescribed in pars. 4 and 5 of Art. 61 deemed to be habitual delinquent, is within a period of
may be simplified as follows: ten years from the date of his release or last conviction
1. If the penalty prescribed by the of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
Code consists in 3 periods, corresponding to robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of
different divisible penalties, the penalty next lower any of said crimes a third time or oftener.
in degree is the penalty consisting in the 3 periods
down in the scale. What are the effects of the attendance of
2. If the penalty prescribed b the mitigating or aggravating circumstances?
Code consists in 2 periods, the penalty next lower a. Aggravating circumstances which are not
in degree is the penalty consisting in 2 periods considered for the purpose of increasing the
down in the scale. penalty:
3. If the penalty prescribed by the 1. Those which in themselves
Code consists in only 1 period, the penalty next constitute a crime especially punishable
lower in degree is the next period down in the by law.
scale. 2. Those included by law in defining
the crime.
EFFECTS OF MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING 3. Those inherent in the crime but
CIRCUMSTANCES of necessity they accompany the
commission thereof.
Art. 62. Effect of the attendance of mitigating b. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances that
or aggravating circumstances and of habitual serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the
delinquency. — Mitigating or aggravating offender to whom such are attendant. Those
circumstances and habitual delinquency shall be taken arising from:
into account for the purpose of diminishing or increasing 1. Moral attributes of the offender
the penalty in conformity with the following rules: 2. His private relations with the
1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves offended party
constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which 3. Any other personal cause
are included by the law in defining a crime and
prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be taken into c. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances that
account for the purpose of increasing the penalty. affect the offenders only who had knowledge of
2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any them at the time of the execution of the act or
aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such their cooperation therein. Those which consist:
a degree that it must of necessity accompany the 1. In the material execution of the
commission thereof. act
3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which - will not affect all the offenders but only
arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or from those to whom such act are attendant
his private relations with the offended party, or from any 2. Means to accomplish the crime
other personal cause, shall only serve to aggravate or - will affect only those offenders who have
mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and knowledge of the same at the time of the
accessories as to whom such circumstances are act of execution or their cooperation
attendant. therein
4. The circumstances which consist in the material
execution of the act, or in the means employed to What are the legal effects of habitual delinquency?
accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the 1) Third
liability of those persons only who had knowledge of conviction
them at the time of the execution of the act or their - the culprit is sentenced to the penalty for the
cooperation therein. crime committed and to the additional penalty
5. Habitual delinquency shall have the following of prision correccional in its medium and
effects: maximum period.
(a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be 2) Fourth
sentenced to the penalty provided by law for the last conviction
crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional - the penalty is that provided by law for the
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and last crime and the additional penalty of prision
maximum periods; mayor in its minimum and medium periods.
(b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall be 3) Fifth or
sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of additional conviction
which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of - the penalty is that provided by law for the
prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods; and last crime and the additional penalty of prision
(c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the culprit mayor in its maximum period to reclusion
shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last temporal in its minimum period.
NOTE: Art. 64 does not apply to: Art. 48. Penalty for complex crimes. —
- indivisible penalties When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less
- penalties prescribed by special laws grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means
- fines for committing the other, the penalty for the most
- crimes committed by negligence serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied
in its maximum period.
Art. 67. Penalty to be imposed when not all
the requisites of exemption of the fourth ♣ Art. 48 requires the commission of at least 2
circumstance of Article 12 are present.— When all crimes. But the two or more GRAVE or LESS GRAVE
the conditions required in circumstances Number 4 of felonies must be the result of a SINGLE ACT, or an
Article 12 of this Code to exempt from criminal liability offense must be a NECESSARY MEANS FOR
are not present, the penalty of arresto mayor in its COMMITTING the other.
maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum ♣ In complex crimes, although two or more
period shall be imposed upon the culprit if he shall have crimes are actually committed, they constitute only one
been guilty of a grave felony, and arresto mayor in its crime in the eyes of the law as well as in the conscience
minimum and medium periods, if of a less grave felony. of the offender. The offender has only one criminal
intent. Even in the case where an offense is a necessary
Penalty to be imposed if the requisites of accident means for committing the other, the evil intent of the
(Art. 12 par 4) are not all present: offender is only one.
a. GRAVE FELONY
- arresto mayor maximum period to TWO KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIMES
prision correccional minimum period
b. LESS GRAVE FELONY
1. COMPOUND CRIME -
When a single act constitutes two or more
- arresto mayor minimum period and
grave or less grave felonies
medium period
2. COMPLEX CRIME
Art. 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime PROPER - When an offense is a necessary
committed is not wholly excusable. — A penalty means for committing the other.
lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law
shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable by COMPOUND CRIME
reason of the lack of some of the conditions required to REQUISITES:
justify the same or to exempt from criminal liability in 1. That only a SINGLE ACT is performed by
the several cases mentioned in Article 11 and 12, the offender
provided that the majority of such conditions be present. 2. That the single acts produces (a) 2 or
The courts shall impose the penalty in the period which more grave felonies, or (b) one or more
may be deemed proper, in view of the number and grave and one or more less grave felonies,
nature of the conditions of exemption present or lacking. or (c) two or more less grave felonies
Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed ♣ Light felonies produced by the same act should be
is not wholly excusable treated and punished as separate offenses or may be
- One or two degrees lower if the majority of the absorbed by the grave felony.
conditions for justification or exemption in the cases Ex. When the crime is committed by force or
provided in Arts. 11 and 12 are present. violence, slight physical injuries are absorbed.
coexistence of both the armed uprising for the purposes Facts: Monteverde was purportedly charged
expressed in Art. 134 of the RPC, and the overt acts of with the complex crime of estafa throught falsification of
violence described in the first paragraph of Art. 135. a commercial document for allegedly falsifying the
That both purpose and overt acts are essential document she had submitted to show that the money
components of one crime and that without either of donated by PAGCOR was used and spent for lighting
them the crime of rebellion legally does not exist, is materials for her barangay.
shown by the absence of any penalty attached to Art. Held: Under Article 48 of the Revised Penal
134. It follows, therefore, that any or all of the acts Code, a complex crime refers to (1) the commission of
described in Art. 135, when committed as a means to or at least two grave or less grave felonies that must both
in furtherance of the subversive ends described in Art. (or all) be the result of a single act, or (2) one offense
134, become absorbed in the crime of rebellion and must be a necessary means for committing the other (or
cannot be regarded or penalized as distinct crimes in others). Negatively put, there is no complex crime when
themselves. (1) two or more crimes are committed, but not by a
Not every act of violence is to be deemed single act; or (2) committing one crime is not a
absorbed in the crime of rebellion solely because it necessary means for committing the other (or others).
happens to be committed simultaneously. If the killing, Using the above guidelines, the acts attributed
robbing, etc were done for private purposes, the crime to petitioner in the present case cannot constitute a
would be separately punishable and would not be complex crime. Specifically, her alleged actions showing
absorbed by the rebellion. falsification of a public and/or a commercial document
were not necessary to commit estafa. Neither were the
Enrile v. Salazar (1990) two crimes the result of a single act.
The appellants proposed 3 options to the
court: People v. Gonzalez (Supra)
(b) abandon Hernandez and adopt the Facts: Both of the families of Andres and that
of Gonzalez were on their way to the exit of the Loyola
minority view in said case that rebellion cannot
Memorial Park. Gonzales was driving with his grandson
absorb more serious crimes, and that under Art.
and 3 housemaids, while Andres was driving with his
48 rebellion may be properly complexed with
pregnant wife, Feliber, his 2yr old son, Kenneth, his
common offenses,
nephew Kevin and his sister-in-law. At an intersection,
(c) hold Hernandez applicable only to their two vehicles almost collided. Gonzales continued
offense committed in furtherance, or as a driving while Andres tailed Gonzales’ vehicle and cut him
necessary means for the commission, of off when he found the opportunity to do so, then got out
rebellion, but not to acts committed in the course of his vehicle and knocked on the appellant's car
of a rebellion which also constitute “common” window. Heated exchange of remarks followed. On his
crimes of grave or less grave character, way back to his vehicle, he met Gonzales son, Dino.
Andres had a shouting match this time with Dino.
(d) maintain Hernandez as applying to
Gonzales then alighted from his car and fired a single
make rebellion absorb all other offenses
shot at the last window on the left side of Andres'
committed in its course, whether or not
vehicle at an angle away from Andres. The single bullet
necessary to its commission or in furtherance
fired hit Kenneth, Kevin and Feliber which caused the
thereof.
latter’s death.
Held: Hernandez doctrine remains binding and
Held: The rules on the imposition of penalties
operates to prohibit the complexing of rebellion with
for complex crimes under Art. 48 of the Revised Penal
another offense committed on the occasion thereof,
Code are not applicable in this case. Art. 48 applies if a
either as a means necessary to its commission or as an
single act constitutes two or more grave and less grave
unintended effect of an activity that constitutes
felonies or when an offense is a necessary means of
rebellion.
committing another; in such a case, the penalty for the
most serious offense shall be imposed in its maximum
People v. Toling (1975)
period. Art. 9 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to
The eight killings and the attempted killing
Art. 25 defines grave felonies as those to which the law
should be treated as separate crimes of murder and
attaches the capital punishment or afflictive penalties
attempted murder qualified by treachery. The
from reclusion perpetua to prision mayor; less grave
unexpected surprise assaults perpetrated by the twins
felonies are those to which the law attaches a penalty
upon their co-passengers, who did not anticipate that
which in its maximum period falls under correctional
the twins would act like juramentados and who were
penalties; and light felonies are those punishable by
unable to defend themselves was a mode of execution
arresto menor or fine not exceeding two hundred pesos.
that insured the consummation of the twins’ diabolical
Considering that the offenses committed by the act of
objective to butcher their co-passengers. The conduct of
the appellant of firing a single shot are one count of
the twins evinced conspiracy and community of design.
homicide, a grave felony, and two counts of slight
The eight killings and the attempted murder were
physical injuries, a light felony, the rules on the
perpetrated by means of different acts. Hence, they
imposition of penalties for complex crimes, which
cannot be regarded as constituting a complex crime
requires two or more grave and/or less grave felonies,
under art. 48 of the RPC which refers to cases where “a
will not apply.
single act constitutes two or more grave felonies, or
when an offense is a necessary means for committing
the other.”
People v. Comadre (2004)
Monteverde v. People (2002)
Facts: Robert Agbanlog, Wabe, Bullanday, Facts: Velasquez, poked a toy gun and forced
Camat and Eugenio were having a drinking spree on the Karen to go with her at his grandmother’s house. Out of
terrace of the house of Robert’s father, Jaime Agbanlog, fear and not knowing that the gun that Velasquez was
Jaime was seated on the banister of the terrace listening holding is a mere toy, Karen went with Velasquez.
to the conversation of the companions of his son. As the Velasquez then raped Karen twice. The trial court
drinking session went on, Robert and the others noticed convicted Velasquez of two counts of rape.
appellants George and Antonio Comadre and Lozano Held: Considering that Velasquez forcibly
walking. The 3 stopped in front of the house. While his abducted Karen and then raped her twice, he should be
companions looked on, Antonio suddenly lobbed a hand convicted of the complex crime of forcible abduction with
grenade which fell on the roof of the terrace. Appellants rape and simple rape. The penalty for complex crimes is
immediately fled. The hand grenade exploded ripping a the penalty for the most serious crime which shall be
hole in the roof of the house. Robert died while his imposed in its maximum period. Rape is the more
father, Jaime, Wabe, Camat, and Bullanday sustained serious of the two crimes and is punishable with
shrapnel injuries.. reclusion perpetua under Article 335 of the Revised
Held: Antonio is guilty of the complex crime of Penal Code and since reclusion perpetua is a single
murder with multiple attempted murder under Article 48 indivisible penalty, it shall be imposed as it is. The
of the Revised Penal Code. The underlying philosophy of subsequent rape committed by Velasquez can no longer
complex crimes in the Revised Penal Code, which follows be considered as a separate complex crime of forcible
the pro reo principle, is intended to favor the accused by abduction with rape but only as a separate act of rape
imposing a single penalty irrespective of the crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua.
committed. The rationale being, that the accused who
commits two crimes with single criminal impulse SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIMES
demonstrates lesser perversity than when the crimes
are committed by different acts and several criminal ♣ Art. 48 does not apply when the law provides one
resolutions. single penalty for special complex crimes:
The single act by appellant of detonating a 1. Robbery with Homicide (Art. 294 (1))
hand grenade may quantitatively constitute a cluster of 2. Robbery with Rape (Art. 294 (2))
several separate and distinct offenses, yet these 3. Kidnapping with serious physical injuries (Art.
component criminal offenses should be considered only 267 (3))
as a single crime in law on which a single penalty is 4. Rape with Homicide (Art. 335)
imposed because the offender was impelled by a “single
criminal impulse” which shows his lesser degree of People v. Fabon (2000)
perversity. The trial court inaccurately designated the
crime committed as “robbery with homicide and rape.”
People v. Delos Santos (2001) When the special complex crime of robbery with
Facts: Glenn Delos Santos and his 3 friends homicide is accompanied b another offense like rape or
went to Bukidnon on his Isuzu Elf truck. On their way, intentional mutilation, such additional offense is treated
they decided to pass by a restaurant where Glenn had 3 as an aggravating circumstance which would result in
bottles of beer. On their way to Cagayan de Oro City the imposition of the maximum of the penalty of death.
from Bukidnon, Glenn’s truck, hit, bumped, seriously The proper designation is robbery with homicide
wounded and claimed the lives of several members of aggravated by rape. When rape and homicide co-exist in
the PNP who were undergoing an endurance run on a the commission of robbery, it is the first paragraph of
highway wearing black shirts and shorts and green Art. 294 of the RPC which applies, the rape is considered
combat shoes. Twelve trainees were killed on the spot, as an aggravating circumstance.
12 were seriously wounded, 1 of whom eventually died
and 10 sustained minor injuries. At the time of the People v. Empante (1999)
occurrence, the place of the incident was very dark as Facts: The accused was found guilty of three
there was no moon. Neither were there lamposts that counts of rape against his daughter who was then below
illuminated the highway. The trial court convicted Glenn 18 years old and sentenced him to death and to
of the complex crime of multiple murder, multiple indemnify his daughter in the amount of P50k with
frustrated murder and multiple attempted murder, with moral damages amounting to another P5ok for each
the use of motor vehicle as the qualifying circumstance. count of rape. On appeal, he claims that the trial court
Held: Considering that the incident was not a should have appreciated two mitigating circumstances in
product of a malicious intent but rather the result of a his favor namely voluntary confession of guilt and
single act of reckless driving, Glenn should be held guilty intoxication and sentenced him to a lesser penalty.
of the complex crime of reckless imprudence resulting in Held: Qualified rape is punishable by the single
multiple homicide with serious physical injuries and less indivisible penalty of death, which must be applied
serious physical injuries. regardless of any mitigating or aggravating
The slight physical injuries caused by Glenn to circumstance which may have attended the commission
the ten other victims through reckless imprudence, of the deed.
would, had they been intentional, have constituted light
felonies. Being light felonies, which are not covered by CRIME DIFFERENT FROM THAT INTENDED
Article 48, they should be treated and punished as
separate offenses. Separate informations should have, Art. 49. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals
therefore, been filed when the crime committed is different from that
intended. — In cases in which the felony committed is
People v. Velasquez (2000) different from that which the offender intended to
commit, the following rules shall be observed:
1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony ♣ Absolute temporary disqualification if the principal
committed be higher than that corresponding to the offender is guilt of less grave felony.
offense which the accused intended to commit, the
penalty corresponding to the latter shall be imposed in WHERE THE OFFENDER IS BELOW 18 YEARS
its maximum period.
2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony Art. 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a
committed be lower than that corresponding to the one person under eighteen years of age. — When the
which the accused intended to commit, the penalty for offender is a minor under eighteen years and his case is
the former shall be imposed in its maximum period. one coming under the provisions of the paragraphs next
3. The rule established by the next preceding to the last of Article 80 of this Code, the following rules
paragraph shall not be applicable if the acts committed shall be observed:
by the guilty person shall also constitute an attempt or 1. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine
frustration of another crime, if the law prescribes a years of age, who is not exempted from liability by
higher penalty for either of the latter offenses, in which reason of the court having declared that he acted with
case the penalty provided for the attempted or the discernment, a discretionary penalty shall be imposed,
frustrated crime shall be imposed in its maximum but always lower by two degrees at least than that
period. prescribed by law for the crime which he committed.
2. Upon a person over fifteen and under
♣ Art. 49 has reference to Art. 4 (1). It applies only eighteen years of age the penalty next lower than that
when there is ERROR IN PERSONAE. prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in the
♣ In Art. 49 pars. 1 and 2, the LOWER PENALTY in its proper period.
MAXIMUM PERIOD is always imposed.
♣ In Par. 3, the penalty for the attempted or frustrated PD No. 603. ART. 192. Suspension of
crime shall be imposed in its maximum period. This rule Sentence and Commitment of Youthful Offender.
is not necessary and may well be covered by Art. 48, in If after hearing the evidence in the proper
view of the fact that the same act also constitutes an proceedings, the court should find that the youthful
attempt or a frustration of another crime. offender has committed the acts charged against him
the court shall determine the imposable penalty,
IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES including any civil liability chargeable against him.
However, instead of pronouncing judgment of
Art. 59. Penalty to be imposed in case of conviction, the court shall suspend all further
failure to commit the crime because the means proceedings and shall commit such minor to the custody
employed or the aims sought are impossible. — or care of the Department of Social Welfare, or to any
When the person intending to commit an offense has training institution operated by the government, or duly
already performed the acts for the execution of the licensed agencies or any other responsible person, until
same but nevertheless the crime was not produced by he shall have reached twenty-one years of age or, for a
reason of the fact that the act intended was by its shorter period as the court may deem proper, after
nature one of impossible accomplishment or because the considering the reports and recommendations of the
means employed by such person are essentially Department of Social Welfare or the agency or
inadequate to produce the result desired by him, the responsible individual under whose care he has been
court, having in mind the social danger and the degree committed.
of criminality shown by the offender, shall impose upon The youthful offender shall be subject to
him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to visitation and supervision by a representative of the
500 pesos. Department of Social Welfare or any duly licensed
agency or such other officer as the court may designate
♣ Art. 59 is limited to cases where the act performed subject to such conditions as it may prescribe.
would be grave or less grave felonies.
♣ Basis of penalty: ♣ Art. 68 applies to such minor if his application for
1. social danger suspension of sentence is disapproved or if while in the
2. degree of criminality shown by the reformatory institution he becomes incorrigible in which
offender case he shall be returned to the court for the imposition
of the proper penalty.
ADDITIONAL PENALTY FOR CERTAIN ♣ 9 to 15 years only with discernment: at least 2
ACCESSORIES degrees lower.
♣ 15 to 18 years old: penalty next lower
Art. 58. Additional penalty to be imposed ♣ Art. 68 provides for two of the PRIVILEGED
upon certain accessories. — Those accessories falling MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
within the terms of paragraphs 3 of Article 19 of this ♣ If the act is attended by two or more mitigating and
Code who should act with abuse of their public no aggravating circumstance, the penalty being
functions, shall suffer the additional penalty of absolute divisible, a minor over 15 but under 18 years old may
perpetual disqualification if the principal offender shall still get a penalty two degrees lower.
be guilty of a grave felony, and that of absolute
temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less THE THREE-FOLD RULE
grave felony.
Art. 70. Successive service of sentence. —
♣ Absolute perpetual disqualification if the principal When the culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he
offender is guilty of a grave felony. shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the
penalties will so permit otherwise, the following rules 4. Temporary special disqualification
shall be observed: 5. Suspension
In the imposition of the penalties, the order of 6. Destierro
their respective severity shall be followed so that they 7. Public Censure
may be executed successively or as nearly as may be 8. Fine and Bond to keep the peace
possible, should a pardon have been granted as to the 9. Civil interdiction
penalty or penalties first imposed, or should they have 10. Confiscation and payment of costs
been served out.
For the purpose of applying the provisions of • The above penalties, except destierro, can
the next preceding paragraph the respective severity of be served simultaneously with imprisonment.
the penalties shall be determined in accordance with the • Penalties consisting in deprivation of
following scale: liberty cannot be served simultaneously by
1. Death, reason of the nature of such penalties.
2. Reclusion perpetua,
3. Reclusion temporal, Three-fold Rule
4. Prision mayor, The maximum duration of the convict’s
5. Prision correccional, sentence shall not be more than three times the length
6. Arresto mayor, of time corresponding to the most severe of the
7. Arresto menor, penalties imposed upon him.
8. Destierro,
9. Perpetual absolute disqualification, ♣ The phrase “the most severe of the penalties” includes
10 Temporal absolute disqualification. equal penalties.
11. Suspension from public office, the right to ♣ The three-fold rule applies only when the convict has
vote and be voted for, the right to follow a profession or to serve at least four sentences.
calling, and ♣ All the penalties, even if by different courts at
12. Public censure different times, cannot exceed three-fold the most
severe.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next - The Rules of Court specifically provide that
preceding, the maximum duration of the convict's any information must not charge more than one offense.
sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of Necessarily, the various offense punished with different
time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties penalties must be charged under different informations
imposed upon him. No other penalty to which he may be which may be filed in the same court or in different
liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those courts, at the same time or at different times.
imposed equals the same maximum period. ♣ Subsidiary imprisonment forms part of the penalty.
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed ♣ Indemnity is a penalty.
forty years. ♣ Court must impose all the penalties for all the crimes
In applying the provisions of this rule the of which the accused is found guilty, but in the service
duration of perpetual penalties (pena perpetua) shall be of the same, they shall not exceed three times the most
computed at thirty years. (As amended). severe and shall not exceed 40 years.
in the foregoing articles, dividing into three equal SECTION 3. There is hereby created a Board of Pardons
portions of time included in the penalty prescribed, and and Parole to be composed of the Secretary of Justice who shall be
forming one period of each of the three portions. its Chairman, and four members to be appointed by the President,
with the consent of the Commission on Appointments who shall hold
office for a term of six years: Provided, That one member of the board
MEANING OF THE RULE shall be a trained sociologist, one a clergyman or educator, one
1. Compute and determine first the 3 periods of psychiatrist unless a trained psychiatrist be employed by the board,
the entire penalty. and the other members shall be persons qualified for such work by
2. The time included in the penalty prescribed training and experience. At least one member of the board shall be a
should be divided into 3 equal portions, after subtracting woman. Of the members of the present board, two shall be
designated by the President to continue until December thirty,
the minimum (eliminate the 1 day) from the maximum
nineteen hundred and sixty-six and the other two shall continue until
of the penalty. December thirty, nineteen hundred and sixty-nine. In case of any
3. The minimum of the minimum period should vacancy in the membership of the Board, a successor may be
be the minimum of the given penalty (including the 1 appointed to serve only for the unexpired portion of the term of the
day) respective members. (As amended by Republic Act No. 4203, June
4. The quotient should be added to the minimum 19, 1965.)
prescribed (eliminate the 1 day) and the total will
represent the maximum of the minimum period. Take SECTION 4. The Board of Pardons and Parole is
authorized to adopt such rules and regulations as may be necessary
the maximum of the minimum period, add 1 day and
for carrying out its functions and duties. The Board is empowered to
make it the minimum of the medium period; then add call upon any bureau, office, branch, subdivision, agency or
the quotient to the minimum (eliminate the 1 day) of instrumentality of the Government for such assistance as it may need
the medium period and the total will represent the in connection with the performance of its functions. A majority of all
maximum of the medium period. Take the maximum of the members shall constitute a quorum and a majority vote shall be
the medium period, add 1 day and make it the minimum necessary to arrive at a decision. Any dissent from the majority
of the maximum period; then add the quotient to the opinion shall be reduced to writing and filed with the records of the
proceedings. Each member of the Board, including the Chairman and
minimum (eliminate the 1 day) of the maximum period
the Executive Officer, shall be entitled to receive as compensation
and the total will represent the maximum of the fifty pesos for each meeting actually attended by him, notwithstanding
maximum period. the provisions of Section two hundred and fifty-nine of the Revised
Administrative Code, and in addition thereto, reimbursement of actual
and necessary travelling expenses incurred in the performance of
duties: Provided, however, That the Board meetings will not be more
than three times a week. (As amended by Republic Act No. 4203,
June 19, 1965.)
in its discretion. If during the period of surveillance such paroled depending upon his behavior and his physical, mental
prisoner shall show himself to be a law-abiding citizen and shall not and moral record as a prisoner, to be determined by the
violate any of the laws of the Philippine Islands, the Board of Board of Indeterminate Sentence.
Indeterminate Sentence may issue a final certificate of release in his
favor, which shall entitle him to final release and discharge.
♣ The settled practice is to give the accused the benefit
SECTION 7. The Board shall file with the court which of the law even in crimes punishable with death or life
passed judgment on the case, and with the Chief of Constabulary, a imprisonment provided the resulting penalty, after
certified copy of each order of conditional or final release and considering the attending circumstances, is reclusion
discharge issued in accordance with the provisions of the next temporal or less.
preceding two sections.
♣ ISL does not apply to destierro. ISL is expressly
SECTION 8. Whenever any prisoner released on parole by granted to those who are sentenced to imprisonment
virtue of this Act shall, during the period of surveillance, violate any of
the conditions of his parole, the Board of Indeterminate Sentence
exceeding 1 year.
may issue an order for his re-arrest which may be served in any part
of the Philippine Islands by any police officer. In such case the PROCEDURE FOR DETERMING THE MAXIMUM AND
prisoner so re-arrested shall serve the remaining unexpired portion of MINIMUM SENTENCE
the maximum sentence for which he was originally committed to ♣ Is consists of a maximum and a minimum instead of a
prison, unless the Board of Indeterminate Sentence shall, in its single fixed penalty.
discretion, grant a new parole to the said prisoner. (As amended by ♣ Prisoner must serve the minimum before he is eligible
Act No. 4225.)
for parole.
SECTION 9. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impair ♣ The period between the minimum and maximum is
or interfere with the powers of the Governor-General as set forth in indeterminate in the sense that the prisoner may be
Section 64(i) of the Revised Administrative Code or the Act of exempted from serving said indeterminate period in
Congress approved August 29, 1916 entitled "An Act to declare the whole or in part.
purpose of the people of the United States as to the future political ♣ The maximum is determined in any case punishable
status of the people of the Philippine Islands, and to provide a more under the RPC in accordance with the rules and
autonomous government for those Islands."
provisions of said code exactly as if the ISL had never
SECTION 10. Whenever any prisoner shall be released on been enacted.
parole hereunder he shall be entitled to receive the benefits provided ♣ Apply first the effect of privileged mitigating
in Section 1751 of the Revised Administrative Code. circumstances then consider the effects of aggravating
Approved and effective on December 5, 1993. and ordinary mitigating circumstances.
♣ The minimum depends upon the court’s discretion
with the limitation that it must be within the range of
♣ The indeterminate sentence is composed of: the penalty next lower in degree to that prescribed by
1. a MAXIMUM taken from the penalty the Code for the offense committed.
imposable under the penal code
2. a MINIMUM taken from the penalty next NOTE: A minor who escaped from confinement in the
lower to that fixed in the code. reformatory is entitled to the benefits of the ISL because
his confinement is not considered imprisonment.
applicable, according to the number and nature of such interpretation of the law accords with the rule that penal
circumstances. laws should be construed in favor of the accused. Since
6. Whatever may be the number and nature of the penalty prescribed by law for the estafa charge
the aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not against accused-appellant is prision correccional
impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by law, in maximum to prision mayor minimum, the penalty next
its maximum period. lower would then be prision correccional minimum to
7. Within the limits of each period, the court medium. Thus, the minimum term of the indeterminate
shall determine the extent of the penalty according to sentence should be anywhere within six (6) months and
the number and nature of the aggravating and one (1) day to four (4) years and two (2) months .
mitigating circumstances and the greater and lesser
extent of the evil produced by the crime. I. EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES
report to the court within the period not later than 60 days from receipt it would be prejudicial to the accused. Bala was placed
of the order of the Court to conduct the said investigation. on probation on Aug. 11, 1982.
Expiration of probation period alone does not
Pre-Parole Investigation. The PAROLE AND PROBATION
automatically terminate probation; a final order of
ADMINISTRATION - (PPA) conducts pre-parole investigation of all
sentenced prisoners confined in prisons and jails within their discharge from the court is required. Probation is
jurisdiction. The purpose is to determine whether offenders confined revocable before the final discharge by the court.
in prisons/jails are qualified for parole or any form of executive Probationer failed to reunite with responsible society. He
clemency and to discuss with them their plans after release. Probation violated the conditions of his probation. Thus, the
officers submit their pre-parole assessment reports to the Board of revocation of his probation is compelling.
Pardons and Parole.
Salgado v. CA (1990)
Supervision of Offenders. The Agency supervises two types of
There is no question that the decision
offenders under conditional release: (1) probationers, or persons
placed under probation by the courts; (2) parolees and pardonees, or convicting Salgado of the crime of serious physical
prisoners released on parole or conditional pardon and referred by the injuries had become final and executory because the
Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP) to PAROLE AND PROBATION filing by respondent of an application for probation is
ADMINISTRATION - (PPA) (PPA). The objectives of supervision are deemed a waiver of his right to appeal.
to carry out the conditions set forth in the probation/parole order, to The grant of probation does not extinguish the
ascertain whether the probationer/parolee/pardonee is complying with civil liability of the offender. The order of probation with
the said conditions, and to bring about the rehabilitation of the client one of the conditions providing for the manner of
and his re-integration into the community.
payment of the civil liability during the period of
Rehabilitation Programs. The treatment process employed by the probation, did not increase or decrease the civil liability
field officers focused on particular needs of probationers, parolees adjudged.
and pardonees. Assistance is provided to the clientele in the form of The conditions listed under Sec. 10 of the
job placement, skills training, spiritual/moral upliftment, counseling, Probation law are not exclusive. Courts are allowed to
etc. impose practically any term it chooses, the only
limitation being that it does not jeopardize the
Community Linkages
constitutional rights of the accused.
Probation/Parole, as a community-based treatment program, depends
on available resources in the community for the rehabilitation of
offenders. Thus, the Agency, recognizing the important role of the Office of the Court Administrator v. Librado (1996)
community as a rehabilitation agent, involves the community in Facts: The respondent is a deputy sheriff who
probation work through the use of volunteer workers and welfare was charged of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act and is
agencies. now claiming he is in probation. The OCA filed an
administrative case against him and he was suspended
Presidential Decree No. 968 permits the utilization of the services of from office.
Volunteer Probation Aides to assist the Probation and Parole Officers
Held: While indeed the purpose of the
in the supervision of probationers, parolees and pardonees
particularly in the areas where the caseload is heavy and the office is Probation Law is to save valuable human material, it
understaff or where the residence of the clientele is very far from the must not be forgotten that unlike pardon probation does
Parole and Probation Office. As defined, a Volunteer Probation Aide is not obliterate the crime of which the person under
a volunteer who is a citizen of good moral character and good probation has been convicted. The image of the judiciary
standing in the community, who has been carefully selected and is tarnished by conduct involving moral turpitude. The
trained to do volunteer probation work. He is appointed by the reform and rehabilitation of the probationer cannot
Administrator after successful completion of the Introductory Training justify his retention in the government service.
Course for probation volunteers. His term of office is one year but can
be renewed thereafter or terminated earlier depending upon his
performance and willingness to serve. Suspension in case of Insanity or Minority
Further, the PAROLE AND PROBATION ADMINISTRATION - (PPA), Art. 79. Suspension of the execution and
through its Community Services Division, Regional and Field Offices service of the penalties in case of insanity. — When
nationwide, has been tapping government/non-government a convict shall become insane or an imbecile after final
organizations/individuals for various rehabilitation programs and
sentence has been pronounced, the execution of said
activities for probationers, parolees and pardonees.
sentence shall be suspended only with regard to the
personal penalty, the provisions of the second paragraph
Llamado v. CA (1989)
of circumstance number 1 of Article 12 being observed
In its present form, Section 4 of the Probation
in the corresponding cases.
Law establishes a much narrower period during which an
If at any time the convict shall recover his
application for probation ma be filed with the trial curt:
reason, his sentence shall be executed, unless the
“after the trial curt shall have convicted and sentenced a
penalty shall have prescribed in accordance with the
defendant and – within the period for perfecting an
provisions of this Code.
appeal”. The provision expressly prohibits the grant of
The respective provisions of this section shall
an application for probation if the defendant has
also be observed if the insanity or imbecility occurs while
perfected an appeal from the judgment of conviction.
the convict is serving his sentence.
Petitioner’s right to apply for probation was
lost when he perfected his appeal from the judgment of
the trial court. The trial court lost jurisdiction already ♠ Only execution of personal penalty is suspended: civil
over the case. liability may be executed even in case of insanity of
convict.
Bala v. Martinez (1990) ♠ An accused may become insane:
PD 1990 which amends Sec. 4 of PD 968 is not a. at the time of commission of the crime
applicable to the case at bar. It went into effect on Jan. – exempt from criminal liability
15, 1985 and cannot be given retroactive effect because b. at the time of the trial
- court shall suspend hearings and order classes of persons, who are subject to trial but have not
his confinement in a hospital until he yet been convicted.
recovers his reason
c. at the time of final judgment or while 4. BY ABSOLUTE PARDON
serving sentence - It is an act of grace proceeding from the
– execution suspended with regard to the power entrusted with the execution of the laws which
personal penalty only exempts the individual on whom is bestowed from the
punishment the law inflicts for the crime he has
♠ see Exempting Circumstance of Minority for PD No. committed.
603 and Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with Law.
Pardon Amnesty
Includes any crime Generally political offenses
VI. EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Given after conviction Given before conviction or
institution of the action
A. TOTAL EXTINCTION Looks forward and forgives Looks backwards and
the punishment abolished the offense itself
Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally Must be proved as a Being a result of a
extinguished. — Criminal liability is totally defense proclamation, the court
extinguished: may take judicial notice of
1. By the death of the convict, as to the the same
personal penalties and as to pecuniary penalties, liability Do not extinguish civil liability
therefor is extinguished only when the death of the
offender occurs before final judgment. 5. BY PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME
2. By service of the sentence; - the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes prosecute the offender after the lapse of a certain
the penalty and all its effects; time.
4. By absolute pardon;
5. By prescription of the crime;
6. By prescription of the penalty; 6. BY PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as - the loss or forfeiture of the right of the
provided in Article 344 of this Code. government to execute the final sentence after the
lapse of a certain time.
How is criminal liability extinguished? Requisites: a) that there be final judgment
1. TOTAL b) that the period of time prescribed
2. PARTIAL by law for its enforcement has
elapsed.
♠ Extinction of criminal liability does not automatically
extinguish the civil liability. 7. BY THE MARRIAGE OF THE OFFENDED
WOMAN
Causes of extinction of criminal liability: - applicable in the crimes of rape, seduction,
1. BY DEATH OF THE CONVICT abduction or acts of lasciviousness. Marriage must be
- the death of the convict whether before or made in good faith.
after final judgment extinguished criminal liability.
- civil liability is extinguished only when death Art. 90. Prescription of crime. — Crimes
occurs before final judgment. punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion
- death of the accused pending appeal of his temporal shall prescribe in twenty years.
conviction extinguished his criminal liability as well as Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties
the civil liability based solely on the offense committed; shall prescribe in fifteen years.
except, the claim for civil liability survives if the same Those punishable by a correctional penalty
may also be predicated on a source of obligation other shall prescribe in ten years; with the exception of those
than delict such as law, contracts, quasi-contracts and punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe in
quasi-delicts. five years.
- death of the offended party does not The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall
extinguish the criminal liability of the offender. prescribe in one year.
The crime of oral defamation and slander by
2. BY SERVICE OF SENTENCE deed shall prescribe in six months.
- crime is a debt incurred by the offender as a Light offenses prescribe in two months.
consequence of his wrongful act and the penalty is but When the penalty fixed by law is a compound
the amount of his debt. When payment is made, the one, the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the
debt is extinguished. Service of sentence does not application of the rules contained in the first, second and
extinguish civil liability. third paragraphs of this article. (As amended by RA
4661, approved June 19, 1966).
3. BY AMNESTY
- amnesty is an act of the sovereign power ♠ In computing the period of prescription, the first day is
granting oblivion or a general pardon for a past offense, to be excluded and the last day included.
and is rarely, if ever, exercised in favor of a single ♠ Where the last day of the prescriptive period for filing
individual, and is usually exerted in behalf of certain an information falls on a Sunday or legal holiday, the
information can no longer be filed on the next day as the - The preliminary investigation conducted by the
crime has already prescribed. municipal mayor in the absence of the justice of peace
partakes of the nature of a judicial proceeding and it
PERIOD OF PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES PUNISHED does not interrupt the running of the period of
BY: prescription.
1. death, reclusion perpetua and reclusion
♠ The period commences to run again when the
temporal
proceeding is terminated:
- 20 years
- without the accused being convicted or
2. other afflictive penalties
acquitted
- 15 years
- the proceeding is unjustifiably stopped for a
3. correctional penalties
reason not imputable to the offender.
- 10 years except arresto mayor which
prescribes in 5 years
♠ In continuing crime, the prescription commences to
4. libel or similar offense
run after the termination of the continuity of the offense.
- 1 year (as amended by RA 4661)
♠ Period of prescription of election offense begins to run:
5. oral defamation and slander by deed
1) if discovery of the offense is
- 6 months
incidental in a judicial proceeding
6. light offenses
- from the date of the termination of the
- 2 months
proceedings
2) otherwise
PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENSES PUNISHED BY
- from the date of the commission of the
SPECIAL LAWS:
offense
a. punished
by a fine or imprisonment not more than 1
month or both – 1 year Art. 92. When and how penalties
b. punished prescribe. — The penalties imposed by final sentence
by imprisonment of more than 1 month but prescribe as follows:
less than 2 years – 4 years 1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty
c. punished years;
by imprisonment for 2 years but less than 6 2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years;
years – 8 years 3. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the
d. punished exception of the penalty of arresto mayor, which
by imprisonment for 6 years or more – 12 prescribes in five years;
years 4. Light penalties, in one year.
e. Internal
Revenue offenses – 5 years PERIOD OF PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTIES:
f. Municipal 1. death and reclusion perpetua - 20 years
ordinances – 2 months (Act. No. 3763, as 2. other afflictive penalties – 15 years
amended)
3. correctional penalties – 10 years except
Art. 91. Computation of prescription of arresto mayor which prescribes in 5 years
offenses. — The period of prescription shall commence 4. light penalties - year
to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by
the offended party, the authorities, or their agents, and Art. 93. Computation of the prescription
shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or of penalties. — The period of prescription of penalties
information, and shall commence to run again when shall commence to run from the date when the culprit
such proceedings terminate without the accused being should evade the service of his sentence, and it shall be
convicted or acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for interrupted if the defendant should give himself up, be
any reason not imputable to him. captured, should go to some foreign country with which
The term of prescription shall not run when the this Government has no extradition treaty, or should
offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago. commit another crime before the expiration of the
period of prescription.
♠ Period commences to run from the day the offense is
committed or discovered by the offended party, the ♠ Period commences to run from the date the culprit
authorities or their agents. It does not run if the evades the service of sentence.
offender is outside the Philippines.
♠ The period is interrupted:
♠ The fact that the offender is unknown will not interrupt a. if the defendant
the period of prescription because what the Code surrenders
requires is the discovery of the crime and not of the b. if he is captured
offender. c. if he should go to a
foreign country with which the Philippines has
♠ The period is interrupted by the filing of the complaint no extradition treaty
or information. d. if he should commit
- The period is not interrupted b the mere act of another crime before the expiration of the
reporting the case to the fiscal. period of prescription
♠ ELEMENTS:
commence to run. Under said provision, it shall former will release the latter upon
commence to run from the date the felon evades the compliance with the condition
service of his sentence. Pursuant to Article 157 of the b) usual condition “he shall
same Code, evasion of service of sentence can be not again violate any of the penal laws of the
committed only by those who have been convicted by Philippines
final judgment by escaping during the term of his Violations of the conditions:
sentence. • offender is rearrested and re-
"Escape" in legal parlance and for purposes of incarcerated
Articles 93 and 157 of the RPC means unlawful
departure of prisoner from the limits of his custody. • prosecution under Art. 159 of the
Clearly, one who has not been committed to prison RPC
cannot be said to have escaped therefrom.
In the instant case, Torrecampo was never
brought to prison. In fact, even before the execution of
the judgment for his conviction, he was already in 2. COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE
hiding. Now Torrecampo begs for the compassion of the a) reduce degree of penalty
Court because he has ceased to live a life of peace and b) decrease the length of
tranquility after he failed to appear in court for the imprisonment
execution of his sentence. But it was Torrecampo who c) decrease the amount of
chose to become a fugitive. The Court accords fine
compassion only to those who are deserving. Specific cases where commutation is
Torrecampo guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt provided for by the Code:
but he refused to answer for the wrong he committed. • convict sentenced to death over 70
He is therefore not to be rewarded therefor. years old
• 10 justices of the SC fail to reach a
People v. Patriarca (2000) decision for the affirmance of the death
Facts: Patriarca with the alias of Ka Django, an penalty
NPA, with ten (10) armed companions, requested
permission to rest in the house, of Malto. They had with 3. GOOD CONDUCT ALLOWANCES DURING
them Arevalo who was hogtied. Patriarca asked that the CONFINEMENT
lights in Malto's house be extinguished. Patriarca then - deduction for the term of sentence for
ordered Arevalo to lie down then shot the latter two good behavior
times. The trial court convicted Patriarca of murder.
Patriarca then applied for amnesty under Proclamation 4. PAROLE
No. 724 amending Proclamation No. 347, dated March - consists in the suspension of the
25, 1994, entitled "Granting Amnesty to Rebels, sentence of a convict without granting
Insurgents, and All Other Persons Who Have or May pardon, prescribing the terms upon which
Have Committed Crimes Against Public Order, Other the sentence shall be suspended.
Crimes Committed in Furtherance of Political Ends, and - May be granted to a prisoner after
Violations of the Article of War, and Creating a National serving the minimum penalty under the
Amnesty Commission." His application was favorably indeterminate sentence law
granted by the National Amnesty Board - Consists in the suspension of the
Held: Paragraph 3 of Article 89 of the Revised sentence of a convict after serving the
Penal Code provides that criminal liability is totally minimum term of the indeterminate
extinguished by amnesty, which completely extinguishes penalty, without granting a pardon
the penalty and all its effects. prescribing the terms upon which the
The Court takes judicial notice of the grant of sentence shall be punished.
amnesty upon Patriarca. Once granted, it is binding and
effective. Hence, the grant of amnesty extinguishes the
Conditional Pardon Parole
liability of Patriarca in the present case.
May be given an time May be given after the
before final judgment is prisoner has served the
B. PARTIAL EXTINCTION
granted by the Chief minimum penalty is
Executive under the granted by the Board of
Art. 94. Partial Extinction of criminal Administrative Code Parole and Pardons under
liability. — Criminal liability is extinguished partially: the ISL
1. By conditional pardon; For violation, convict may For violation, convict can
2. By commutation of the sentence; and be rearrested or be rearrested and re-
3. For good conduct allowances which the prosecuted under Art. 159 incarcerated to serve the
culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence. unexpired portion of his
original penalty
CAUSES OF PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL
LIABILITY:
Art. 95. Obligation incurred by person
1. CONDITIONAL PARDON
granted conditional pardon. — Any person who has
a) when delivered and
been granted conditional pardon shall incur the
accepted is considered a contract between
obligation of complying strictly with the conditions
the sovereign power and the convict that the
imposed therein otherwise, his non-compliance with any
of the conditions specified shall result in the revocation ♠ Under Art. 158, a convict who evaded service of his
of the pardon and the provisions of Article 159 shall be sentence by leaving the penal institution on the occasion
applied to him. of disorder resulting from a conflagration, earthquake,
explosion or similar catastrophe or during a mutiny in
which he did not participate, is liable to an increased
Art. 96. Effect of commutation of
penalty (1/5 of the time still remaining to be served –
sentence. — The commutation of the original sentence
not to exceed 6 months) if he fails to give himself up
for another of a different length and nature shall have
within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation
the legal effect of substituting the latter in the place of
by the President announcing the passing away of the
the former.
calamity.
♠ The deduction of 1/5 is based on the original sentence. ♣ But if there is no damage caused by the commission
of the crime, the offender is not civilly liable.
♣ Civil liability arises from the commission of the felony. Art. 2177. Responsibility for fault or
It is determined in the criminal action except: negligence under the preceding article is entirely
a. the offended party waives separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from
his right to file a civil action negligence under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff
b. the offended party reserves cannot recover damages twice for the same act or
his right to institute it separately, or omission of the defendant. (n)
c. the offended party institutes
the civil action prior to the criminal action.
been rendered. However, if no final judgment has been of petitioner Melba Quinto, Wilson's mother, and
rendered by the trial court in the civil action, the same informed her that her son had died. Melba Quinto rushed
may be consolidated with the criminal action upon to the drainage culvert while respondent Andres followed
application with the court trying the criminal action. If her. The respondents aver that since the prosecution
the application is granted, the evidence presented and failed to adduce any evidence to prove that they
admitted in the civil action shall be deemed committed the crime of homicide and caused the death
automatically reproduced in the criminal action, without of Wilson, they are not criminally and civilly liable for the
prejudice to the admission of additional evidence that latter’s death.
any party may wish to present. In case of consolidation, Held: The extinction of the penal action does
both the criminal and the civil actions shall be tried and not carry with it the extinction of the civil action.
decided jointly. However, the civil action based on delict shall be
(b) Extinction of the penal action does not deemed extinguished if there is a finding in a final
carry with it extinction of the civil, unless the extinction judgment in the civil action that the act or omission from
proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the where the civil liability may arise does not exist. In the
fact from which the civil might arise did not exist. present case, the court ruled that respondents cannot be
held criminally nor civilly liable for the death of Wilson.
Sec. 3. When civil action may proceed In this case, the petitioner failed to adduce proof of any
independently. In the cases provided for in Articles 32, ill-motive on the part of either respondent to kill the
33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the deceased before or after the latter was invited to join
independent civil action which has been reserved may them in fishing. Indeed, the petitioner testified that
be brought by the offended party, shall proceed respondent Andres used to go to their house and play
independently of the criminal action, and shall require with her son before the latter's death. When the
only a preponderance of evidence. petitioner's son died inside the drainage culvert, it was
respondent Andres who brought out the deceased. He
Sec. 4. Judgment in civil action not a bar. then informed the petitioner of her son's death. Even
A final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the after informing the petitioner of the death of her son,
defendant from civil liability is no bar to a criminal respondent Andres followed the petitioner on her way to
action. the grassy area where the deceased was.
to pay forms an integral part of the penalty imposed by crime of reckless imprudence resulting to triple
law for the commission of the crime. The civil action homicide, multiple physical injuries and damage to
involves the civil liability arising from the offense property. The court further ruled that Philippine Rabbit,
charged which includes restitution, reparation of the in the event of the insolvency of accused, shall be liable
damage caused, and indemnification for consequential for his civil liabilities. Accused then jumped bail and
damages. remained at-large. Philippine Rabbit filed a notice of
Under the Rules, where the civil action for appeal. It argues that, as an employer, it is considered a
recovery of civil liability is instituted in the criminal party to the criminal case and is conclusively bound by
action pursuant to Rule 111, the offended party may the outcome thereof. Consequently, petitioner must be
intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the offense. accorded the right to pursue the case to its logical
31 Rule 111(a) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure conclusion — including the appeal.
provides that, "[w]hen a criminal action is instituted, the Held: The argument has no merit.
civil action arising from the offense charged shall be Undisputedly, petitioner is not a direct party to the
deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the criminal case, which was filed solely against Roman, its
offended party waives the civil action, reserves the right employee.
to institute it separately, or institutes the civil action The cases dealing with the subsidiary liability
prior to the criminal action." of employers uniformly declare that, strictly speaking,
Hao did not waive the civil action, nor did she they are not parties to the criminal cases instituted
reserve the right to institute it separately, nor institute against their employees. Although in substance and in
the civil action for damages arising from the offense effect, they have an interest therein, this fact should be
charged. Thus, we find that the private prosecutors can viewed in the light of their subsidiary liability. While they
intervene in the trial of the criminal action. may assist their employees to the extent of supplying
the latter's lawyers, as in the present case, the former
Basilio v. CA (2000) cannot act independently on their own behalf, but can
Facts: Pronebo was found guilty by the trial only defend the accused.
court of Reckless Imprudence resulting to the death of When the accused-employee absconds or
one Advincula. Pronebo then filed an application for jumps bail, the judgment meted out becomes final and
probation. Subsequently, the trial court issued an Order executory. The employer cannot defeat the finality of
granting the motion for execution of the subsidiary the judgment by filing a notice of appeal on its own
liability of his employer Basilio. Basilio now asserts that behalf in the guise of asking for a review of its
he was not given the opportunity to be heard by the trial subsidiary civil liability. Both the primary civil liability of
court to prove the absence of an employer-employee the accused-employee and the subsidiary civil liability of
relationship between him and accused. Nor that, the employer are carried in one single decision that has
alternatively, the accused was not lawfully discharging become final and executory.
duties as an employee at the time of the incident.
Held: The statutory basis for an employer's B. SPECIAL CASE
subsidiary liability is found in Article 103 of the RPC.
This liability is enforceable in the same criminal Art. 101. Rules regarding civil liability in
proceeding where the award is made. However, before certain cases. — The exemption from criminal liability
execution against an employer ensues, there must be a established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of Article 12
determination, in a hearing set for the purpose of 1) the and in subdivision 4 of Article 11 of this Code does not
existence of an employer-employee relationship; 2) that include exemption from civil liability, which shall be
the employer is engaged in some kind of industry; 3) enforced subject to the following rules:
that the employee is adjudged guilty of the wrongful act First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of
and found to have committed the offense in the Article 12, the civil liability for acts committed by an
discharge of his duties (not necessarily any offense he imbecile or insane person, and by a person under nine
commits "while" in the discharge of such duties; and 4) years of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years
that said employee is insolvent. of age, who has acted without discernment, shall
Basilio knew of the criminal case that was filed devolve upon those having such person under their legal
against his driver because it was his truck that was authority or control, unless it appears that there was no
involved in the incident. Further, it was the insurance fault or negligence on their part.
company, with which his truck was insured, that Should there be no person having such insane,
provided the counsel for Pronebo, pursuant to the imbecile or minor under his authority, legal guardianship
stipulations in their contract. Basilio did not intervene in or control, or if such person be insolvent, said insane,
the criminal proceedings, despite knowledge, through imbecile, or minor shall respond with their own property,
counsel, that the prosecution adduced evidence to show excepting property exempt from execution, in
employer-employee relationship. With the convict's accordance with the civil law.
application for probation, the trial court's judgment Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of
became final and executory. All told, it is our view that Article 11, the persons for whose benefit the harm has
the lower court did not err when it found that Basilio was been prevented shall be civilly liable in proportion to the
not denied due process. He had all his chances to benefit which they may have received.
intervene in the criminal proceedings, and prove that he The courts shall determine, in sound discretion,
was not the employer of the accused, but he chooses the proportionate amount for which each one shall be
not to intervene at the appropriate time. liable.
When the respective shares cannot be
Philippine Rabbit v. People (2004) equitably determined, even approximately, or when the
Facts: Accused Roman, an employee of liability also attaches to the Government, or to the
Philippine Rabbit was found guilty and convicted of the majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all
events, whenever the damages have been caused with establishments. — In default of the persons criminally
the consent of the authorities or their agents, liable, innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons
indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes
by special laws or regulations. committed in their establishments, in all cases where a
Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and violation of municipal ordinances or some general or
6 of Article 12, the persons using violence or causing the special police regulation shall have been committed by
fears shall be primarily liable and secondarily, or, if them or their employees.
there be no such persons, those doing the act shall be Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the
liable, saving always to the latter that part of their restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft within
property exempt from execution. their houses from guests lodging therein, or for the
payment of the value thereof, provided that such guests
CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS EXEMPT FROM shall have notified in advance the innkeeper himself, or
CRIMINAL LIABILITY the person representing him, of the deposit of such
Exemption from criminal liability does not goods within the inn; and shall furthermore have
include exemption from civil liability. followed the directions which such innkeeper or his
Exceptions: representative may have given them with respect to the
1. There is no civil liability in paragraph 4 of care and vigilance over such goods. No liability shall
Art. 12 which provides for injury caused by mere attach in case of robbery with violence against or
accident. intimidation of persons unless committed by the
2. There is no civil liability in par. 7 of Art. 12 innkeeper's employees.
which provides for failure to perform an act
required by law when prevented by some lawful SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY OF INNKEEPERS,
or insuperable cause. TAVERNKEEPERS OR PROPRIETORS OF
ESTABLISHMENTS – ELEMENTS OF PAR. 1:
♣ The exemption from criminal liability does not include 1. That the INNKEEPER, TAVERNKEEPER OR
exemption from civil liability in the cases provided for in PROPRIETOR of establishment or his employee
pars. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of Art. 12. Pars. 4 and 7 are not committed a violation of municipal ordinance
mentioned. Therefore, there is also exemption from civil or some general or special police regulation.
liability in the cases provided for in pars. 4 and 7 of Art. 2. That a crime is committed in such inn, tavern
12. or establishment.
3. That the person criminally liable is insolvent.
1. CIVIL LIABILITY FOR ACTS COMMITTED BY AN ♣ When all the above elements are present, the
INSANE OR IMBECILE OR MINOR UNDER 9 OR innkeeper, tavernkeeper or any other person or
OVER 9 AND LESS THAN 15 WHO ACTED WITH corporation is civilly liable for the crime committed in his
DEISCERNMENT establishment.
1. The employer, teacher, person or corporation ♣ RESTITUTION of the thing itself must be made
is engaged in any kind of industry. whenever possible.
2. Any of their servants, pupils, workmen, ♣ The convict cannot, by way of restitution, give to the
apprentices or employees commits a felony offended part a similar thing of the same amount, kin or
while in the discharge of his duties. species and quality.
3. The said employee is insolvent and has not ♣ Where the crime committed is not against property,
satisfied his civil liability. no restitution nor reparation of the thing damaged can
be done, although the offended party is entitled to
♣ Private persons without business or industry are not indemnification under Art. 107.
subsidiarily liable. ♣ If the accused is acquitted, he cannot be ordered to
♣ The felony must be committed by the servant or return the property or amount received EXCEPT if:
employee of the defendant in the civil case. - it is proved that the property belonged to the
♣ Employer has the right to take part in the defense of offended party was in his possession when
his employee. stolen from him
♣ No defense of diligence of a good father of a family. - and the identity of the offender is not proved,
in which case the acquitted person in whose
Carpio v. Doroja (1989) possession the property was found may be
Ruling upon the enforcement of the subsidiary ordered by the court to return it to the owner.
liability of an employer in the same criminal proceeding
without the need of a separate action, the court held ♣ HOW RESTITUTION IS MADE?
that it should be shown that: The thing itself is to be restored, whenever
1) the employer, etc. is engaged in any kind of possible, with allowance for deterioration, or diminution
industry of value, even if found in the possession of the 3rd
2) the employee committed the offense in the person who acquired it legally, although the latter can
discharge of his duties and file an action against the person who may be liable to
3) he is insolvent him except if the thing has been acquired by the 3 rd
The subsidiary liability of the employer, person in the manner provided by law which bars an
however, arises only after conviction of the employee in action for its recovery.
the criminal action. All these requisites present, the
employer, becomes ipso facto subsidiarily liable upon Art. 106. Reparation; How made. — The
the employee’s conviction and upon proof of the latter’s court shall determine the amount of damage, taking into
insolvency. consideration the price of the thing, whenever possible,
and its special sentimental value to the injured party,
C. WHAT CIVIL LIABILITY INCLUDES and reparation shall be made accordingly.
c. those suffered by 3rd person by reason of the Whenever the liability in solidum or the
crime subsidiary liability has been enforced, the person by
whom payment has been made shall have a right of
♣ Damages cover not only ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY action against the others for the amount of their
damages but also MORAL AND EXEMPLARY or respective shares.
CORRECTIVE damages, especially when attended by 1
or more aggravating circumstances in the commission of LIABILITY OF PRINCIPALS, ACCOMPLICES AND
the crime and considering that proof of pecuniary loss is ACCESSORIES
not necessary in order that moral or exemplary damages - Each within their respective class is liable in
may be adjudicated as the assessment of such damages solidum among themselves for their quotas and
is left to the discretion of the court. subsidiarily for those of the other persons liable.
♣ Upon whom does the obligation to make restoration, E. EXTINCTION OF CIVIL LIABILITY
reparation or indemnification for damages devolve?
- upon the HEIRS of the person liable Art. 112. Extinction of civil liability. — Civil
♣ The heirs of the person liable has no obligation if liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of
restoration is not possible and the deceased left no this Code shall be extinguished in the same manner as
property. obligations, in accordance with the provisions of the Civil
♣ Civil liability is possible only when the offender dies Law.
after final judgment.
♣ The action to demand restoration, reparation and ♣ Extinguished in the same manner as other obligations
indemnification descends to the heirs of the person in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code.
injured.
CIVIL CODE, Art. 1231. Obligations are extinguished:
Art. 109. Share of each person civilly (1) By payment or performance:
liable. — If there are two or more persons civilly liable (2) By the loss of the thing due:
for a felony, the courts shall determine the amount for (3) By the condonation or remission of the
which each must respond. debt;
(4) By the confusion or merger of the rights of
Art. 110. Several and subsidiary liability creditor and debtor;
of principals, accomplices and accessories of a (5) By compensation;
felony; Preference in payment. — Notwithstanding (6) By novation.
the provisions of the next preceding article, the Other causes of extinguishment of obligations,
principals, accomplices, and accessories, each within such as annulment, rescission, fulfillment of a resolutory
their respective class, shall be liable severally (in condition, and prescription, are governed elsewhere in
solidum) among themselves for their quotas, and this Code. (1156a)
subsidiaries for those of the other persons liable.
The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first ♣ Loss of the thing due does not extinguish civil liability
against the property of the principals; next, against that because if the offender cannot make restitution, he is
of the accomplices, and, lastly, against that of the obliged to make reparation.
accessories.